In October, Jay Leno joked that  “don’t ask, don’t tell” was the administration’s de facto policy on questions about the Sept. 11 Benghazi terrorist attack.

On Thursday night, Leno lashed out at the lapdog media for dutifully accepting President Obama’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on all things Libya. It would be “very dangerous to the White House if journalists should suddenly start asking real questions,” he said.

Not that Leno was willing to ask those “real questions” of the president. When Obama appeared on “The Tonight Show” during campaign season, they chatted about how math is hard.

Via Drudge, Newsbusters has the video:

What happened in Benghazi is no joke, but it’s good to see it making an appearance in a late night monologue. Now if only lapdogs were capable of feeling shame, Leno’s monologue might get us some answers on who changed the Benghazi talking points.

Those “real questions”? You “real journalists” can start any time now.

  • TwitWit

    Leno knows he’s part of the % ‘ers that these progressive terrorists are coming for.. he also knows that he built his success. He probably also knows he will receive a punishment for his ” jokes”.

  • Lord Foggybottom

    You’re in on this too, Leno. You had your shot at asking tough questions and you blew it. Be sure to tell plenty of Obama jokes during the next round of layoffs, you sellout.

  • daviddlpe

    “Not that Leno was willing to ask those “real questions” of the president. When Obama appeared on “The Tonight Show” during campaign season, they chatted about how math is hard.” – To be fair, I don’t expect Jay Leno to perform the work that is supposed to be done by the so-called “journalists,” and most especially the White House press corps. However, the failure of this administration to provide the security and protection necessary to prevent the Benghazi terrorist attack, and the subsequent cover-up in the weeks that followed is the biggest scandal to rock this administration. As a matter of fact, this is the biggest scandal of any administration in modern times. This is bigger than Valerie Plame (GW BUSH), Monica Lewinsky (Slick Willie), Read My Lips (GHW BUSH), Iran-Contra (Reagan), The Iranian Hostage crisis (Carter, from a standpoint of scandals) and most certainly bigger than Watergate (Nixon). If the Poser-in-Chief is going to insist upon continuing to use late-night tv as his own platform pulpit, he is putting himself out there to discuss such issues. After all, what is he going to do? Get angry and refuse to go on late night television shows?

    • Lord Foggybottom

      Actually, it IS Leno’s job to ask questions – that’s what he gets paid for: asking questions. if a politician goes on a show for an interview, the interviewer has the responsibility to ask questions; hard and soft. Leno certainly didn’t have a problem bringing up the “war on women” to Dennis Miller. Also, how is “read my lips” a scandal? Are broken campaign promises now considered scandals?

      • daviddlpe

        Thanks for assuming instead of seeking clarification, thus providing a living example of the problems in our modern discourse. To answer your retort, I did not say it is not Leno’s job to ask questions. I am saying that I do not hold him accountable to perform the duties of those who are supposed to be actual journalists. I agree that to not ask about it is an act of cowardice on his part, but I do not view it as a failure to do his job. He is an entertainer on what is largely considered to be a comedy show. If you are relying upon Leno to do the job of the White House Press Corps, then our situation is even more grave than I believed when I woke up this morning…

        As to my list, I was not claiming that “Read my lips” was a scandal. If you will notice, I was going through each president back to Nixon. There were no scandals that I can recall during the GHWB years. The most ‘scandalous’ event was his going back on his pledge to not raise taxes. The point I was making was to look at the event in each administration that could be deemed the most scandalous. For GHWB, that was the best I could do. I am open to correction if you have something better. Carter’s Iran hostage situation was less of a scandal and more of sheer incompetence. But again, it was the most scandalous event I could recall in his administration. The point still stands. Benghazi trumps everything else I mentioned, and it does so on two fronts: the failure to provide security which is gross negligence leading up to the anniversary of 9/11, and the disinformation campaign after the fact.

        Does that help?

        • daviddlpe

          To put it another way, when I hear that our Poser-In-Chief is going to appear on almost any show, I don’t even bother to tune in. He only goes on shows where he can count on softballs. The only time it is worthwhile to watch him field questions is when he is giving a rare press conference. That is the only time he gets questions that are even remotely challenging, which is why his press conferences are so rare. I am certainly not going to tune in to an interview between Obama and Jay Leno or David Letterman thinking that I may hear a piece of ground breaking information, and I will not force myself to listen to the latest vacation adventures of the Obama family on the taxpayer dollar in order to get some tiny nugget of insight. If Obama wants to sit down with Bret Baier or Chris Wallace, that may be worthwhile. Otherwise, the less I see or hear of him, the better.

