Any last remnants of the wingnut fairy tale of Benghaaaaazi!
But before you get too excited, do not for one minute imagine this will trigger a sudden outbreak of Conservative self-awareness; there will be no wailing and rending of stupid, little "Benghaaaaazi!" ribbons by an army of Eagle-rampant-on-flag-rampant-on-the-Constitution-rampant-on-another-flag-rampant-on-crossed-M-16s Liberty! Christian! NRA! Free Markets! Unapologetic! Love Murrica! Conservative! Twitter halfwits.
None of this will in any way penetrate the lightless, factless Netherville in which they live. We sailed way, way past that point years ago. But one more baseline from which future historians can calibrate just exactly how hopelessly Limbaughtomized the Pig People actually were might be useful.
Right on cue,
The White Citizens' Council Powerline chimes in:
Right on cue,
THE NEW YORK TIMES’ REVISIONIST ACCOUNT OF BENGHAZIThe New York Times is out with a revisionist account of the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi. The Times says that in months of investigating, it “turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault.” The Times also claims that the attack “was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.”I suspect that the Times story tells us more about Hillary Clinton’s assessment of the threat Benghazi poses to her likely 2016 run for president than it does about what happened in Benghazi...