I don't think it's about the General giving Obama "bullshit intel".. I think it's safe to assume the General was not going to play the fall guy for anyone on the Benghazi fiasco.. and he probably made some noise about "telling the truth to the American people"...

underthematrix

(5,811 posts)

7. Petraeus must still testify. It's makes no difference he

Reply to elehhhhna (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 11:49 PM

Nov 2012

resigned. Benghazi does not have anything to do with a security breach. There was no security breach. The ambassador died in the line of duty along with the ex-navy seals. And I don't believe for minute Petraeus was having an affair. I think he's lying about that. I think the most important thing is to protect the real purpose of the CIA operation. I want the senate intelligence committe to track adelson's 100 million dollars and netanyahu's chest thumping.

Caroline-Vivienne

(117 posts)

8. Petraeus will testify if he is called to, by name...

Reply to elehhhhna (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:33 AM

Nov 2012

But the 'Director of the CIA' is scheduled to testify next week, and that is no longer him.

Petraeus' Second in Command (I forgot his name) who is now (I assume) the acting Director of the CIA, until a new one can be appointed, will testify instead.

This is my understanding of the situation.

dem4ward

(323 posts)

9. I was kind of wondering too if it had to do with Benghazi somehow.

Reply to elehhhhna (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:37 AM

Nov 2012

I'm shocked none of my right wing tea baggin family members haven't spouted this off yet!
Their still stuck on the impeachment plan & blaming the economy on Obama. Now he's inherited his own economy they say LMAO!!! Once again like it just magically appeared in 2008 & once again in 2012. It hurts my brain to try and rationalize their thoughts. ugh

Reply to this discussion