Skip to comments.We will soon know the REAL character of General David Petraeus
Posted on 11/14/2012 8:18:32 AM PST by IbJensen
The reason for General David Petraeus sudden, forced resignation is as plain as the ass on a goat. Barack Obama wanted to discredit Petraeus, prejudice the American public against him and effectively intimidate the general into silence lest he spill the beans to congress about the Regimes criminal activities of providing arms, fighters and support to Syrian terror groups from the Chris Stevens-managed, Benghazi mission.
Of course, Obama also didnt want anyone in-the-know testifying about his treacherous betrayal of Stevens and 3 other Americans as he deliberately offered them up to al Qaeda killers. A dead Regime operative can never testify against his boss about gun running to terrorists, can he Mr. President?
Stevens base of operations in Benghazi was NOT a consulate, it was a mission which served as a meeting place to coordinate aid for the rebel-led insurgencies in the Middle East (1) And among the tasks performed inside the building was collaborating with Arab countries on the recruitment of fighters including jihadists to target Bashar al-Assads regime in Syria. (1)
Of course, such goings on at the Benghazi mission would have caused no small amount of political embarrassment for Barack Obama had they become widely known. For U.S. officials [had] stated the White House [was] providing nonlethal aid to the Syrian rebels, not arms. (1) And lest the American public forget, Congress [had] appropriated money, at the behest of Obama, for humanitarian aid, not weapons and certainly not for al Qaeda linked, Islamic jihadist fighters recruited by Saudi Arabia (2)
Obama knew of Petraeus indiscretions with Paula Broadwell months before the election. But had the president outed the general before Election Day, it might have raised questions about Obamas dealings in Benghazi to which even the Obama-owned media might have had to request answers as the new media would certainly have run with the story.
So when a CIA spokesman clearly heaped blame for the mission deaths on the president by saying, No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate, Obama could do nothing but bide his time and depend upon the liberal media to bury the story of his having betrayed Stevens and the Benghazi dead (which of course it did.) (3)
But with the election finally over, Obama swiftly introduced the General to countless others he has placed beneath the Regime bus. And now the question becomes: What kind of man is David Petraeus? He knows it was Obamas decision alone to betray 4 Americans to their death. He knows assistance could have been provided, the terrorists killed or dispersed and the mission staff rescued. And as CIA director, Petraeus must also have known what was going on at the mission, that is, of the weaponry being secretly provided to al Qaeda-connected fighters in direct opposition to the wishes and understanding of congress.
But will Petraeus testify to all of this (and more), or will he quietly sneak away like so many cowards who have graced the ranks of the Obama Regime? Obama has already worked to destroy the Generals credibility and reputation. And Petraeus has undoubtedly been threatened with consequences far more chilling than a revelation of marital infidelity should he testify before congress about the presidents criminal dealings.
Therefore, like so many American soldiers before him, David Petraeus must choose between acting with valour or cowardice against his countrys enemies.
Well soon discover whether the General chooses to honor or disgrace both his uniform and himself
I think I know more than I want to know about his character already.
He has a pension and benefits to lose so, Congress will have to include that in any immunity granted his testimony.
Keep in mind, liberals typically circle the wagons and defend their own regardless of how aggregiously morals and values have been compromised. That is, unless, they become a liability to something or someone greater.
Then, they isolate, target and execute the threat. It’s a simple and effective war strategy. If you don’t want the enemy to advance on you, burn the bridge.
They have discredited the General but he has himself to blame. The democrats and Obama will come out squeeky clean because now the General can also be blamed for Bengazi.
We’ll see if the General comes clean and tells all or tries to salvage his only avenues back to a normal existance.
I expect, sadly, he’ll “commit suicide” in the next couple of weeks. That will be tragic too and I pray I am wrong. But it follows the natural path to secure total secrecy and “protect America” from finding the truth.
He could lose all of that. But he could easily make up for it in a tell all book deal not to mention Hollyweird. Sex sells.
If Holder brings charges against him, he will lose benefits and pension too (dishonorable discharge). This is the stick the president holds regardless of what congress can say about the investigation. I don't know that congress can grant him immunity from Holder. Let me know if I am wrong.
The President can still threaten him into silence about Bengazi.
Don’t be surprised if Petraeus gets the “Ron Brown Treatment”... you know, a .45 caliber bullet hole in the back of your skull, found in a plane crash... ruled an accident.
Or maybe more appropriate for this scenario - found naked, with ligature marks on his wrists, and with a bullet hole in the back of his head... ruled as a suicide. Hillary knows how to make that happen...
“Today is the first day of redemption if he chooses to select it”
Dont get your hopes up with Petraeus. He has already betrayed his duty and country when he lied to congress in September.
If he tells what he knows now, he will be admitting he failed his duty as CIA director, and was willing to sacrifice 4 American live to support a lie. At least he could have resigned before going along with the lie, blackmailed or not.
Where do you gain any credibility at this point?
No, we won’t. The investigation is obviously still unfolding and the principals are still under threat of charges. Petraeus may show loyalty to his mistress over country, for example, and feel morally justified in doing so. IOW, the ongoing investigation, FBI raids, etc., mean there are hostages involved.
“If Holder brings charges against him”
What charges? They would have to charges of a high nature to lose your benefits, such as willingly divulging classified material.
Just having an affair might result in a reduction of rank, but it would take a conviction resulting in prison time to lose all benefits.
Remember you are talking about a 4 star general.
Really? I would think that his revelation about "classified" information during the investigation would be easily enough spun to support anything Holder wants to charge him with.
Remember Scooter Libby and Sandy Berger? Holder charged the Sherif Arapoe (sp?) on BS and sued a state to prevent them from enforcing laws.
How can you have confidence in the federal justice system?
Any person can start with a change in life on any day. I don’t expect David to suffer that hell but he might.
“Really? I would think that his revelation about “classified” information during the investigation would be easily enough spun to support anything Holder wants to charge him with.”
Holder can not take away his pension and benefits, that would be up to a military court, UCMJ.
Again they would have to convict not just charge, and then it would be turned over to a military trial for their punishments.
Listening to Rush just now - he thinks the prospects are bleak that the general will come clean..
Please add me to your Benghazi list.
Feminism/romanticism aside, bomb Iran.
I think he’s done a pretty good job of demonstrating his character already.