The New York Times ‘reporter’ David Kirkpatrick who wrote that ridiculous Benghazi story over the past weekend of no Al-Qaeda involvement, and being caused by a video is starting to show his real side. On Twitter, Kirkpatrick claimed that the New York Times had reporters on the ground during the Benghazi terrorist attack. Now only did the Times have reporters on the ground during the terrorist attack, but Kirkpatrick claims they actually talked with the attackers DURING the attack on the consulate that left four American dead.
@RichardGrenell we had a reporter on the scene talking to the attackers during the attack- still invaluable
— David D. Kirkpatrick (@ddknyt) December 30, 2013
|
| New York Times David Kirkpatrick claims to have had a reporter on the ground in Bengahzi during terrorist attack |
|---|
Of course I don’t buy this crock of shit Kirkpatrick is spewing. But if the New York Times had a reporter on the ground during the Benghazi terrorist attack, interviewing the attackers, how the hell does the US governent not vaporize these terrorist scum before they even have a chance to open their mouth to America’s version of Pravda. Seems like some House committee hearings may be needed here. I’m starting to wonder if this David Kirkpatrick assclown on Twitter is just a parody account or something. If you look at the moron’s timeline, you’ll get a good kick out of how stupid he comes off as.
But there’s more David Kirkpatrick than either he or the New York Times wants you to know. Seems this clown is trying to drive more of his personal book sales. Isn’t that an amazing coincidence/