And you cited Media Matters.

Do you like these stories from Media Matters?

As Media Matters for America has documented, 9-11 Commission member and former senator Slade Gorton (R-WA) has argued that, because a far-reaching Pentagon investigation has yet to find any evidence supporting Shaffer's account, "as of today" the civilian official "does not corroborate what he [Shaffer] has to say."

Further, the AP reported that 9-11 Commission chairman Thomas Kean and vice chairman Lee Hamilton said the commission "did not obtain enough information on the [Able Danger] operation to consider it historically significant." But the article omitted the key reasons the commission provided for determining that the claims were unreliable. As the Post reported on August 23, "The Sept. 11 panel said it did not find Phillpott's assertions credible because there were no documents to support them, and because Atta did not first travel to the United States until June 2000," at least four months after Phillpott claims that Able Danger identified Atta in Brooklyn, New York. As USA Today noted on August 26: "Shaffer says the team placed Atta in New York as early as February 2000, but The 9/11 Commission Report said he arrived in June of that year."

http://mediamatters.org/research/200508290008

See, about 5 years ago Shaffer caused a big stir by claiming that his military intelligence unit, known as Able Danger, identified lead 9-11 hijacker Mohammed Atta in a chart more than a year before the 9-11 attacks, but that the Defense Department and the 9-11 Commission kept that knowledge out of the 9-11 Commission report.

Naturally, such an allegation was thoroughly checked out. In addition to the 9-11 Commission chairman's statement that the Commission report did not contain these assertions because they were not "credible," separate investigations were conducted by the Defense Department Inspector General and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. The DOD IG report found that, "The anti-terrorist program, Able Danger, did not identify Mohammed Atta of any of the other 9/11 terrorists before the 9/11 attack" and that members of the program were "not prohibited from sharing intelligence information with law enforcement authorities or other agencies that could have acted" on that information. Similarly, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that "both the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence staff review and the DOD Inspector General review revealed no evidence to support the underlying Able Danger allegations."

That would seem to put the matter to rest, but now Shaffer has a book to sell. Coincidently -- just after the book came out -- Fox News reporter Catherine Herridge "exclusively obtained" an un-redacted copy of the DOD IG report, and contacted "at least" five of the witnesses listed in the report (whose identities were originally redacted). These witnesses now claim their stories were distorted by the report. Herridge does not make clear whether these are the same individuals whose claims of having seen Atta in the chart were deemed to be "not accurate" by the IG report and "not credible or reliable" by the Senate Committee, nor did her article note that the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence corroborated the DOD IG's findings on Shaffer's allegations. And it should be noted that this all happened under the Bush administration, making the suggestion of a 9-11 cover-up of intelligence failures during the Clinton administration just seem odd.

However, none of these issues stopped Fox & Friends from reporting the claims as fact - completely ignoring they were debunked years ago, even if one of these reports is now being disputed.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201010050024

Tell me you were being facetious, citing Media Matters.