Feinstein: I’ll subpoena CIA about Petraeus trip to Libya after Benghazi attack

posted at 8:51 am on November 13, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

One piece of information that got lost the last few days of sex scandals is the news that David Petraeus personally traveled to Libya after the Benghazi attack — and apparently filed a “trip report” covering his own findings.  Senator Dianne Feinstein, who heads the Senate Intelligence Committee probing the Benghazi terrorist attack, wants either the report or Petraeus to testify to its contents.  So far, though, the CIA and the White House have refused to provide it — and yesterday, Feinstein threatened that subpoenas may be forthcoming if the stonewalling continues:

 

“The premise is not necessarily an investigation,” Feinstein said, speaking of an investigation into Petraeus. “The premise is to see exactly what happened. I believe that Director Petraeus made a trip to the region, shortly before this became public. I believe that there is a trip report. We have asked to see the trip report. One person tells me he has read it, and then we tried to get it and they tell me it hasn’t been done. That’s unacceptable. We are entitled to this trip report, and if we have to go to the floor of the Senate on a subpoena, we will do just that.”

Host Andrea Mitchell asked Feinstein for clarification, and Feinstein explained that trip would include “relevant information.”

“Yes,” she replied. “For the very reason that it may have some very relevant information to what happened in Benghazi.”

This seems more than passingly curious.  Why wouldn’t the CIA share the trip report with Feinstein? First of all, the Congressional intelligence committees in both chambers are entitled to see it as part of their oversight responsibilities over the agency, especially given the fact that the report comes after a terrorist attack that Congress has an obvious interest in investigating.  On top of that, Feinstein and the Senate committee are arguably a more friendly venue than the House committees looking into the attack.

This lack of openness, coming on the heels of the revelations of Petraeus’ affair and his resignation, will only raise more questions about why Petraeus is no longer testifying, and why he was so quick to get out of the way.  When a Democratic Senator has to go on MSNBC to threaten a Democratic administration with a subpoena, well …. it should raise a few eyebrows.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Geez. Second look at Dianne Feinstein?

Doughboy on November 13, 2012 at 8:54 AM

And if they ignore the subpoenas, then what? She’ll wave a Gadsden flag from her Senate seat in protest?

Archivarix on November 13, 2012 at 8:55 AM

Feinstein is a key player in obama’s Benghazi cover-up – - – her fake outrage is ridiculous and completely transparent.

Pork-Chop on November 13, 2012 at 8:57 AM

It should raise eyebrows …. but it won’t.

djl130 on November 13, 2012 at 8:58 AM

Valerie won’t be happy

Pretty pathetic the way Andrea is defending the administration

cmsinaz on November 13, 2012 at 8:59 AM

Feinstein is a key player in obama’s Benghazi cover-up – – – her fake outrage is ridiculous and completely transparent.

Pork-Chop on November 13, 2012 at 8:57 AM

That’s a pretty dangerous game to play. How can she know for certain what’ll be said when these people are dragged before Congress under oath to testify and that all of the witnesses testimony will match up?

Doughboy on November 13, 2012 at 8:59 AM

Can’t wait for Dimocrats to start eating their own. Calling the Donner party, your table is ready.

College Prof on November 13, 2012 at 8:59 AM

I never thought I’d see that lady doing something I’d like. If something stinks so bad that leading Democrats are standing up to the Obama administration over it, then Obama may be facing a very unpleasant second term. And that’s assuming the stuff doesn’t hit the fan before the end of his first.

backwoods conservative on November 13, 2012 at 8:59 AM

Hmmm… I don’t even know what to think of all of this. I hate to go all tin foil hat, but this is starting to reek of “Never let a crisis go to waste.” The Hegelian Dialectic “order from chaos” idea just seems to fit too well here.

MobileVideoEngineer on November 13, 2012 at 9:01 AM

When a Democratic Senator has to go on MSNBC to threaten a Democratic administration with a subpoena, well …. it should raise a few eyebrows.

Let’s remember the joint briefing the House and Senate Intel committees got a couple days after the Benghazi attack (when the narrative was still about spontaneous protests over a video). Clinton was among those who were there.

It was a closed session but the members of both parties came out of that meeting openly seething at the lack of information they were getting from the administration. In that respect, I can understand why this isn’t being swept under the rug the way the administration would like.

