Petraeus Resigns as Questions Remains About Benghazi

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 9461
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 3:24 pm

PostWed Nov 14, 2012 12:58 am » by *WillEase*


Jill Kelley Has Secrets Besides Petraeus Ties

Published on Nov 13, 2012 by NewsyPolitics

In the midst of the David Petraeus scandal, General John Allen is now being investigated for his ties with Jill Kelley, who reported Petraeus' affair.


Upload to Disclose.tv

Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 9461
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 3:24 pm

PostWed Nov 14, 2012 2:33 am » by *WillEase*


Seahawk wrote:The plot thickens...

Petraeus, Broadwell scandal: New implications ('Driving the Day')

POLITICO's Jonathan Allen and Josh Gerstein report new details on the drama involving former CIA Director David Petraeus and Paula Broadwell, including implications for Afghanistan commander Gen. John Allen ('Driving the Day') 11/13/2012 9:57 AM EDT

See video at Politico link:

http://www.politico.com/multimedia/video/2012/11/petraeus-broadwell-scandal-new-implications-driving-the-day-.html


US general Allen now under investigation
Published on Nov 13, 2012 by AlJazeeraEnglish

The scandal that's cost CIA Director David Petraeus his job, has now dragged in the United States' top military commander in the Afghan war.
The FBI says General John Allen emailed tens of thousands of pages to the woman who led investigators to Petraeus' affair.
From Washington, Al Jazeera's Rosiland Jordan explains.


Upload to Disclose.tv

Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 9:03 pm

PostWed Nov 14, 2012 3:12 pm » by Rydher


Word is that Paula Broadwell didn't do anything with Petraeus. She's covering for her swinging sister. :ohno:

Conspirator
Posts: 1003
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 11:15 am

PostWed Nov 14, 2012 8:55 pm » by Chronicnerd


Chronicnerd wrote:A few more things to think about whilst contemplating what goodies the socialist liberal nut jobs have in store for you:
Did anyone know that Holly Petraeus was appointed as part of Obama's new "Consumer Financial Protection Bureau"?
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/01/obama-appoints-petraeus----holly-petraeus/1

As well, and this is *very very important*, let us *NOT* forget who originally *FIRED* Stanley McChrystal and put...oh wow... General Petraeus in charge...
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_world/view/1065334/1/.html

Someone mentioned the left bashing him... nope... not General Petraeus...they all *LOVED* Petraeus and for some unknown reason hated Stanley McChrystal...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_A._McChrystal

Obama has his little grubby hands all over this mess...
My bet is that General Petraeus was being blackmailed by either Obama or members of Obama's team. Some of the calls made in Libya and surrounding hot spots in the middle east since Petraeus's "promotion" were questionable to say the least...
http://www.examiner.com/article/resolution-obama-bypassing-congress-on-use-of-military-impeachable-offense

What I believed happend in Benghazi was that Obama "forced the final decision", regarding whether or not to help the Ambassador, and General Petraeus was either setup or was just being dumb with the affair...the way it went down it could very well have all been a setup...either case....I believe Petraeus decided to wait until the new President was elected (hoping for Romney) but when he found out is was Obama again... he went directly to Obama after making a press statement about his resignation and basically said: "I am out...my secret is no longer a secret...find someone else to do your dirty work."

With his final words being something to the effect of: "Let the cards fall were they may fall..."

It is kind of obvious and makes sense...if Romney was elected Petraeus could potentially use information he knew about Obama to counter any *dirt* he had on him...while Obama finished his term....if Obama was re-elected...then he knew he would have to come clean and resign in order to stop the madness.

This whole thing, to me, is the actions of someone who is honorable in many ways...but also was placed in some very sticky situations that all pointed back to him...the best way out? Disclose the dirt himself and resign...and then wait until the supreme court issues a summons which would supercede any previous legal gagging restrictions he would have as an ex-CIA official...and then at that point...he would "have" to tell all...which would clear his record (to a point) and expose the Obama administration for what it truly is.

