Petraeus’s Quieter Style at C.I.A. Leaves Void on Libya Furor

NY Times ^ | November 2, 2012 | SCOTT SHANE

[neverdem]

--snip--

But the Benghazi crisis has posed an extraordinary test for Mr. Petraeus. After the killings, intelligence officials concerned about exposing the extent and methods of the large C.I.A. presence in the city would say little to reporters for publication. Conservative critics of Mr. Obama seized on a series of reports by Fox News and other outlets to make the incendiary charge shortly before the election that four Americans had died because of the administration’s negligence.

Mr. Petraeus said nothing publicly, but that did not keep him out of the story. Some news reports faulted his secret testimony to Congress days after the attack for supposedly supporting the view that it was not a planned strike but a spontaneous response to an offensive anti-Muslim video. Then, last week, Fox News reported that agency officials had refused desperate requests for help from operatives under fire in Libya, and the agency issued a flat denial. “No one at any level in the C.I.A. told anybody not to help those in need,” its statement said.

Far from ending the speculation, the statement added to it. William Kristol, the editor of The Weekly Standard, concluded that the agency was pointing its finger at the White House, which he suggested must have refused the requested intervention. “Petraeus Throws Obama Under the Bus” was the headline on the Weekly Standard’s blog.

--snip--

On Thursday, hoping to subdue the gathering public relations storm, intelligence officials invited reporters to a background briefing to, in their view, set the record straight. They offered a timeline of C.I.A. actions on the night of the attack, countering the idea that the besieged Americans were left alone under fire, and explaining why some would-be rescue efforts discussed in news reports were never feasible.

Notably, they also sought to rehabilitate Mr. Petraeus from...

[GOPJ]

CBS's 60 Minutes is doing a similar thing - they're releasing information they suppressed about Benghazi and Obama's comments on it.

CBS didn't want to look like total liars - liars in the tank for Obama - so they released some of the interview with Obama before the election but NOT sooooo far ahead of time that it would hurt Obama.

The New York Times is probably doing a similar thing - they assume if THEY believe they've covered their asses, that we'll also believe they've covered their asses.

They're wrong - but it is a hint about how delusional the MSM has become...

[GOPJ]

CBS's 60 Minutes is doing a similar thing - they're releasing information they suppressed about Benghazi and Obama's comments on it.

CBS didn't want to look like total liars - liars in the tank for Obama - so they released some of the interview with Obama before the election but NOT sooooo far ahead of time that it would hurt Obama.

The New York Times is probably doing a similar thing - they assume if THEY believe they've covered their asses, that we'll also believe they've covered their asses.

They're wrong - but it is a hint about how delusional the MSM has become...