Posted on 11/14/2012 7:02:02 AM PST by Stars&StripesNE
Former CIA Director David Petraeus has agreed to testify about the Libya terror attack before the House and Senate intelligence committees, Fox News has learned.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
YES!
I hope he lives long enough to testify.
Wouldn't it be great if I were wrong, and he actually told the truth.
Under oath?
Job Opening: Food taster - Call The General
Pray for his safety! It’s too bad The Tea Party doesn’t have a security detail to protect him, like the Nation of Islam does...
They will get nothing from him of any substance.
Sadly in all of this muck the preventable murders of four Americans no longer matters. 
“Under oath?”. Not going to happen.
I predict he will “suffer a heart attack from all the stress” or will just feel so badly about what he has done that he will “commit suicide.”
The bodies are going to start dropping like flies.
I have a feeling that when Petraeus goes before congress he will say it was the video that sparked the raid just to protect his pension because Barry Hussein Soetoro could ruin him financially.
“There are so many amendments to this Constitution . . . which one should I choose? I choose the FIF!” - Tron Carter
When ?
He has smeared his great and honorable career by this affair and his less than honest testimony about the Benghazi attack. The only way he has of redeeming his honor is to testify with the absolute truth of what happened in Benghazi and about any pressure applied to him to by the Obama administration to shade the truth.
The Democrats on the committee will try and destroy him using his affair as ammunition. General Petreaus needs to open his testimony by detailing the history of the affair. This will defange the democrat smear that is coming.
Better put a detail on Ft. Marcy park....
I just overheard a doctor where I work saying that Patreous is nothing but a Republican toady. The only one Obama could get in the office because of Republican opposition to his better choices. Don’t expect the left to give credence to anything he says.
I want to believe Patraeus is an honorable man with human failings. I want to believe that, having tarnished his honor, he will seek to restore what dignity he can by spilling ALL the beans on Obamalini.
If he did, then I could certainly forgive him for being human and I would gladly acknowledge that, at his core, he truly is an honorable man who made a horrible mistake. He will suffer the rest of his life, but people could say, “...at least he did the right thing in the end.”
One can only hope.
Yep, that’s what I expect...
Unfortunately, I feel that you are correct. Maybe, somewhere in Petraeus’s soul he has the wherewithall to tell the whole truth and expose all of the problems, even if it exposes himself to more problems.
When they have those hearings it should be like one-on-one, not like the last one where you had all of them from the State Dept. sitting together and listening in what the others are testifying to. That way you get a better end result without being intimidated of the others present!!!
Barack Obama decapitated David Petraeus. America’s finest? No match. The media is holding up his bloody head.
R.I.P. Ty Woods, Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, Chris Stevens. They’re pissing on your graves.
Now...where’s that guy that made the video that caused all this?
3-dimensional chess vs. tiddly winks BUMP!
Already discredited, Dave.
Thanks for your service on the physical battlefield.
“Fox News has learned he is expected to speak off-site to the Senate Intelligence Committee on Friday about his Libya report. “
What’s “off-site”?
What’s wrong with the Senate hearing room—before the public, and with cameras?
Is this going to be a secret appearance? With all the testimony kept sealed?
Two possibilities:
1-Petraeus tells the truth and lets the chips fall.
Now that he admitted to the affair, creating what he had to know would be tremendous personal loss, I can’t see the General fearing Obama any more.
There may even be some personal animosity, probably not so much from the affair, but for the fact that so many young men have perished for no reason, once Obama decided to announce the departure date for Afghanistan, and changed the rules of engagement. He’s a flawed man, but he is a soldier.
2-Petraeus is privy to Benghazi’s real purpose, believed in the righteousness of arming the Syrian opposition, and will protect secrets for reasons of national security.
Petraeus seems to have taken the Ambassador’s death personally. He made a personal visit to Benghazi after the attack. He could reveal some things about the attack that would not compromise national security, in particular whether he actually felt a video had precipitated the attack, or not.
Either way, I think Obama should worry about the General’s testimony.
That would be great. Ms. Broadwell may actually, by her lawyers, bring the light of day to truth. My antennae always goes off when the media does and extra special job of trying to make someone look bad. That’s what they are doing to her. She helped, but let’s see what happens here. She’s shrewd. V’s wife.
Ollie North testified in the light of day. V’s wife.
