CBS Reporter Apologizes To Viewers For False Reporting On Benghazi


CBS Reporter Apologizes To Viewers For False Reporting On Benghazi

By Hayes Brown

TV LARA LOGANCREDIT: AP

After a week of defending their reporting, CBS News’ Lara Logan on Friday morning made a stunning apology to her viewers for a much-hyped story about the Benghazi attack, based on an interview with a security contractor that directly contradicts what he told the FBI.

“We were wrong to put him on air and we apologize to our viewers,” Logan said on the CBS’ This Morning on Friday. “We will apologize to our viewers and we will correct the record on our broadcast on Sunday night,” she added.

On Sunday, CBS’ venerable 60 Minutes newsprogram aired what they hailed as a shocking new report on what really occurred the night of an attack on a diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya last year. Promoted as the culmination of a year-long investigation, the segment heavily featured an interview with Morgan Jones — a pseudonym for Dylan Davies, a security officer hired to help protect the U.S. assets in Benghazi — who claimed to have rushed to the scene the night of the attack, making him the first eyewitness of the attack to come forward for interviews.

Jones’ story was quickly questioned from various outlets, especially the progressive media watchdog site Media Matters, which published multiple stories over the course of the week about the holes in Davies’ story. Davies in response took to other media outlets, including The Daily Beast to defend himself against what he called smears.

CBS in turn stood by its reporting for days, insisting that while Jones’ story was different from an incident report he submitted to his employer filed after the attack, the version promoted on the air was the truth. Executive Producer Jeff Fager went so far as to tell the Huffington Post that he was “proud” of the reporting that went into the segment.

“Our effort was to give our viewers a better understanding about an event in which a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans were killed,” Fager, who is also CBS News’ chairman, wrote in his statement to the Huffington Post. “We are proud of the reporting that went into the story and have confidence that our sources, including those who appeared on ’60 Minutes,’ told accurate versions of what happened that night.”

On Thursday evening, however, the situation seemed to shift suddenly. “60 Minutes has learned of new information that undercuts the account told to us by Morgan Jones of his actions on the night of the attack on the Benghazi compound,” CBS said in a brief statement on the 60 Minutes website last night. “We are currently looking into this serious matter to determine if he misled us, and if so, we will make a correction.” Only minutes after CBS’ statement went live, the New York Times reported that Davies’ story completely differed from the statement he gave the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

That revelation caused CBS to completely reverse course, taking down the story from its website and sending Logan out to apologize. “What we now know is that he told the FBI a different story to what he told us,” she said, “and that was the moment for us when we realized that we no longer had confidence in our source.” Logan insisted that the documents that Davies had provided and his role working for the State Department in Benghazi were confirmed, “but we were misled and we were wrong and that’s the important thing,” she continued. “That’s what we have to say here. We have to set the record straight and take responsibility.”

Watch the full apology here:

It remains to be seen whether this latest debunked scandal will satiate conservatives who latch on to anything that they claim proves there was a secret cover-up from the Obama administration the night of the attack. It also remains to be seen whether the incident will inspire Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) to withdraw the holds he currently has on all Obama nominees, pending meetings with more Benghazi survivors, given that his threat was a direct response to the 60 Minutes report

What’s clear, however, is that Davies’ book on the his account of Benghazi — that was set to be published through Simon & Schusters’ conservative Threshold Editions imprint — is now imperiled. “Although we have not seen the F.B.I. report, in light of these revelations we will review the book and take appropriate action with regard to its publication status,” Jennifer Robbins, a spokesperson for Threshold, told the New York Times.

Update

Foreign Policy’s John Hudson reports even with today’s apology and the news that three more witnesses are prepared to testify before Congress, Graham is still keeping his holds in place.

Update

The New York Times on Friday afternoon reports that Simon & Schuster is pulling Davies’ book. “We are suspending the publication,” the publisher said, adding that it is notifying stores to return books already received.

Right Wing Conspiracy Thinking and Mind Control | Gunman’s Aunt: Nancy Lanza Talked About Survivalism


Gunman’s Aunt: Nancy Lanza Talked About Survivalism
“Prepping” for the collapse of civilization
According to the aunt of Adam Lanza, Adam’s mother Nancy was a “survivalist.”

“Last time we visited with her in person we talked about prepping and you know, are you ready for what can happen down the line when the economy collapses,” said the gunman’s aunt, Marsha Lanza.

The reporter asked, “Survivalist kind of thing?”

“Yeah,” said Marsha Lanza.

World NUT Daily Crazy Called For Political Witch Hunts, Purges and Ultimately, Executions of Liberals if Romney Had Won!


WND Columnist: Prosecute Liberals, Journalists for Treason
Submitted by Brian Tashman

For years, conservatives have claimed that liberals seek to criminalize Christianity and conservative opinions through imaginary hate speech laws. But today, WorldNetDaily columnist Erik Rush writes that the government should prosecute liberals and members of the press… in order to defend freedom, of course. He accuses journalists of “treasonous collusion” with the Obama administration and said the Founders would have wanted journalists to be “found guilty of high crimes.” “Trials for treason and the requisite sentences would apply,” Rush says, “and I would have no qualms about seeing such sentences executed, no matter how severe.” He claims that progressives’ “seditious, anti-American” speech is “excepted from protection under the First Amendment,” hoping that “the political disenfranchisement of liberals, progressives, socialists and Marxists can begin in earnest, and in the open.”