Tough times ahead folks...make sure you tighten your budgets...the economy will most certainly tank several thousand points within the next 6 months...if not more.


-CN

p.s. Now is a good time to look over your 401k and/or IRA and move at least 1/3rd to 1/2 of your investments into precious metals and stones...stocks will get rocked...but precious metals will always maintain their relative global value.


Well, I would think that if my guess about what went down was right then he would have done exactly this:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/14/petraeus-agrees-to-testify-on-libya-before-congressional-committees/

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 9461
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 3:24 pm

PostWed Nov 14, 2012 9:25 pm » by *WillEase*


Chronicnerd wrote:Well, I would think that if my guess about what went down was right then he would have done exactly this:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/14/petraeus-agrees-to-testify-on-libya-before-congressional-committees/


As of 2:23 pm EDT, only Fox is reporting this... :headscratch:
Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 9461
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 3:24 pm

PostThu Nov 15, 2012 12:18 am » by *WillEase*


Petraeus' emails weren't safe: are yours?

Published on Nov 14, 2012 by RTAmerica

If you've turned on your television to catch up on the latest news, it's no doubt that the mainstream media is all over General David Petraeus sex scandal. Even though Petraeus' sex life has gotten the most attention, there are other matters that are more alarming. In the first six months of 2012, Google has received over 20,000 user data requests from the US government in which Google complied with nearly 90 percent of them. So does the government have the right to snoop through personal emails if no crime committed like General Petraeus? RT's Andrew Blake and Adriana Usero give us theie take on user data requests.


Upload to Disclose.tv

Image

Conspirator
Posts: 1003
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 11:15 am

PostThu Nov 15, 2012 1:11 am » by Chronicnerd


WillEase666 wrote:
Chronicnerd wrote:Well, I would think that if my guess about what went down was right then he would have done exactly this:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/14/petraeus-agrees-to-testify-on-libya-before-congressional-committees/


As of 2:23 pm EDT, only Fox is reporting this... :headscratch:

:hiho:

Welcome...yes Fox News, while the majority of their talk show hosts are not *liberal* but more libertarian and/or conservative, Fox News is the only news source that I know of who's reports are more geared towards "concern for America" than "concerns for the progressive liberal (i.e. socialist) agenda".

Yeah... I am sure you will find articles in the bowels of the inter-tubes... but more often than not Fox reports things that are relavent to the cause.

Heck, I know many of the more conservative members of Fox News were jabbing at Romney for not being aggressive enough and/or not bringing up specific issues during the debate...so I have seen them hit both sides of the table.

It is a sad day when there is one last standing news media outlet that provides pertinent, and important, information...

Thus...the rest of the liberal medias' viewers have been constantly hit with false information or have not been informed of "all things pertinent" for their viewers to get the whole picture...and this is why we had the election results that we had...

The moo-cow sheeple are just moving whichever way the liberal media wind blows...
Image

Conspirator
Posts: 1003
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 11:15 am

PostThu Nov 15, 2012 1:40 am » by Chronicnerd


WillEase666 wrote:Jill Kelley Has Secrets Besides Petraeus Ties

Published on Nov 13, 2012 by NewsyPolitics

In the midst of the David Petraeus scandal, General John Allen is now being investigated for his ties with Jill Kelley, who reported Petraeus' affair.


Upload to Disclose.tv



I know of someone who wouldn't have been easy to "setup" for a fall like this...
Let's see... there were two generals who held the same position during the 1st O-term:
Image
Image

Which of the two do you think would be easier to setup( ~if~ this was a setup)?

McChrystal was fired for joking around with his soldiers, who were upset about some of the administrations policies at the time, in the same mess hall/break area that the rolling stone reporter was in...but was not at the same table nor was he making any form of public statement...and was fired for making a joke about Joe Biden...

Patraeus was Obama's self appointed General... to replace McChrystal...

Hmmmmmm.....


So yeah yeah... I know what most might think... "You just picked two pictures that happen to make one look less 'hardened' than the other"...

