Friends and Family Benghazi Roundup

Due to the latest round of Benghazi news, we wanted to send our updated Benghazi talking points as well as some of the key stories. 

Friends and Family Benghazi Roundup

11.25.14

TALKING POINTS: NEW BENGHAZI REPORT PROVES RIGHT WING WRONG

 
KEY POINTS:

·       A two-year investigation into the Benghazi tragedy by the Republican-led House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence proved right-wing conspiracy theorists to be flat wrong and their attacks to be baseless.

·       The committee’s report was released last Friday by Chairman Mike Rogers (R-MI), and Ranking Member Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD).

·       The report debunks past and ongoing right-wing attacks on Hillary Clinton and further proves that the right wing is playing politics on the backs of dead Americans in an attempt to score political points.  

·       The report adds to the extensive reporting already completed by the ten congressional committees involved in investigating Benghazi. 

·       It concludes that there was no wrongdoing by Obama administration officials. [AP, 11/21/14]

·       The final report made the following conclusions:

o   There was no intelligence failure before the attack. [CNN, 11/22/14]

o   No stand-down order was issued. [CNN, 11/22/14]

o   The administration did not intentionally mislead the public about the details surrounding the attacks. [New York Times, 11/22/14]

·       According to the New York Times, “A report released late Friday about the fatal 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya, left Republicans in the same position they have been in for two years: with little evidence to support their most damning critiques of how the Obama administration, and then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, responded to the attacks.” [New York Times, 11/22/14]

·       According to David Brock, “The Republican committee report should close the case….If the scandal persists into 2016, it will only be for partisan reasons.” [New York Times, 11/22/14]

THE FACTS:

·       Secretary Clinton took responsibility: In interviews, testimony and in her book, Secretary Clinton has taken responsibility repeatedly. She was determined to leave the State Department and our country safer, stronger, and more secure.

·       Secretary Clinton took action: Secretary Clinton appointed a nonpartisan, independent Accountability Review Board to review what happened and began the process of implementing the 29 recommendations put forth by the ARB before leaving the State Department to strengthen embassy security.

·       Secretary Clinton was fully transparent: Secretary Clinton fully and publicly answered questions before Congress. The report of the Accountability Review Board is just the second to be made public, making it one of the most transparent internal reviews in State Department history. 

·       The Benghazi tragedy has been investigated exhaustively, costing taxpayers millions of dollars to repeat the same investigations over again. Ten different congressional committees have participated in investigating the Benghazi tragedy. They have held more than 50 senior level staff briefings, 14 public hearings, at least 3 independent/bipartisan reports, dozens of interviews, and the disclosure of more than 25,000 pages of documents. The Department of Defense reported that these efforts have cost the taxpayers millions of dollars and thousands of man-hours. The House Select Committee on Benghazi is expected to cost taxpayers more than $3 million.

Headlines:

New York Times: “G.O.P.-Led Benghazi Panel Bolsters Administration”

"'The effort to turn the Benghazi tragedy into a political scandal never had a factual basis,' said David Brock, founder of Correct the Record, a group that defends Mrs. Clinton in the news media, and author of the e-book 'The Benghazi Hoax.' ... 'The Republican committee report should close the case,' he added. 'If the scandal persists into 2016, it will only be for partisan reasons.'"

AP: House intel panel debunks many Benghazi theories

“A two-year investigation by the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee has found that the CIA and the military acted properly in responding to the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, and asserted no wrongdoing by Obama administration appointees.”

American Bridge 21st Century: House Intel Panel Quietly Releases Benghazi Report That Clears Obama Administration of Wrongdoing Yet Again

“The Republican-led House Intelligence Committee’s two-year investigation into Benghazi is the seventh major probe into the attacks to clear the Obama Administration of wrongdoing. The Committee, chaired by Congressman Mike Rogers (R-MI), debunked long-held GOP claims on the attacks.”