Happy Nomad on November 13, 2012 at 9:02 AM

Ain’t that the truth djl

Unless the president has an R next to his name…. this will continue to fly under the radar

Those low information voters are clueless

cmsinaz on November 13, 2012 at 9:02 AM

Obama will just assert executive privilege. It doesn’t matter that the information being sought doesn’t belong to Obama. When he doesn’t want congress to know something, they won’t know it.

It worked fabulously with Fast and Furious.

Mord on November 13, 2012 at 9:05 AM

Geez. Second look at Dianne Feinstein?

Doughboy on November 13, 2012 at 8:54 AM

Oh please. She’s a gun grabbing imbecile who is pushing harder than ever for the US to sign up to the UN small arms treaty (also known as the Disarmament of the US Citizenry Accords).

CorporatePiggy on November 13, 2012 at 9:05 AM

Feinstein is a key player in obama’s Benghazi cover-up – – – her fake outrage is ridiculous and completely transparent.

Pork-Chop on November 13, 2012 at 8:57 AM

I dunno about that — I think she senses that the administration is about to step in it and she’s trying to limit the damage, but that doesn’t make her a conspirator. It’s more of an intervention.

Mr. D on November 13, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Feinstein has broken ranks before. She voted for school vouchers for DC schoolchildren. (IIRC, she also voted Alito’s nomination on Judiciary?)

She saw the common sense of school vouchers, as opposed to waiting decades for DC schools to “improve” while children suffered. She claimed she’d been around so long she could take some risks. (And she has a safe seat and would never be primaried.)

Wethal on November 13, 2012 at 9:07 AM

Feinstein: I’ll subpoena CIA about Petraeus trip to Libya after Benghazi attack

I wonder how much of this is just posing for her constituents and how much is real?

sharrukin on November 13, 2012 at 9:08 AM

I hate to go all tin foil hat, but this is starting to reek of “Never let a crisis go to waste.” The Hegelian Dialectic “order from chaos” idea just seems to fit too well here.

MobileVideoEngineer on November 13, 2012 at 9:01 AM

Sometimes a crisis is just a crisis.

I think that the administration thought all this would go away after the Rose Garden speech and attending the arrival of the bodies back in the US. But the video lie did not stick the way the administration had hoped and they kept having to add layer upon layer to the lie until it became untenable. Which is why with these latest developments, the focus has shifted to real national security questions about what the CIA was doing in Benghazi and what did Patraeus know about that?

The affair is somewhat of a red herring EXCEPT that Broadwell made the claim that the CIA was operating a detention facility at Benghazi and she did it back on October 26th. Was that classified information she got access to through Patraeus? Is it true? These are national security issues.

Happy Nomad on November 13, 2012 at 9:09 AM

The only reason the Nebuchadnezzer Progressives like Feinstein are going after Petraeus is to give them a fall guy to demonize to save Obama.

All Hail the great political GOD of our time, fall and worship at his feet.

PappyD61 on November 13, 2012 at 9:09 AM

Oh please. She’s a gun grabbing imbecile who is pushing harder than ever for the US to sign up to the UN small arms treaty (also known as the Disarmament of the US Citizenry Accords).

CorporatePiggy on November 13, 2012 at 9:05 AM

I was being facetious. Feinstein directed taxpayer dollars to her husband’s company so he could cash in millions. She’s about as corrupt as they come. But in this instance you know what they say about the enemy of your enemy.

Doughboy on November 13, 2012 at 9:09 AM

She saw the common sense of school vouchers, as opposed to waiting decades for DC schools to “improve” while children suffered. She claimed she’d been around so long she could take some risks. (And she has a safe seat and would never be primaried.)

Wethal on November 13, 2012 at 9:07 AM

I could see that, plus she’s not getting any younger and I’m sure she’s loaded. So why not at least try help the country a little?

MobileVideoEngineer on November 13, 2012 at 9:10 AM

Can’t help it but I have a WILLING SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF when it comes to her.

docflash on November 13, 2012 at 9:11 AM

What we are dealing with in the Obama administration: Corrupt, corrupter, corruptest.

albill on November 13, 2012 at 9:11 AM

I wonder how much of this is just posing for her constituents and how much is real?

sharrukin on November 13, 2012 at 9:08 AM

Didn’t she just get reelected a week ago? She doesn’t need to pose for anyone. She’s either conspiring with the White House or she’s on the level. I’m guessing the latter.