Assuming that all goes well and that we are rid of Obama in January, there will be a nation to repair – but what about the causes for this necessity? Yes, many Americans are now cognizant of the fact that progressives have “progressed” America dangerously close to being a Marxist-socialist nation and that we are collectively responsible for not having checked that progress. But aside from grass-roots efforts toward electoral and political reform, there are other widespread, organized threats to America’s ongoing concern as a representative republic with guaranteed personal liberties, free speech foremost among them.

Here, I am speaking of the press, the conglomeration of national broadcast, digital and print media organizations that has been incrementally packed with ideological liberals and socialists, and so has disqualified itself as the impartial government watchdog it once was. During my lifetime, I have seen the press become an advance force for social engineering and global socialism. The degree to which they have deceived Americans and enabled the agenda of radicals in recent decades is beyond shame. As former Democratic pollster Pat Caddell said recently, the press has become an enemy of the American people. In the matter of this president, the press largely facilitated the ascension of Barack Obama. The instances wherein they have promoted, shielded and aided him are beyond enumeration.

This goes beyond such things as MSNBC’s Chris Matthews and his man crush on Obama – I’m talking about treasonous collusion. One particularly scandalous incident occurred during the second presidential debate, when CNN moderator Candy Crowley made an interjection that appeared to have been as spontaneous as Ambassador Chris Stevens’ murder, and which led to a solid point scored for Obama. Most recently, after Mitt Romney brought up Obama’s 2009 “Apology Tour,” the press did their best to support Obama’s claim that this never happened, despite boundless reams of footage that exist chronicling the event.

It is improbable that the framers of the Constitution anticipated a situation in which the press were entirely given over to seditious, anti-American policies. If they had, it is likely that their modus operandi would be similar to that for any faction found guilty of high crimes. Trials for treason and the requisite sentences would apply, and I would have no qualms about seeing such sentences executed, no matter how severe.

This is not likely to occur, however. Radio personality and nascent media mogul Glenn Beck has the intention of putting the establishment press out of business. While I wish him every success, it doesn’t seem likely that he will accomplish this through his organizations alone. In addition to the advent of powerful alternative media sources, I believe it will be necessary to codify – or reaffirm – the nature of crimes against the Constitution and the American people. In this manner, we can thwart the designs not only of the press, but all global socialists operating in America.

Those whose speech and actions impinge upon the God-given rights set forth in the Declaration of Independence and codified in the Constitution are, by definition, excepted from protection under the First Amendment (as well as the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment). This is a very important concept to consider, because it is based on these presumptions of protected speech and equal protection for all that progressives and socialists have engaged in their predation upon our liberties.

If these truths can be acknowledged and widely accepted as such (as opposed to progressives’ Orwellian interpretations), then the political disenfranchisement of liberals, progressives, socialists and Marxists can begin in earnest, and in the open.

The Endless Republican Sludge | Mike Coffman Another Crackpot Republican


The Endless Republican Sludge | Mike Coffman Another Crackpot Republican

In May, Coffman drew national attention when he made birther comments about Obama, saying that “that in his heart, he’s (Obama) not an American. He’s just not an American.”

The release of the audio clip comes on the same day Coffman released his first TV ad touting his military background.

Democratic State Rep. — and a pair of third party candidates — is challenging Coffman in the Aurora-based 6th Congressional District.

“Mike Coffman’s pattern of bringing up extremist conspiracy theories shows a high level of disrespect for our Commander-in-Chief and his commitment to the safety of our troops. He owes people an explanation,” said Ryan Hobart, a spokesman for Miklosi.

Follow Kurtis on Twitter: @kurtisalee

Coffman says his “fundamental concern” is Obama might use military for political gain

American Conservatism | Ushering In The Age of Absurdity


Quote of the Day: Modern Conservatism

Via:- Mario Piperni

No More Mister Nice Blog:

…the unreported story of our times is that birtherism isn’t an isolated example of paranoid lunacy taking hold of a disturbingly large segment of the population — in fact, modern conservatism is driven by multiple lunatic theories that are precisely as delusional as birtherism.

True…but the mulitple lunacies have been reported time and time again. The problem is that the people who should be paying attention aren’t listening to anyone whose first name isn’t Rush, Glenn or Sean.

The theories:

  • Birtherism
  • Obama is a Muslim
  • Obama is a Communist
  • Obama is the anti-Christ
  • Obama eats little white babies on Tuesdays (made that one up…but not by much)
  • Tax cuts for the rich creates jobs
  • Homosexuality is a perversion and can be cured with prayer
  • The Tea Party is a grassroots movement
  • Corporations are people
  • Bush, Palin and Bachmann have functioning brains
  • Abstinence education prevents teenage pregnancies
  • Climate change is a hoax
  • The GOP in its current state is a serious political party
  • FOX News is fair and balanced
  • The Affordable Care Act creates death panels
  • Creationism is science
  • Evolution is a flawed theory

And on it goes…the delusional theories of a self-destructing political party.

