Conservatives find it so refreshing when a liberal outlet performs what is called – in the parlance of Rush Limbaugh – a ‘random act of journalism’ that they’re often willing to overlook the history of the individual who supposedly committed it. CNN’s Drew Griffin appeared to commit a ‘random act of journalism’ when he reported that CIA agents are being intimidated into not talking about Benghazi. However, based on the history of Griffin, perhaps some skepticism is in order.
There was a time when journalists were paranoid about getting something wrong. Missing an important fact or being wrong on a critical story could torpedo a career. That very thing should have happened to Griffin in October of 2008, when he deliberately – not accidentally – misquoted National Review’s Byron York in a blatant attempt to smear Palin right before an election:
Yet, today, Griffin is being hailed for doing his job. Based on his past performances, what exactly is his job?
Not only did Griffin intentionally misquote York but his organization didn’t retract it and he just kept moving along as if his credibility meant nothing.
Fast forward to August 1, 2013. Barack Obama has been taking heat over a reference to “phony scandals” and there’s been talk that witnesses to what happened in Benghazi may start talking. Just last week, David Ubben’s story was told on Fox News. Ubben was gravely injured atop one of the roofs at the CIA Annex and was left for twenty hours before getting picked up.
CNN’s Griffin – whose credibility should be in tatters – releases a report about CIA officials who were in Benghazi on 9/11/12 being intimidated. Based on Griffin’s history, shouldn’t any report be viewed through a more cynical lens? Speaking of lenses, imagine if you’re one of those witnesses and you’re watching this news report from your living room. What’s the message to you?
Conspicuously absent from Griffin’s report was any mention of CIA Director John Brennan, who is a Muslim Brotherhood apologist. There was apparently no attempt to interview him either. Griffin’s news report refrained from putting any journalistic heat on Brennan.
In politics, messages are often communicated through the media out of interest, convenience or necessity. If Griffin carried Obama’s water in 2008 – which he clearly did – why wouldn’t he do the same thing in 2013, by sending a message on behalf of the administration, through a news report?
This is why Griffin should treat his credibility with more care than he did in 2008 and why conservatives who are thirsting for honest journalism shouldn’t give it to him so quickly.