Sharyl Attkisson Discusses Reporting About Obama-Era 'Fast And Furious' And Benghazi Scandals

8 months ago

At today's House Judiciary Committee hearing, Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-ND) questioned Sharyl Attkisson about her reporting of the Fast and Furious and Benghazi scandals.

Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:

https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript

Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com

Transcript

00:00More round of questions before we break for the Prime Minister, so I'm going to recognize the

00:04gentleman from North Dakota. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don't think people go into investigative

00:09reporting to get rich. I think it's an incredibly important service that was just pointed, but I just

00:15want to react a little bit. I don't think being held in contempt, either civilly or criminally,

00:20is either A, a conspiracy theory, or B, part of an employment dispute. You're either going to be

00:27civilly held in contempt and fined until you disclose your source, or worse yet, you're going

00:31to be put in an 8x10 with bars on the window. That's what contempt means, for not disclosing

00:37a source. So, if there's been a more chilling effect on the right of the free pass and right

00:43for North Dakota citizens to be informed about what's going on, I'd like to know it. Ms. Heritage,

00:50you've been held in contempt. Do you feel like that's part of an employment dispute?

00:53I want to have complete respect for the legal process. My case is being litigated, but no,

00:58these are separate matters, Congressman. You know, I'm hopeful soon that the Senate will take up the

01:02PRESS Act and add a federal SHIELD law for reporters being compelled to reveal confidential

01:07sources. Ms. Atkinson, I am under the impression that reporters in most states have SHIELD law

01:12protection, but federal judges and courts are not bound by the same laws? I'm terribly sorry,

01:17I'm not familiar with the status of the states versus... I know in North Dakota, we have a

01:21SHIELD law, and in a lot of different states, they do. So, in 2011, you reported on the Obama...

01:27And I want to back up just a sec. We act like this is new stuff, but this has been going on

01:32for a long time. I mean, we've had a lot of talks about DOJ, Twitter, and Section 230,

01:38and liability, and immunity, and all of those things. But in 2011, you reported on the Obama

01:42administration's Operation Fast and Furious operation, in which ATF purposely allowed

01:47licensed firearm dealers to sell weapons to illegal straw buyers. Were confidential sources

01:53and information critical to informing the public about that scandal? Yes. Would you have been able

01:59to shed light on the federal government selling weapons, including grenade launchers and anti-aircraft

02:03weapons, to the Mexican drug cartels without guaranteeing confidentiality of your sources?

02:09It would have been tough. There would have been something to report, but not what we ended up

02:14reporting. And when you were reporting on the security lapses in the 2012 Benghazi embassy

02:20attack, do you think you would have been able to shed light on the federal government's failure

02:24to maintain embassy security without guaranteeing confidentiality of your sources? Some of it, yes,

02:29but some of it, no. Do you, like me, believe it's important for the American people to be

02:33informed of these things, along with waste, fraud, and abuse by the federal government,

02:37and we should do what we can to ensure robust media scrutiny of those government officials?

02:42Yes. Even if that includes members of Congress? Right. Does the status quo where sources need to

02:48depend on a reporter and their outlet's financial tolerance or physical tolerance for contempt

02:53punishment equate to a functional, sensible system? No, and one quick example. A lot of times,

03:02a source will end up going on the record, which is preferable, but you can't begin the conversation

03:07many times if you can't start out by telling him, as you begin to talk, that he's not going to be

03:14identified yet. Does the current system have a chilling effect on potential confidential sources

03:19and whistleblowers? Yes. If we pass the PRESS Act, you talked a little bit about the PRESS Act

03:24and where you think it's deficient and whatever, but you agree it would be helpful, at least. It

03:28seems like it would be helpful. You know, in the last minute and 30 seconds, I think we can

03:33deal with this. I think there's certain things that we have to recognize. I'm a former criminal

03:39defense attorney. Confidentiality with my clients is absolutely essential in order to deal with

03:44those things, and I think there are a lot of different similarities, but you have to be as

03:48mentally tough as anybody to be an investigative reporter, and we're sitting here right now talking

03:53about these things. At the same time, we got a letter from the DOJ saying that they can't release

03:59an audio tape after they've already given us the transcript from a computer where it was where it

04:05was tried to be erased but only found later because it would have a chilling effect on potential

04:11witnesses coming forward to talk about a crime. That's what the letter said, and at the same time,

04:17we have a DOJ going to investigative reporters saying, I know you guaranteed these people

04:24confidentiality to report against their government doing something bad against U.S. citizens,

04:28but I am going to force you to expose that, or I'm going to hold you in civil contempt,

04:34criminal contempt, or all of those things. Does that seem a little bit hypocritical to you,

04:37Ms. Atkinson? There are many things that seem to be double standard-ish, one way for them and

04:46another way for us. I mean, they're literally saying we can't release something because

04:52otherwise we won't ever be able to investigate anything again, which, by the way, is patently

04:56false. But also, at the same time, when they don't like something any of you all are writing,

05:00right, left, center, conservative, liberal, they say, I want to know who your source is.

05:05I get it. I do too, and I think it's very,

05:07very unfortunate. With that, I yield back. And I recognize my colleague.

Sharyl Attkisson Discusses Reporting About Obama-Era 'Fast And Furious' And Benghazi Scandals

Category

Transcript

Recommended