Related articles

Right Wing Fox News Harpy Claims Jews Worst Enemies of the Country


Right Wing Fox News Harpy Claims Jews Worst Enemies of the Country

Sandy Rios Says Secular Jews Have Been ‘The Worst Enemies of the Country’
      Submitted by Brian Tashman on Mon, 03/05/2012 – 3:55pm

The American Family Association recently hired Fox News contributor and former Concerned Women for America president Sandy Rios to host her own show on American Family Radio, and here’s what we get to look forward to: attacks on Jewish Americans for supporting President Obama. Earlier today she spoke with the AFA’s Tim Wildmon and Bryan Fischer, where she suggested that secular Jews are enemies of America. Rios bemoaned that “the Jewish vote in this country is so confused, so many of the Jews in this country are atheist and their hearts are with this President.” “They’re far-left,” Wildmon said, “Most of the Jews in this country are far left, unfortunately.”  Rios said that “a lot of Jewish atheists are some of the ones who have done, just like former Christians or quasi Christians, people who have some dealing with Judeo-Christian ethics, sometimes turn out to be the worst enemies of the country.”

Later on in the show, Rios said that “there are very few” religious people in Israel, “by and large Israel is an atheistic country, they don’t really believe in the God of their fathers, there’s no question about that,” and maintained that Christians must “evangelize and pray for our Jewish brothers and sisters.”

Ron Paul Signed Off On Racist Newsletters | Ron Paul’s Newsletters Best Loved by Neo-Nazis and Jew-Hating Extremists


Ron Paul Signed Off Racist Newsletters | Ron Paul’s Newsletters Best Loved by Neo-Nazis and Jew-Hating Extremists
WaPo: Ron Paul Signed Off On Racist 1990s Newsletters
Ron Paul’s newsletter problem gets worse, but Paulians won’t care
The Washington Post has new information today on Ron Paul’s racist, antisemitic newsletters; a former secretary in the company that produced the newsletters says Ron Paul was fully aware of their content: Ron Paul signed off on racist 1990s newsletters, associates say.

Ron Paul, well known as a physician, congressman and libertarian , has also been a businessman who pursued a marketing strategy that included publishing provocative, racially charged newsletters to make money and spread his ideas, according to three people with direct knowledge of Paul’s businesses.

The Republican presidential candidate has denied writing inflammatory passages in the pamphlets from the 1990s and said recently that he did not read them at the time or for years afterward. Numerous colleagues said he does not hold racist views.

But people close to Paul’s operations said he was deeply involved in the company that produced the newsletters, Ron Paul & Associates, and closely monitored its operations, signing off on articles and speaking to staff members virtually every day.

“It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product. . . . He would proof it,’’ said Renae Hathway, a former secretary in Paul’s company and a supporter of the Texas congressman.

And there’s more; Paul apparently made a deliberate effort to peddle his newsletters to racists and extremists, using the mailing list of a notorious antisemitic newspaper published by Holocaust denier Willis Carto:

Ed Crane, the longtime president of the libertarian Cato Institute, said he met Paul for lunch during this period, and the two men discussed direct-mail solicitations, which Paul was sending out to interest people in his newsletters. They agreed that “people who have extreme views” are more likely than others to respond.

Crane said Paul reported getting his best response when he used a mailing list from the now-defunct newspaper Spotlight, which was widely considered anti-Semitic and racist.

This comes as absolutely no surprise, but I predict it will have no impact on Ron Paul’s popularity. Anyone who still supports this creepy old crypto-racist has either found a way to rationalize this stuff, or has no problems with it.

The Muslim conspiracy theory and the Oslo massacre


The Muslim conspiracy theory and the Oslo massacre

Abstract

Anders Behring Breivik, perpetrator of the Norwegian massacre, was motivated by a belief in a Muslim conspiracy to take over Europe. Extreme and aberrant his actions were, but, explains the author, elements of this conspiracy theory are held and circulated in Europe today across a broad political spectrum, with internet-focused counter-jihadist activists at one end and neoconservative and cultural conservative columnists, commentators and politicians at the other. The political fallout from the circulation of these ideas ranges from test cases over free speech in the courts to agitation on the ground from defence leagues, anti-minaret campaigners and stop Islamisation groups. Although the conspiracy draws on older forms of racism, it also incorporates new frameworks: the clash of civilisations, Islamofascism, the new anti-Semitism and Eurabia. This Muslim conspiracy bears many of the hallmarks of the ‘Jewish conspiracy theory’, yet, ironically, its adherents, some of whom were formerly linked to anti-Semitic traditions, have now, because of their fear of Islam and Arab countries, become staunch defenders of Israel and Zionism.

http://rac.sagepub.com/content/53/3/30.abstract

Related articles