MSM face Benghazigate dilemma

For the moment only Fox and conservative media are covering the revelations of a Benghazi whistleblower, limiting knowledge of the disturbing revelations to perhaps a third of the public, if that. The vast pool of low information voters will never know that there is anything to be concerned about regarding the slaughter of four Americans and the apparent lies and cover-up that has followed from Obama administration.

And neither will the medium information voters who get their news solely from MSM outlets, those which generally follow the lead of the New York Times in deciding what is and isn't a news story. The MSM are erecting a cofferdam around the whistleblower revelations which cast doubt on official testimony. But can such a barrier survive the promised House hearings?

Attorney Victoria Toensing is attempting to gain legal shielding for her four whistleblower clients and running into difficulty, an issue reported on Fox  News the day before, which President Obama claimed to be unaware of in his last presser. Never shy about speaking out, Toensing should not be underestimated. A former client of hers told me she is "tough as they come," and that squares with my impression of her too. And her husband and legal partner Joseph DeGenova is no slouch either.

At this point, we do not really know what is being covered up by the White House. Is it the rumored arms supply operation from Libya to Syrian rebels? Does it have anything to do with what else occupied the president's attention during the many hours the incident lasted? Or something else we can't even imagine? Or is it merely massive incompetence, the most parsimonious and therefore likely explanation?

So desperate is the situation for the administration that Jay Carney yesterday was reduced to the risible argument that Benghazi was "a long time ago" -- as if there is a statute of limitations of six months for the murder of a US Ambassador. "What difference, at this point, does it make?" Well, if they have been caught lying, it makes a lot of difference.

Victoria Toensing knows more than we do, and she is determined to get to the bottom of it. I wouldn't bet against her.

The biggest risk the MSM face is that this story will explode, that armed with subpoenas and immunity, revelations will pour out in testimony, and Fox News will get the sole credit. They will look even more like the modern courtiers they showed themselves to be at the White House Correspondents Dinner last weekend.  

So the question is, at what point does the cofferdam show a breach, with a story in the New York Times, and a broadcast net or two? Or will the cofferdam hold and the whole thing fizzle out, the public lulled to sleep as the administration hopes?

For the moment only Fox and conservative media are covering the revelations of a Benghazi whistleblower, limiting knowledge of the disturbing revelations to perhaps a third of the public, if that. The vast pool of low information voters will never know that there is anything to be concerned about regarding the slaughter of four Americans and the apparent lies and cover-up that has followed from Obama administration.

And neither will the medium information voters who get their news solely from MSM outlets, those which generally follow the lead of the New York Times in deciding what is and isn't a news story. The MSM are erecting a cofferdam around the whistleblower revelations which cast doubt on official testimony. But can such a barrier survive the promised House hearings?

Attorney Victoria Toensing is attempting to gain legal shielding for her four whistleblower clients and running into difficulty, an issue reported on Fox  News the day before, which President Obama claimed to be unaware of in his last presser. Never shy about speaking out, Toensing should not be underestimated. A former client of hers told me she is "tough as they come," and that squares with my impression of her too. And her husband and legal partner Joseph DeGenova is no slouch either.

At this point, we do not really know what is being covered up by the White House. Is it the rumored arms supply operation from Libya to Syrian rebels? Does it have anything to do with what else occupied the president's attention during the many hours the incident lasted? Or something else we can't even imagine? Or is it merely massive incompetence, the most parsimonious and therefore likely explanation?

So desperate is the situation for the administration that Jay Carney yesterday was reduced to the risible argument that Benghazi was "a long time ago" -- as if there is a statute of limitations of six months for the murder of a US Ambassador. "What difference, at this point, does it make?" Well, if they have been caught lying, it makes a lot of difference.

Victoria Toensing knows more than we do, and she is determined to get to the bottom of it. I wouldn't bet against her.

The biggest risk the MSM face is that this story will explode, that armed with subpoenas and immunity, revelations will pour out in testimony, and Fox News will get the sole credit. They will look even more like the modern courtiers they showed themselves to be at the White House Correspondents Dinner last weekend.  

So the question is, at what point does the cofferdam show a breach, with a story in the New York Times, and a broadcast net or two? Or will the cofferdam hold and the whole thing fizzle out, the public lulled to sleep as the administration hopes?

RECENT VIDEOS