On October 27, 2013, 60 Minutes ran a blockbuster story of a Benghazi witness who dramatically told of his presence on the scene the night Ambassador Christopher Stevens was killed.

His story of being on the scene was new, his information regarding prior warnings was not new. The failure of the Obama administration to provide protection and the cover-up that the attack was the result of a spontaneous protest are the scandal. That’s why we headlined the 60 Minutes report that 60 Minutes “confirms” the scandal, 60 Minutes confirms Benghazi is a real scandal, and you’ve been lied to.

We weren’t the only one seeing that the scandal information confirmed prior reports.  Dave Weigel at Slate.com, in trying to minimize the damage to Obama, wrote What Did We Learn From the 60 Minutes Benghazi Report?:

But the report tells us more about what we’ve known for a year, and known in detail since the spring of 2013. Lara Logan’s big coup is an interview with a British security officer who uses a psuedonym; her other on-camera sources, Andy Wood and Gregory Hicks, had testified before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee….

This colors in some of the story, but it doesn’t advance the scandal. The Stevens cables that warned State about what might happen were revealed almost a year ago, sparking off some minor head-rolling at State but not much else. What conservatives want to know—and when I go to conferences or political rallies, I hear this—is what Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were doing on the night of the attack, and whether they heard earlier warnings but ignored them.

The scandal part of Benghazi now will be lost in the media narrative because it turns out that 60 Minutes star witness may not have been on the scene.  His dramatic story of his own heroics that night appears to be false, or at least subject to serious doubt.

Via Noah Rothman at Mediaite, Lara Logan says 60 Minutes got it wrong, and will correct the story this weekend (video at bottom of post): 

CBS 60 Minutes reporter Lara Logan admitted on Friday that a person who claimed to have been witness to the deadly September 11, 2012 attack on an American consulate in Benghazi and who served as the centerpiece of a recent report on that attack may have misled her.

In late October, 60 Minutes ran a report featuring the account of British security expert Dylan Davies – though he called himself Morgan Jones – who recounted in detail his actions in the early morning hours during the Benghazi attack.

It was later revealed that Davies told the FBI he did not visit the American diplomatic compound on the night of the attack and had not, as he claimed, seen the body of slain U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

“The most important thing to every person is the truth and today the truth is we made a mistake,” Logan said. “That’s very disappointing for any journalist.”

“Nobody likes to admit that they made a mistake, but if you do, you have to stand up and take responsibility and you have to say that you were wrong,” she continued. “And in this case we were wrong.”

It is unclear as of this writing how much of the story was wrong, whether just the witness’s presence on scene that night or more of his story. 

Regardless, this is like manna from heaven for those who say Benghazi is a phony scandal.  It’s not a phony scandal, as demonstrated by numerous witnesses whose testimony is not impeachable; but this phony eyewitness and 60 Minutes’ shoddy journalism have done damage to the truth being told.