UPDATE I - The reason for the title, was that this is what spurred me on to read more about the story. Then I wanted to point out the obvious discrepancies in CBS's account of things. Then at the end, I got back to being angry about their "nopology." Hope this clears up any confusion as to the focus of my diary.
UPDATE II - From "second gen" in the comments, comes this tidbit from the Chicago Sun Times:
Logan even called for retribution for the recent terrorist killings of Christopher Stevens, the U.S. ambassador to Libya, and three other officials. The event is a harbinger of our vulnerability, she said. Logan hopes that America will “exact revenge and let the world know that the United States will not be attacked on its own soil. That its ambassadors will not be murdered, and that the United States will not stand by and do nothing about it.”Speaks to her frame of mind, while producing this story for 60 Minutes. Revenge. And apparently she bought the lies from Fox et al, that Obama and Clinton were negligent in Benghazi.
Upon reading the New York Times piece (published 11-7-13), I was confused about two particular paragraphs in the article.
But the program seemed to make a crucial error in going ahead with its report before it knew for certain what was in the F.B.I. interviews. Mr. Fager said CBS had made extensive efforts to determine what Mr. Davies told the F.B.I. He said the network had sources who led the program to believe that the report was “in sync” with the account Mr. Davies gave to “60 Minutes.”
Informed Thursday night by The Times that the F.B.I. version diverged from what Mr. Davies said on “60 Minutes,” CBS News quickly checked its own F.B.I. sources, Mr. Fager said, and learned that what Mr. Davies had told the F.B.I. “differed from what he told us.”
Let's put those two sentences back to back, for comparison:
CBS had made extensive efforts to determine what Mr. Davies told the F.B.I. He said the network had sources who led the program to believe....
CBS News quickly checked its own F.B.I. sources....
So, CBS made extensive efforts with the sources they had.........
And, after reading the NYTimes article, CBS quickly checked its own F.B.I. sources.........
Ahhhhhhhhhh, I get it. They used multiple sources, apparently none of them the actual F.B.I., to determine the veracity of Mr. Davies' claims.
Then, when pressed with counter-facts, by a print story, they "quickly" checked with their own F.B.I. sources, and found out the truth.
So, CBS had F.B.I. sources.
But didn't feel the need to check with them directly.
And instead, counted on other sources, who claimed to know what the F.B.I. knew.
And when the NYTimes claimed they were wrong, it took them just a few hours to check with the F.B.I. sources to find the truth.
Ms. Logan did not reply to requests for an interview Friday. In an interview earlier this week, she had ardently defended Mr. Davies’s character and his veracity against charges that he had given differing accounts of the events that night in Benghazi.
She also suggested, as Mr. Fager did on Friday, that the “60 Minutes” report became enmeshed in the continuing political battle over the Benghazi incident. The compelling account from Mr. Davies had provided congressional Republicans with new ammunition to criticize the Obama administration.
So, to recap:
On October 27th, 2013, CBS's 60 Minutes aired an ADMITTEDLY politically motivated story about the Benghazi Embassy attack on 9-11-12. In it they presented a witness to the attack, who was not a witness to the attack, who wrote a book about the attack he was witness to, that he wasn't a witness to, called "The Embassy House: The Explosive Eyewitness Account of the Libyan Embassy Siege by the Soldier Who Was There" but he wasn't really there, published by the company owned by CBS Inc., the very same company who aired the politically motivated story about the embassy attack witness who wasn't a witness to the attack. In this admittedly politically motivated story, there was no mention of the fact that CBS owns the company which published the book about the witness to the attack, who was not a witness to the attack. And when shown that they were wrong, dismissed their own "F.B.I. sources," and "quickly" checked ACTUAL F.B.I. sources, finding out that their witness to the attacks was not a witness to the attacks, and their story a was complete fabrication, made by the man (who they were talking with for months), who wrote the book that was published by the company, that they own, which was never disclosed to their viewers.
And their "apology" ??? Well, it's basically this:
We're sorry we were lied to.
And their apology is to their viewers.
Not to the President of the United States, The U.S. Secretary of State, Embassy employees who died, nor their families.
But to their viewers..........who buy the products that CBS sells during their airing of the admittedly politically motivated, and fabricated, story about the embassy attacks, by a witness who was not a witness.
That's who they're apologizing to.