In case you missed it, the New York Times published a story again blaming an anti-Islamic YouTube video for the 9/11/2012 attack on our consulate in Benghazi.
The reality behind the attack on American outposts in Libya is murkier and more complex than initially believed, but months of investigation turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda had any role in the assault.
The article is by Times reporter David Kirkpatrick. Many left-wing partisans and their allies in the media have jumped on the story to absolve the Obama Administration, which originally blamed the video for the attack.
But there’s a problem. Actually, there are a couple of problems.
First of all, as Democratic pundit Kirsten Powers noted on Twitter, this is the same Kirkpatrick who originally tried to blame the video back in September 2012. So David Kirkpatrick was sent to investigate whether David Kirkpatrick’s long-discredited claim was actually accurate. And what do you know, David Kirkpatrick found that David Kirkpatrick was right and David Kirkpatrick’s detractors were wrong.
Second, people on both sides of the aisle who have actually seen the intelligence aren’t buying it. Congressman Mike Rogers (R-MI), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, refuted the story this morning.
“There was some level of pre-planning, we know that. There was aspiration to conduct an attack by al-Qaeda and their affiliates in Libya. We know that,” said Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. He appeared on Fox News Sunday…
Rogers said his intelligence disputes that. “Did they have differences of opinion with al-Qaeda core? Yes. Do they have affiliations with al-Qaeda core? Definitely,” he said.
And he’s not alone. A Democrat on the same committee backs him up:
“I agree with Mike that, however, the intelligence indicates that al-Qaeda was involved. But there were also plenty of people and militias that were unaffiliated with al-Qaeda that were involved,” said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., also appearing on Fox News Sunday.
That assessment is based on more than 4,000 diplomatic cables reviewed by the committee.
The New York Times and reporter Kirkpatrick are desperate to cover for the Obama Administration and the paper’s own early errors. And many left-wing compatriots in the media are quick to jump on the bandwagon. Unfortunately, the intelligence doesn’t back up their fairy tale.