Someone Send Eleanor Clift the Current White House Talking Points on Benghazi
May 12, 2014 - 12:48 pm
In her weekly appearance on the McLaughlin Group Eleanor Clift of the Daily Beast rattled off some interesting talking points on the Beghazi attack.
The only problem was that they were the wrong vintage; the talking points were long out of date, making her appear absolutely ridiculous.
ELEANOR CLIFT: I would like to point out Ambassador Stevens was not murdered. He died of smoke inhalation in the safe room in that CIA installation.
SUSAN FERRECHIO: I don’t think that’s a fact, Eleanor.
CLIFT: I think that is a fact.
FERRECHIO: I’ve heard a drastically different story from people who are also in the know about that. So, I don’t think it is –
PAT BUCHANAN: It was a terrorist attack, Eleanor. He was murdered in a terrorist attack.
CLIFT: It was an opportunistic terrorist attack that grew out of that video.
BUCHANAN: The video had nothing to do with it.
CLIFT: There were demonstrations across the world.
Someone this obtuse should serve on the defense team for the 9/11 conspirators.
Need I point out that the White House itself changed its tune on Benghazi, admitting that the video had nothing to do with it?
And Holy Mother! Stevens wasn’t killed in a terrorist attack — or was it an “opportunistic” terrorist attack? I’m sure the families of the 3,000 people who died on 9/11 are put at ease knowing their loved ones died of being crushed, or burned to death, or even of smoke inhalation rather than at the hands of terrorists. After all, I think the 9/11 terrorists were quite “opportunistic,” taking advantage of lax airport security and an unprepared America.
It’s moments like these that prove the need for a comprehensive investigation into Benghazi. If media figures like Clift are still babbling out long-debunked talking points on national television, then the House needs to eliminate any more confusion or ambiguities in a decisive and authoritative manner.
Clift is stuck in an information cocoon, unwilling to listen to any information at odds with what she is absolutely sure is the truth. But in trying to protect the administration — and Hillary Clinton — she makes herself look pathetically out of touch and ill-informed.