Representative Peter King stated that former CIA Director David Petraeus stated that he knew the Benghazi attack was terrorism and that the talking points given to Ambassador Susan Rice were different from the ones prepared by the CIA. Petraeus stated Rice's talking points were edited to demphasized the possibility of terrorism. David Petraeus is going to tell members of Congress that he "knew almost immediately after the September 11th attack, that the group Ansar al Sharia, the al Qaeda sympathizing group in Libya was responsible for the attacks," CNN reports. In his closed door meeting on the Hill, "[Petraeus] will also say he had his own talking points separate from U.N. ambassador Susan Rice. [Hers] came from somewhere other in the administration than his direct talking points," Barbara Starr of CNN reports, referencing a source close to Petraeus. The former CIA director will move to further himself from comments that didn't accurately characterize the terror attack that Rice made 5 days after on national television shows. "When he looks at what Susan Rice said," CNN reports, "here is what Petraeus's take is, according to my source. Petraeus developed some talking points laying it all out. those talking points as always were approved by the intelligence community. But then he sees Susan Rice make her statements and he sees input from other areas of the administration. Petraeus -- it is believed -- will tell the committee he is not certain where Susan Rice got all of her information." http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...linked-group-responsible-benghazi_663458.html
The slide from grace for Obama. We all know who ordered the change to the talking points. Now, who ordered the rescuers to stand down? the claim that the CIA's original talking points were changed is sure to stoke controversy on the Hill. "The original talking points were much more specific about Al Qaeda involvement. And yet the final ones just said indications of extremists," King said, adding that the final version was the product of a vague "inter-agency process." Further, King said a CIA analyst specifically told lawmakers that the Al Qaeda affiliates line "was taken out." Lawmakers are focusing on the talking points issue because of concern over the account U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice gave on five Sunday shows on Sept. 16, when she repeatedly claimed the attack was spontaneous -- Rice's defenders have since insisted she was merely basing her statements on the intelligence at the time. The suggestion that the intelligence was altered raised questions about who altered it, with King asking if "the White House changed the talking points." One source told Fox News that Petraeus "has no idea what was provided" to Rice or who was the author of the talking points she used. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...rrorism-from-start-source-says/#ixzz2CPVCYg3S
They are desperately tyring to spin this to preserve Rice's chances of being Secretary of State. Don't kid yourself, the republicans want to be able to give her a pass on this rather than vote against a black woman, particularly after democrats are already playing the race card on it. The real point here is that Petraeus did two very bad things. One, he lied to congress. His current testimony seems to make that very clear. He should be prosecuted for that, but good luck getting an administration as corrupt as this one to do that. Two, he said nothing after Rice lied on all the sunday morning shows about the video being the cause of all the attack. He kept his mealy mouth shut even after they blamed the "intelligence community" for her lies. He has shown himself to be utterly lacking in honor. He has vindicated the judgment of his many detractors in the Army, who viewed him as a desk general who advanced through calculated ass kissing.
Petraeus was towing the administrations line to keep the affair out of sight. Obama knew long before he claims to have known and used it against Petraeus. When Petraeus decided he was going to stop playing ball, the affair was leaked and the rest is history. Obama is an idiot because the whole thing really should not have been that damaging. All Obama had to do is come out on day one and say it was a terrorist attack and they were going to get the guys who did it and it would have stayed in the news cycle for about 2 days.
1) Date = 9/11 2) Attack = US embassy 1 + 2 = terrorist attack. My 11 year old daughter immediately knew it was a terrorist attack. Hard to understand why some adults couldn't do the math.
In the end, Petraeus is the bad guy, the liar, the incompetent asshole, etc. and Obama saved us all from the evil doers. I know this because all the t.v. reporters and newspapers said so.