FROM MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA: MMFA: Fox News Sunday Ignored Congressional Report Debunking Benghazi Myths 

Articles:

New York Times: “G.O.P.-Led Benghazi Panel Bolsters Administration”

By Michael S. Schmidt

November 22, 2014

WASHINGTON — A report released late Friday about the fatal 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya, left Republicans in the same position they have been in for two years: with little evidence to support their most damning critiques of how the Obama administration, and then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, responded to the attacks.

Similar to five other government reports, the one released by the House Intelligence Committee on Friday said that the administration had not intentionally misled the public about what occurred during the attacks in talking points it created for officials to use in television appearances that turned out to be inaccurate.

It also said that no order was given by the military to “stand down” in responding to try to save the four Americans killed in the attacks, a claim that Republicans have made based on the account of a member of the security team in Benghazi that day.

Coming six months after Speaker John A. Boehner created a separate special committee to investigate the Benghazi attacks, the report raised questions about what that panel might uncover that the Intelligence Committee — whose chairman, Representative Mike Rogers, Republican of Michigan, is leaving Congress — and the other investigations missed.

The special committee that Mr. Boehner created is led by Representative Trey Gowdy, Republican of South Carolina, who has a budget of $3.3 million for the investigation.

Mr. Gowdy, in a written statement, said that his committee had reviewed the latest findings along with the other reports. “It will aid the select committee’s comprehensive investigation to determine the full facts of what happened in Benghazi, Libya, before, during and after the attack and contribute toward our final, definitive accounting of the attack on behalf of Congress,” he said.

Democrats have asserted that the special committee was created by Republicans only to try to discredit Mrs. Clinton, who is expected to seek the Democratic nomination for president in 2016.

“The effort to turn the Benghazi tragedy into a political scandal never had a factual basis,” said David Brock, founder of Correct the Record, a group that defends Mrs. Clinton in the news media, and author of the e-book “The Benghazi Hoax.”

“The Republican committee report should close the case,” he added. “If the scandal persists into 2016, it will only be for partisan reasons.”

While the report backed up many of the administration’s longstanding claims that its response was proper, it agreed with the other reports that criticized the State Department for having inadequate security at the compound where the ambassador to Libya, J. Christopher Stevens, was killed.

“The State Department security personnel, resources and equipment were unable to counter the terrorist threat that day and required C.I.A. assistance,” it said.

The panel’s findings reflected well on the intelligence apparatus, particularly the Central Intelligence Agency. The agency “ensured sufficient security” for its facilities in Benghazi and “without a requirement to do so, ably and bravely assisted the State Department on the night of the attacks,” according to the report.

“Their actions saved lives,” the report said.

The report said the C.I.A. did not have an “intelligence failure” in the months before the attacks. In fact, the report said, the agency had increased its security because of intelligence reports showing that attacks had intensified in the area.

In the course of the investigation, the committee reviewed thousands of pages of intelligence assessments, cables, emails and other documents, and it interviewed many senior intelligence officials and people who were on the ground during the attacks — including eight security personnel who responded to them, it said.

Republican lawmakers have said that the administration, fearing political fallout from the attacks — which occurred on Sept. 11, 2012, less than two months before the presidential elections — tried to mislead the public.

In particular, the Republicans have said that Susan E. Rice, who was the ambassador to the United Nations at the time, lied on several Sunday television talk shows when she said the attacks were set off by a protest over an anti-Muslim video. They claimed that she glossed over whether the fatalities were the result of “terrorist” attacks by Al Qaeda because that would have undermined the administration’s narrative that it had all but defeated the group.

The panel found that in the days after the attacks, there was contradictory intelligence about what precipitated them and who was behind them. Ultimately, Ms. Rice’s assertions were wrong, the committee said, but there was no evidence that the administration was attempting to misconstrue the facts.

Even today, the report said, the government is still uncertain about much of what happened that day.

“Much of the early intelligence was conflicting, and two years later, intelligence gaps remain,” the report said. A mix of individuals, “including those affiliated” with Al Qaeda, participated in the attacks, it said, adding, however, that “the intelligence was and remains conflicting about the identities, affiliations and motivations of the attackers.”

