The Obama administration has lied, stonewalled, bullied, and intimidated – the true marks of an open and transparent administration in the wake of the Benghazi incident that killed four Americans. And, with a few notable exceptions, the American media haven’t just let them get away it. Heck, they’ve helped.

‘Obvious political undercurrent’

Hill testimony of State Department whistleblowers might change that, but it’s doubtful given the one-sided reporting so far. NBC said there was an “obvious political undercurrent” to the hearings and accused the GOP of going after the “most popular Democrat,” Hillary Clinton.

A Politico story about CBS showed the truly insidious nature of media bias on this story and how the network held back Emmy award-winning reporter Sharyl Attkisson.

It hasn’t just been CBS that has been trying to corral this story. New York Times coverage might still damage the administration even though that paper has tried to prevent it. MSNBC’s sometime conservative, former Florida Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough, even Tweeted about Thursday’s Times story, saying it “should cause great concerns in the White House.”

‘Downplay the death’

It wasn’t just the traditional media spinning for Team Obama. Lefty outlets did their darnedest to downplay the death of four Americans, including the only U.S. ambassador killed since 1979. Other liberal sites went even further, ignoring the hearing and the testimony entirely. The Nation, Alternet and Democracy Now had no visible coverage. That’s a far cry from how the left reacted to even something as mundane as the NRA convention, where no terrorists killed four Americans.

It doesn’t really matter how they spin it, the news continues to get out. But if all major news outlets do is cover for the administration, they may well succeed in protecting their 2016 candidate.

Do you think there really was a political cover-up in the Benghazi scandal? Feel free to share your speculations with us!

Source: Dan Gainor, Fox News

Image: The Weekly Standard