The media is increasingly calling out the House Select Committee on Benghazi for its laser-like focus on Hillary Clinton’s emails, particularly the ones between herself and a confidant, Sidney Blumenthal. In fact, that’s virtually all we’ve been hearing about for months now. There’s been considerably less about “the truth of what happened at Benghazi” and more, and more, and more, about those emails, coming out of that panel. It seems that growing numbers of individual media personalities are just about done with this, much like many of the rest of us.
Fox News’ own Shepard Smith, who has a nasty habit of actually telling the truth, is apparently over it. Smith was speaking to political editor Stephen Dinan, at the not-at-all liberal publication, Washington Times. Smith said, according to Media Matters for America:
We know now [that Sidney Blumenthal hated the Obamas] because we have emails to that effect. I’m just not sure that this wedge, putting this wedge between camp Clinton and camp Obama is very helpful when finding out what happened at hashtag Benghazi.
Dinan believes that nobody on either side of this coin saw anything in Hillary’s testimony today that swayed their opinion one way or another. He does believe that she’s got some stuff she must answer for, though, but he agrees with Smith in a way. In response, he said:
You know, I don’t disagree with that at all.
He went on to say that the whole obsession speaks to her decision-making abilities as Secretary of State, and how she’s going to have to explain changing her story in relation to Blumenthal’s advice when she was Secretary of State. However, it’s starting to look like at least some of the right-wing media is getting just as confused over the focus on her emails as the allegedly “liberal” media.
Watch Shep Smith with Stephen Dinan, below, via Media Matters:
This isn’t all, though. According to a different story by Media Matters, CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin appeared with Jake Tapper on “The Lead,” who said that our policy in Libya needed further examination. Toobin replied with:
[T]he accusation has not been “Hillary Clinton is a criminal.” The accusation has been “Hillary Clinton was a bad secretary of state.” And that has really been the focus of the inquiry. That seems to me a very legitimate question for the political campaign coming ahead. It’s somewhat less clear why that’s relevant to what happened in Benghazi, on 9/11/2012 … [T]he inquiry has gone very far afield particularly with this, I have to say, bizarre obsession with the former journalist Sidney Blumenthal whose name has been mentioned far more often than Al Qaeda or the actual attackers. [emphasis mine]
It has, and increasing numbers of people recognize it. Donald Trump even wants it this way, so it’s not too difficult to figure that other Republicans probably want it this way, too. And yet, the panel has tried to maintain, officially, that this is about getting the truth to the families of four slain Americans. They won’t answer with any clarity why they’re so obsessed with Hillary’s emails. If they sincerely felt that those emails were important to getting the truth out, they would have found a way to explain that to us by now that didn’t involve, “Well, she mishandled sensitive information…maybe…sort of — if we spin it that way, so…yeah. We’ll figure a way to tie this to Benghazi so it looks legit later.”
(The CIA has contradicted the assertion that her emails with Sidney Blumenthal were sensitive.)
Watch Toobin’s comments below, also via Media Matters:
Hillary faced that committee yesterday and made them look like the political-agenda pushing, witch-hunting idiots they are. It’s so bad that Senate Democrats want the Republican National Committee to reimburse the American people for the tax dollars wasted on this nonsense. The time is coming when the Benghazi committee will fall, and the Republicans who fall with it will have brought it upon themselves.
Featured image via screen capture