Not going to predict this one. Will take a wait and see, but you may have it correct. Keyword = may
http://www.kmbz.com/David-Petraeus-Personally-Investigated-Benghazi-At/14775180
Petraeus has offered two reasons for wanting to avoid testifying: Acting CIA Director Morell is in possession of all the information Petraeus gathered in conducting his review and he has more current information gathered since Petraeus’ departure; and it would be a media circus.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83835.html?hp=l1_b1
“He really enjoyed his job at the CIA, it was the best job in the world, as far as he was concerned,” Mansoor told CNN’s Erin Burnett. “He had a good relationship with the president and national security team, and he threw that all away for…due to a personal failing. He is very, very down right now.”
The source who attended the event was struck by how openly Broadwell spoke about Petraeus, adding that she seemed to have personal insights about the CIA director: “She said he was unsure of himself sometimes. She said he was concerned about the public’s perception of him.”
“Is it true you were a crack cocaine dealer for seven years?”
Sentenced to one year in jail for parole violation. Not sure what his record was. Didn't care, after seeing 3-5 minutes of video.
Is he also going to testify before the House panel, or just the Senate (at an “off-site” location)?
Since when does a witness get to set the conditions for testifying before Congress?
Will the Senate “off-site” “interview” be just a cover-up to satisfy the public demand that he testify?
(paint me skeptical until I see him before the microphones and cameras)
Don’t know if this has been posted yet, but Acting CIA Director Morell briefed “Capital Hill” yesterday... (before testifying at hearing tomorrow). Why??? No hearing yesterday, was there?
Wonder if that influenced Petreaus decision?
“Since when does a witness get to set the conditions for testifying before Congress?”
When your uniform has 4 stars on it, and you can embarrass high level politicians.
Also, Hillary isn’t testifying because she’s getting drunk in Australia...WTF is that!
“I just overheard a doctor where I work saying that Patreous is nothing but a Republican toady.”
Change that to Democrat Toady and the doctor would be right. Check out Holly’s political affiliations.
I don't think the General will tell the truth about Obamugabe. I think he will cover for him.
I hope I am wrong.
It seems the WH surrounded Petraeus with their own guys.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83652.html
Michael Morell
Now the acting director, Morell served as deputy CIA director to Petraeus since 2010. He has been the agency’s director of Asian Pacific and Latin American Analysis and the briefer of presidents on national security matters.
In that position, according to a White House aide, Morell often briefed Obama as the United States closed in on Osama bin Laden, earning the president’s trust and developing a close relationship with him.
Morell is “extraordinarily well respected in the White House, across the intelligence community and throughout the national security establishment,” the aide said, discussing the deputy’s elevation to acting director.
The smartest thing Petraeus did was to form a partnership early on with Michael Morell, who was acting director before his arrival and resumed that role Friday. Morell is a career analyst and veteran of the mill that produces the famous “PDB,” or president’s daily brief, and he knew the agency’s culture — or at least the analysts’ version of it. His task was to encourage Petraeus when his commander’s instincts made sense for the agency, and dissuade him when his ideas were counter-productive.
Michael J. Morell: Introducing the CIA’s New Acting Director
http://dawn.com/2011/09/06/petraeus-battles-fears-of-cia-militarisation/
Non-military chief of staff
To that end, sources tell Reuters that a long-time CIA insider — not one of Petraeus’ “guys” — has been named as his new chief of staff. One person familiar with the matter identified him as Rodney Snyder, who has previously worked on the White House national security staff. But US officials would not immediately confirm that name.
With Petraeus, there was particular concern that an imported staff would give the military too much influence in a civilian agency that has increasingly assumed paramilitary functions. That concern helped prompt Petraeus to retire and remove his uniform before taking the job.
During his decorated U.S. Army career, Petraeus was known for being followed by an extensive staff of advisers as he moved from one command post to another. He may add new hires after he settles into the job, but U.S. officials said his immediate staff is already intact.
His chief of staff is Rodney Snyder, a CIA analyst who also served as the intelligence chief for the Department of Homeland Security. Michael J. Morell, who served as acting director of the CIA after Panetta stepped down, will resume his deputy role.
http://m.startribune.com/news/?id=129304758&c=y
But Petraeus has insisted he will be serving the president and the policymakers, providing information, but not shaping policy.
And the White House and Petraeus both have taken steps to make peace.
