Benghazi mom Pat Smith: Why wasn’t I treated with the same reverence by the media as the Khans?

Loading

Allah:

Via Mediaite, the key bit comes at 5:00 after Brooke Baldwin spends several long minutes nudging Smith in every way she can think of to side with the Khans against Trump. One thing that’s gotten lost in the coverage of Pat Smith is that she’s not the only parent of an American killed in the Benghazi attack to claim that Hillary blamed the Mohammed YouTube video when they met with her privately after the attack. The father of Tyrone Woods once told Glenn Beck that Clinton promised them she’d make sure the man who made the movie would be arrested and prosecuted for it. (And so he was, albeit on supposedly unrelated charges.) A would-be president of the United States threatening criminal punishment for thoughtcrimes, huh? Hillary’s not going to let any Republican out-authoritarian her.

We all know the answer to Smith’s question. The Khans are on the “right team” in the election; their son is a shining example that Muslims are patriotic too, a message the media is eager to convey; and, unlike Pat Smith, Mr. and Mrs. Khan aren’t a living reminder of one of Hillary Clinton’s biggest fiascos. (Actually they are, although you don’t hear many reminders these days about that Iraq vote Hillary cast in 2002.) You expect partisan media bias if you follow political news but it’s been a trip to watch the press shift from the idea that having a grieving parent speak at a convention is exploitative to the idea that it’s a form of patriotic redemption from tragedy in the span of 10 days. Even here, Baldwin leaves Smith almost exasperated at times because she can’t quite accept that Smith won’t use her bereaved-mom moral authority to come to the Khans’ defense against Trump.

But let’s not forget this either: Hillary’s smart enough at least not to let herself get dragged into a four-day running war of words with a sympathetic parent who lost their child overseas. Some of Trump’s pain the last few days is bias at work. But not all of it.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
6 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Hillary Clinton and the Kahn event was political, and it’s over.

I ask two questions of Khizr Khan:

1. When have you EVER protested individually and in public the atrocious acts of violence perpetrated by ISIS against innocent people? Like most all of the Muslim populations, you all sit in silence and say nothing, nada. It is your tacit approval of ISIS and you have no business challenging your views and actions against those of Donald Trump. You are full of loathing, lies and deceit.

2. When, Mr. Khizr Khan, have you participated in an open and public display of protest against ISIS and their horrible Muslim terrorist attacks with a large number of your native Muslims? ISIS is despicable and loathsome, and you Mr. Khan are part and parcel of the attacks and the Muslim hatred toward the West. Give the name, date and the place where you have marched against ISIS.

Furthermore, your wife was not allowed to speak because of your Muslim beliefs. As for Hillary Clinton, you know she doesn’t care about women’s rights, otherwise she would have insisted that Mrs. Khan say something. She doesn’t even give a hang!

But will you attack ISIS, who have killed hundreds (even mostly Muslims) and injured countless others? Instead both of you let yourselves be used like slut whores to attack a good man; as is Donald Trump. Shame on you and may the God of our New Testament DAMN you both and condemn you both and your bold faced Muslim lies to the pit of fiery Inferno to be damned forever.

May this same God curse and damn Hillary Clinton for lying, cheating, and coughing til she drops dead.

Well, Pat, it’s like this. The corrupt liberal media does not give a damn about you or your son that Hillary got killed. But, if it is any consolation, they don’t give a damn about Captain Khan, either. It just so happens the left can utilize Khan’s death via a Muslim zealot father who, like Cindy Sheehan, is willing to use a tragic death to further a harmful political agenda.

It ain’t personal, Pat. It’s politics.

Good thing that ISIS has nothing to do with Islam, as Mr. Khan avers.
ISIS just came out with a proclamation (also called a fatwa) to whit that Mr. Khan is an apostate from Islam and whomsoever kills him goes to paradise.

Remember the ”journolist” scandal of collusion?
Breitbart has discovered the media is colluding again.
Media-wide reporters, editors, producers, and anchors, sensing blood in the water, have tried to lay criticism on Trump over the Khan matter.

Breitbart News showed on Monday midday, that Khizr Khan has all sorts of financial, legal, and political connections to the Clintons through his old law firm, the mega-D.C. firm Hogan Lovells LLP.
That firm did Hillary Clinton’s taxes for years, starting when Khan still worked there involved in, according to his own website, matters “firm wide”—back in 2004.
It also has represented, for years, the government of Saudi Arabia in the United States. Saudi Arabia, of course, is a Clinton Foundation donor which—along with the mega-bundlers of thousands upon thousands in political donations to both of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2016—plays right into the “Clinton Cash” narrative.

All of this information was publicly available, and accessible to anyone—including any of these reporters, and Breitbart News—with a basic Google search. Anyone interested in doing research about the subjects they are reporting on—otherwise known as responsible journalism—would have checked into these matters.

So, that was midday-Monday.
What happened?

In the hours after Breitbart News presented this information publicly in a coherent report on Monday, others in media engaged in willful distortion of the story’s origins.

New York Times reporter Nick Confessore, at 3:25 p.m. ET on Monday, Tweeted out a link to the Bretibart News report with this commentary attached to his link to Breitbart News: “First oppo dump on the Khans.”

Less than three minutes later, Huffington Post politics editor Sam Stein Tweeted out a link also using the phrase “oppo dump.”

A few minutes after that, New York Magazine reporter Annie Lowery, at 3:59 p.m. ET Tweeted out her own link to the Breitbart News report, also using the apparently choreographed talking point “oppo dump.”

Three major media writers (can’t call them journalists) all using ”oppo dump” within a little over a 1/2 hour!

What Breitbart did next is really cool.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/01/just-joking-media-apoplectic-khizr-khan-attack-donald-trump-goes-flames/

@Nanny G: In addition, as has been pointed out, the universal left wing media characterization of Trump’s speech as “dark”. This would not be so striking except that his speech was anything but.

Here is what Khan wrote in 1983:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/01/khizr-khan-has-previously-written-extensively-on-sharia-law/

“The Shari’ah-was completed during the lifetime of Prophet Muhammed, in the Quran and Sunnah. This brings up an important fact which is generally overlooked, that the invariable and basic rules of Islamic Law are only those prescribed in the Shari’ah (Quran and Sunnah), which are few and limited,” Khan continues to write. “All other juridical works which have been written during more than thirteen centuries are very rich and indispensable, but they must always be subordinated to the Shari’ah and open to reconsideration by all Muslims.”

So yet another example of taqqiyah from a muslim. Khan makes his little propaganda ploy asking if Trump has read the Constitution – which by this muslim’s own writings he believes is subordinate to the evil of muslim shariah law!

There is no reason to ever trust any muslim, any leftist, nor any worthless RINO.