UPDATE @ 5:38 p.m. PT
Charles Krauthammer: White House ‘Held Affair Over Petraeus’s Head’ – “The Sword Was Lowered on Election Day”
nicedeb at Nice Deb - 13 minutes ago
While many pundits on the right have been whispering that blackmail may have been involved in the Petraeus scandal, Charles Krauthammer, Tuesday on Fox News’s Special Report didn’t mince words, saying what everyone with working brain cells is thinking: “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,” he said.
Transcript via Newsbusters:
CHARLES 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?Watch the video at Newsbusters.While many pundits on the right have been whispering that blackmail may have been involved in the Petraeus scandal, Charles Krauthammer, Tuesday on Fox News’s Special Report didn’t mince words, saying what everyone with working brain cells is thinking: “Of course it was being held over Petraeus’s head, and the sword was lowered on Election [...]
As I watched a segment on Fox News earlier today on the potential connection between these two scandals, I wished that I was a body language expert. Gemu Green blinked profusely throughout the segment and with a straight face, out rightly claimed that there was no connection between the two scandals. In other words...the typical liberal leftist lunatic way of saying...move on...nothing to see here folks!
Now, the scandal widens with General John Allen under investigation.
Lawmakers question why they weren't told of Petraeus probe, yet the General Allen alleged scandal came out immediately.
What is wrong with this picture?
I tried to watch another cable station while their panel discussed the Petraeus scandal last night, but I fell asleep. The portion that I did watch did not even discuss a possible connection between Benghazi and the Petraeus scandal. Why not? Answer: Because they don't care about the truth. They want to protect BHO - no matter what.
This morning, Debbie Wasserman Schultz practically fell all over herself denying that there even COULD be any connection between the two scandals! I'm just waiting to here a liberal left lunatic claim "It's Bush's fault!" You know it's coming...
They won't follow the evidence to wherever it might lead - they will just talk about the Petraeus "sex" scandal. The media of mass deception runs with a sex scandal, but not the much more important Benghazi massacre cover-up? Makes us want to say Hmmm.....
This morning, I read on WND that the video of Paula Broadwell speaking at a university (and possibly spilling some secret CIA information in the process) was removed from You Tube. You can still view it HERE. Great article and comments there, as well.
So...what exactly in that video got the BADministration all in a tizzy? I think this commenter has the answer:
Broadwell's comment that the annex in Libya was being used to hold prisoners must have been a CIA secret that the BADministration did not want to come out. I think that it will get A LOT of attention during the upcoming hearings.
It has been revealed that the Petraeus/Broadwell affair (which ended four months ago) was an "open secret," meaning that apparently, no one cared about it for quite some time. So...why now? And why was this information (if it was SO important) kept secret before the election, revealed to the general public two days after the election and four days before Petraeus would have appeared before Congress in the Benghazi hearings? If this doesn't smell like a cover-up to readers, you must have your head in the sand!
Did the FBI sit on the Petraeus story to protect the president?
Answer: OF COURSE THEY DID! If this came out before the election (just like the Iran drone strike that was not reported before election) it may have had a negative affect upon BHO's vote count. On the other hand...maybe not. The fix was in with all of the voter fraud that went on.
So, what does the revelation of this sex scandal being splattered all across the media of mass deception accomplish? Now it apparently allows Petraeus and Secretary Clinton to skip the Benghazi hearing?
Here's an accurate comment about it all:
koinea 1 commentAnd another:
Ultimately, the American people deserve to know the truth about the Benghazi massacre, cover-up and scandal!!
Hat tips to all links.