Posted on 11/15/2012 4:29:22 PM PST by hole_n_one
Just a few minutes ago on CNN, Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr reported that a high-placed source informed her that former CIA Chief David Petraeus will use his upcoming testimony to amend his previous testimony. According to this source, Petraeus will tell the closed door congressional hearing that he knew "almost immediately" that the September 11 anniversary attack on our Libyan consulate was a terrorist attack committed by the al-Qaeda-linked militia Ansar Al Sharia.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
What was the “socialite” doing at the White House OTHER than having breakfast two weeks after the Benghazi incident?
Not getting this, obama is the only one with the authority (CBA). No one can do it for him. So what decision are you addressing here?
wowsers - things gonna get mighty hot at the WH now.
No it won’t. How many times do we need to be hit over the head that the media will cover his butt? All day all the media has done is gush over how obama “smacked down” the GOP at the press conference. They will cover for him on this, too.
Your second point has the context fixing portion garbled. I won't accuse you of doing that deliberately. But I will say that what you've quoted in the context setting IS NOT what he said. Specifically, this is the context: Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, the top Democrat on the House Intel committee, said Petraeus laid out “a chronological order exactly what we felt happened, how it happened, and where we’re going in the future.”
He directly attributes what comes next to Petraeus. The GOP could have just as clearly said, "No P4 did not say that." The GOP has not done that. Furthermore, Petraeus himself had numerous opportunities to deny these remarks, as well as to deny WH claims that the "spontaneous demonstration" legend originated with the CIA. He did not do so. He did not contradict the WH on any point of significance until the Friday before the election, at which point he claimed that stories that the CIA denied assistance to the Ambassador and his team were false. That is 100% of his push-back to date.
Sorry, but as much as I didn't want to believe this originally, all the evidence (and silent agreement) we have points to one conclusion: David Petraeus was complicit in the cover-up of the murders of the American Ambassador and three other Americans on 9/11/2012.
It's all good!
LOL!
The Presidential Pardon should kick in soon.
So his first testimony was false, or what?
“They had correspondance with the CIA station chief in Libya within 24 hours they kind of knew what was happening.”
“...there was a failure in the system because there was additional security requested. But is frustrating to see the sort of political aspect of what’s going on with this whole investigation.”
This pretty well sums up the talking points. Now, will Petraeus stick to the talking points or will he go rogue?
...a failure in the system is the big issue here. Why were those men allowed to die? Who gave the order? Why the bare bone security in the first place? What was going on in Benghazi that Obama doesn’t want the world to know about?
I don’t think it was militia prisoners...I still believe those two prisoners she was talking about were the ones they captured at the Consulate. The attack at the Annex didn’t happen for hours after the Consulate was taken out.
I think it was gun running to Al Qaeda and their affiliates to take out Assad in Syria. I have no idea why that went south...something blew up in their faces.
Well, since the pResident isn’t Bill Clinton, but was Barack 0bama, we can safely infer that she wasn’t there for any services that might have been available from 1992-2000.
Ping to sleepingfreeper’s post!
Thanks for the info sf!
Believe it when I see/hear it............
Agree 100%
But presently I'm a pessimist...and don't believe anything is going come down on Obama here.
FWIW-
Kabuki Theater.
Meant to ping you to 256 too!
I’m just getting around to this thread and my first words when I read the header were,”So what!”.
Your comments sum it all up nicely.
I just turned 80 and I’m glad I’m at the end,not the beginning.
I had the best of it.
.
Lucy.Football.
I am forced to agree with you. However, I do believe Patraeus is a potential wildcard that the administration can’t control. Tomorrow may be interesting.
I am dumbfounded when I think of what the media frenzy would have looked like if something like this had happened under Bush. I know we often say that, but it would have been the story of the century and bigger than Watergate if Bush had pulled something like this.
stupid remark on a serious subject.
take your jokes to DU or MSNBC...
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.