Doughboy on November 13, 2012 at 9:12 AM

I have sheet of stainless steel in my shop that are more transparent than this administration.

Hey libs, wachoo thing, Hope and Change getting sort of tarnished, yes?

Bishop on November 13, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Questions that need to be put to Petraeus

1. Why did you perjure yourself about the nature and cause of the Benghazi attack?
2. Why did you let Obama take credit for the result of Bush’s Surge?
3. How long did you think Obama would protect you?
4. When did you become a moron?

Basilsbest on November 13, 2012 at 9:15 AM

I call BS. Unless Dianne actually does something with this, then it is pure BS. Obama will, once again, come out smelling like a rose.

4 dead, he watched them give up the ghost, and repercussions? *shrug*

ted c on November 13, 2012 at 9:16 AM

Feinstein is a key player in obama’s Benghazi cover-up – – – her fake outrage is ridiculous and completely transparent.

Pork-Chop on November 13, 2012 at 8:57 AM

.
That’s a pretty dangerous game to play. How can she know for certain what’ll be said when these people are dragged before Congress under oath to testify and that all of the witnesses testimony will match up?

Doughboy on November 13, 2012 at 8:59 AM

.
Insufficient data to draw a conclusion, as to her motives.

This will have to play out further, before we can say why she’s doing this.

listens2glenn on November 13, 2012 at 9:17 AM

Yeah..sure she will.
And Lieberman was going to hold the line on Obamacare..and Lady Graham was going hold the line on illegal aliens..and .

Mimzey on November 13, 2012 at 9:17 AM

The affair is somewhat of a red herring EXCEPT that Broadwell made the claim that the CIA was operating a detention facility at Benghazi and she did it back on October 26th. Was that classified information she got access to through Patraeus? Is it true? These are national security issues.

Happy Nomad on November 13, 2012 at 9:09 AM

Older and busted: Herrings
Old and busted: Squirrels
New and hotness: Beavers.

ted c on November 13, 2012 at 9:18 AM

Don’t fall for it – this will never happen – Feinstein will STAND DOWN, because her main job, as with ALL elected democrats, is to protect obama.

Remember this?
‘Feinstein backtracks on statement that White House leaked secrets’

http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/policy-and-strategy/239783-feinstein-backtracks-on-statement-that-white-house-leaked-secrets

Pork-Chop on November 13, 2012 at 9:19 AM

We are entitled to this trip report,

Jeez, even when she’s actually doing what a Senator ought to be doing she can’t help but see things from an “entitlement” perspective.

Browncoatone on November 13, 2012 at 9:19 AM

And Lieberman was going to hold the line on Obamacare..and Lady Graham was going hold the line on illegal aliens..and .

Mimzey on November 13, 2012 at 9:17 AM

and Bart Stupak was going to hold out cuz he was ‘pro life’ or something…..

/change.

ted c on November 13, 2012 at 9:19 AM

Sen Feinstein’s public comments regarding this affair have been almost as skeptical as McCain’s, however I don’t trust any Democrat when it comes to a thorough and objective investigation into this scandal.

The sudden Patraeus resignation on the eve of testimony before Congress stinks to high heaven and screams cover up. The press chasing the false flag of his affair and emails is deliberate. The only questions the American press needs to focus on are:

1) What was Amb Stevens doing in Benghazi, Libya on Sept 11, 2012?

2) What were the President, Vice President, Secty of Defense, and Natl Security Director doing in Whitehouse situation room the late afternoon of Sept 11, 2012 while the Benghazi mission was under attack?

3) Where were the Secty of State and Director of the CIA during this time and what were they doing?

4) Why was an American citizen taken from his home by police in the middle of the night on trumped up charges and still being held incommunicado by the federal government?

Everything else is bullshit.

RobertE on November 13, 2012 at 9:20 AM

she’s just posing….ruffled feathers…cackling…clucking her tongue.

it’s all part of today’s show.

I wonder what’s on tomorrow’s episode.

ted c on November 13, 2012 at 9:20 AM

Obama will just assert executive privilege. It doesn’t matter that the information being sought doesn’t belong to Obama. When he doesn’t want congress to know something, they won’t know it.

It worked fabulously with Fast and Furious.