Hmmm?

Well look for yourself if you are in doubt:
General Stanley McChrystal:
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=stanley+mcchrystal

General David Petraeus:
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=petraeus&FORM=AWIR

Decide for yourself... but I had made mention of this awhile back ago...

General McChrystal is relieved of his Afghan post because a reporter over heard soldiers during their time off in a bar making jokes about Obama due to his lack of making a decision towards the end of 2009. General McChrystal was not part of that discussion but happened to be in the same bar/area, and as such he was "somehow" linked to being responsible for the soldiers conduct and was "punished" by being brought back to the U.S. where he resumed his military rank, but was assigned to more "domestic" related issues.

General McChrystal was Obama's hand pick to replace the Bush administration's previous pick for the Afghan front...setting aside the Rolling Stone article... why would Obama remove the Bush administration's pick, then a heavily Liberal Biased/Influenced magazine (The Rolling Stone) is given "top clearance" to follow McChrystal around in the Afghan war which resulted in a very odd article that somehow linked McChrystal to being "unfit", and then remove McChrystal to only have him resume his military duties...but in the U.S.?

Read more: korean-crisis-summary-t36961.html#ixzz2CF7LmSan


and how it didn't quite make much sense that a *liberal* reporter was given *top* security clearance to follow McChrystal around...they called it a "report"...but in the end...in my personal opinion...it was a plant to hang around and try to find "anything possible" that could force McChrystal out...I mean...the clearance for the Rolling Stone magazine article *came from the white house*...

Now we have this... with the guy that Obama himself...hand picked...of course back then I was thinking it was more to have someone with large scale urban street warfare experience here in America...but now...it really makes a lot of sense...

Let's see... Patreaus replaced McChrystal back around 2010:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/23/petraeus-to-replace-mcchr_n_622713.html

Hmmm... and let's look at the time line for Patreaus in his "affair":
http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/13/15119278-infidelity-intrigue-and-politics-a-timeline-of-the-david-petraeus-case?lite

Oh... so Paula Broadwell met Patreaus back in 2006!!!

Hmm... wonder if they were doing the naughty naughty prior to Patreaus being replaced by Obama?
Hmm... wonder if *anyone* that Obama knew or had access to was aware of the "affair" prior to this time?

My bet, as this all unfolds, is that there *will* be ~someone~ who testifies that knew about the affair prior to the Rolling Stone article and the whole "White House requesting that a Rolling Stone reporter do an article on McChrystal" thing...because at that point...if you know a General has dirt you can use...well...then that General just became easier to get to agree with you...if that was your thing...

As a matter of fact... I would bet that if you look at all of the people who have had "scandals" this past four years and resigned, and were in a high political/government position, I would bet that they all were tied to other "Obama oriented" agendas...and once the agenda was completed...they resign...

I would be willing to bet with a little bit of search engine typing and patience...and a bit of willingness to do the leg work to make sure it is accurate...one would find a very interesting pattern...

Either way...the Mad Hatters are in control... duck and cover!
:peep:

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2790
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 7:31 pm
Location: Looking for a city, not built by man!

PostThu Nov 15, 2012 1:41 am » by Truthdefender


By Douglas J. Hagmann

13 November 2012: Sex, trysts and indiscretions. Nothing more effectively diverts the public’s attention away from emerging critical truths better than the time-tested template of salacious headlines. It hijacks people’s attention away from far more critical matters that threaten the positions and agendas of the most powerful people engaged in even more immoral acts. It must be recognized for what it is: a tactic of diversion.

The alleged trysts of power brokers are a component to the story of Benghazi, but they are not the story. They provide convenient cover for emerging revelations. Like arrows in a quiver of those in positions of power, they exist as leverage to be used to neutralize existing or potential threats at the precise moment they are needed, without the untidiness and inconvenient inquiries that tend to accompany dead bodies. They are also powerful weapons that control the perception of a voyeuristic public, which is dutifully fed the salacious details by a complicit media.

