Opening the segment, co-host Brian Kilmeade re-introduced an issue that happened to Shaffer “a few years ago.” Kilmeade noted that Shaffer “has got a new book out right now, but that's not the book we're talking about.” Actually, his new book -- coincidently published by News Corp.'s HarperCollins -- had everything to do with what they were talking about.

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. And, in the process, they proved they couldn't even get the basic facts of the story right. Co-host Gretchen Carlson asked “Why wouldn't they [9-11 Commission] put in the report these findings, because maybe that would look at least like they were kind of following the trail of Mohammed Atta?” Kilmeade followed that up by claiming that “the Defense Department put a line in the sand that these five people that brought up the fact that we were tracking a cell that included Mohammed Atta in it leading up to 9/11, was redacted.” In reality, no one is claiming that they were “tracking” Atta. These people are claiming that they once saw a chart that included Atta, a claim which the DOD and the Senate Committee found to be “not accurate.”

But Kilmeade wasn't done. He added that Shaffer “would not stand for this. He said it was called Operation Able Danger, and we were tracking Mohammad Atta,” and that “Shaffer would not be corralled.” He then linked Shaffer's claims to the recent news that the DOD bought and destroyed the entire first printing of Shaffer's book, Operation Dark Heart, saying that “they were destroyed,” and that the DOD was “going to make him a best seller. And, they're burning his books, as if that's going to stop it. As if we're going to be out of ink. We're not going to make other books?” Of course, what he doesn't tell you, is that the DOD bought and destroyed what appears to be an earlier version of the book - reportedly because it contained classified material - and the publisher subsequently published a new version, while “working with [the DOD] to 'mitigate the resulting effects of the disclosures'.” So, contrary to his suggestion, the book is available, just in a form that the Defense Intelligence Agency has deemed does not compromise the security interests of the United States.

Well, Fox & Friends may have bungled the reporting, but Kilmeade was right on one thing -- if he has his way -- the book will be a best seller. Kind of makes you wonder if that was the point all along.