David Petraeus Could Nail Obama To The White House Wall On Benghazi

The greatly anticipated testimony by former CIA Director David Petraeus is almost upon us. In less than half an hour, General Petraeus will be going behind closed doors to testify to before members of the House and Senate intelligence committees. Specifically, he will be asked about what he knew about the attack in Benghazi and when he knew it. According to CNN, Petraeus will also testify that the CIA was not responsible for the talking points used by Susan Rice when she famously went on five different Sunday talk shows and spread the false rumor that a video was responsible for the attacks.

For security purposes, much of the content of Petraeus' testimony will be classified. I am hopeful, however, that enough information will be released to allow us to gain some knowledge about what really happened, before, during, and after the attack in Benghazi. There is no doubt in my mind that the American people were fed a load of lies. There is also no doubt in my mind that it was done for two specific purposes.

First, President Obama was embroiled in a very tight reelection bid against Mitt Romney. A scandal of these proportions could have very well derailed that bid. As such, there was a concerted effort by his campaign, the White House, and the media to keep the truth about what happened in Benghazi out of the news as much as possible.

Secondly, I believe it goes against Obama's ingrained prejudice to allow any such event, attack or protest, to make Muslims appear in a bad light. He doesn't want them to appear to be the terrorists many of them are, therefore the video excuse was concocted. For days and weeks afterward, the media fed the American people the lie that the attack was the direct result of a video maligning the precious Muslim prophet, Muhammad. Even the casual observer could tell that wasn't the truth, but they continued the lie until after the election.

We could discuss much more about the cover up that continues to surround Benghazi. President Obama had his first press conference in a very long time and used it to attack Senators McCain, Graham, and Ayotte for going after Susan Rice. He famously said they should come after him instead. I am looking for the Senators to take him at his word. If David Petraeus testifies, as is being reported, that the talking points used by Susan Rice on the Sunday talk shows were provided by the White House, then go after Obama they should. Obama is fond of saying the buck stops with him and he likes to go it alone a lot of the time, albeit without the inherent responsibility of the job description. This is one time when he should be held completely and totally responsible for what has transpired.

Forget Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice. Forget David Petraeus and the rest of the intelligence community. Never mind about the staff in the White House who may or may not have told President Obama about the attack in Benghazi and how it was transpiring. Any investigation that proceeds from this day forward should go straight to the man who likes to claim he is responsible. I am not a vindictive man, but I hope David Petraeus nails President Obama to the White House wall for his role of responsibility about what happened in Benghazi and the cover up he has perpetrated.

You the only sane one on this thread? My Gosh, we have no clue what Petraeus is going to say, yet everyone is an expert this morning.

I agree with you in this matter.

I heard one congressman from Texas say he is wanting to get a Special Prosecutor as in Watergate. That Special Ops and other military are demanding this happen. That if enough people begin to call for it, it could happen. Although it would take Obama or Holder to call for one, ain't that a hoot?

Yet if enough people rise up and DEMAND it, it could happen. Where's the Petitions?

With this administration, Not one of our children, grandchildren, etc. who serve in the Military SAFE anymore. THEY "ARE" EXPENDABLE.

Can you imagine the outrage by the liberal MSM if Bush had made this despicable statement? Why Romney didn't challenge BO on this calloused remark in the debates is beyond me.

When I read numerous posts here that end in "such and such is beyond me" or "I just cannot understand such and such", it re-inforces the Pauline-Kaelism that we conservatives live in today, insulated from the rest of the country.

What I have noticed is that this sense of outrage and shock (rightly) expressed here is limited only to conservative websites and conservative outlets. The rest of the country largely feels no such sense of outrage. For them, Benghazi is just another unfortunate situation caused by the "events in the Middle East". They have compartmentalized it in such fashion, and are not going to spend their time and energy agonizing over it. They do not see the relevance in the larger context of national security, and do not share our perspective of how this illustrates dereliction of duty.

Since the media reflects this "who cares" attitude over Benghazi, they never developed a coherent narrative that put it all in context. Romney did not have an opportunity, in the absence of such a narrative in the public consciousness, to parlay it into something damning about 0. The low information voters who are independents would have been confused if Romney had made a big deal about it, since that would be the first time they would have heard about it.

I just don't think this story has any legs. The official narrative is that it was the fog of war, early information was unreliable, and we will wait to finish the investigation to find out what happened. The fact that help was denied can never be proven beyond hearsay and low level officials in the State Department.

Just like the lead up to the election showed a disconnect between us and the rest of the country, with people here expecting a R&R landslide and the rest expecting 0 to win easily, this event also shows a big disconnect. Outside of conversative outlets, people have shrugged this off, and no one thinks it is as serious as Watergate. Here and on other conservative outlets, we are convinced it is far worse than Watergate.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.