The editorial page editor for the New York Times denied on Monday the existence of a “newsroom conspiracy of any kind” to support Hillary Clinton for president in 2016.
Editor Andrew Rosenthal declared the paper’s non-allegiance to the former Secretary of State after the paper found itself accused by conservatives over the weekend of carrying Clinton’s water with its new reporting on the Benghazi attacks of 2012.
“Since I will have more to say about which candidate we will endorse in 2016 than any other editor at the Times,” Rosenthal wrote, “let me be clear: We have not chosen Mrs. Clinton. We haven’t chosen anyone.”
Added Rosenthal: “I can also state definitively that there was no editorial/newsroom conspiracy of any kind, because I knew nothing about the Benghazi investigation article until I read it in the paper on Sunday.”
Over the weekend, the New York Times published an in-depth investigative piece, “A Deadly Mix in Benghazi,” which Democrats have gleefully promoted. The story contradicts what Republicans on Capitol Hill say they have learned from their investigations. The New York Times reports that al-Qaida was not involved in the 2012 attacks in Libya and the attacks were partly motivated by an anti-Islam video.
Would Clinton run for president, it is expected that she will be criticized for not doing enough to to stop the attacks, which killed four Americans including Chris Stevens, the U.S. ambassador to Libya.