In a couple posts Steve and I discussed Candy Crowley’s naked partisanship in Tuesday night’s debate. In short, by intervening on Obama’s behalf at a nationally televised debate to spout demonstrably false White House talking points she changed roles from impartial moderator to Obama advocate. I hate to beat a dead horse, but Mediaite’s Noah Rothman has done an excellent job with the timeline and just how crucial Crowley’s assistance was to Team Obama in their on-going effort to evade responsibility for Libya as the election nears:
My singular take away moment of last night’s debate was one that elevated Crowley from moderator to debate participant. Crowley shot from the hip and echoed a talking point from the Obama campaign regarding their handling of the Libya attack to criticize Mitt Romney mid-debate. What’s more? She was wrong. Crowley did her profession a disservice last night and confirmed many Americans deepest suspicions about the media in the process.
The timeline of events regarding Libya is clear. After weeks of the president’s surrogates, and the president himself on programs like Late Night with David Letterman and at the United Nations, saying the Libya attack resulted from a spontaneous demonstration, the story began to unravel. Drip by drip, it became clear that security at the consulate was lax, the station had come under attack before and there was never any demonstration outside the Benghazi consulate.
Knowing they were caught in a distortion of the truth, the Obama campaign began pointing to the president’s Rose Garden address on the day after the 9/11/12 attacks to show that his administration had always referred unambiguously to Libya as an act of terrorism.
“No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for,” said Obama in the Rose Garden on September 12, after two paragraphs of recounting how Americans responded to the attacks of September 11, 2001.
The Obama campaign, knowing that they had advanced a false narrative for weeks and were being called on it, found the word “terror” in his initial response and relied on that speech to show that the president had known the Libya attack was terror all along.
This is wildly offensive to everyone who followed the story closely. The president seemed to think that he could perhaps get away with it if he had the assistance of complicit journalists who would not fact check that hard. He could not have known the kind of gift he would receive from Candy Crowley — amid a presidential debate, no less.
Read Rothman’s entire piece here.