Petraeus and Benghazi…..it\’s amaaaaazing!

Isn\’t this just absolutely amazing?

The Obama Administration is set to come under intense congressional scrutiny this week over the resignation of General David Petraeus, amid mounting criticism of the delay in alerting senior government figures to the former CIA director’s affair with his biographer.

It is now becoming clear that while President Obama was kept in ignorance until November 8, two days after he had been re-elected, the hierarchy at the FBI and the Justice Department had been aware of the extra-marital affair and the potential for national security concerns since the summer. There is also speculation that Mr Obama’s own Attorney-General, Eric Holder, may have known of the affair for months.

Last week there was a growing scandal about what happened at the embassy/consulate in Benghazi. About how those there on the ground were screaming for back up and none came. About who and how no back up was sent. And who was responsible therefore for those deaths.

This week everyone is shouting about whether a 60 year old man dipped his wick where perhaps he shouldn\’t have.

And no one at all is talking about the Benghazi problem that he was part of and which he was to have been questioned about in Congress this week.

Gosh, isn\’t that just amazing.

No, it\’s not time for me to get fitted with a tin foil hat. I\’m only noting that it\’s just amazing, isn\’t it?

10 comments on “Petraeus and Benghazi…..it\’s amaaaaazing!

  1. Okay, so he’s no longer Director of the CIA, fine. But he was Director of the CIA on 11 Sep 12 – resigning for having an affair doesn’t change history, even in the USA, does it?

    So what, precisely is preventing Congress from summoning the Director of the CIA at the time of the event they are investigating to give evidence about what happened then? Or is it analogous to our police habit of resigning on ill-health grounds to avoid a disciplinary? Is there some statute or convention that prevents them from subpoenaing ex-officials?

  2. Is it not more that this infidelity has thrown up a smokescreen around the Libya stuff, Congress being more outraged, natch, by a General enjoying some with an attractive younger woman than by a General being incompetent and constructively killing a diplomat?

  3. Actually, there’s been a growing scandal about Benghazi for months…which most of the media have been studiously ignoring. Now Obama is re-elected I’m sure they’ll find it’s Hilary’s fault :-)

  4. Fairly sure that the diminished on Libya has more to do with the fact that, in the absence of a desperate attempt to snatch an election win out of the jaws of defeat by pretending the incumbent is an Al Qaeda supporter who murders troops for fun, there’s no longer any incentive for anyone outside lunatic conspiracy fringes to run with such a bullshit story.

  5. And more crapola from johnboat, a one man obamanationalist. Benghazi was a fuckup, and one that was not covered by the MSM in the way it would have been under, say, a Republican president.

    It was a terrorist action, on 11 September, date ring any bells by chance. And here’s Obama sending out his UN ambassador for weeks pretending it was all inspired by a flakey video. They were worried (needlessly, the MSM carries the Democrat’s water far too well) that the story would get out that Obama knew of the attack, knew that two CIA contractors were defending about 30 other staff (Stephens was dead by then, or good as, but they didn’t know that), but refused to allow any assistance and jetted off to Vegas for yet another fund raiser.

    It should be a scandal, if anyone cared. It seems that as far as the MSM is concerned Obama is too godlike proof to report anything bad against him or his minions. Nope, that would be racist, or a “lunatic conspiracy theorist” sort of thing to do. No scrutiny, no investigation, no questions; move along now, nothing to see here…

  6. Wha Ed Snack said.

    It seesìm to me that between this, Solynya, operation fast & furious… there is far more to be had on Obama than there ever was on Clinton, who may have had the odd stain on his character and possibly his trousers but he balanced the budget and the USA was still respected when he finished.

    I reckon they’ll get Obama impreached.

    The “black” (acually grey ) dude’s second term is going to be a long hard slog.

    Whether the GOP has the wit to get its act together around a convincing candidate is another matter.

  7. Luke – so what? Why is that connected to malfeasance in the Obama Administration? Does your side grant blanket immunity? Because I can cite specific examples when you didn’t. Please explain why this is not a story.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>