Of all the news outlets reporting on Hillary Clinton’s appearance in front of the Benghazi committee the Las Vegas newspaper chose the Washington Post version, possibly the least objective of the wire services.
Its opening paragraph states:
Hillary Rodham Clinton easily parried barbed Republican questioning Thursday about the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya, emerging unscathed from a high-stakes congressional hearing with a smooth and sometimes poignant account of her role in the event that has loomed as among her largest political liabilities.
Never does the story mention how she and the president, just weeks before the election, concocted a story blaming the attack on the ambassador’s compound on reaction to an anti-Islamic video to distract from Obama’s insistence that terrorism was on the decline.
It’s all about politics now but not then.
The print version of the story was cut before getting to questions about how she could find time to swap emails with Sidney Blumenthal — described in Wikipedia as a “journalist, activist, writer and former political aide” Bill Clinton and a “long-time confidant to Hillary Clinton— but not the ambassador the Libya.
The story does mention in passing the FBI investigation of her handling of national security information.
For comparison, the lede on The Associated Press story, to which the Las Vegas paper no longer subscribes, stated:
Hillary Rodham Clinton strove to close the book on the worst episode of her tenure as secretary of state Thursday, battling Republican questions in a marathon hearing that grew contentious but revealed little new about the 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya. She firmly defended her record while seeking to avoid any mishap that might damage her presidential campaign.
Lacks the interpretative conclusions of the WaPo account.