Posted on 09/11/2015 10:28:11 AM PDT by UMCRevMom@aol.com
Former CIA director David Petraeus on Friday testified in front of Congress on the terrorist acts against the American Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that took place on September 11th. His testimony will no doubt place him severely at odds with both the Obama administration and its official stance on the attacks.
It's a good thing Petraeus is already out of a job, otherwise he would probably be asked to resign this afternoon.
Fox News and CNN both have both released stories earlier confirming that David Petraeus will state in no uncertain terms that both he and the CIA knew that the assault on the American consulate in Benghazi, immediately after it happened, was a terrorist attack linked to al-Qaeda, and not the random act of violence in response to a YouTube video that the Obama administration initially said it was.
Not only does this contradict the numerous statements that President Obama made, but it also contradicts UN Ambassador Susan Rice, who was seen on many Sunday morning news programs on September 16th stating that it was in response to a YouTube video insulting Muslims.
In the Friday testimony, Petraeus reportedly testified that the al-Qaeda element was initially removed from Rice's CIA talking points, according to Congressman Peter King, who led the congressional session and briefed the media afterwards.
Petraeus is also prepared to testify that his initial remarks were altered by the Obama administration, which would explain why the briefing he gave shortly after the attack was similar to the one given by Ambassador Rice. When speaking before Congress, Petraeus appears ready to distance himself from those comments as well as the administration's initial stance.
Congressman King reportedly asked the former CIA director if he concurred with the administration that the attack on Benghazi great out of a spontaneous demonstration against the aforementioned YouTube video insulting the Prophet Mohammed. King said that that is not what his recollection was when it came to what Petraeus initially said.
Congressman King also said that Petraeus testified that the CIA's talking points were edited by the administration in order to play down the terrorism aspect. The edited comments were much close to those parroted by Ambassador Rice later on.
According to CNN, it was believed that Petraeus would testify that he did not know where Ambassador Rice got her information from. Fox News is reporting that Petraeus was planning on bringing his original set of talking points as prepared by the CIA, no doubt so that Congress could see what the CIA believed before being told to water down their story.
This will of course raise even more questions. Why did Petraeus wait until now to recant his story? He of course had numerous opportunities to come forward and do so. Did someone order him to go along?
One thing for sure is that this will no doubt bring about more inquiries and an even deeper investigation. Now that Petraeus appears to have directly contradicted Ambassador Susan Rice and President Obama, one can expect that more high level officials will be summoned to appear before Congress. It's anyone's guess as to how badly this could hurt the president as well as members of his administration.
Treason.
The plot thickens.
This fool and his big mouth are going to endanger bipartisanship.
He is literally going to put bipartisanship at risk of danger if he doesn’t shut up right now!
He’s already been rolled for an offense that Hillary herself has committed thousands of times
What does he have left to lose?
Better not meet anyone for lunch at Ft Marcy
This is news? That Sunday morning after the attack. when Susan Rice appeared on 5 morning shows with that utterly stupid and vapid story about the YouTube video, you knew they were lying
Get the NSA and CIA telephone intercepts planning the attack ONE MONTH BEFORE IT TOOK PLACE...
and
They know the names of the plotters and the executioners
WHERE IS JUSTICE...???
another cover-up by the TRAITORS... OBAMA and CLINTON
MORSI WANTED TO KIDNAP THE AMBASSADOR AND Al ZAWAHIRI WANTED REVENGE FOR A DRONE ATTACK ...
I am 100% certain at the appropriate time more whistleblowers will come forward from inside the intel community...
EVEN THOUGH THE WHITE HOUSE HAD ALMOST EVERYONE AND THEIR MOTHERS SIGN NON DISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS TO COVER IT UP...
Hey Obama this chicken is coming home to roost bitch.
Additional Truth is going to get one way or the other.....sooner or later......about the evil deeds of the treasonous Satan and his corrupt, venal, traitorous pitchfork carriers.
Thank you, also, General Petraeus.
Leni
Zawahiri and Morsi also wanted the release of the “ blind sheikh” and the administration brotherhood operatives needed a face saving way to make it happen
I don’t have any intelligence and I could tell the next day it was Jihad.......
It’s been incontrovertible for some time that the YouTube story was a hoax. What a putz...
This is a bad link to a three year old article.
Simple answer. An answer that is always briefed to those with TS security Clearances and work in the UW/Covert world. BLACKMAIL. That is why one never fools around with a woman that is not your spouse. Very susceptible to blackmail.
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.
![https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/988433_10200788378807352_915796285_n.jpg?oh=4172580139e37d701a179040d99baa04&oe=56606C76"](https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/988433_10200788378807352_915796285_n.jpg?oh=4172580139e37d701a179040d99baa04&oe=56606C76"){kind=link}