We’ve got more on Benghazi. In fact, if I understand what I have here correctly, CBS News actually… I don’t know if I’ll use the word “colluded,” but, gee, it’s close to it. They actually helped Obama promote the notion that it was a video that led to the Benghazi attack when Obama had told them during a Steve Kroft 60 Minutes interview on September 12th that it was a terror attack.

CBS had that video all this time and never used it until recently, until Friday night on the CBS Evening News a week ago. But they had it September 12th. Obama was not blaming the video. They had Obama talking about how it was a terror attack.

They actually came to the conclusion that, “Okay, Obama wants to blame it on a video. So…” I was watching Greta Van Susteren last night.

She had a great show last night. She had Trump on, and Rudy was great last night. Brit Hume was on the show last night. She asked him about the media, and Hume said (paraphrased), “Look, I was with the mainstream media for a long time, I was at ABC News, and they are not looking at this every day as, ‘How can I help this candidate or how can I hurt that candidate?’ They just look at Benghazi and they just don’t see anything interesting there.

“They probably look at the Benghazi story and say, ‘How does this relate to the campaign? It isn’t any big deal,'” and I’m sitting there pulling my hair out. How do you say that? Don’t they mean the same thing? If you’re looking at the Benghazi story with the mainstream media and you don’t see anything that relates to the campaign, are you not obviously in the tank for Obama? Or maybe not obviously, but where is this notion that we’re not looking at stories that…?

Continue reading on www.rushlimbaugh.com