A man accused of being the ringleader of the attackers was apprehended in a raid by American commandos in Benghazi in June, and will likely go on trial in Washington next year on murder charges.

The report also debunked a few accusations against the C.I.A. It said that the agency had not intimidated or prevented “any officer from speaking to Congress or otherwise telling their story.” It also said that the agency had not administered “any unusual polygraph exams” to officers about their assignment in Benghazi. And it said that the C.I.A. was not collecting arms in Libya and sending them to rebel groups in Syria.

AP: House intel panel debunks many Benghazi theories

By KEN DILANIAN
Nov. 21, 2014 5:22 PM EST

WASHINGTON (AP) — A two-year investigation by the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee has found that the CIA and the military acted properly in responding to the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, and asserted no wrongdoing by Obama administration appointees.

Debunking a series of persistent allegations hinting at dark conspiracies, the investigation of the politically charged incident determined that there was no intelligence failure, no delay in sending a CIA rescue team, no missed opportunity for a military rescue, and no evidence the CIA was covertly shipping arms from Libya to Syria.

In the immediate aftermath of the attack, intelligence about who carried it out and why was contradictory, the report found. That led Susan Rice, then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to inaccurately assert that the attack had evolved from a protest, when in fact there had been no protest. But it was intelligence analysts, not political appointees, who made the wrong call, the committee found. The report did not conclude that Rice or any other government official acted in bad faith or intentionally misled the American people.

The House Intelligence Committee report was released with little fanfare on the Friday before Thanksgiving week. Many of its findings echo those of six previous investigations by various congressional committees and a State Department panel. The eighth Benghazi investigation is being carried out by a House Select Committee appointed in May.

The attacks in Benghazi killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, foreign service officer Sean Smith, and two CIA contractors, Tyrone S. Woods and Glen Doherty. A Libyan extremist, Ahmed Abu Khatalla, is facing trial on murder charges after he was captured in Libya and taken to the U.S.

In the aftermath of the attacks, Republicans criticized the Obama administration and its then-secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton, who is expected to run for president in 2016. People in and out of government have alleged that a CIA response team was ordered to "stand down" after the State Department compound came under attack, that a military rescue was nixed, that officials intentionally downplayed the role of al-Qaida figures in the attack, and that Stevens and the CIA were involved in a secret operation to spirit weapons out of Libya and into the hands of Syrian rebels. None of that is true, according to the House Intelligence Committee report.

The report did find, however, that the State Department facility where Stevens and Smith were killed was not well-protected, and that State Department security agents knew they could not defend it from a well-armed attack. Previous reports have found that requests for security improvements were not acted upon in Washington.

"We spent thousands of hours asking questions, poring over documents, reviewing intelligence assessments, reading cables and emails, and held a total of 20 committee events and hearings," said Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., the committee's chairman, and Rep. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger of Maryland, the ranking Democrat, in a joint statement.

"We conducted detailed interviews with senior intelligence officials from Benghazi and Tripoli as well as eight security personnel on the ground in Benghazi that night. Based on the testimony and the documents we reviewed, we concluded that all the CIA officers in Benghazi were heroes. Their actions saved lives," they said.

Rep. Adam Schiff, a California Democrat who serves on the intelligence panel and the Benghazi select committee, said, "It's my hope that this report will put to rest many of the questions that have been asked and answered yet again, and that the Benghazi Select Committee will accept these findings and instead focus its attention on the State Department's progress in securing our facilities around the world and standing up our fast response capabilities."

Some of the harshest charges have been leveled at Rice, now Obama's national security adviser, who represented the Obama administration on Sunday talk shows the weekend after the attack. Rice repeated talking points that wrongly described a protest over a video deemed offensive to Muslims.

But Rice's comments were based on faulty intelligence from multiple agencies, according to the report. Analysts received 21 reports that a protest occurred in Benghazi, the report said —14 from the Open Source Center, which reviews news reports; one from the CIA; two from the Defense Department; and four from the National Security Agency.