Longing for the days of Watergate

America has never been in greater need of a “Woodward and Bernstein” effort than today. We are witnessing a cover-up of monumental proportions, with all roads leading directly to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. We’ve already seen the modern day equivalent of the infamous Saturday night massacre in the form of resignations of senior officers and officials, with more to certainly follow. It’s all about the cover-up, and always about the cover-up. Yet, such an effort will not be made by a media compromised by years of infiltration, having evolved into its present incarnation as a ministry of propaganda.

When one begins pulling on the thread of Benghazi, the entire fabric covering Barack Hussein Obama, from his earliest political activities to the current operations in play begin to unravel. By pulling on this one thread, his associates and associations, compatriots and coconspirators, alliances, plans and agendas become exposed for all to see in the proper context.

Benghazi, by a thread

The reason full disclosure about Benghazi is needed is that it will expose an agenda much larger, much deeper, and much more nefarious than any extra-judicial operation we have seen in recent history. It will reveal Obama’s contempt for the United States Congress and the rule of law. It will also reveal Obama’s ugly contempt for human life, as there are not only four Americans dead from his operational objectives, but forty thousand dead in Syria – and counting.

Consistent with his modus operandi, Barack Hussein Obama has made congress and the oversight it provides irrelevant, and committed America to a proxy war without the approval of its citizens. If this were a play, North Africa, the Middle East and that entire region would be Obama’s theater. If allowed to continue on this path, the proxy war being directed by Obama will turn into another military engagement in Syria, with American troops and equipment, in costumes supplied by NATO at the forefront of a war to which Americans never agreed.

Pulling the thread of Benghazi will reveal that yes, the CIA under the direction of Barack Hussein Obama, was engaged in an arms running operation from Libya to Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey. It was and continues to be the Obama plan to overthrow Syrian President Assad and install a regime backed by the Muslim Brotherhood. Why? For humanitarian reasons? The families of forty thousand dead in Syria would likely disagree, as most were killed at the hands of U.S. backed, trained and armed “rebels.”

The western headquarters of the Muslim Brotherhood, the location of the casting couch for this Shakespearian tragedy, has a prominent address of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The visitor logs show an interesting flow of representatives into the house once owned by the people, as do the various appointments made by Obama over the years. No one should be surprised at this casting call, as Obama’s past reveals an association that far preceded the plans we see being implemented. That is, as much of his past as we have been permitted to know, or have fought to see.

Pulling on the Benghazi thread will expose the money trail from Saudi Arabia. It will show that the Royal family has their own personal army and intelligence agency. It’s the U.S. military and Obama’s CIA. We’re doing the heavy lifting and dirty work for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, by a captured operative we know as Barack Hussein Obama.

We are in a proxy war with Iran and by extension, with Russia, with Saudi Arabia picking up much of the tab for the venue and props. Syria is just the theater, and Libya was the opening act. The attack at Benghazi was an unscheduled act in the play, but one that provided us with the program.

When the frenzy of headlines about sex and lies gradually abates, will we refocus on the events obscured by our thirst for salaciousness, or will it be too late? Perhaps we can do so now by understanding that the headlines are being written by the operatives themselves. Let’s not be derailed. Let’s look at the program, and understand the plot of the play before the final curtain call.

In Pursuit of the Truth...
http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/archi ... #more-7116
In Christ are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge

Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 5734
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 10:24 pm
Location: Wankerville

PostThu Nov 15, 2012 3:10 am » by Evildweeb


.


The thing is, why is this such a story?

My problem with this is there really is no such thing as a sex scandal.

I mean, are they trying to tell us NO ONE in Washington DC is getting laid?


All I have to say is this:

GO GENERAL.......GET SOME................


Next time, get some for the American People......there's no sex better than keeping it real sex.......


:flop:



:cheers:








Image
Image
.
"What a pity if he logged into a porn channel we could see him for the wanker he is." - Toxic32


PreviousNext

  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook