NYT Doubles Down: Claims of Al Qaeda Involvement in Benghazi 'Strictly Political'
Smarting from the number of witnesses who came out to challenge The New York Times' weekend article downplaying terrorist involvement in the 2012 Benghazi attack, NYT editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal "argued that those trying to claim Al Qaeda was involved" do so "for strictly political reasons."
According to Fox News, Rosenthal said:
For anyone wondering why it's so important to Republicans that Al Qaeda orchestrated the attack--or how the Obama administration described the attack in its immediate aftermath--the answer is simple. The Republicans hope to tarnish Democrat candidates by making it seem as though Mr. Obama doesn't take Al Qaeda seriously.
Rosenthal added: "[Republicans] also want to throw mud at former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who they fear will run for president in 2016."
But as Breitbart News reported on December 30, those who immediately and most staunchly questioned the NYT's claims of a spontaneous attack were not Republican politicians but witnesses who were in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. According to these accounts, there were terrorist commanders on the ground coordinating the Benghazi attack.
Moreover, these witnesses contend that Ahmad Abu Khattallah--the militia leader "responsible for the actions at the actual consulate [on September 11]"--has demonstrable ties to terrorist groups.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins.