Fox News’ “Ethics in Journalism” hit what may be a new low Friday (11/16/12) when Megyn Kelly was so busy eating up Rep. Peter King’s claim that Benghazi memos were altered in a cover up, that she forgot to ask him why he had already provided a much different story to reporters elsewhere. 

First, King spoke with reporters immediately following a closed-door hearing regarding Benghazi. Here is a transcript of King’s relevant comments about statements by then-CIA head General David Petraeus courtesy of Think Progress - whose article also provides valuable context to the statements:

Q: Did he (Petraeus) say why it was taken out of the talking points that [the attack] was Al Qaeda affiliated?

KING: He didn’t know.

Q: He didn’t know? What do you mean he didn’t know?

KING: They were not involved — it was done, the process was completed and they said, “OK, go with those talking points.” Again it’s interagency — I got the impression that 7, 8, 9 different agencies.

Q: Did he give you the impression that he was upset it was taken out?

KING: No.

Q: You said the CIA said “OK” to the revised report –

KING: No, well, they said in that, after it goes through the process, they OK’d it to go. Yeah, they said “Okay for it to go.”

In other words, the CIA was fine with U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice not saying that the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was Al Qaeda affiliated – for which she is now vilified daily by conservatives.

King's Q&A with reporters is in the first video below.

Now, let’s compare that with what King told Megyn Kelly:

(SPOILER ALERT! The acknowledgment is never brought up!)

That’s right. In an 11-minute interview with Megyn Kelly on America Live, the acknowledgement that the revised documents were accepted by the CIA never left King’s mouth. Instead, he helped feed Kelly’s fabricated outrage over Al Qaeda not being mentioned because, they suggested, the White House wanted to hide behind Susan Rice.

Here’s a transcript of part of the discussion, starting at the 3:03 mark, when they talked about the Al Qaeda reference being removed from the talking points:

KING: The expression they (the CIA) use is that, when (the talking points) left the building, meaning the CIA - when it left the building, the reference to Al Qaeda was in there, when it came back, it was taken out, indicated it went to the Department of Justice, it went to the State Department, apparently went to the National Security Council, it went to Public Information Officers, It went to what they call a Deputy’s Meeting, and somewhere along the line, that was taken out. So it really shames the whole tone of it.

KELLY (full of indignation): Mr. Chairman, that’s unbelievable to me, that you have all these officials on something this important, and no one has been able to tell you, the Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, or any of these other lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who removed the Al Qaeda references from the talking points that would be delivered to the American people? There’s been no accountability by these folks who answer to us, we the People, through you, our representatives?

KING: Megyn, I agree with you completely. Especially since the President, and the Vice President, and the Administration have hidden behind the fact all along that Susan Rice only said on the TV programs what she was told was the best estimate of the intelligence community. Well, the fact is, the best estimate of the intelligence community on September 15^th and 16^th was that there was direct Al Qaeda involvement. That was taken out, and to me, again, if I had to presume, I’d say it was somebody in the Administration had to have taken it out because nobody in the Director of National Intelligence Office, and nobody in the CIA that did it. So it was someone else that did it, and I doubt if the State Department or the Defense Department, or the Justice Department would be involved in taking that out.

But again, we’ll have to find out. That, to me, has to be pursued.

KELLY: How do you find out? So, your suspicion is it was coming from the White House, that’s what I hear you saying. How do you find out whether that’s true?

If King knows the CIA approved of the removal of "Al Qaeda," he knows nothing has been covered up.

As Media Matters noted, in its coverage of this segment, 

King's comments are a fatal blow to the phony controversy over Rice's interviews: Rice never ruled out the possibility that the attack was an act of terrorism, and what she said was consistent with the public assessment approved by the intelligence community -- including the CIA.

Silence is the only way Fox can keep its scandal alive.

UPDATE: Peter King was erroneously referred to as Steve King in the original headline. We apologize for the error.