Agreed. “Omitting” is not the same as “concocting.”
Sounds logical to me, and even the NYT agrees.
There could be a potent counter argument here and the real criminals are far above him, trying to save their own asses, and particularly over the phony issue of terrorism being put to bed by the successfully led Obama America (sic), the only inconvenience being the attack on the Benghazi outlets by terrorist groups right smack in the middle of the reelection campaign which laid a big pile of doo doo right on their narrative about how they succeeded in the “War on Terror”. He could turning evil, or he could still be a good man but is being excoriated by those larger fish above him who are about to go scott-free via the old Potomac Two Step Blame Game.
We know that he's already perjured himself at least once on the matter. Nevermind the adultery - it now appears he's morphed into a...
HOW DID HE PERJURE HIMSELF? Shows us where/when he was under oath!
You are worse than the MSM that has turned on America. But that's nothing new about you.
It comes down to the one question Greg Gutfeld, on THE FIVE, has been asking for 8 weeks...”Who pushed the video?? “
He already turned when he supported gays in the military.
He’s now protecting his wife’s new position and salary.
One thing that strikes me as rather strange is that today’s general wears a ton of ‘fruit salad’ on his coat. It’s gone even beyond merit badges for scouts.
Betrayus, for example, has one for combing his hair and tying his necktie correctly. It would be an interesting afternoon for him to explain exactly what each Dentine Chewing Gum wrapper represents.
A far cry from the days of DDE who wore no decorations on his jacket.
Apparently its a generational thing. “I, I, I, I, I!”
pitifully stupid premise
Updated November 16, 2012, 6:18 p.m. ET
David Petraeus and Dwight Eisenhower
The I's Have It
By PEGGY NOONAN
An epidemic of egomania strikes America's civilian and military leadership.
We are becoming a conceited nitwit society, pushy and self-aggrandizing. No one is ashamed to brag now. And show off. They think it heightens them. They think it's good for business.
It used to be that if you were big, you'd never tell people how big you were because that would be kind of classless, and small. In fact it would be a proof of smallness.
So don't be showy. The big are modest.
There is the issuesmall but indicative of something largerof how members of the U.S. military present themselves, and the awe they consciously encourage in the public and among the political class. The other day on his Daily Beast blog, Andrew Sullivan posted a letter from a reader noting the way officers are now given and relentlessly wear on their dress uniforms ribbons, markers and awards for pretty much everything they dowhat used to be called fruit salad. Mr. Sullivan posted two pictures we echo here, one of Gen. David Petraeus and one of Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower. This is the Eisenhower of D-Day, of the long slog through Europe in World War II. He didn't seem to see the need to dress himself up and tell you what he'd done. Maybe he thought you knew. He didn't wear all the honors to which he was entitled, though he could have used them to dazzle the masses if that had been what he was interested in.
Top brass sure is brassier than it used to be. And you have to wonder what that's about. Where did the old culture of modesty go? Ulysses S. Grant wore four stars on his shoulder and nothing else on his uniform. And that was a fellow who'd earned a few medals...
I don’t think the blatant lie is as much an issue as the lack of intervention during the attack, which is not as much an issue as the lack of security leading up to the attack, which is not as much of an issue as the secret gun-running to terrorists.
Do you really believe that Petraeus testified that the Obama people changed the CIA report to hide the Al Qaeda connection to avoid tipping off the terrorists? I am certain that if Petraeus said anything like that, he said that is what he was told, not that it was true.
Petraeus had zero imput as far as the administration cover story was concerned. He never spoke to Obama. Obama never called him and asked his advice or his opinion. He didn’t need it because Obama was in the situation room on 9/11, watching the events unfold in real time. He knew that it was not a peaceful protest that went bad.
How can that be when the group responsible claimed credibility just hours after it began?
Committed perjury? When? Where? You better look up the definition of perjury. Petraeus was never sworn in when he briefed Congress. Petraeus was sworn in when he testified on Friday before House and Senate committees. Where is the perjury committed by Petraeus on Friday?
No oath, no perjury.
I’d prefer to let more of the facts become clear before making final judgement. This guy may be being set up and blackmailed by the Obama Chicago Thug Machine.
It seems to me that it is the country who is turning on Patraeus. And our entire military.
Whatever the case may be, the reason we know of his affair and the reason the media is coverning so urgently is becuase this is the result of blackmail from the white house.
You don’t play ball, we ruin your life and career.
Personally, I think the video, or at least the dubbed audio of it, was made by our government specifically for the purpose of blaming it as opposed ot them in case something went wrong, which it did.
These are evil, vile, people. They are the most stupid masterminds of all time, yet they think they are Gods. All they know is the lie.