Petraeus agrees to testify on Benghazi before Congress and Senate

I had read somewhere that Petraeus didn’t want to testify. So either he changed his mind or the report was wrong:

FOX NEWS – Former CIA Director David Petraeus has agreed to testify before the House and Senate intelligence committees, Fox News has learned.

Prior to his abrupt resignation last week, Petraeus had been scheduled to testify this Thursday on the burgeoning controversy over the Libya terror attack.

Also, just to make the post more interesting, here is Krauthammer from last night explaining the importance of this sex scandal and how it impacts Benghazi. In short, he says the White House held the sex scandal over Petraeus’ head, threatening his job with it, which likely influenced him to give false information to Congress on the Benghazi attacks (via Newsbusters):

KRAUTHAMMER: I think the really shocking news today was that General Petraeus thought and hoped he could keep his job. He thought that it might and it would be kept secret, and that he could stay in his position. I think what that tells us is really important. It meant that he understood that the FBI obviously knew what was going on. He was hoping that those administration officials would not disclose what had happened, and therefore hoping that he would keep his job. And that meant that he understood that his job, his reputation, his legacy, his whole celebrated life was in the hands of the administration, and he expected they would protect him by keeping it quiet.

And that brings us to the ultimate issue, and that is his testimony on September 13. That’s the thing that connects the two scandals, and that’s the only thing that makes the sex scandal relevant. Otherwise it would be an exercise in sensationalism and voyeurism and nothing else. The reason it’s important is here’s a man who knows the administration holds his fate in its hands, and he gives testimony completely at variance with what the Secretary of Defense had said the day before, at variance with what he’d heard from his station chief in Tripoli, and with everything that we had heard. Was he influenced by the fact that he knew his fate was held by people within the administration at that time?

KRAUTHAMMER: Of course it was being held over Petraeus’s head, and the sword was lowered on Election Day. You don’t have to be a cynic to see that as the ultimate in cynicism. As long as they needed him to give the administration line to quote Bill, everybody was silent. And as soon as the election’s over, as soon as he can be dispensed with, the sword drops and he’s destroyed. I mean, can you imagine what it’s like to be on that pressure and to think it didn’t distort or at least in some way unconsciously influence his testimony? That’s hard to believe.

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

To our ad-free users: I apologize for the ad below but unfortunately DISQUS requires this ad in order to use their commenting system and I cannot make it go away.

71 thoughts on “Petraeus agrees to testify on Benghazi before Congress and Senate

  1. I’d normally post the link, but you have to pay $8.95 to join, and I wanted to share it with others. From Dr. Jack Wheeler’s website, Dr. Wheeler used to work for Ronald Reagan and the CIA.


    Written by Michael Ledeen

    Tuesday, 13 November 2012

    I may have awakened him. The late James Jesus Angleton, once the chief of CIA counterintelligence, sounded kinda groggy to me after I got him-loud and clear!-on my famously untrustworthy ouija board. Of course I have no idea whether he gets to sleep at all. I don’t quite know exactly “where” he is, after all, and he doesn’t answer direct questions on the subject. Anyway, there he was, and I started right in.

    ML: So what am I supposed to think about Petraeus?

    JJA: That you’re living in a country where espionage is rampant.

    ML: Huh?

    JJA: Have you read those stories about the “software breakdowns” in the Romney get-out-the-vote program “Orca”?

    ML: Sure, it didn’t work, passwords didn’t work, it was a gigantic snafu.

    JJA: Uh huh. And has anyone raised the possibility that the Romney organization was penetrated in order to introduce “fatal errors” in their computers?

    ML: Actually I don’t believe I’ve seen that in print, although I’m sure somebody must have thought of it.

    JJA: I mean, the Obama people know all about Stuxnet, right?

    ML: Yes, the killer worm that was fed into the computers that run the centrifuges in the Iranian nuclear program.

    JJA: So if politics is war by other means, why shouldn’t they use similar methods in the election?

    ML: Haven’t you inverted that? Didn’t Clausewitz say that “war is the continuation of politics by different means”? You’re the literary expert, but still…

    JJA: I expected you’d like the inversion. Anyway, “Orca” is a good case for espionage, don’t you think?

    ML: Ok, I’ll buy that. But what does it have to do with the Petraeus story?

    JJA: Everything. Both are potential espionage stories. On Petraeus, for starters, we’re told that the FBI was investigating some “broader” thing, and they just happened to come across emails between him and her. As if the bureau weren’t running an investigation into Petraeus all along.

    ML: Why would they do that?

    JJA: Jeez, nobody knows anything any more! (coughing again, he’d probably lit up a Camel). It’s routine. The FBI always monitors the top levels of CIA, especially the director, any time there is reason for them to worry about a national security counterintelligence matter. Everybody in the business knows that.

    And all they need to open one of those investigations is a complaint, or a tip, from anybody. You can’t imagine how many hours are devoted to checking out anonymous leads. I can give you lots of recent stories about promotions and nominations being held up because some fabulist sent a little whisper across the transom of an inspector general’s office…

    ML: And the CIA guys know that? Petraeus knew that?

    JJA: Of course. And he also knew what any moderate geek knows, namely that gmail is an open book. Any skilled nerd can read most anybody’s emails. We don’t ever use email here.

    ML: You’ve got computers?

    JJA: Indeed. What do you think that “cloud” thing is all about anyway? We control it.

    ML: I should have known! So Petraeus knew that people were reading, or at least could read, all his passionate emails to his lover.

    JJA: Yes. And he knew enough about such matters to realize that when the counterintel people became aware of the affair, the bureau would instantly worry that he could be blackmailed. So they would go back through all his emails, and all hers as well, to everyone.

    ML: Just because they were having an affair?

    JJA: Unlikely. Most of the time, there’s either evidence, or allegations, that classified information has been compromised. The Intelligence Community, and the national security crowd more broadly, isn’t a model of virtue. CIA has had many cases of top officials sleeping around, sometimes with underlings, sometimes with outsiders. Sometimes the Agency has taken punitive action, sometimes not…

    ML: Yeah, I know. And by the way, you know that letter to the New York Times’ “ethicist” from a cuckolded husband that everyone suspected to be about the Petraeus affair? The Times says it wasn’t. So…

    JJA: So, if the letter is kosher, there’s another high-level official carrying on an affair. No surprise.

    ML: I think that blackmail is not what it used to be. When I had to pass security exams, I was told, for example, that gays could be blackmailed because they were terrified of being outed. But that was in the eighties. I doubt a threat of exposure would be very effective nowadays.

    JJA: That’s what I hear, too. So why did the bureau fear Petraeus might be blackmailable?

    ML: Right. If someone threatened to expose him, couldn’t he just say “be sure to print the really great pictures”?

    JJA: I’d have to know more about his psychology. But I found his “message to the CIA” confession quite amazing. It reminds me of confessions from the Soviet purge trials. It’s one of the most humiliating statements ever. Which baffles me. Why didn’t he just resign?

    ML: Indeed. And there’s that odd statement from him, “the president permitted me to resign…”

    JJA: As if he couldn’t just turn in his badges and go home.

    ML: Maybe that’s where the blackmail comes in.

    JJA: Good one! The White House knew about the investigation (the FBI would have briefed Holder, and he would have told the president) for quite a while, but kept him at Langley until the election was over.

    ML: Makes sense.

    JJA: Sure, but it also suggests that they had some way to keep him on the job, doesn’t it? And that “some way” isn’t loyalty or friendship, because when he went, he went in the most devastatingly damaging way possible.

    ML: And you’re saying that’s not his decision, it was imposed on him?

    JJA: What do I know? But it sure stinks of that. He wasn’t very masochistic, was he?

    ML: Not at all. He was famous, already in the early days in Iraq, for going around with a phalanx of Public Affairs officers squiring him from meeting to meeting. He’s very attentive to his image, and some of his colleagues resented that no end.

    JJA: There you go. So he’s not the sort who would be overcome with guilt and driven to make a piteous public confession of sins.

    ML: I never met him, but the humiliating confession seemed out of character to me.

    JJA: Don’t you love counterintelligence? You start with the theory that he was blackmailed out of office, and you quickly move to a theory that he was blackmailed into remaining in office. That’s why “wilderness of mirrors” is such a good description…

    ML: So, if the sex scandal doesn’t work, what could they have used to keep him chained to his desk? Some other scandal? Corruption in Iraq? In Afghanistan?

