During a speech at the University at Buffalo, Clinton first ignored the man’s shouts as she spoke of Buffalo as a model for problem-solving through cooperation. “Because we can’t move from crisis to crisis, we have to be willing to come together as citizens to focus on the kind of future we want,” she said.
As the shouts grew louder from an upper section of bleachers, she added, “which doesn’t include yelling. It includes sitting down and talking.” The 6,500 people in attendance reacted with a sustained standing ovation as the heckler was led out.The future doesn't include yelling? Really?
Well, it shouldn't be surprising that the local CBS affiliate didn't bother to tell its readers what the heckler was heckling her about. It was Benghazi. That would never happen if the roles were reversed, because in those stories the hecklers are speaking truth to power. Take the Code Pinkos who recently heckled Ted Cruz:
Sen. Ted Cruz struggled to finish his speech at the Values Voter Summit in Washington today as hecklers repeatedly interrupted his remarks. Protesters interrupted Cruz more than six times, some yelling questions about why Cruz does not support a pathway to citizenship for immigrants in the country illegally.Here's another:
One of the hecklers Cruz faced called on him to support a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants.No commentary in either story about how Cruz "turned the tables" on his opponents by the way, as the CBS affiliate in Buffalo described Hillary's reply. That will be standard fare going forward.
But try as they might the media will not be able to
QUESTION: Marie, as you may or may not be aware, there’s new evidence linking two Benghazi suspects to senior al-Qaida leadership. Does the State Department have a reaction to that?
MS. HARF: I think for any of those questions, I’d refer you to the FBI. I know they’re the ones handling the investigation and that part of it, so --
QUESTION: Okay. Yesterday, Chairman Mike Rogers said that the Intelligence Committee has been – who is studying the attacks said that planning went on for weeks. Is there any reaction to that? To Benghazi.
MS. HARF: Oh. Again, I’d refer you – the FBI, I know, is looking into all of this right now.
QUESTION: Does the State Department own the Reward for Justice program?
MS. HARF: Own it in what way? Run it? I believe so, yeah.
QUESTION: Why is it --
MS. HARF: But let me double-check on that, though.
QUESTION: Okay. Why is it --
MS. HARF: Where is this question going? I’m not sure.
QUESTION: I’ll tell you. Why does the State Department refuse to put any of the Benghazi suspects on the Reward for Justice program?
MS. HARF: Let me go back to our folks and see how – (A) if it’s actually run out of here – I believe it is, but let me double-check – and (B) what the process is for putting people on that list. I just don’t know the answer.
QUESTION: Okay. It is --
MS. HARF: But I’m happy to look into it for you.
QUESTION: Okay, because it is – your email address is on the bottom of the Reward for Justice program.
MS. HARF: Well, then, it’s probably – I’m probably right that it’s ours, Lucas.The reporter comes back several times and tries to get her to answer, probably a tactic designed to rattle the fresh-faced Ms Harf, a fresh face probably put there to make it seem less hostile when she eventually doesn't answer any questions. She finally shows a little crack in the armor:
QUESTION: However, I just wanted to ask you, what signal does it send the world when, on those Reward for Justice programs, we rank the – our adversaries according to their importance – their kill, capture, their importance. But when the suspects of the Benghazi attacks are not on the list, what message does that send?
MS. HARF: Again, Lucas, I said this isn’t – this doesn’t represent the entirety of the way we look at the terrorist threat out there. We have designations. We have the Reward for Justice program. I have stood up here and said we are committed to bringing the Benghazi terrorists to justice, period. I don’t know what crystal – more of a crystal clear message I can send to them than that, and I’m happy to say it every day until we do.Notice she never answered the principal question--why aren't those suspects on the list. She claimed there was a process and she would get back, but that's clearly a BS answer. They likely don't want hose terrorists on the list because it would bring attention to the story and perhaps even result in finding someone, bringing more attention to the story. They probably have a desire to treat the story like her husband treated the Khobar Towers bombing-- yell "bring them to justice!" on day one followed by burying the case for the rest of his term (the terrorists were finally convicted during the Bush administration to almost zero fanfare). That may not be only for politics sake depending on what was actually occurring in Benghazi.
According to James Rosen there may be some interest in the Benghazi story from other networks, presumably CBS (perhaps Sharyl Attkisson?). He told O'Reilly that 60 Minutes may do a feature on it as soon as this Sunday, of course, it's unclear whether it would be a hit piece or a clever explanation piece designed to run cover for Hillary just like they did for her and her husband back in 1992. We will see.
HERE IT IS.. 10/25/13
CBS previews their Sunday 60 Minutes segment on Benghazi. Not with Sharyl Attkisson, but their veteran security reporter Lara Logan. Should be interesting.