Dennis Kucinich appeared as a “liberal” on Fox News Sunday’s panel today. But he was so virulent in his criticism of the Obama administration's handling of the Benghazi incident, he could not have made his employer happier. Don’t get me wrong. I’ve got my own criticisms of the Obama administration. And I’ll be the first to admit that there are questions that should be answered about Benghazi. But for a liberal like Kucinich to demand answers while ignoring the ulterior motives of Fox News not only helps them advance their partisan agenda but it gives them a veneer of undeserved journalistic integrity and impartiality.
I’ll leave it to others to speculate on Kucinich’s motives. Frankly, I find it unfathomable that he could either be so blind to how he allowed himself to serve Fox’s interests so blatantly or else be so unconcerned.
Here are the exchanges between host Chris Wallace and Kucinich, as per Fox News’ transcript (video is also below):
FORMER REP. DENNIS KUCINICH, D-OHIO: Well, I didn’t need those memos (about threats in Benghazi) to know that it was wrong for us to intervene in Libya. This is one liberal Democrat who said the intervention was wrong. And what the attack on the consulate brings up, Chris, is the failure of the Benghazi policy from the beginning. And that’s why they had to call it a street demonstration instead of an attack because on the eve of an election that brought in a whole new narrative about foreign policy, about dealing with terrorism, and about the consequences that led to four deaths of people who served the United States.
WALLACE: So do you think those talking points were politically scrubbed?
KUCINICH: Of course they were. Come on, are you kidding? You know, this is one of those things that you have to realize, we’re in the circumference of an election, and when you get on the eve of an election, everything becomes political. Unfortunately, Americans died and people who believe in America who put their lives on the line, they weren’t provided with protection. They weren’t provided with a response. They and their families had a right to make sure that they were defended. Look, we went into Benghazi with under the assumption that somehow there was going to be a massacre in Benghazi. So we went there to protect the Libyan people. We couldn’t go into Benghazi to protect our own Americans who were serving there? I’m offended by this, and there has to be real answers to the questions that are being raised.
… WALLACE: And Congressman Kucinich, I want to ask you, as I discussed with the two congressmen at the beginning of the—a couple of conservative groups this week came up with, I think you have to call them attack ads against Hillary Clinton and Benghazi linking her to that. We’re talking about Victoria Nuland not being important. How damaging, do you think, this week’s revelations and the whole affair are to Hillary Clinton?
KUCINICH: That’s going to remain to be seen. I mean the fact of the matter is that we first have to know that this had an impact on 2012 election, because the truth didn’t come out before the election and now in 2016, I don’t know. I mean you can’t predict. But one thing for sure, Secretary Clinton has to be accountable here and she has more questions to answer. That’s just a fact. How she answers them, we’ll see.
I don’t begrudge Kucinich his criticisms of either Hillary Clinton or the Obama administration but Kucinich seems to be going out of his way to flaunt them on the same network that has never apologized for having its hosts refer to our president as a racist nor for endlessly promoting bogus questions about Obama’s birth certificate. Just whom does he think will be listening and what does he think will be their takeaway? That they'll support Kucinich over Clinton in 2016? Does he seriously think he’s advancing a more-liberal-than-Obama agenda with this kind of talk on this network? I’m not sure which would be worse: not understanding how he’s serving as Fox News’ tool or knowing and not caring.