Bill OReilly outdid himself last night when he interviewed Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R- Utah). He not only wants to mislead the public he attempted to manipulate Chaffetz. You have to listen closely to what is said in the video in order to follow my interpretation:
Ill begin with a line from the talking points memo:
The president is actively harming the nation. Forget all of the welfare state stuff, forget all of the foreign policy failures, Iraq, Afghanistan, the Arab Spring, Egypt, Libya, Syria forget the unexplained reason for purging high-ranking military officers. Examine two items:
1. Open-borders and amnesty for 20 million illegal aliens.
2. The first item is but one phase of surrendering the nations sovereignty to the United Nations.
I do not know OReilly definition of harming the nation. If the two items I cited do not qualify, Id sure like to hear OReilly tell us what does qualify as actively harming the nation.
I do know that OReilly always comes down on the side of the government, and for all of his bluster he always defends the president, the presidency, and presidential authority. Claiming the president is not actively trying to harm the nation is proof of OReillys position.
Before going to Leon Panetta and Rep. Chaffetz let me point out that the president is lying about Benghazi. No more proof than his own words is required. The president lies about everything. Everybody in his administration lies from sunup to sundown. Suzy Five Shows, Eric Holder, and Louise Lerner are but three examples. Not only do they tell lies, the way they do their jobs is an egregious lie.
Newspeak
Irrespective of OReillys theatrical challenge to Rep. Chaffetz whatever Leon Panetta told the president is not the crux of the matter. Where did the order to stand down originate? and who gave it? is the key to finding the truth about Benghazi. One can only wonder why OReilly is not pursuing that line of inquiry.
The fact is: Americans who are following the story know everything except who decided not to send help when nobody knew how long the men under attack could hold out. Nobody gives a flying F what Panetta said to the president.
Panetta is an old Communist sympathizer to put it politely. OReilly browbeating Rep. Chaffetz into subpoenaing Panetta can only result in an official whitewash. When the question OReilly poses is asked of Panetta under oath he will lie. The lie will be accepted as the truth because nobody can prove otherwise. That is the outcome OReilly is after. That is newspeak.
Incidentally, Rep. Chaffetz surely knew OReilly was trying to get the president off the hook. If the committee thought Panetta would tell the truth they would have subpoenaed him long before now.
Let me close with another video. Megyn Kelly hammered Adam Schiff (D- CA) pretty good. Panetta was not mentioned, but whatever Leon Panetta might say under oath will give Democrats one more Benghazi talking point. Note Schiffs absurd defense of Suzy Five Shows. Towards the end of the video he even calls the search for the truth a conspiracy theory. Democrats calling everything they cannot defend a conspiracy theory is textbook pooh-pooh:
