On Thursday's New Day on CNN, after host Chris Cuomo charged that GOP presidential candidates had gone "a little bit too far into pandering" in attacking the media during the CNBC presidential debate, Florida Senator and GOP presidential candidate Marco Rubio shot back by recalling the dominant liberal media heaping praise on Hillary Clinton after her Benghazi testimony, in spite of evidence she changed her story on whether the attack was an organized terrorist attack or the result of a spontaneous protest.
At about 7:50 a.m., Cuomo brought up charges of liberal media bias as he fretted:
The stuff about the media last night, can't lose going after the media. I grew up in a house where my father was a politician, and he went after the media all the time. But it did seem last night that it went a little bit too far into pandering. I understand what Ted Cruz said and why it played well. You say that you believe the media is a superpac for Hillary Clinton. Do you really believe that the media is so much in favor of her and against somebody like you -- as you know, we often ask to have you on the show, the invitation certainly extends going forward. Is all the media the same?
Senator Rubio began his response:
No, of course all the media is not the same, but, by and large, I think a great example of it is last week. There was this testimony before the Benghazi committee, and, in that testimony, it was revealed that Hillary Clinton knew early on and was telling her family and telling her friends, that the attack on the consulate was by terrorists, al-Qaeda-like terrorists. And yet, for a week, not just her but a lot of people in the administration were going around telling the families of the victims and the American public that it was due to a video.
He added:
And the reason why they did that is because they were in the midst of a presidential election in which the President was arguing that al-Qaeda was defeated and on the run. And that reality of what truly happened in Benghazi, it countered that narrative. Well, that was revealed last week, And yet, the media around the country hailed her performance as incredible, the best week of her campaign. I thought it was the week she was exposed as lying about Benghazi. And it's going to be a major issue in this election. And for me, it was an example of the bias.
The CNN host who, to his credit, has himself showed skepticism toward Clinton's Benghazi story, pushed back with the Democratic point of view on the issue:
But I'm saying -- first of all, you're saying all media is not the same, and that's good to hear because it seemed like that last night coming from the panel. And, again, I get why that plays well to, you know, to partisans. But, look, here's the situation. I've gone after what Hillary said in that hearing a lot, and much to getting beaten up on Twitter as a result. But that's okay, it's part of the job. She says and Democrats and the administration say, "No, it wasn't a lie. She thought that's what it was. The CIA then came out with their rationales and changed their reckoning of what it was. And so she changed it. So it certainly wasn't a lie, and she was following CIA guidance."
Rubio countered:
There wasn't a single person on the ground near that incident in Benghazi which she has access to those people -- there was not a single person on the ground in Benghazi who thought that it was a spontaneous uprising. Just the nature of the weaponry that was brought to that attack, the swiftness with which it was conducted. There was no reports of protests in that area. Everybody on the ground knew that. All they had to do was talk to people in Benghazi, which she could have done, survivors and others who responded to the attack, and they could tell you that it was an organized and orchestrated effort.
The Florida Republican then continued:
They also should have known because that consulate was already had come under previous attack in the past, not at that scale and scope, but it had already come under. The Brits had already left Benghazi, the Red Cross had closed its facilities. So it goes beyond just the lying. I mean, if that facility was going to remain open, which was questionable, but if it was going to remain open, it should have had a lot more security in place than it had. It was -- the compound was easily breached.
Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the Thursday, October 29, New Day on CNN:
CHRIS CUOMO: The stuff about the media last night, can't lose going after the media. I grew up in a house where my father was a politician, and he went after the media all the time. But it did seem last night that it went a little bit too far into pandering. I understand what Ted Cruz said and why it played well. You say that you believe the media is a superpac for Hillary Clinton. Do you really believe that the media is so much in favor of her and against somebody like you -- as you know, we often ask to have you on the show, the invitation certainly extends going forward. Is all the media the same?
SENATOR MARCO RUBIO (R-FL): No, of course all the media is not the same, but, by and large, I think a great example of it is last week. There was this testimony before the Benghazi committee, and, in that testimony, it was revealed that Hillary Clinton knew early on and was telling her family and telling her friends, that the attack on the consulate was by terrorists, al-Qaeda-like terrorists. And yet, for a week, not just her but a lot of people in the administration were going around telling the families of the victims and the American public that it was due to a video.
And the reason why they did that is because they were in the midst of a presidential election in which the President was arguing that al-Qaeda was defeated and on the run. And that reality of what truly happened in Benghazi, it countered that narrative. Well, that was revealed last week, And yet, the media around the country hailed her performance as incredible, the best week of her campaign. I though it was the week she was exposed as lying about Benghazi. And it's going to be a major issue in this election. And for me, it was an example of the bias.
CUOMO: But I'm saying -- first of all, you're saying all media is not the same, and that's good to hear because it seemed like that last night coming from the panel. And, again, I get why that plays well to, you know, to partisans. But, look, here's the situation. I've gone after what Hillary said in that hearing a lot, and much to getting beaten up on Twitter as a result. But that's okay, it's part of the job. She says and Democrats and the administration say, "No, it wasn't a lie. She thought that's what it was. The CIA then came out with their rationales and changed their reckoning of what it was. And so she changed it. So it certainly wasn't a lie, and she was following CIA guidance."
RUBIO: There wasn't a single person on the ground near that incident in Benghazi which she has access to those people -- there was not a single person on the ground in Benghazi who thought that it was a spontaneous uprising. Just the nature of the weaponry that was brought to that attack, the swiftness with which it was conducted. There was no reports of protests in that area. Everybody on the ground knew that. All they had to do was talk to people in Benghazi, which she could have done, survivors and others who responded to the attack, and they could tell you that it was an organized and orchestrated effort.
They also should have known because that consulate was already had come under previous attack in the past, not at that scale and scope, but it had already come under. The Brits had already left Benghazi, the Red Cross had closed its facilities. So it goes beyond just the lying. I mean, if that facility was going to remain open, which was questionable, but if it was going to remain open, it should have had a lot more security in place than it had. It was -- the compound was easily breached.
CUOMO: That's a fair criticism. That's a fair criticism, and you certainly understand the situation well and the policy considerations around it. But I'm just saying, a big part of your campaign is saying, "I'm a new generation, I'm different, I don't play the same games that these guys did." You showed it last night when Jeb Bush came at you. How can it be a lie if it is true that Hillary Clinton changed what she said about her understanding of why it happened because the CIA told her something different? If you had been in her position and the CIA said, "No, Secretary, it wasn't terrorists. It was this spontaneous thing here, this is why we think it." Would you have not followed them?
RUBIO: No, she consistently privately told people over and over again including in the early aftermath of it that this was led by al-Qaeda-like elements. There was never a single shred of evidence presented to anyone that this was spontaneous. And, in fact, the CIA themselves understood that early on, irrespective of what the administration is telling you now. Beyond that I would say that she went well beyond the period of time which that was in question.I mean, she went past a week and was still saying that this was a spontaneous uprising because it furthered a political narrative that that administration was settled on. Maybe she was trying to be a team player, but I thought that was a moment where true leadership would have said, 'No, these victims and their families, the families of these victims deserve to know the truth, and so do the American people. And I'm not going to change what I believe to be true, or what there's doubts about even, based on some political narrative you're asking me to further."
And I thought it was interesting that the weekend after that attack, she refused to go on the Sunday shows. They sent someone else out there to do that. If the Clintons are nothing but masters of self-preservation, and obviously I think that was one of her calculus saying, "I'm not going on the Sunday shows and say that because I don't believe it's true." She was telling her relatives and friends early on she clearly had doubts.