In the years since, some participants in the attack have said they were motivated by the video. The attackers were a mix of extremists and hangers on, the investigation found.

"To this day," the report said, "significant intelligence gaps regarding the identities, affiliations and motivations of the attackers remain."

American Bridge 21st Century: House Intel Panel Quietly Releases Benghazi Report That Clears Obama Administration of Wrongdoing Yet Again

The Republican-led House Intelligence Committee’s two-year investigation into Benghazi is the seventh major probe into the attacks to clear the Obama Administration of wrongdoing. The Committee, chaired by Congressman Mike Rogers (R-MI), debunked long-held GOP claims on the attacks.

According to the Associated Press, “many of [the report’s] findings echo those of six previous investigations by various congressional committees and a state department panel.” These latest findings come as the ongoing Benghazi House Select Committee -  the eighth investigation into the attacks - costs taxpayers $3.3 million.

Adam Schiff (D-CA), who serves on both the House Intelligence and Benghazi Select Committees, stated, “It's my hope that this report will put to rest many of the questions that have been asked and answered yet again, and that the Benghazi select committee will accept these findings.”

The report, released Friday, found:

· There was no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama Administration in the aftermath of the Benghazi attack.

· There was no intelligence failure before the attack.

· No stand-down order was issued and no military assets were withheld.

The $3.3 million Benghazi House Select Committee is expected to meet during the lame-duck session this fall, but what is left to investigate? Even Republicans are calling for an end to their party’s witch-huntOn NBC’s Meet the Press, GOP Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ) stated, “we ought to move beyond” Benghazi.

Seventh Major Benghazi Probe Finds No “Wrongdoing” By Obama Administration

House Intelligence Committee Report Concluded After Two Years Of Committee Investigation There Was “No Wrongdoing By Obama Administration Appointees” In The 2012 Benghazi Attack . According to the Associated Press, “A two-year investigation by the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee has found that the CIA and the military acted properly in responding to the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, and asserted no wrongdoing by Obama administration appointees.” [Associated Press, 11/21/14]

House Intelligence Report: “Appropriate U.S. Personnel Made Reasonable Tactical Decisions That Night, And The Committee Found No Evidence That There Was Either A Stand Down Order Or A Denial Of Available Air Support.” According to a report from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, “Appropriate U.S. personnel made reasonable tactical decisions that night, and the Committee found no evidence that there was either a stand down order or a denial of available air support.” [U.S. House Intelligence Permanent Select Committee Report, 11/21/14]

House Intelligence Report: “The Committee Finds That There Was No Intelligence Failure Prior To The Attacks” In Benghazi. According to a report from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, “[T]he Committee finds that there was no intelligence failure prior to the attacks. In the months prior, the IC provided intelligence about previous attacks and the increased threat environment in Benghazi, but the IC did not have specific, tactical warning of theSeptember 11 attacks.” [U.S. House Intelligence Permanent Select Committee Report, 11/21/14]

House Intelligence Report: “The Committee Found Intelligence To Support CIA’s Initial Assessment That The Attacks Had Evolved Out Of A Protest In Benghazi.” According to a report from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, “[T]he Committee concludes that after the attacks, the early intelligence assessments and the Administration’s initial public narrative on the causes and motivations for the attacks were not fully accurate. There was a stream of contradictory and conflicting intelligence that came in after the attacks. The Committee found intelligence to support CIA’s initial assessment that the attacks had evolved out of a protest in Benghazi; but it also found contrary intelligence, which ultimately proved to be the correct intelligence. There was no protest.” [U.S. House Intelligence Permanent Select Committee Report, 11/21/14]

House Intelligence Report: “The CIA Only Changed Its Initial Assessment About A Protest… Two Days After Ambassador Susan Rice Spoke.” According to a report from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, “The CIA only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24, 2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September 18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke), and after the FBI began publishing its interviews with U.S. officials on the ground on September 22, 2012.” [U.S. House Intelligence Permanent Select Committee Report, 11/21/14]

