Something Very Unlikely Happened During Dana Loesch's First Appearance on 'Piers Morgan Live' Since Being 'Banned

In her first appearance on CNN's "Piers Morgan Live" since being "banned" by the host, TheBlaze TV's Dana Loesch on Monday argued that there is a double-standard in the media when it comes to political scandals. Specifically, she said New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's "Bridgegate" is being treated differently than the Benghazi terror attacks, the IRS scandal and "Operation Fast and Furious."

Loesch also said she has additional questions about Christie's involvement in his current scandal, but she isn't being attacked for pressing for answers like she is when discussing Benghazi or other Obama administration scandals.

CNN

In a surprising development, Loesch actually got some backup from Piers Morgan as Marc Lamont Hill accused conservatives of having a "verbal tick" that causes them to always bring up Benghazi when a Republican is under fire.

"You call four dead Americans a verbal tick?" Loesch shot back.

That's when Morgan stepped in and defended Loesch's assessment.

"I actually think Dana raises a very, perfectly relevant point, which is, I think there is a hypocrisy there," Morgan said. "Having lived through these three other scandals that she cited, I do remember the way the Democrats behaved over that -- and now suddenly it looks like it's a different criteria."

Morgan also argued that Bridgegate could be just as serious as some of the scandals that President Obama has faced because people could have lost their lives.

Hill went on to clarify that he doesn't believe the death of four dead Americans is unimportant. However, he said there is no solid evidence of wrongdoing on behalf of President Obama or the State Department.

"It comes down to accountability," Morgan pressed. "If you're the boss, if you're the president or you're a governor, how accountable should you be for the actions of people working for you?"

Loesch also pushed back against Hill after he claimed that "all we ever talk about is Benghazi."

"We just found out that the New York Times apparently had someone there on the ground and they were interviewing people who were apparently participating in the attack and that came out a year after this happened," she added. "How long have eyewitnesses been held back by the State Department? I think it's perfectly legitimate and valid to ask these questions."

"You can't say that we've talked about Benghazi endlessly, because we haven't. We are still learning information about it," Loesch concluded.

Listen to Hill's response and the rest of the segment via CNN below: