Hardball with Chris Matthews, 5/22/13, 5:58 PM ET

Matthews: ‘Consummate unfairness’ in fight over Benghazi

Chris Matthews looks at the politicization of the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001 versus the Sept, 11, 2012 attack in Benghazi, Libya, comparing coverage of the two.

The ‘consummate unfairness’ of the Benghazi fight

Updated

Let me finish tonight with this.

I was thinking the other day about the consummate unfairness of this Benghazi fight.

When our country was hit in 2001, with those planes flying into the World Trade Center up in New York and the Pentagon down here in Washington, the country accepted the horror. Sure, there was some finger pointing about the warning the CIA had given the President about Al Qaeda attacking in the United States, but nobody serious was out there saying it was George W. who was behind 9/11, nobody really calling him a bad guy over it, and certainly nobody serious talking about impeachment.

Then I read the other day about some Republicans talking about impeaching President Obama over the attack by terrorists on a CIA facility in Benghazi, out there in the wilds of revolutionary Libya.

Think, for a second, of how disproportionate this is. In one case, the United States is attacked in its greatest city and its capital. The casualties climb into the thousands.

In the other case, an ambassador is killed in the midst of his duties, out there in a location that even under quiet circumstances was risky.

In the case of 9/11, the political critics pull with the president. They put politics aside.

In the case of the outpost in Libya, they make it grounds for the biggest scandal in god’s creation, the basis for all-out political war!

Who is reasonable here? Who is fair?

The 'consummate unfairness' of the Benghazi fight

Updated