          • auntgiddy

            …bravo…agree with all your posts…don’t EVER watch BO on entertainment PR BS campaigns… and don’t hold Leno (or that moron Letterman) responsible for what our 4th estate has shirked these 4+ years… the MSM balance sheets are crying because less and less useful idiots are tuning-in or reading their rags… benghazi is a very deep well for BO… and there’s more “news” in Pravda… than the NYTs…

          • Lord Foggybottom

            I can’t stand to see his face on the top of Drudge, let alone watch an interview. Blech.

          • Barb

            Leno is just now realizing his huge wallet is going to become a lot smaller. Idiot!

        • Lord Foggybottom

          I wasn’t assuming anything, I was going on what I read. If you step back and read it again later you’ll see why I thought what I did: you kind of lumped the stuff together and didn’t make it clear these weren’t scandals, etc. No matter, I wasn’t attacking. :)

          • daviddlpe

            No worries – sorry about the misread on my part. I understand your frustration… When no one is doing their job, we start, clamoring for anyone to do it. I just think it is fallacy to rely on Jay Leno to do what the American media should be doing. In the end, as proven with Benghazi, it is up to us as citizens to keep being loud enough to not allow his misdeeds to be ignored.

    • EEKman

      I dont get this right wing ‘cover up’ conspiracy. There is no coverup. There is no scandal. All you have is the difference between classified talking points and unclassified talking points. The language was changed by the intelligence community, not the white house. The changes were approved unaninmously by the intelligence community, not for any political purpose.
      There are very valid security reasons why they changed the language. Its an ongoing investigation, you dont want to point fingers and show your hand, or certain communication channels go dark. Get it? If you want to talk about why the security budget wasnt approved, fine, but you might want to ask why the Republicans didnt provide the requested funds. Other failures are intelligence related and not political.
      The republicans are trying to force a scandal, because you want an excuse for impeachment. You arent going to get it. You will only further damage your brand. You know that your questions cant be fully answered without revealing classified information.
      It doesn’t make any sense, I dont even get what the supposed response should have been. You’re arguing whether its a terrorist attack or not. Whats the bloody difference? How does that change how we respond? How should we have responded?
      Theres more evidence that this is a GOP ruse to get Obama to nominate Kerry instead, leaving his seat free for Scott Brown. Its pathetic, but par for the course for the GOP. Given the voter suppression tactics they tried to pull this season i wouldnt put anything past them at this point.

      • daviddlpe

        All I can say is that it is telling what conspiracies you will allow yourself to see and what you will not. The fact is that Barack Obama went out on many occasions in many different venues and blamed Benghazi on a YouTube video, even as he criticized Romney for “shooting first and aiming later…” Where is the evidence that allowed Obama to put forth the narrative of an obscure video sparking the attack? High officials in his administration watched the video of the attack, and there is ample speculation that Obama was among those in the room. Even if he was not in the room, those who serve as his advisers saw the evidence for themselves. No one who has seen the video evidence leaves any room for doubt – this was a terrorist attack, planned and organized, and not a spontaneous reaction to a video.

        Therefore, it is time for you to hold your president accountable to the same standards you employed against Bush and what you now employ against the GOP. The GOP is not the Commander-In-Chief. If Susan Rice was sent out with false talking points, then she needs to name the person or persons who provided her with those points. She also needs to answer for why she voluntarily went onto 5 talk shows to put forth a narrative which proved to be false without using her own security clearance to check further into the facts. Finally, and ultimately, the buck stops with the Commander-In-Chief. No one has more or better access to intel than does he. If he was not lying, than he was amazingly incompetent. Either way, he should be impeached.

        • EEKman

          What is the difference? Tell me, how does it change anything meaningful whether the average American thinks its a spontaneous demonstration, a terrorist attack or both? The actual definition is classified for reasons I already stated.