House Intelligence Report: “The Committee Finds That The Intelligence Was And Remains Conflicting About The Identities, Affiliations, And Motivations Of The Attackers.” According to a report from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, “[T]he Committee finds that a mixed group of individuals, including those affiliated with Al-Qa’ida, participated in the attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, although the Committee finds that the intelligence was and remains conflicting about the identities, affiliations, and motivations of the attackers.”  [U.S. House Intelligence Permanent Select Committee Report, 11/21/14]

House Intelligence Report: “The Committee Finds That The Process Used To Generate The Talking Points…Was Flawed.” According to a report from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, “[T]he Committee finds that the process used to generate the talking points HPSCI [House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence] asked for—and which were used for Ambassador Rice’s public appearances—was flawed. HPSCI asked for the talking points solely to aid Members’ ability to communicate publicly using the best available intelligence at the time, and mistakes were made in the process of how those talking points were developed.” [U.S. House Intelligence Permanent Select Committee Report,11/21/14]

“Many” Of The House Intelligence Report’s Findings “Echo Those Of Six Previous Investigations By Various Congressional Committees And A State Department Panel.” According to the Associated Press, “The House Intelligence Committee report was released with little fanfare on the Friday before Thanksgiving week. Many of its findings echo those of six previous investigations by various congressional committees and a State Department panel. The eighth Benghazi investigation is being carried out by a House Select Committee appointed in May.” [Associated Press,11/21/14]

Report’s Implications On Benghazi Select Committee

Republican Senator Jeff Flake: “With Regard To Other Things That Were Addressed By This Report…We Ought To Move Beyond” Benghazi. According to the Huffington Post, “Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) thinks it's probably time for Republicans to drop their fixation on Benghazi. […] Flake said on Sunday that he thought Republicans needed to move on from the Benghazi issue. ‘I always thought the biggest problem with Benghazi is how it was cast by the administration, and the remarks of Susan Rice just really flew in the face of what we knew was going on,’ he said. ‘But with regard to other things that were addressed by this report, yes, I've thought that for a long time we ought to move beyond that.’” [Huffington Post, 12/23/14]

Benghazi Select Committee Leader Trey Gowdy: House Intelligence Report “Will Aid The Select Committee’s Comprehensive Investigation To Determine The Full Facts Of What Happened In Benghazi.” According to The New York Times, “Mr. [Trey] Gowdy, in a written statement, said that his committee had reviewed the latest findings along with the other reports. ‘It will aid the select committee’s comprehensive investigation to determine the full facts of what happened in Benghazi, Libya before, during and after the attack and contribute toward our final, definitive accounting of the attack on behalf of Congress,’ he said.” [New York Times, 11/22/14]

House Intelligence And Benghazi Select Committee Member Adam Schiff: “It's My Hope That This Report Will Put To Rest Many Of The Questions That Have Been Asked And Answered Yet Again, And That The Benghazi Select Committee Will Accept These Findings.” According to the Associated Press, “Rep. Adam Schiff, a California Democrat who serves on the intelligence panel and the Benghazi select committee, said, ‘It's my hope that this report will put to rest many of the questions that have been asked and answered yet again, and that the Benghazi Select Committee will accept these findings and instead focus its attention on the State Department's progress in securing our facilities around the world and standing up our fast response capabilities.’” [Associated Press, 11/21/14] 

FROM MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA: MMFA: Fox News Sunday Ignored Congressional Report Debunking Benghazi Myths 

By Oliver Willis 

November 23, 2014, 5:02 p.m. EST

Fox News Sunday ignored a new report from the GOP-led House Intelligence Committee that debunked many of the myths that Fox News has spent the last two years promoting.

On November 21, the Republican-led House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released its reporton the September 2012 attacks on two U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya. Similar to the many preceding investigations into the attacks -- including the Accountability Review Board and the bipartisan U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence -- the report found that no stand down order was issued during the attacks, there was no intelligence failure leading up to the attack, and that the talking points the administration used in the days following the attacks were based on the CIA's best assessment at the time.

