[PennsylvaniaMom]

My question is who are the spooks loyal to? The Regime or their own (Amb Stevens very well may have been CIA). The timing...after what should have been a Romney win of an election...makes me wonder if “this” was someone’s FUBO to Benghazi (thinking that the intel/gun running parts wouldn’t make sense to the populace, but that sex would?)

[RummyChick]

Don’t forget Clinton’s hatred of Obama .

CIA is the expert at mayhem.

Don’t be fooled by Fast and Furious. They knew about it.

They have to fund their black ops. Drugs are part of that.

I have said from the very beginning that you don’t mess with the CIA and come out unscathed.

It’s a blood bath right now.

[what's up]

My question is who are the spooks loyal to?

Don't expect Rummy to answer that question.

He/she delights in trying to be cryptic/tin foil-y.

Lotsa stuff about drugs, Rove, Colby, black ops, CIA, Bing Crosby, etc. but answers? Nope.

[piasa]

Speaking of Stevens, whom I always suspected was the regional station chief, an article about Feinstein made a point of mentioning that Petreaus went to Libya and met with the CIA station chief there in October. I thought that was kind of weird. Why would anyone in the know tell a reporter- that specifically -who he met with, especially if it was really the CIA station chief?

I'm guessing the "Taliban in the building" specifically hunted down our station chief, and this recent Feinstein story was really lame misdirection, a wounded agency trying to convince the world that we are not as wounded and blinded as we are. Remember, we lost a station chief in Afghanistan, too, that time to a double agent.

It could also be someone trying to expose the station chief by telling the world it is one of the people Petreaus met with.