    But he was gone. Maybe back to sleep. Wouldn’t blame him.

    Michael Ledeen holds the Freedom Scholar Chair at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington, DC. Author of numerous books, he writes the Faster Please! column in PJ Media, where this was originally published.

  2. Petraeus stated months ago that the Libyan “embassy” attack was due to the anti-muslim video which is completely insane. So he was either towing the party line or is a traitor.

    Seems Radicals Have Stepped up Their Pace…

    A related topic is Barry expanding the Arab Spring to Southeast Asia. Samantha Powers, another marxist radical was one of the creator’s of the UN mandate, the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), that allowed for the illegal war in Libya, Egypt, and probably Syria.

    FYI – Barry signed another executive order giving DHS more power to create Barry’s civilian army which is probably why DHS has purchased 1.2 billion rounds of ammo and 200 million .308 (sniper) rounds. In effect, DHS has the authority to create their own storm troopers. Should be fun.

    Guess my theory that Barry’s arming al-aqaeda in Libya to hit Israel could be true…
    Israel says Syrian rebels have control of villages near Golan Heights
    The 46-mile-long buffer zone is governed and policed by the Syrian authorities, and no military forces other than U.N. forces are permitted within it. Which means no one there would actually prevent an attack on Israel.

  3. He will protect his NWO colleague. There are a wall of traitors around the American people right now.

  4. Petraeus stated 3 days after the attack it was violent mob. Now, he has actually been to
    Benghazi and conducted interviews personally (may be reason he was forced to resign)
    so, do they still hold enough over his head, or hopefully, he will tell exactly what he found.

  5. Call me cynical, because I am. What the heck happened with Fast & Furious? Agents Terry and Zapata died as did hundreds of MX people. Instead of focusing on an “affair”, I want to know what we were doing in Benghazi and why our people didn’t get the security they needed when requested months ago.

    I sure hope Petraeus saves what little dignity he has left by spilling the beans.

  6. If Krauthammer’s speculation is correct, then former CIA Director David Petraeus and Paula Broadwell deserve to be recalled to active duty to face all punitive articles under the Uniform Code of Military Justice – Article 134 for pure stupidity in addition to lying to Congress. How could he have thought Obama/WH had his back is beyond me.

    Obama didn’t bother to swear-in Petraeus as the CIA Director. He accepted the oath of office as the next director from VP Joe Biden which should have been all the evidence he needed to know where he stood within the Obama administration.

    If he lied to Congress during intelligence briefings on what occurred in the terrorist attack in Benghazi, as it pertains to the faux narrative of a protest about a video that never happened to protect the President and himself, then IMO he and anyone else involved in the cover-up should also face charges of treason as well.

  7. It is time for you to regain the dignity of our troops who fight and die for us. What do you honestly have left to lose? Tell the truth!

  8. I hope he tells the truth and others with the truth come forward to back him up. he lied about it from the beginning, saying it was the movie, now his credibility is about gone, with that and this affair. but we deserve the truth, we have 4 m urdered americans whose families deserve the truth.

  9. Well, since his hearing will not be heard by the American people, we will never really know what he says. Closed door hearings do not clarify anything for us. We are then dependent on what our elected representatives tell us – do you trust them enough? I really don’t. Until I hear things from Petraeus’ mouth for myself, I will remain suspicious. It’s gone too far now for me to be any other way.

  10. General, please tell the whole, complete, unvarnished truth. That is the way the ultimate warrior would behave. Tell the truth, sir. We don’t care about what you did under the desk.

  11. He’s either a Traitor like Leon “The Red” and Barry or he’s going to drop the bomb at the hearing. Right now he’s given no indication of being a patriot; however, Barry knew he had a pawn during his vetting for CIA chief. 2 questions come up:
    Why move Leon “The Red” to DOD?
    Why hasn’t Petreaus spoken out regarding CIA arming al-qaeda in Libya and Syria? Remember, he was Bush’s man on the surge which only worked with his “hearts and minds” campaign which is worth asking, was he “friends” with al-qaeda back then causing the appearance of success?

