Fox: Petraeus will not testify on Benghazi

Fox News Live | 11/9/12

[pabianice]

Upon the heels of Petraeus' resignation as CIA director comes the news that he will not testify about the Benghazi outrage or any Libyan matters.

[shhrubbery!]

Was BLACKMAIL involved here?

If not blackmail, then some kind of extortion.

E.g., maybe the Obamaites threatened to have one of Petraeus's friends or compatriots killed. Say, someone who is currently serving in Afghanistan. And the Obamaites told Petraeus the dirty deed could easily be covered up by blaming the death on the Taliban.

Do you think Petraeus would agree to take a fall - to save the life of a friend? I think he might.

[MestaMachine]

Think ‘saddam’. Exactly the same catchmeifyoucan...petraeus.

Moving weapons from Iraq to Libya then and from Libya to Syria now.

[freekitty]

Why not

[freekitty]

I agree.

[Triple]

Ummmm - That is what *SUBPOENAS* are for...

Like he gets to decide...NOT!

[dforest]

They do, and John Bolton said they can subponea him, but it probably won’t make it possible before the hearings coming up next week. He also said Petraeus may also lawyer up before he does.

[Triple]

Petraeus did not go quiet.

He said “No one in the CIA told or delayed anyone from helping the people in Benghazi. The CIA gave a green light, and anything to the contrary did NOT come from CIA” - paraphrasing from my memory.

3

[dglang]

It already is known. If the affair happened while he was on active duty, it could be used to revoke his pensions via a retroactive dishonorable discharge.

Any retired officer or enlisted man could be recalled to active duty to testify in any military court regarding actions taken or crimes committed while on active duty. This could also be used to pertain to crimes committed by others under ones command.

[MayflowerMadam]

“Petraeus said he will be happy to testify to Congress.”

I expect that before that ever happens he’ll be discovered taking a dirt nap in Fort Marcy Park.

[BatGuano]

Actually the oath taker swears to “preserve, protect, and defend” the Constitution. Most of the present administration are busy doing none of the above. I consider the breakers of the oath, from Obama on down, guilty of TREASON who should be impeached, found guilty, and imprisoned. This won't happen. I am a dreamer to even go there.

[throwback]

So Obama purposely hired him for the CIA job because he knew he was compromised. Obama had the ace in the hole and he pulled it in to cover him on Libya when needed. I wonder why he's punching out now? Maybe he was confronted with the affair to get him to backup the video story. So Patraeus gave him the cover but told him he was gone after the election. Petraeus probably revealed the affair just to get out from under that sword, but he won't reveal anything else about Benghazi because he realizes he's dealing with criminals that could ruin him completely if they want.

[Nita Nupress]

Has anyone mentioned a theory that obama didn’t KNOW that Patraeus was going to make the affair public when he announced his resignation? Patraeus may have told obama that he would vaguely claim it was for “personal reasons,” then when Patraeus made the actual announcement, he went public with his affair to take the blackmail threat away from obama.

[tennmountainman]

Sounds right to me. Especially since it is being reported that Obama
did not accept his resignation immediately.

[throwback]

Your mind could run wild with this stuff. So what are the connections of the woman who wrote Petraeus’ bio? Was this possibly a set up for some time? What is the timeline for when the FBI learned of the affair? I would have thought he already had the highest security clearance you can get before being considered for the CIA. Maybe they do them anyway considering that is the most sensitive job in the government. If it is the case that Obama hired him with the affair revealed, then Obama was deliberately subverting existing security protocol to put someone in place he had something on.

[Hildy]

Maybe he decided to get in front of this and is ready to spill the beans?

[tennmountainman]

That sounds right to me. The fact that Obama did not immediately leads me
To believe what you said. He may have been the one to come clean,
To remove the leverage Obama had over him.
There is no reason for him not to testify now. No more leverage against him.

[piasa]

That dog won’t hunt. If there were no assets within reach of the attack then it makes the White House even more culpable, because there should have been. Doubly so for this case where assets were actually pulled from the consulate when the consulate was still requesting more.