In the wake of bombshell reports Monday indicating former national security adviser Susan Rice had “unmasked” associates of President Donald Trump, the mainstream media largely ignored the story or even flatly denied the seriousness of the revelations.
“This is such a low point for the American media,” LifeZette Editor-in-Chief Laura Ingraham said on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends” on Tuesday. “I mean, they have been pounding the Russia story for weeks — even though top officials have said they have no evidence that any Russia involvement in our election or attempt to meddle in our election had any effect. They stay on that story.”
“But this story about Susan Rice, given her past, is explosive. And I hope journalists at The Washington Post start doing their job.”
Ingraham referred to the infamous interviews Rice gave in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. During an interview with CBS News’ “Face the Nation,” Rice blamed the assault on outrage over a YouTube video. Details later emerged that debunked Rice’s claims and laid more of the blame on security decisions made at the State Department.
“But now we have a confidante, close confidante of both Hillary Clinton, who was running against Donald Trump, and Barack Obama — the same woman who went out on four Sunday shows and lied about the attack in Benghazi,” Ingraham added.
“[Rice] was that trusted and that relied upon that they sent her out to sell that lie endlessly on television,” Ingraham said.
Ingraham said even if Rice’s actions turn out to be legal, the incident should raise serious questions among the American people.
News for the Informed American Patriot
Sign up for our twice-daily emails and stay up-to-date on the most important news and commentary!
“It very well might have been legal. That’s a separate problem that we have with our surveillance culture in Washington. I mean, should this be legal? I think we’ll have to find out more about what she actually did,” Ingraham said. “If she had a political motive for doing what she did, that is reprehensible and could be unlawful, and more investigation needs to go on about this.”
But if the sole purpose of unmasking was to discover what Trump associates were discussing or how they planned to alter former President Barack Obama’s policies, there could be legal ramifications, Ingraham said. If that was the case, “then we are on the verge in this country of living with police state tactics,” Ingraham added.
“This is what police states do to their political opponents. They surveil and they report back to headquarters,” Ingraham said. “Was there a concerted effort to discover as much information as possible on the incoming administration for future use and politics and other investigations that might now have been going on? What were they looking for? And who else did she discuss this unmasking with?”
Ingraham noted it remains unclear how much, if anything, Obama knew about Rice’s unmasking efforts.
“What did Barack Obama know, and when did he know it? And who in the Obama administration directed Susan Rice to do this, or was she just acting alone?” Ingraham asked. “There is an aggressive lack of curiosity on the part of the ‘lame-stream’ media on all of this.”
As a prop, Ingraham held up a copy of The Washington Post for Tuesday — dubbing it “The Washington Compost” — and noted that Rice appeared nowhere on the front page.
“We know exactly what side they’re on here,” Ingraham said. “But this story about Susan Rice, given her past, is explosive. And I hope journalists at The Washington Post start doing their job.”