Now that the NY Times story has failed, what will liberals try next to defend Obama's lies about Benghazi?

Obama will give a speech on Chocolate syrup and how it affects the economy..

The "story" didn't fail. You simply are unable to understand that Al Qaeda as it was does not exist any more as an organized, centralized army, that it has morphed into many, many, very loosely defined organizations with no allegiance to a central power. That in no way causes the story to "fail".

Im sorry but a group of people pissed off over a movie don't infiltrate an embassy in the manner that AL QUEDA did. It was done with precision, and professionalism-not the work of a mob of angry protesters!

Libs will repeat that under W. Bush their were several American embassys that were attacked and a few people killed. Allan Colmes is using this argument. This is true, but it does not excuse Shillary for sending our people into a dangerous area without adequate security, and it certainly does not excuse Oblama and Shillary from lying about it.

Seriously, we should investigate the death of four Americans in Benghazi with all of the resources at our disposal... just as soon as we investigate with equal voracity the death of over four THOUSAND Americans in Iraq searching for non-existent WMDs.

I mean, fair is fair.

The fire and smoke profile for covering Hillary failed big time.

There's nothing that needs defending.