In response to the New York Times calling BS on Right Wing conspiracy theories on Benghazi, they have been driven even further around the bend.

Courtesy of MSNBC:  

The New York Times published a comprehensive report over the weekend on last year’s attack in Benghazi, and it’s arguably the most detailed account any major news organization has completed on what transpired in Libya in September 2012. 

The report also appears to have driven some Republicans bonkers. 

GOP conspiracy theories surrounding Benghazi have long been something of a sideshow – after multiple, independent investigations, none of the far-right allegations have been substantiated in the slightest. But the NYT’s account discredited the far-right theories even more thoroughly, effectively ending the debate, such as it was. 

That said, watching the concerted effort to defend the conspiracy theory with an even more elaborate conspiracy theory is rather alarming. 

Charles Krauthammer asserted Monday that the New York Times was driven to conduct a months-long investigation into the deadly attack in Benghazi, Libya solely to give political cover to Hillary Clinton and her fellow Democrats – a year after the influential conservative bemoaned the lack of media coverage on the attack. 

Krauthammer was backing a baseless claim floated by Reps. Mike Rogers (R-MI) and Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA). Westmoreland accused the Times of “laying the groundwork” for a Clinton presidential bid, while Rogers said he found the timing of the report “odd.” 

The Republican pundit believes it’s “quite obvious” that the New York Times “invested all the effort and time in this and put it on the front page is precisely a way to protect the Democrats, to deflect the issue, to protect Hillary, who was exposed on this issue as almost no issue in her tenure in the administration. It is obviously a political move.” 

Noting that Times editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal explained how baseless the allegations against the paper really are, Krauthammer added that Rosenthal “being defensive” only bolsters the new conspiracy further. 

It’s one thing for conservative activists to desperately search for new ways to keep their rallying cry alive, but for high-profile Republican lawmakers and pundits to embrace loony-tunes ideas without shame or embarrassment is unsettling.

You know it would be unsettling if it weren't all too predictable. 

The Right was really convinced that they could use Benghazi against Hillary in 2016. Having it explode in their faces is like going all in on a hand of poker only to learn that the guy on your left is holding a full house.

Without Benghazi they really do not have anything to hang onto.

Therefore it is not surprising that they are refusing to let go.

If other news agencies are reporting there is no scandal they are covering for the administration. If people on the ground report that things did not happen the way Fox News has reported it did, they are lying. And if others claim there is no evidence of al-Qaeda involvement it is becasue they using the definition of al-Qaeda too narrowly.

A couple of years ago I might have been unsettled by Right Wing's inability to recognize that a conspiracy lacked credibility, but those days are long gone.

Today it is just par for the course. And to be honest I would be surprised if they WEREN'T working so hard to breathe fresh life into Benghazi.