The November 23 edition of Fox News Sunday did not inform viewers of the report's findings. This stands in stark contrast to Fox's longstanding campaign to promote myths about the attacks.

Fox has been a tireless promoter of nearly every facet of the Benghazi hoax. In the 20 months following the attacks, Fox ran over 1,100 segments on Benghazi and hosted Republicans at a rate of 30:1 over Democrats to discuss the issue. Meanwhile, the network has routinely ignored and downplayed evidence refuting its conspiracy theories.

CNN media critic Brian Stelter noted that other Fox programs only provided cursory coverage of the report on the night of its release and that Fox never mentioned it the following day. According to Stelter (emphasis added):

STELTER: Boy, has Fox News spent a lot of time over the past two years focused on the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, and I mean a lot of time. [...] But when a new Benghazi report came out on Friday, there was hardly a peep, and maybe that's because the report, which was Republican led, it was by the House Intelligence committee, debunks many of the myths that have run rampant on Fox News and in conservative media circles. [...] So I have to wonder: will Fox will stop aggressively pushing its theories about Benghazi? Probably not. With its audience largely in the dark about the latest findings, the myths may, and perhaps will, live on.

On the November 23 edition of Fox News' own MediaBuzz, host Howard Kurtz noted that it only received "brief" coverage on Fox and that the results of the two-year long investigation "deserved more coverage from all news outlets."

FROM MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA: Media Matters for America: “Media Lessons From The Benghazi Charade”

By Eric Boehlert

November 24, 2014

[Subtitle:] For Fox News, It's Six Strikes And You're Out

The calling cards of anger and denial have been on display since Friday afternoon when the House Intelligence Committee, led by Republican Rep. Mike Rogers, released the findings of its two-year investigation into the 2012 terror attack in Benghazi. Becoming the sixth government inquiry to come to a similar conclusion, the report found nothing to support the allegations behind Fox News' ongoing Benghazi witch-hunt. And that's where the anger and denial came in.

Appearing on CNN, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who has staked his professional reputation on the endless claim of an elaborate White House cover-up, flashed irritation when he denounced the House report as being "full of crap."

Meanwhile, Fox News contributor Stephen Hayes did his best to deflate the supposedly "deeply flawed" Republican report:

Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes @stephenfhayes: I'd caution against reaching firm conclusions based on the #Benghazi report issued by the House Intel cmte. It's deeply flawed. [11/21/14, 7:57 p.m. EST]

For Benghazi conspiracy disciples, unanswered questions always remain as long as devotees say so, and as long as the answers provided by government (and Republican-led investigations) don't match up their conspiracy narrative. But apparently if the seventh investigation finds wrongdoing on the part of the administration, that's the one that will really matter?

Sorry Fox News, but six strikes and you're out.

Still, Benghazi Truthers, like Joel Pollak at Breitbart, soldiered on, claiming the exhaustive House report was no big deal [emphasis added]:

“The House committee, chaired by Republican Mike Rogers (R-MI), found that there was no intelligence failure leading up to the attack, and that the CIA and military personnel present did the best they could. The crucial new finding is that there was no ‘stand down’ order, as some there have claimed, and that no further military resources were available.”

The three points Pollack mentioned that were debunked by the House report represented almost the entire basis of the "scandal" crusade. They were easily the inspiration for hundreds of Fox News programming hours over the last two years, and likely thousands of hours of talk radio attacks on Obama, Hillary Clinton and anyone connected to the administration. (Note that Fox aired 100 segments on the "stand down" allegation alone during its evening programs in the 20 months following the attack.)

While Breitbart and other right-wing media players gallantly tried to play defense (it's just a flesh wound), Fox News simply went into denial as the cable news channel essentially turned a blind eye to the story: Fox News Sunday completely ignored the topic. But it wasn't just Fox News Sunday. CBS' Face The Nation and ABC's This Week also ignored news about the latest Benghazi debunking; a Republican debunking no less.

There was something fitting about those two omissions, considering CBS and ABC likely suffered the two worst Benghazi-related black eyes within the mainstream media when their reporters, Lara Logan and Jonathan Karl respectively, flew too close to the far-right flame and got very badly burned. (Note to reporters: When your sources have to make stuff up about Benghazi, it's a pretty good indication the 'scandal' is lacking.)

And don't forget how Logan played ball with at least one vociferous Benghazi critic behind the scenes while putting her fatally flawed 60 Minutes report together. According to a May report in New York magazine, Logan met with Sen. Graham, who helped shape the Benghazi story. Then when the 60 Minutes segment aired he immediately cheered it on, calling it a "death blow" to the White House and announced he'd block every White House appointee until he got more answers about Benghazi.

In other words, the Benghazi lessons to be learned here aren't only for Fox News. Media Matters has spent the better part of two years detailing how Beltway reporters, producers and pundits who should've known better have played along with the contrived conspiracy talking points about the Democratic president and a far-reaching cover-up. (Is Benghazi to Obama what Whitewater was to Bill Clinton?)

There's clearly been plenty of Pavolivan behavior on display here: Republicans ring the Benghazi "scandal" bell and the press presents is as news. For two years. (See here, here, here, here and here for National Journal columnist Ron Fournier's contribution to the bogus genre.)

For instance, just last spring major Beltway news outlets appeared to be in complete agreement that Benghazi represented a major hurdle in Hillary Clinton's path to the White House, should she choose to pursue the Democratic nomination. The story was "quickly growing into a potentially devastating target of opportunity for the GOP," reported the Christian Science Monitor, while The National Journal claimed Benghazi represented "perhaps the biggest thing" she'll have to combat on the campaign trail. By playing along with the flimsy premise, the press simply bolstered the Republican goal of portraying Benghazi as a pending Democratic doomsday.  (ABC News: "Scandal City.")

The media's proof for that sweeping claim about Benghazi possibly dooming Hillary? There was none. But Republican sources were saying it was true, so too many journalists typed it up as analysis.

As for Benghazi conspiracy theorists backing down? Not likely. Recall this Associated Press report from July 10:

“The testimony of nine military officers undermines contentions by Republican lawmakers that a ‘stand-down order’ held back military assets that could have saved the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans killed at a diplomatic outpost and CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya.”

Even after nine U.S. military officers debunked and denied the "stand down" claim under oath, it wasn't enough to move Fox off its talking point.

Keep in mind that over the last two years Fox News has claimed Obama never called the Benghazi attack an act of terror, that former CIA director David Petraeus was forced to resign because of Benghazi, and that the White House had demanded changes in the original Benghazi talking points. They've insisted Obama watched Americans die in real time on September 11, 2012 and refused to send help. That so-called whistleblowers have been blocked from testifying, along with Benghazi survivors. Also, that Hillary Clinton faked a concussion in order to avoid testifying about the terror attack. (That last claim is all you really need to know about the Benghazi charade.)

Why the endless obsession?

Two years ago I highlighted an unhinged Benghazi column from a Boston Herald conservative, published on the eve of the presidential election that seemed to perfectly capture the larger-than-life meaning of Benghazi within the Obama-hating community. According to the conservative writer, Benghazi confirmed that Obama is "cowardly," "dishonest" and that he lacks "integrity" as well as "competence." Plus, he supposedly has a "reflexive impulse to blame, rather than defend, America."

The point is, die-hard Obama haters are always going to say those things about the president. Benghazi simply gave them a useful framework: He's the Manchurian Candidate who let Americans die in Benghazi and "sacrificed American lives for politics."

Benghazi conspiracies have come to represent a vile and ugly chapter in American politics. It's a chapter built upon hypocrisy and cynical Fox News ethics. Journalists should keep that in mind the next time the right-wing media launch a hollow "cover-up" crusade against a Democrat.