          • Dawn

            Hmm, perhaps because the information that came out was nothing but a lie, a cover-up, or ?? It would have been very simple and straight forward and honest, to simply state that the attack was still under investigation and as soon as more information was available it would be released. But no, we get made up story of a spontaneous reaction to a video.

      • Teresa Davis McCormick

        “voter suppression from the GOP” said no one but this guy^

        • EEKman

          You might want to pay attention to current events. It’s been admitted to even by republicans.

          • Teresa Davis McCormick

            Thanks for looking for me just so you could slam me. Makes me laugh. Once again, your complete lack of civility surprises no one. You’ll forgive me but I don’t feel like educating you today. So go watch “the View” and calm down.

      • RightThinking1

        OK. Just two simple questions…, very simple. When did Obama know that it was a terrorist attack? When did Rice know that it was a terrorist attack? Easy enough, right?

        • EEKman

          Re read what I said. It’s irrelevant when he knew. The CIA asked him to use the language he did for valid security reasons.

          • daviddlpe

            “What is the difference?” Wow – where to start… Let’s try this:

            You come home to find your family has been slaughtered. The police officer tells you that it was because of a sign that one of your neighbors had posted that was against a certain ethnic group, and they reacted against your family at random in a spontaneous demonstration against those who posted the sign.

            You find out later that it was a targeted gang attack against your family. You have been trying to tell the police for months about the gang activity in your area, only to have them not only refuse to provide additional police patrols, but they even remove one of the two patrol units you used to have in your neighborhood. In addition to that, your house and family had been attacked on at least 3 occasions prior to this one. Each time, you requested extra police presence, and you had even requested extra security on the day your family was killed.

            On top of all this, the police chief is running for re-election, and he has been campaigning on the faulty and misleading assertion that, on his watch, there is no more threat from gangs, and he has them on the run.

            Is there a difference in what happened and what you have been told? Does it matter?

            “The language was changed by the intelligence community, not the white house. The changes were approved unaninmously by the intelligence community, not for any political purpose.”

            There is no credibility whatsoever in this argument. There is no intelligence source that would be compromised from the correct identification of this as a terrorist attack. We have it on video, from two different sources.
            Are you really advocating for the right of the CIA to pull the strings on the White House and determine what information the American people are entitled to when we have been attacked by terrorists?
            It is one thing to protect sources. It is altogether different to lie about an event which refutes the re-election campaign talking points. Not for any political purpose? That is sheer willful naivete…

          • Dawn

            Great analogy!

          • RightThinking1

            “Irrelevant” to you, perhaps. If only the saying of it made it so, but it doesn’t.
            At any rate, it seems you have no answers….


    Not only did Jay Leno nail it with that one but the reaction immediately following it was telling….people know this is the case but either favor it or fear speaking out about it.

    Face it…if you say anything you get attacked…terrorist supporters and apologists were not voting for the GOP after all…

  • Burt Zerker

    It is only just starting to dawn on guys like Leno, that they will not be able to keep all of their ‘cool stuff’, when and if these 0bama communists succeed.

    Leno: It is high time that you figure out which side your bread is buttered on, act accordingly, be a man.

  • nc

    I’m actually cutting Leno some slack on this one and going to give him him an “Atta boy.” Sure, he had his opportunity to ask the questions before the election. But he’s a Hollywood guy, playing the Hollywood game, and it was BHO who changed things up and did most of his TV interviews in the “soft” venues for the first time. Leno is not a hard news guy, and he didn’t expect to carry the weight of the alphabets. Now that it’s obvious that they didn’t do their job, we’re blaming Leno?

    I say good for him for not burying the issue and maybe, just maybe, enlightening the low-informeds about what this Benghazi thing was all about.

  • JustLikeAnimals

    I met Jay Leno at a car show in LA in August. Nice guy.

  • P Owen

    Yes, I saw this last night. Jay almost whispered it! A little frighten to expose the truth to the Hollywood- kool- aide drinkers

  • Edward Tiegs

    It’s Ok for libs to question Obama now that he is already elected.

  • Herman LaClair

    leno demonstrates, at the very least, a willingness to acknowledge a problem with the way Benghazi was handled.

  • lana ward

    Never happen. Why would the media say anything to make queer boy out to be a liar

  • disqus_ys7YLGvSbv

    Thank you Jay!