Obama has promised Petraeus regular, weekly access in a capital where face time with the president equals influence.
Petraeus agreed to hire Obama White House veteran, and longtime CIA employee Rodney Snyder to be his chief of staff. Snyder has spent the past few years at the NSC, as a senior official on intelligence and counterterrorism issues.
“Is he also going to testify before the House panel, or just the Senate (at an “off-site” location)?”
He is going to testify before the House committee, but final arrangements are yet to be determined.
FYI: Which hearings are closed & which are open?
The House Foreign Affairs Committee has scheduled an open hearing for next Thursday (Nov 15) on the Libya terror attack and has invited Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to testify, Fox News has learned. The committee joins two others planning to hold hearings, albeit closed ones, that day.
The House Intelligence Committee will hold its closed hearing on the attack on Nov. 15.
The Senate Intelligence Committee plans to meet the same day to discuss the Libya attack — that hearing will also be closed to the public.
I had to look to see what state you live in - hoping it wasn't mine. LOL
and the briefer of presidents on national security matters.
In that position, according to a White House aide, Morell often briefed Obama as the United States closed in on Osama bin Laden, earning the president’s trust and developing a close relationship with him.
*******************
hmm... Supporting your info, I also heard that Petraeus never had a particularly close/friendly relationship with Obama.
We’re just not going to know until we hear leaks from this briefing Friday, but when I posted last post to you, I began to wonder, negatively, if Petraeus isn’t working with Morell & WH in order to call the dogs off Broadwell (who, in turn, if her father is correct, would agree NOT to spill the beans on “the much bigger story that has nothing to do with the affair”).
My mind bouncing back and forth on Petraeus motives and future actions. Sigh... Need to let it go. Will know soon enough.
“Under oath?”
Wouldn’t matter. He had “oaths” to keep while in his military positions and he ignored them. Expect he’ll lie in front of Congress to avoide being “suicided”.
Wonder what Peaches will have to say?
Here’s my take on this....pay attention, my plot changes by the hour.
I think it was arranged, probably by Val Jarrett, to place two valuable Libyan prisoners in custody in the CIA annex near the consulate in Benghazi.
A faux riot would be started and a Utube video was found to cast the blame. In the ensuing riot, the prisoners would be taken from their prison, exchange made, huge payment given to the Obama re-election campaign.
I don’t know why these prisoners in my scenario would be so valuable but with more thought there could be reasons.
Only the “riot” was taken over by an Al Queda attack so the group assigned to abscond with the valuable Libyan prisoners got swept into the consulate. At some point the annex was aqccessed but about 30/40 people had been removed from the CIA annex by that time. I don’t think there ever was a prison exchange but hey, allegedly “Libyan authorities” removed embassy employees....so maybe this planned prisoner exchange happened.
I sure don’t think it was part of the plan for the ambassador and those security guys to get killed. But after the deed was done might as well stick to the original script because mission was accomplished, just got to get around that bit about dead people and such.
Obviously the regime lied to the American people, of course they did, quit debating that point already and move on. The American people, in a fashion, spoke last week and either this whole sad episode was not in their radar but they don’t mind being lied to so long as it about things far away and not much import to yon average joe.
The question here, first I think that entire operation was done WITHOUT the knowledge of the CIA...come on, Holder calls up a couple of guys, they get a hold of a couple Libyan yahoos....it’s a done deal....five million for the re-election campaign, we’ll work on the State Dept and CIA later.
The CIA is pissed and I’m thinking also the State dept. I am so not sure that this was supposed to happen. I think the CIA and State knew it was a terror attack and were prepared to deal with it as suc h. UNTIL the admin called them and said this is how we’re playing the story.
An election coming up....yada, yada....we’ll get to the bottom of it later.
And of course they’re flipping congress the bird. Question here is, will congress, Dems and pubs, get insulted enough at this, do they care enough to knowingly allow an administration to continue endangering this country...do they have children, grandchildren? ....pride?
This is just so serious and I’m not convinced these defeated pubs have what it takes to get through it.
I desperately want to be wrong.
What will they do when Eric Holder’s presidential campaign needs some cash?
And we’ve no opposition party with gonads.
Scary.
This will serve to give the adoring press their talking points that will help diffuse the entire Benghazi narrative making it palatable to the public with a logical sounding scenario.
great tag line material.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