Mord on November 13, 2012 at 9:05 AM

US vs Nixon…8 to 0 against the pres…limiting executive privilege…Wartergate all over again???only worse because our men died.

gracie on November 13, 2012 at 9:22 AM

Feinstein 1st and foremost a Democrat…and a shaky old bag now…this sex talk embarrases her….gotta move on.

gracie on November 13, 2012 at 9:24 AM

Ask Issa how his F&F subpoenas are working out. Supoenas are weaker than a sternly worded memo when there’s no one to enforce them. Maybe throw on a few contempt citations.

crash72 on November 13, 2012 at 9:25 AM

When a Democratic Senator has to go on MSNBC to threaten a Democratic administration with a subpoena, well …. it should raise a few eyebrows.

you see this…. ^ …

that’s my raised eyebrow.

now pound sand, I won.

/BHO.

ted c on November 13, 2012 at 9:28 AM

I’ve said it before. She’s a Lib’s lib HOWEVER she’s no nonsense when it comes to National Security and the roll of the Senate Intellegence committtee.

WisRich on November 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM

I’ve said it before. She’s a Lib’s lib HOWEVER she’s no nonsense when it comes to National Security and the roll of the Senate Intellegence committtee.

WisRich on November 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM

well, we’ll see about that. I’m skeptical.

ted c on November 13, 2012 at 9:32 AM

gracie on November 13, 2012 at 9:22 AM

Heh. If the GOP actually has the stones to sue, do you really think our “wise latina” or “refuse to recuse” Kagan are going to do anything that will hurt the cause?

We staked the future of our country and the fundamental relationship of citizen and government on the SCOTUS and got badly burned not so long ago.

Mord on November 13, 2012 at 9:32 AM

It was a closed session but the members of both parties came out of that meeting openly seething at the lack of information they were getting from the administration. In that respect, I can understand why this isn’t being swept under the rug the way the administration would like.

Happy Nomad on November 13, 2012 at 9:02 AM

Now that Obama’s been re-elected, he no longer has need of Congress.

Doomberg on November 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM

I don’t trust her. The corrupt media discussing transparency with the corrupt democrat party somehow doesn’t fill me with confidence.

Night Owl on November 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM

and by “subpoena”, does she mean that she is going to nab, stifle, and suppress relevant information on gun running, lack of security, heinous acts committed against our personnel, information on culpability etc????? of course it’d all be under the premise of ‘national security‘…….

ted c on November 13, 2012 at 9:34 AM

Yeah, uh huh, yeah, sure you will lady.

jake49 on November 13, 2012 at 9:35 AM

we are merely sideline observers for the show here folks.

ted c on November 13, 2012 at 9:35 AM

…she’s no nonsense when it comes to National Security and the roll of the Senate Intellegence committtee.

WisRich on November 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM

Feinstein is ALL NONSENSE all the time – she is not to be trusted and she will do exactly as obama tells her to do.

FEINSTEIN BACKTRACKS ON WHITE HOUSE NATIONAL SECURITY LEAKS

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/24/Feinstein-Backtracks-on-White-House-National-Security-Leaks

Pork-Chop on November 13, 2012 at 9:35 AM

Agree night owl

cmsinaz on November 13, 2012 at 9:36 AM

Heh. If the GOP actually has the stones to sue, do you really think our “wise latina” or “refuse to recuse” Kagan are going to do anything that will hurt the cause?

We staked the future of our country and the fundamental relationship of citizen and government on the SCOTUS and got badly burned not so long ago.

Mord on November 13, 2012 at 9:32 AM

Even if the ruling goes against Obama, his response will be: “John Roberts has made his decision; now let him enforce it.” Essentially, with impeachment off the table, there is no legal means to control Obama. He is essentially a king above the law. The meek obeidience of the GOP of informal dictatorship is both pathetic and sad.

Doomberg on November 13, 2012 at 9:36 AM

Feinstein 1st and foremost a Democrat…and a shaky old bag now…this sex talk embarrases her….gotta move on.

gracie on November 13, 2012 at 9:24 AM

.
How many women her age are embarrassed by “sex talk”?

Virgin spinsters?
.
But I agree, she “is 1st and foremost a Democrat”.

listens2glenn on November 13, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Don’t forget how the whole democrat side of the House got up and walked out when it came to holding Holder in contempt of congress for refusing to provide documents. Or the last minute claim of Executive Privilege. I don’t think democrats in the Senate are going to go too far out of their way to force the issue.

Night Owl on November 13, 2012 at 9:38 AM

ted c on November 13, 2012 at 9:19 AM

‘Zackly.

