The Blog

Responding to the Washington Post on Benghazi

5:50 PM, May 17, 2013 • By STEPHEN F. HAYES
Widget tooltip
Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts

This one, published back in November under the headline “The GOP’s Bizarre Attack on Susan Rice,” lambasted Republicans for sending a letter to President Obama opposing Rice’s possible nomination as secretary of state, and for a “focus on half-baked conspiracy theories” on Benghazi.

Then, in the next and final paragraph, the Post wrote this: “Could it be, as members of the Congressional Black Caucus are charging, that the signatories of the letter are targeting Ms. Rice because she is an African American woman? The signatories deny that, and we can’t know their hearts. What we do know is that more than 80 of the signatories are white males, and nearly half are from states of the former Confederacy. You’d think that before launching their broadside, members of Congress would have taken care not to propagate any falsehoods of their own.”

Yes, the Post actually published that.

You’d think before scolding others about half-baked conspiracy theories, the Post would resist the temptation to engage in conspiracies of the fully-baked variety. And you’d think before complaining that “actual facts don’t matter” to those concerned about the administration’s selling of Benghazi, they’d have made certain theirs were correct.

Recent Blog Posts

The Weekly Standard Archives

Browse 19 Years of the Weekly Standard

Old covers