  12. all this talk about Petraus betraying us leads me to wonder, what is the real cover up? Like how about those elections? fraud? Convenience is the middle name of the democrat regime and if they time things just right, they can take the focus off any issue.

    “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” Ring any bells? I believe that voter fraud is far more widespread than we will ever know because Petraus is the focal point. Convenient that this all came out on Tuesday, election day? I think not! A perfect plan to cover up the fact that this election was stolen from We the People, again!

    Petraus has one opportunity to redeem himself with the American people, not that it will do anything to improve his plight, but at least he will have done the right thing. He better do the right thing and speak the whole truth and NOTHING BUT the TRUTH, so help him God. I’m praying that if a lie is attempted to spew out of his mouth that God will put a guard over it and only the truth will be told.

    1. “LIKE” inFINITY!!

      This makes me sick! YES, I care about four dead Americans, of COURSE I do!

      But if there’s any way to stop this trainwreck of an administration for tearing our country apart for another four years, we need to do it NOW.

      THIS ELECTION was STOLEN and I don’t care WHO thinks I sound crazy!!

  13. I sure am glad that Krauthammer is saying what we here have been saying all along!

    Just goes to show that we don’t need these Beltway talking heads any longer: scoopers are much better and much faster at analysing what that lot in Washington DC is up to,

  14. It will be interesting to hear what he has to say. But the real news will be made to the Senators behind closed doors in a private hearing. They will all then probably decide where to go from there. But keep an eye on one thing. If the Senate offers the general immunity for his testimony, then Obama and Clinton are finished. If there is no offer of immunity, then what Petraeus has to say isn’t really that important and we’ll have to find the truth somewhere else. Whatever the CIA was really doing in Benghazi probably wasn’t very legal, and the only way for Petraeus to get off free and clear is if he gets immunity. We’ll probably know in the next few days which way Congress is going to go.

    1. I no longer believe that those we elect will do the right thing – even the conservatives. They are outnumbered, and they so far have been toeing the line doing what they are told by the likes of Boehner, McCain, and McConnell. Who knows what will be said behind closed doors, and what truths will really be given to the American people.

  15. Yeah, this outta be fun! Now, let’s come up with a real good story to sound so believable that we can put this puppy to rest! Right!

    Time for some popcorn! In the meantime, the country is coming apart at the seams, people want to succede from the union, Israel is on the attack, and Obama is off golfing again!

    1. Agree..I’ve been looking at homes to buy, but I am alittle scrared of what this next year..hec 4 years have in store for us..I can’t afford to have “this” house lose value as my last did. Man, oh Man, are we in trouble!!!

  16. The first question I would ask him under oath is: “Has anyone threatened you with prosecution for your role in the unfolding scandal involving your relationship with Paula Broadwell and Jill Kelley?” Second question: “Has anyone implied to you, in any way, that prosecution of charges would be withheld or reduced if you were to testify in a certain way?”

    1. I am worried for his life and the life of his family. As dirty as Obama is, he might just make someone General Petraeus loves disappear rather than the General himself.

      1. He was the head spook…..those in the CIA are more likely to handle those in the administration than visa versa…..they don’t like being thrown under the bus and there is groups within groups that handle these types of things.

        All IMHO

  17. So the “Administration” is guilty of subornation of perjury.

    Guess they get away with that too. Argggh.

      1. His earlier testimony was not under oath. I hope regard for his country wins out over his personal security.

  18. The terrorist no longer need to crash into our buildings. They are part of our administration now. They can destroy us from within now. This is what the real problem is. our freedom of elected officials has been stolen from us

  19. Once again this administration has outmaneuvered the wagging the dog!!

    Impeachment is what should happen..but of course the mainstream..will stand by their man!!

    1. Erm … what? How do you figure the Odministration has been outmaneuvered by the GOP on this matter? I’m missing the connection …

        1. Oh, ok. Yeah, that makes sense. I must’ve read it wrong. Too early. Too early. Must get more sleep …

  20. If he does live long enough to testify, I sure hope he tells the truth. I fear for his and his family’s lives should he testify. This is what happens when you get in bed with lying communists. He will forever be vilified as the traitor he became.

  21. My problem is that Gen. Patraues put his personal well being ahead of his sworn duty to the country. His self interest allowed him to be used and now his self interest is in trying to get his reputation back. I guess his testimony will be the deciding factor but up until now he has lost any regard I had for him.

    1. I’m not so sure. Now that he has resigned he is free-er to talk. Before, he could have been ordered to remain silent. There are still confidentiality rules in play but he no longer has to self censor.

      1. Mike, he had to have been vetted to take the job of CIA director knowing he had been compromised. I had been a constant supporter of his until he went before the country and confessed to the affair knowing full well he could not fulfill that position without lying, or else the vetting process no longer can be trusted.

        1. What vetting process? Like Maobama was vetted? And I never liked Patreas. He’s a politician, not a warrior.

          1. Exactly, making my point, he knew the process was a scam, participated in it, benefitted from it and now after being exposed he is to be taken as honorable. You and I were more thoroughly vetted at enlistment time than Obama, Clinton, Panetta, the whole lot of them.

            1. You are right about that. I had a soviet friend in 3rd grade. The Corps asked me about him during processing. Can you believe that?

              1. Yes I can because we have a very close friend with a pretty high security clearance and his entire family is vetted every time he is promoted. Plus on a thread yesterday I mentioned recently filling out a form 4473 and had to have a NICS check that if I lied on would be a serious offense.

  22. At this point its all an act for show for the reality tv absorbed americans. Its all made up drama to deflect from whats really going on. Just like the election was all for show. It was a done deal before any of us went to the booth.

  23. I think he’s in the come-clean mode now.

    It’s David versus Goliath. (Yeah…I have a dream)

    Here General David, five smooth stones for ya’.

    Let the truth set you free, while that same truth binds Obama.

  24. At this point, can we seriously trust anything Petraeus might say? I’ve suspected he’ll do little more than take the Fifth, at this point, as anything else might come close to perjury.

    1. Sadly you’re right. I’d be stunned if he summoned what little honor he has left and actually told the truth.

      1. Well, right, precisely. If he shows up and delivers the truth, he’s still been tarnished, and the media will paint him as someone who can’t be believed. At this point, I’ve no idea if I’d believe him, though I’d be as jazzed as the next guy if he can clean. I just have no way of knowing what ‘clean’ looks like at this point.

        1. The truth is obvious, Barry and his comrades let those men die. It is just a matter of whether or not Petraeus will come clean on this fact.

        2. Agreed. Rush thinks there’s no way he’ll spill the beans… I expect a lot of 5th pleading myself.

    2. That was the whole game behind the administration ‘outing’ him in the first place. To cast a doubt over anything he might have to say and have their media ‘flunkies’ run with it, if he didn’t cooperate. He resigned and ‘outed’ himself.
      If Obama’s Chicago gangsters had any military experience, they would already know it’s never a good idea idea to screw around with a 20+ year, 4 star, General, whose name isn’t Colon Powell or Wesley Clark. 😉 😉

      1. Oh, I’d never disagree on that point. I’m just saying that, given what has happened, I just can’t even begin to imagine what ‘truth’ in this case looks like. There appear to be several layers — another one was peeled back just today with the whole cancer charity scam run by Kelley — and I’m wondering where all of this might be heading.

        So long as Petraeus can back up whatever he says (assuming he actually says anything) with hard evidence (emails, documents, something), then I’ll be inclined to give him some measure of credibility. If he just shows up and begins contradicting what he’s already said, then methinks this’ll mostly fall apart with no legs.

  25. What does he have to lose now? The CIA issued a statement that they did not tell anyone to stand down which drops it at POTUS’S door. Finish the good fight General. Lay it at the feet it belongs at and then let our Government do its job

      1. She had the security clearance to be able to read the documents. The only issue may be was it ok for her to have them in her possession in her home.

    1. You’re right. He has one chance to restore a smidgen of honor here by telling the truth… hope he doesn’t blow it.

      I can’t help thinking of the movie: The Firm (with Tom Cruise). It’s literally the same situation imo… Petraeus is set up with an attractive woman to ensure his blackmailed (no pun intended) silence later on. Plausibly logical and with this crooked regime, highly likely.

    2. People are asking what does he still have to lose now if he tells the truth.
      With the crooks in power, how about his life or that of his family?
      These people would stop at nothing.

Comments are closed.