You rang, sweetheart?
Posted on 11/11/2012 4:36:54 PM PST by Will88
Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. ”
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...
remember, when his resignation was made public, a statement said that there will be “no criminal charges brought “..i.e. perjury...this guy had to perjure himself at his confirmation hearing. Dont they also give a lie detector test for the C.I.A. conformation? Perhaps he failed that and he was confirmed anyway. As it stands now, they just want him to ride off into the sunset..the testimony from his replacement this week will tell alot..if the new guy sticks to this “video” story, that tells me Obama etc viewed Petraues as a threat.
This all so much like that old political novel by Alan Drury, Advise and Consent. The intrigue, the sex, the mystery, the players, they’re all there! There has to be a murder or suicide somewhere to complete the story, and maybe a gay bar or two, and some sort of Communist connection . . . oh, well, we already know where that is.
Now that could make sense, though it might be too much to hope for. But it's possible that he had already been blackmailed to go along with that ridiculous story, and eventually he decided that he'd be blackmailed no longer so he got the blackmail threat (the affair) out of the way, then resigned. So, now he can tell the truth.
It's plausible, and I sure hope it's true, but it's anyone's guess at this point.
And I also think the most damning information would concern who knew of the requests for assistance from the Americans in Benghazi, and who denied the requests for that assistance. That is far more damning than the lies about the reasons for the terror attack, and all that is still to be discovered if someone will step forward and tell the truth.
And it's more important that we learn about who denied the asssistance than anything about why Petraeus went along with the Obama lies about what caused the attack.
lol,,,no doubt. Im a Watergate junkie...this puts that to shame.
http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk69/jadedtom/Fox%20News%20Women%2011%20-%20jadedtom/haley830.jpg
and . . . .crickets . . . never heard anything else
I'm not familiear with that, but it would be another piece of the puzzle, and something that weakens Petraeus as a possible truth teller if he had to cut a deal to get that included in an agreement to resign.
Then again, if the Obama people used that to pressure him to withhold relevant information about Benshazi, that is part of an illegal coverup to prevent the truth from being learned.
It's a damned tangled web and I wonder if it can be untangled.
It sure does put Watergate to shame, and I wonder if a Butterfield will ever stop forward (if I recall the right name).
And I still keep wondering about the other Americans who were at the Benghazi consulate and the CIA safe house. Not one word from any of them and several reports I read said around 30 Americans were saved from the attack.
to me, its actually unraveling kind of fast...mostly because the premise of what they are trying to sell about the attack is just ridiculous..not to mention the incompetance. In Watergate, that was very complex and it took awhile to unravel it all..then again, the media hated Nixons guts, and they really went after him.
I hope he comes out and testifies the whole truth, but I have no faith hat he will.
But a witness that can’t be discredited, and/or some irrefutable evidence has to be found to knock the first bricks from the Obama administrations wall of lies. And as you imply, the MSM will mostly aid the coverup. Something has to happen to knock the first holes in the wall.
That’s for sure...
“Now that could make sense, though it might be too much to hope for. But it’s possible that he had already been blackmailed to go along with that ridiculous story, and eventually he decided that he’d be blackmailed no longer so he got the blackmail threat (the affair) out of the way, then resigned. So, now he can tell the truth.”
*****************************
Yes, this is what I’m hoping for as well. Petraeus most certainly is guilty of having at least one affair, but I can not believe he would have left “his” men there to be butchered by not sending in backup forces. Only a nonmilitary person could have been this unattached and callous toward the situation in Benghazi, IMO.
Maybe Petraeus was threatened and came out with it to nullify the threat. Now the Admin has nothing to hold over his head
You rang, sweetheart?
One thing is for damn sure Watergate junkie is that there was no Free Republic New Media back then. With all the brilliant and savvy posters here at Free Republic anyone interested in the truth need only log on and look here. Great job to all. I am proud to lurk here.
One thing is for damn sure Watergate junkie is that there was no Free Republic New Media back then. With all the brilliant and savvy posters here at Free Republic anyone interested in the truth need only log on and look here. Great job to all. I am proud to lurk here.
Stepped away for a time and there have been more good comments. I think we’ve discussed the most likely scenarios based on the information available as of now. I’m sure there will be more to discuss at who knows what time, but probably fairly soon.
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.