Mimzey on November 13, 2012 at 9:38 AM

She probably just wants her pound of flesh , she’ll pipe down when she gets it.

the_nile on November 13, 2012 at 9:38 AM

Watergate was “just a burglary” – until it wasn’t.

just sayin’

Flora Duh on November 13, 2012 at 9:38 AM

I fear that Obama will follow the lead of his contemporary Hugo Chavez and convert our government into a marxist dictatorship. The American Pravda media will be a willing partner and the majority of the electorate just demonstrated their denial of fiscal reality. Obama will thumb his nose at this and continue to amass executive power.

litebrite on November 13, 2012 at 9:40 AM

She probably just wants her pound of flesh , she’ll pipe down when she gets it.

the_nile on November 13, 2012 at 9:38 AM

yep. someone will pay her some penance, give her some attention then, it’ll all be water under da bridge……

ted c on November 13, 2012 at 9:41 AM

I was being facetious. Feinstein directed taxpayer dollars to her husband’s company so he could cash in millions. She’s about as corrupt as they come. But in this instance you know what they say about the enemy of your enemy.

Doughboy on November 13, 2012 at 9:09 AM

The enemy of your enemy is a useful idiot?

CorporatePiggy on November 13, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Goody, more distractions to what’s going on behind the scenes. Dear leader is cranking out more and more regulations every day so don’t be surprised if you wake up one day and find your guns and bible gone as well as your 401K and IRA. We all have to pay our fair share, remember. Feinstein is the kabuki of the day.

Kissmygrits on November 13, 2012 at 9:45 AM

Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein is full of fake outrage and other stuff. She will do nothing. The GOP will do nothing and the circus will continue to perform.

I fear that Obama will follow the lead of his contemporary Hugo Chavez and convert our government into a marxist dictatorship. The American Pravda media will be a willing partner and the majority of the electorate just demonstrated their denial of fiscal reality. Obama will thumb his nose at this and continue to amass executive power.

litebrite on November 13, 2012 at 9:40 AM

They don’t actually need to convert anything. Zero will have his perks for the rest of his life at this point, so why will he need to bother with that messy business of governance?

Isn’t it time for another vacation or some golf?

dogsoldier on November 13, 2012 at 9:49 AM

Even if the ruling goes against Obama, his response will be: “John Roberts has made his decision; now let him enforce it.” Essentially, with impeachment off the table, there is no legal means to control Obama. He is essentially a king above the law. The meek obeidience of the GOP of informal dictatorship is both pathetic and sad.

Doomberg on November 13, 2012 at 9:36 AM

Their meek obedience is also treasonous, no?

Naturally Curly on November 13, 2012 at 9:49 AM

This lack of openness, coming on the heels of the revelations of Petraeus’ affair and his resignation, will only raise more questions about why Petraeus is no longer testifying, and why he was so quick to get out of the way.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), one of the most liberal members of the upper chamber, also said Congress should have been informed.

“They should have been told,” Sanders said on MSNBC. Source

Flora Duh on November 13, 2012 at 9:49 AM

Now that Obama’s been re-elected, he no longer has need of Congress.

Doomberg on November 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM

Congress, a co-equal branch of government, has its own ideas about what the President needs. They have given him latitude in the past but I predict they will be more jealous of their role during the second term.

Happy Nomad on November 13, 2012 at 9:53 AM

Where’s the majority of Congress screaming from the highest of hills?

Mr. Arrogant on November 13, 2012 at 9:54 AM

I ran out of popcorn this morning

jake49 on November 13, 2012 at 9:54 AM

Feinsteinn will get nowhere because anything she discovers will reflect badly on Obama and these leftists all stick together and defend each other. This is just another sham.

rplat on November 13, 2012 at 9:56 AM

You go Feinstein!

The front page on Drudge is just shameful. It’s hard to wrap my head around the levels of incompetence and arrogance from this administration. And where is dear leader, anyway?

scalleywag on November 13, 2012 at 10:04 AM

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/06/Dianne-Feinstein-Still-Dogged-by-Allegations-of-Conflicts-of-Interest

Sounds like she is sending a gentle reminder about those defense sequestration cuts.

can_con on November 13, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Congratulations, Ed!! You’ve almost woken up!! ALMOST!!

REALIZE THIS: This ENTIRE Petraues Kerfuffle was something that the Obama Adminstration had in their “back pocket” for MONTHS in case they had to use it to CENSOR AND SHUT-UP PETRAEUS ON BENGHAZI!!

Now – AFTER you’ve had More Coffee – you might want to PRY your partner Allashpundit from smelling Boradwell and Petraeuss’ undergarments and divert him to WHAT OBAMA IS USING THIS FOR – SILENCING PETRAEUS!!

williamg on November 13, 2012 at 10:28 AM

So far, though, the CIA and the White House have refused to provide it — and yesterday, Feinstein threatened that subpoenas may be forthcoming if the stonewalling continues:

Executive Privilege!

GarandFan on November 13, 2012 at 10:31 AM

The room reeks of naivete and gullibility.

C’mon- You think these morons have decided to do their job the way they should? Do the right thing? after America just told them their OK with the corruption and scandal.

These “ploys with the media” have NOTHING to do with finding the truth about Benghazi. Kabuki, but with stupid people.

This is all about building Petraeus up as the inevitable Fall Guy (who knew?) and while we’re at it throw out enough discrediting BS of the military along with some vagyna diaries.

How would anyone NOT want to cut Military budgets after this scandal? Lets put Janet Incompetano in charge of something here.

FlaMurph on November 13, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Pretty simple to me, I don’t/never will trust Feinstein. She will limit, by altering the natural course (of determining the truth).

darlus on November 13, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Congratulations, Ed!! You’ve almost woken up!! ALMOST!!

REALIZE THIS: This ENTIRE Petraues Kerfuffle was something that the Obama Adminstration had in their “back pocket” for MONTHS in case they had to use it to CENSOR AND SHUT-UP PETRAEUS ON BENGHAZI!!

Now – AFTER you’ve had More Coffee – you might want to PRY your partner Allashpundit from smelling Boradwell and Petraeuss’ undergarments and divert him to WHAT OBAMA IS USING THIS FOR – SILENCING PETRAEUS!!

williamg on November 13, 2012 at 10:28 AM

If that was the boy king’s plan, it was a stupid one. Patraeus is now a private citizen. Obama no longer has any leverage over him, so he is free to tell what he knows about Benghazi, either through Congressional hearings, the National Enquirer, or a tell-all book deal.

If he still has a thread of the decency and honor he was purported to have had, he will, no matter what that truth might be.

Flora Duh on November 13, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Russia style

Pravda is doing a better job than the US media do.

Schadenfreude on November 13, 2012 at 11:10 AM

If he still has a thread of the decency and honor he was purported to have had, he will, no matter what that truth might be.

Flora Duh on November 13, 2012 at 10:53 AM

The congress can change his status back and actually court marshall him, alas…the wussies.

Plus, the story is still unfolding.

Schadenfreude on November 13, 2012 at 11:12 AM

And where is dear leader, anyway?

scalleywag on November 13, 2012 at 10:04 AM

Where’s the nearest golf course?

CorporatePiggy on November 13, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Congress, a co-equal branch of government, has its own ideas about what the President needs. They have given him latitude in the past but I predict they will be more jealous of their role during the second term.

Happy Nomad on November 13, 2012 at 9:53 AM

I concur. Those of you who think that the senators are going to just fall into line behind Obama are forgetting that they think of themselves as his equal. A senator who was just re-elected has two years beyond Obama’s final term before they even have to run again. So they are not nearly as concerned about how this affects HIM as they are about how he may be blocking them. His power grabbing was for the most part overlooked in the first term, but, it will not go over as well now.

Lily on November 13, 2012 at 11:17 AM

You know whom this helps? Hillary Clinton, think about it.

Knott Buyinit on November 13, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Congress, a co-equal branch of government, has its own ideas about what the President needs. They have given him latitude in the past but I predict they will be more jealous of their role during the second term.

Happy Nomad on November 13, 2012 at 9:53 AM

That’s cute how you think Obama will listen to anyone. “Oh, but they’ll force him to.” Unless someone is prepared to send police into the Oval Office to arrest him for violating the law, he will defy anything he wants to defy, lawful or not, Constitutional or not, and just dare folks to do anything about it. He thinks is is beyond reproach.

Shump on November 13, 2012 at 11:26 AM

I’m thinking Feinstein must be the Senator that Valerie Jarrett tore into over her wavering on Fast and Furious, per WHI.

