Posted on 11/11/2012 4:36:54 PM PST by Will88
bttt
Inasmuch as he has *already* sold his integrity and honor down the river, any testimony he may end up giving is going to be suspect in my eyes, at the very least. Even if whatever he eventually testifies to is stone cold truth, I for one, would be unable to take it at face value, in all honesty...
the infowarrior
“Isn’t October 26th the same day that Petraeus’s girlfriend spoke out with the same story at University of Denver?”
Hmmm ... interesting timing.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/161964#.UKBpo4X2Fph
Broadwell was speaking at her alma mater, the University of Denver, on October 26. ...
(snip)
“The challenge has been the fog of war, and the greater challenge is that it’s political hunting season, and so this whole thing has been turned into a very political sort of arena, if you will,” she said. “The fact that came out today is that the ground forces there at the CIA annex, which is different from the consulate, were requesting reinforcements.
“They were requesting the – it’s called the C-in-C’s In Extremis Force – a group of Delta Force operators, our very, most talented guys we have in the military. They could have come and reinforced the consulate and the CIA annex. Now, I don’t know if a lot of you have heard this but the CIA annex had actually taken a couple of Libyan militia members prisoner, and they think that the attack on the consulate was an attempt to get these prisoners back. It’s still being vetted.
“The challenging thing for Gen. Petraeus is that in his new position, he’s not allowed to communicate with the press. So he’s known all of this – they had correspondence with the CIA station chief in Libya, within 24 hours they kind of knew what was happening.”
(snip)
“If you remember at the time, the Muslim video, the Mohammed video that came out, the demonstrations that were going on in Cairo, there were demonstrations in 22 other countries around the world, tens of thousands of people, and our government was very concerned that this was going to become a nightmare for us,” she said.
“So you can understand if you put yourselves in his shoes or Secretary Clinton’s shoes or the President’s shoes, that we thought it was tied somehow to the demonstrations in Cairo. And it’s true that we have signal intelligence that shows the militia members in Libya were watching the demonstration in Cairo, and it did sort of galvanize their effort. So we’ll find out the facts soon enough.
“As a former intel officer it’s frustrating to me because it reveals our sources and methods, I don’t think the public necessarily needs to know all of that. It is a tragedy that we lost an ambassador and two other government officials, and [...] there was a failure in the system because there was additional security requested, but it’s frustrating to see the sort of political aspect of what’s going on with this whole investigation.”
Oct 26, 2012 6:31pm
Earlier today, Fox News’ Jennifer Griffin reported that CIA agents in the second U.S. compound in Benghazi were denied requests for help.
In response, CIA spokesperson Jennifer Youngblood said, “We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi. Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. In fact, it is important to remember how many lives were saved by courageous Americans who put their own safety at risk that night-and that some of those selfless Americans gave their lives in the effort to rescue their comrades.”
“So you can understand if you put yourselves in his shoes or Secretary Clinton’s shoes or the President’s shoes, that we thought it was tied somehow to the demonstrations in Cairo.”
We thought? Shouldn’t she have said “THEY ?
“So you can understand if you put yourselves in his shoes or Secretary Clinton’s shoes or the President’s shoes, that we thought it was tied somehow to the demonstrations in Cairo.”
We thought? Shouldn’t she have said “THEY thought” ?
Yeah, caught that too. What message is she sending??
Did she give that speech before or after her interview with the FBI?
Posted this on here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2958487/posts
“Broadwell was subsequently interviewed by FBI agents, as was Petraeus two weeks ago.”
Where does this fall into the timeline of Broadwell’s Oct. 26 speech, the CIA’s Oct. 26 statement, and when Cantor was tipped off in late October?
Petraus knows too much and Benghazi was his limit. He accepted the bimbo charge to escape. Which begs the question as to his fate: Honorable, Dishonorable, other than Honorable or Administrative?
He still knows too much. His fate will be determined by his use of knowledge and the company he has kept.
http://www.wdbj7.com/news/sns-rt-us-cia-petraeus-timelinebre8ab01g-20121111,0,3964365.story
Week of October 21: Federal investigators interview Broadwell.
Week of October 28: Federal investigators interview Petraeus. Prosecutors conclude afterward they likely will not bring criminal charges.
Obviously she already had insider info when she gave the speech. Was she turning on the General by intentionally giving her source away? Or, was she trying to impress the crowd and slipped up? Either way, the timing of her chat with FBI seems to me like they had to shut her up ASAP.
btw,I would love to hear HER story. Was she madly in love with Gen P? She left her babies for an entire year to tag along for a book? In Afghanistan? Now that we know about the threatening emails, she sounds like a jealous lunatic. A timebomb that was about to explode.
My brain is going around in circles.
Here is a question I don’t see anyone asking. Were the two EX Navy SEALS working for an independent contractor and NOT directly employed by the cia? That would explain how the cia could say technically they never told anyone to stand down. The order would have come from their ‘employer’ of record who was contracted by the cia...but NOT from the cia itself.
The guy who was murdered in Iraq technically worked for Wye Oak Technologies...a cia front group.
Anyone wanting on or off this ping list, please advise.
Women have their own issues when put in positions of power, such as having professional disagreements turn into personal vendettas.
The issue with powerful men is that women are attracted to high-status men, and beautiful women are intoxicating to such men.
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.