According to Representative Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, the New York Times would have no reason to engage in a little journalism unless they were seeking to boost Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign which doesn’t actually exist yet.
“The reports by the New York Times was — I don’t know why they put it out unless it was for political reasons, but we thoroughly dispute that story as far as the link to al Qaeda,” he said Monday on Fox News.
“Of course Secretary Clinton was in charge at the time, and you know there are just now a lot of rumors going and pushing about her running for president in 2016,” he said. “So I think they are already laying the groundwork.”
I don’t know why one of the nation’s oldest journalistic institutions would engage in journalism unless it was for political reasons. It probably has something to do with Hillary Clinton even though she isn’t even mentioned in the Times piece.
The Times story does, however, make it clear that there were warning signs ahead of the attack and that those signs were not fully comprehended or communicated until it was too late. And in that respect, you could say the piece was may have been slightly anti-Hillary.
To be clear, Westmoreland is accusing the New York Times of being a part of the Clinton Machine.
“We are not quite as used to this kind of political machine as the president and the Clinton’s have, and so I think they are just laying the groundwork and trying to absolve [Clinton] from the lack of security that was sent over there, the number of requests for security that was turned down,” he said.
And I think Westmoreland wants to absolve himself and his colleagues for cutting the State Department’s security budget.
Let’s see what Fox News has to say about that. Nothing?