Jarrett and Holder surely have some juicy stuff on Feinstein, so she’s playing with fire here.

slickwillie2001 on November 13, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Feinstein is all talk…blustering and a smoke screen for the administration…she does whatever she needs to to stay in power.

When she was caught scamming the system for her husband, caught red handed pushing business to her husbands businesses…she negotiated with President Bush, she promised not to attack him but to defend his war policies, if he backed off…
She suddenly became an advocate of Bush’s foreign policies, against, and no charges were ever brought up…I think one of Bush’s lowest points of presidency.

right2bright on November 13, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Feinstein is a liar and a Democrat. Watch her other hand, her feet, her assistants, her family and other Democrats….

Mitch_A on November 13, 2012 at 12:17 PM

I never thought I’d see that lady doing something I’d like. If something stinks so bad that leading Democrats are standing up to the Obama administration over it, then Obama may be facing a very unpleasant second term. And that’s assuming the stuff doesn’t hit the fan before the end of his first.

backwoods conservative on November 13, 2012 at 8:59 AM

This is why I have a feeling an impeachment, if we get that far, may have more weight this time around. I think there are enough Dems (DiFi being one of them) who actually take national security and foreign policy seriously enough to be pissed off about the whole Benghazi episode. If enough crap comes up, they may very well throw Obama under the bus.

It would be a lovely day, and I’m certainly not holding my breath. But there is a glimmer of possibility here. It’s worth paying attention to. Those of us who have even semi-reasonable Democratic Senators should be keeping an eye on them. You never know when just the right nudge causes a cascade.

Yeah, yeah. Whistling in the dark. But you never know….

nukemhill on November 13, 2012 at 12:19 PM

I dont think Obama is smart enough to follow this stuff or even care. He reads from a teleprompter, goes to the links, parties with friends. As all Democrats, watch the other hand…

Mitch_A on November 13, 2012 at 12:20 PM

When a Democratic Senator has to go on MSNBC to threaten a Democratic administration with a subpoena, well …. it should raise a few eyebrows.

When such things happen in Chicago it indicates one of two things.

1. There is an internal power struggle going on in the Machine.

2. Or, the Machine politicians are putting on a show for the plebes designed to create the illusion they do not collude and conspire behind closed doors on everything.

Not sure if this carries over to the national stage, but I have little doubt the upstart Chicago Gang often grates on the NorthEast and West coast lefties.

farsighted on November 13, 2012 at 12:21 PM

nukemill: I heard something similar just prior to this election. Something about a Cascade of voters that wont say they would vote for Romney but would. This never materialized just as I doubt your hypothesis. Democrats dont use reason and common sense to make decisions. They use EMOTION and rhetoric.

Mitch_A on November 13, 2012 at 12:24 PM

I dunno, if he angers enough Senators, articles of impeachment might get 51 votes.

Who is John Galt on November 13, 2012 at 12:38 PM

A regular As the World Turns….

Sherman1864 on November 13, 2012 at 10:34 PM

Congratulations, Ed!! You’ve almost woken up!! ALMOST!!

REALIZE THIS: This ENTIRE Petraues Kerfuffle was something that the Obama Adminstration had in their “back pocket” for MONTHS in case they had to use it to CENSOR AND SHUT-UP PETRAEUS ON BENGHAZI!!

Now – AFTER you’ve had More Coffee – you might want to PRY your partner Allashpundit from smelling Boradwell and Petraeuss’ undergarments and divert him to WHAT OBAMA IS USING THIS FOR – SILENCING PETRAEUS!!

williamg on November 13, 2012 at 10:28 AM

If that was the boy king’s plan, it was a stupid one. Patraeus is now a private citizen. Obama no longer has any leverage over him, so he is free to tell what he knows about Benghazi, either through Congressional hearings, the National Enquirer, or a tell-all book deal.

If he still has a thread of the decency and honor he was purported to have had, he will, no matter what that truth might be.

Flora Duh on November 13, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Yeah “Duh” is appropriate – yes, he’s a private citizen – AND HE NO LONGER HAS THE LEGAL PROTECTION OF THE GOVERNMENT TO KEEP HIM SAFE = WHY WOULD HE TALK WITH HIS LIFE AT STAKE AND NO ONE OR NOTHING TO PROTECT HIM??

GENIUS, Flora……..tell me, what FLAVOR is the MSNBC Kool-Aid?

williamg on November 13, 2012 at 10:37 PM