Petraeus replacement to testify CIA never requested military assistance in Benghazi

posted at 8:51 am on November 15, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

So says Eli Lake of The Daily Beast, getting tips from his sources within the intelligence community.  Michael Morell, who became acting Director of Central Intelligence following the surprise resignation of David Petraeus, will appear before the Senate Intelligence Committee today to discuss the agency’s response to the attack on the Benghazi consulate.  Morell will testify that no one at the agency requested military assistance during the seven hours of the terrorist attack that killed four Americans, including two CIA operatives:

When the CIA’s acting director, Michael Morell, testifies Thursday before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, he is expected to say that the agency never requested Europe-based special operations teams, specialized Marine platoons, or armed drones on the night of the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, Libya, according to a senior U.S. intelligence official.

The disclosure may put an end to one line of inquiry into the Benghazi affair about why reinforcements from the region were not sent on the night of the attack. “Assistance from the U.S. military was critical, and we got what we requested,” the senior U.S. intelligence official said.

According to a Pentagon timeline made public last week, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta prepared multiple military responses from the region at around midnight Benghazi time, more than two hours after the initial assault began. Those orders included mobilizing two special Marine platoons known as Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team (FAST) from Rota, Spain, to deploy to Tripoli and Benghazi. Panetta also ordered a special operations force, training in central Europe, to deploy at the Signonella Airbase in Italy. Another special operations team based in the United States also prepared to deploy to Libya.

The CIA, however, requested none of that assistance. Neither did the State Department. None of those teams ever arrived in Benghazi.

That differs from what Fox News reported almost three weeks ago, and which has gone virtually unchallenged in the vacuum of official explanations about Benghazi since.  Jennifer Griffin reported on October 26th, citing sources that were actually “on the ground” in Benghazi during the attack, that the CIA contingent repeatedly requested assistance — but were told to “stand down” twice by officials in the CIA chain of command:

Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that three urgent requests from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. Consulate and subsequent attack nearly seven hours later were denied by officials in the CIA chain of command — who also told the CIA operators to “stand down” rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.

Former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were part of a small team who were at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. Consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When they heard the shots fired, they radioed to inform their higher-ups to tell them what they were hearing. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. An hour later, they called again to headquarters and were again told to “stand down.”

Woods, Doherty and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the Consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The quick reaction force from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the Consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.

At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Specter gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. The fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours — enough time for any planes based in Sigonella Air base, just 480 miles away, to arrive. Fox News has also learned that two separate Tier One Special operations forces were told to wait, among them Delta Force operators.

Morell will testify that the CIA team received two forms of military assistance, apparently on the CIA’s request, although that’s not clear — an unarmed surveillance drone and a medevac team when the CIA squad on the ground was able to extract the remaining Americans to the airport.  It’s certainly possible that this is true, and that Griffin got it wrong, even though Griffin claimed multiple sources who were on the ground during the attack.

But Morell’s explanation, as related by Lake, doesn’t make a lot of sense.  If the consulate and the CIA annex was under heavy and deliberate attack by forces using mortars and RPGs, why wouldn’t they ask for the military assistance that they knew was on standby for just this sort of contingency?  Why just ask for an unarmed surveillance drone rather than something that could potentially offer a diversion for the extraction of personnel from the consulate?  It’s difficult to imagine that the intelligence unit under fire off an on for seven hours would never have requested military assistance to save the lives of the people in the compound — not impossible, perhaps, but certainly implausible.


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

Comment pages: 1 2 3

WTF!!!?

Patriot Vet on November 15, 2012 at 8:55 AM

Just another lapdog for dear leader

Cripe

Petraeus speak up for the love of pete

cmsinaz on November 15, 2012 at 8:55 AM

and where’s the video from the freakin’ “unarmed surveillance drone”?

Slade73 on November 15, 2012 at 8:56 AM

Ed i wish you were at the WH Presser

cmsinaz on November 15, 2012 at 8:57 AM

Seems like Obama is taking advantage of the sex scandal to tag Petraeus with the blame for Benghazi as well. White House and State Department off the hook entirely.

Jerks.

jwolf on November 15, 2012 at 8:57 AM

But Morell’s explanation, as related by Lake, doesn’t make a lot of sense. If the consulate and the CIA annex was under heavy and deliberate attack by forces using mortars and RPGs, why wouldn’t they ask for the military assistance that they knew was on standby for just this sort of contingency?

You see, Ed, those were good patriotic Americans at that consulate willing to give their lives for their country. They didn’t need no stinkin’ backup.

Is this really the story they’re going with? I think the YouTube video explanation was more believable.

Doughboy on November 15, 2012 at 8:57 AM

Eli Lake clearly has good sources to comment on Morell’s testimony. But, I wonder what the truth is (which is something entirely different). Jennifer Griffin also has good sources.

This, IMO, is why John McCain is right that this requires a select committee where the various standing committees hear the same testimony from the same people at the same time.

Happy Nomad on November 15, 2012 at 8:57 AM

WHO ordered “Stand Down”?

WHO started the video lie?

I bet they are the same person and I bet his initials are BHO.

stenwin77 on November 15, 2012 at 8:58 AM

It’s difficult to imagine that the intelligence unit under fire off an on for seven hours would never have requested military assistance to save the lives of the people in the compound — not impossible, perhaps, but certainly implausible

Sorry, I’m going with impossible on this one.

tommyboy on November 15, 2012 at 8:59 AM

Well golly gee, we WOULD have sent reinforcements and gosh darnit we wanted to, but those guys taking heavy fire for 7 hours and dying, while we watched via live camera on the drone, well heck they just never ASKED us to!

AttilaTheHun on November 15, 2012 at 8:59 AM

I resent the fact that our govt. keeps throwing garbage “facts” at the wall in order to see what sticks, thinking Americans are
stupid.

Oh, I forgot that over half were stupid enough to vote for Obama! (well, if you take off the numbers
of massive voter fraud, less than half – probably 47%)

Amjean on November 15, 2012 at 8:59 AM

Just your friendly terrorist attack that got a little rowdy.
Nothing to see.

Electrongod on November 15, 2012 at 8:59 AM

Ed i wish you were at the WH Presser

cmsinaz on November 15, 2012 at 8:57 AM

yeah, he could have asked, “Mr. President, how important is granting Amnesty to 12 million Dems? