Friday, October 23, 2015

Between the Lines #1 [Treason]

How often have you heard a conservative talk show host declare something is a conspiracy?

Well, I just heard it on one of their shows.

On Hugh Hewitt of all places. Early in the first hour of his Oct 22, 2015 show.

What I heard was a report of the Benghazi hearing by Hewitt’s guest whose name I didn’t catch.

What he said was approximately this:
‘there was clearly a conspiracy between DOS and the WH to deny that Benghazi was a terrorist attack so as not to undermine Obama’s reelection narrative that Al Qaeda was on the run.’
[Anyone can capture this comment from a podcast it will verify what I heard. I don’t know if there is a free one and I won’t pay that hack to hear his show. If a reader can capture it I will add it to this post. Thanks.]

Hewitt didn’t call him a conspiracy nut like his colleague Medved likes to do most every day. He accepted it and engaged him in further discussion.

Reading between the lines I get the following.

What I think this open talk of a conspiracy does, however, is deflect from the thought of the deeper conspiracy. The one that might come to wider attention but for the notable lack of more probing questions such as
“What happened to over 1000 of Gaddafi’s ManPADs?” and
“Where does intelligence say some turned up?” and
“Why exactly was Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi in the first place?”
Conspiracy to gain election seems to be accepted as par for the course in America today, at least when the Dems are caught at it. What felonious conduct?

But conspiracy to commit treason rises to another level entirely. So don’t expect your favorite conservative talkshow host to call that one out.


  1. Pascal, The guest on Hewitt's show was none other than Lindsay Graham. How about that, Hewitt still has that transcript available! He must think it's worth keeping out there:
    The quote is right in the first paragraph.
    If I could believe DP voters gave 1/10 of a damn about the conspiracy, I'd have some faith in the democratic process.

    1. I was away for 3 weeks. What a pleasant surprise to greet me on my return home. Thank you Daniel.

      As for the democratic process; I've said it before: it appears our republic is toast. Too much dishonesty has become standard operating procedure. So even felonious conduct has acquired some level of acceptability. It is similar to the Parisian Shrug, but Americans appear less honest in acknowledging it and instead blame it on "the other guys do it too" without any sense of balance to such charges. If each culprit were actually charged (even only in the court of public opinion) and consequences paid there'd be a record upon which to adjudge such dismissiveness.

      But the SSM decides so much of what garners outrage (providing red herrings so as to protect favored miscreants from the unrelenting scrutiny they harass opponents with) and only little blogs such as mine even try to read between the lines in the slim hope others will pick up the ball.


View My Stats