General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Jon Stewart carrying water for the GOP yet again. [View all]BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)I thought his bit was heading somewhere for one of his classic punch lines. But instead it just looked like a chronology of the news coverage. I really didn't get his point, other than to say that there was some confusion in the days following the attack. Some people were more comfortable than others referring to it as a terrorist attack.
The problem with the bit is that the facts are still pretty hazy, so each of the positions was pretty reasonable, even though people weren't all using the same words to describe it.
The fact is that nobody (official) has come forward with evidence that this was a strategically planned attack -- the kind of pre-planning that we always associate with the words "terrorist attack". On the other hand, it seemed to be more than just an angry mob. SO where is the truth in the middle there?
Stewart seemed to be implying that it actually was a major al Qaeda-planned operation and that Obama didn't want to refer to it as a terrorist attack for political reasons. But that just doesn't match the information the administration has let out so far. I realize Rachael had some reporting that suggested more of a pre-planned attack, but that was mostly speculation and she never followed up with anything.
Basically it was a slow fake-news day. It happens.