Benghazi Chapter 2: Generals, Timeliness, and Sex Under the Desk
If you thought Benghazi was weird before, then you should probably sit down. Before the election, all we knew about Benghazi was that four Americans were killed over a seven hour period, during an attack by a group of heavily armed protestors, and that the remaining facts were still unclear. Of course, the conspiracy nuts out there thought the whole “we’re looking into it” thing was simply an effort by the Administration to stonewall until after the election. Fools. Well, my sources are telling me that Barry was actually telling the truth when he said he didn’t know much about the attack. See, what happened is, he DVR’d the live feed of the attack so he could watch it later without commercials, but became too busy with the whole election thing to see it.
Just kidding. I don’t have any sources, and Barry would never DVR an attack on Americans…unless it was to watch “Nashville,” which conveniently aired on September 12.
Now that the election is over, however, hold on to your hat! First, during the weekly Friday night document dump, the Pentagon released a timeline revealing that it took more than 19 hours for any military assets to arrive in Libya.
But there have been persistent questions about whether the Pentagon should have moved more rapidly to get troops into Libya or had units closer to the area as the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks on America approached. In particular, there was at least a 19-hour gap between the time when Panetta first ordered military units to prepare to deploy – between midnight and 2 a.m. local time in Tripoli – and the time a Marine anti-terrorism team landed in Tripoli, which as just before 9 p.m.
Why? According to Pentagon chief Leon Panetta, the situation was “murky.” It’s hard to believe that it was 19 hours murky, however, considering the consulate had notified the State Dept. about an expected attack three hours before it started, and that everyone, including the White House, was notified of the attack only 20-30 minutes after it began. In other words, we still don’t know why it took everyone so friggin’ long to respond to the attack.
Also on Friday, we all learned that CIA Director General David Petraeus was resigning his position, effective immediately, because of an extramarital affair he had with his biographer. The Administration, and its surrogates in the media, have obviously claimed the timing of the resignation has nothing to do with Benghazi or the fact that Patraeus was scheduled to testify before Congress this week. The resignation follows the “retirement” of our head guy in Northern Africa (which is where Libya is located on the map. #geographybee). General Carter Ham reportedly redirected an unarmed drone to the scene just 17 minutes after the attack began, and allegedly objected to orders to “stand down” after the first reports of the attack came in.
According to the FBI, however, the govt. already knew about Petraeus’s indiscretions from affair-related emails discovered this last summer. So why did the resignation happen now? It’s clear that the White House has been pointing its finger at the CIA since Benghazi hit the papers. Is Petraeus the fall guy? Or could it be that Petraeus leaked secrets to his mistress, which we all found out about when she gave a speech at the University of Denver on October 26.
‘I don’t know if a lot of you have heard this, but the CIA annex had actually had taken a couple of Libyan militia members prisoner. And they think that the attack on the consulate was an effort to try to get these prisoners back,’ Broadwell declared during the speech, at the University of Denver.
The CIA denied the existence of the alleged prison in Benghazi, but that’s to be expected. Still though, was the resignation forced as a result of the speech, thus making its timing just a coincidence with Petraeus’s upcoming Benghazi testimony, or is it just a cover?
Why was the FBI investigating the head of the CIA in the first place? It is being claimed that the FBI got involved when the mistress sent threatening emails to some random woman named Jill Kelley, and Kelley went to the FBI. During its investigation, the feds apparently found the scandalous emails between the mistress and Petraeus. I bet I couldn’t get the FBI to investigate the threatening emails I receive on a daily basis. Just sayin’.
This whole thing is really weird, and is only going to get weirder. Closing quote by the mistress’s father:
He told the Daily News: ‘This is about something else entirely, and the truth will come out.’
Don’t bet on it.
Fox News has a source confirming the mistress’s story:
A well-placed Washington source confirms to Fox News that there were Libyan militiamen being held at the CIA annex in Benghazi and that their presence was being looked at as a possible motive for the staged attack on the consulate and annex that night.
According to multiple intelligence sources who have served in Benghazi, there were more than just Libyan militia members who were held and interrogated by CIA contractors at the CIA annex in the days prior to the attack. Other prisoners from additional countries in Africa and the Middle East were brought to this location.
I wonder if they were water-boarded. That would be awesome.