Fox News Finally Sees the Danger in Asking a Stupid Question

     I mean they've been asking stupid questions for 15 years. Who knew it would finally backfire on them? That's exactly what happened when they tried to ask intelligence expert Tom Ricks some stupid questions about Benghazi.

      "During a Monday interview on Fox News, author Tom Ricks blasted the network as "operating as a wing of the Republican Party” and accused it of hyping the Benghazi attack for political purposes."

      "Ricks — who writes a blog for Foreign Policy magazine and is a best-selling author of books such as “Fiasco” and “The Generals” — told Fox News’s Jon Scott “that Benghazi generally was hyped, by this network especially.”

      “I think that Benghazi generally was hyped, by this network especially,” Ricks said. “And now that the campaign is over, I think [Sen. John McCain] is backing off a little bit. They’re not going to stop Susan Rice from being Secretary of State.”

       "Scott pushed back on the accusation that Fox News "hyped" the attack, asking, “When you have four people dead, including the first U.S. ambassador in more than 30 years, how do you call that hype?”

       “How many security contractors died in Iraq? Do you know?” Ricks replied.

       “I don’t,” Scott said.

        “No, nobody does, because nobody cared,” Ricks said. “We know that several hundred died, but there was never an official count done of security contractors dead in Iraq. So when I say this focus on what was essentially a small fire-fight, I think, number one, I’ve covered a lot of fire-fights, it is impossible to figure out what happens in them sometimes.”

        "Ricks then slammed Fox News again for their Benghazi coverage."
“And second, I think that the emphasis on Benghazi has been extremely political, partly because Fox was operating as a wing of the Republican Party."

        After that, Scott wrapped the interview. "Alright, Tom Ricks. Thanks very much for joining us today," Scott said.

      “You’re welcome,” Ricks replied.

        http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/11/tom-ricks-to-fox-news-the-network-operates-as-a-wing-150296.html

        Lawyers say they want to always know what a witness is going to say before they ask him anything. When your at Fix News where your specialty if faux news that's probably at least as important for you.

        So when Fox ends up with all this egg on their face their reaction is to end the interview. Their next step is to: claim the interviewee that embarrassed you has apologized-even though they didn't.

        "Fox News has hit back at author Tom Ricks for blasting the network during an on-air interview as “operating as a wing of the Republican Party” and accusing it of hyping the Benghazi attack, saying he “apologized in our offices afterward but doesn’t have the strength of character to do that publicly.”

         http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/11/fox-says-ricks-apologized-ricks-disputes-150376.html?hp=l4

         When you think about it, to apologize at all takes some strength of character... Making up a fake apology certainly doesn't. Ricks of course has no recollection of this:

          "Ricks, however, told The Hollywood Reporter he never apologized."

            "Please ask Mr. Clemente what the words of my supposed apology were. I'd be interested to know," he wrote in an e-mail to THR. "Frankly, I don't remember any such apology."

            So that's their safe mode: to make up an apology that never happened. The apology that wasn't. They aren't used to getting smart answers to all their stupid questions.