Why else would he have stood by Obama declaring that the anti-Islamic film was the cause for the attack at Benghazi? The anti-terror warrior wasn't that stupid; he knew very well that the four Americans were killed in an act of terror. Yet, he compromised the truth and stood with Obama in his lie.
Read from Atlas Shrugs:
KRAUTHAMMER: WHITE HOUSE "HELD AFFAIR OVER PETRAEUS'S HEAD" FOR DISHONEST TESTIMONY ON BENGHAZI...
Obama said in his Benghazi and Hurricane Sandy speeches that "we don't play politics with people's lives." Yeah, right. Obama is a lying thug. This is his MO from early on. Remember when Obama ran for Senator and his team of gangsters got Jack and Jere Ryan's unsealed over the objection of both parties, and despite the potential harm to their young son? Evil.
No free pass for Petraeus on this. He is beneath contempt. No honor. None. He sold out his country to keep his dirty little secret. Will he now when he testifies? He has nothing to lose -- unless, of course, Obama is blackmailing him with something else.
Krauthammer: White House 'Held Affair Over Petraeus's Head' For Favorable Testimony On Benghazi... Newsbusters (thanks to Van)
Syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer on Tuesday saidused David Petraeus’s affair to get the CIA director to give testimony about the attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that was in line with the administration’s position on the matter.Appearing on Fox News's Special Report, Krauthammer said, "The sword was lowered on Election Day" (video follows with transcript and commentary):CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: I think the really shocking news today was that General Petraeus thought and hoped he could keep his. 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?As a point of reference, ABCNews.com reported on September 14:The attack that killed four Americans in the Libyan consulate began as a spontaneous protest against the opportunity to launch an attack, CIA Director David Petreaus told the House Intelligence Committee today to one lawmaker who attended a closed-door briefing.“The Innocence of Muslims,” but Islamic militants who may have links to Al Qaeda used theThis of course was the administration line for almost two weeks after the attacks.With that in mind, Krauthammer drove his point home further a few minutes later:KRAUTHAMMER: 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.If Krauthammer is correct, it's going to be very interesting to see if and how the Obama-loving media reports it.
David Petraeus has his chance to stand up and tell it like it is. Obama threw him under the bus. Let's hope he dares to tell the truth about how the Obama regime refused to protect the four Americans and then tried to cover their tracks.
From Gateway Pundit: