“Petraeus agrees to testify on Libya before congressional committees”

Loading

Jeff G @ Protein Wisdom:

Fox:

Former CIA Director David Petraeus has agreed to testify about the Libya terror attack before the House and Senate intelligence committees, Fox News has learned.

Petraeus had originally been scheduled to testify this Thursday on the burgeoning controversy over the deadly Sept. 11 attack. That appearance was scuttled, though, after the director abruptly resigned over an extramarital affair.

The resignation has since expanded into a sprawling scandal that now includes allegations that Gen. John Allen, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, exchanged “inappropriate” and sexually charged emails with Jill Kelley, a Florida socialite linked to the Petraeus case. The rapid developments in the case have all but obscured what until last week was an intense debate on Capitol Hill and beyond over the Benghazi terror attack.

– Gee. What a strange and astounding coincidence!  Kinda makes a dead buggered ambassador, an equally dead diplomatic worker, and two snuffed SEALs cold news, doesn’t it? Because it’s sex, and we live in Reality TV nation, where our “investigative journalists” have all become Entertainment Tonight reporters.

The logistics of Petraeus’ appearance are still being worked out. But a source close to Petraeus said the former four-star general has contacted the CIA, as well as committees in both the House and Senate, to offer his testimony as the former CIA director.

Fox News has learned he is expected to speak off-site to the Senate Intelligence Committee on Friday about his Libya report.
The House side is still being worked out.

[…]

While Petraeus prepares to give his side, lawmakers have begun to openly question when Petraeus first knew about the investigation that uncovered his affair — and whether it impacted his statements to Congress on Sept. 14 about the Libya terror attack.

Petraeus briefed lawmakers that day that the attack was akin to a flash mob, and some top lawmakers noted to Fox News he seemed “wedded” to the administration’s narrative that it was a demonstration spun out of control. The briefing appeared to conflict with one from the FBI and National Counterterrorism Center a day earlier in which officials said the intelligence supported an Al Qaeda or Al Qaeda-affiliated attack.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., told Fox News he now questions whether Petraeus’ statements — which were in conflict with both the FBI briefing and available raw intelligence — were in any way impacted by the knowledge the FBI was investigating his affair with Broadwell.

King questioned whether the investigation “consciously or subconsciously” affected his statements to Congress.

That last being code for was Petraeus being blackmailed, or did he fear being blackmailed?

As with the Benghazi attacks proper, we’re being asked now — with the help of a compliant, progressive press that merely parrots the administration party line (fight the Power!) — to believe that the President or his top staff knew nothing whatever about a potentially compromised CIA head until just after the election.  That is, that the FBI, which knew about the affair many many months back, didn’t share that information with the Imperial President or anyone close to him.

This, all of it, the entirety of our political spectacle, is a mirage.  A fraud.  A fantastical and oftentimes surreal puppet show.

And as we watch it, we’re being asked to bracket reason, logic, experience, and evidence, all things that, when applied to this administration’s very existence reveal it as but a series of interconnected disasters (from our perspective; from the perspective of the far left things are going swimmingly!) that each help, in their own ways, to undermine our constitutional republic, the rule of law, the stability of our economy and currency, and the liberty of the individual — the narrative for which is clothed in the phony populism of “fairness” and “social justice” and “tolerance”.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
1 Comment
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

If Patraeus makes it to the committee alive, you have to ask yourself: how much will he be able to testify about “classified information?” Especially, as typically to get a security clearance position to you have have to vow never to divulge “Classified Information.” So, if lets say what happens if the President ordered that much of the information regarding what happened in Benghazi was to be “classified” for national security reasons. Will Patraeus talk or will he plead the 5th amendment.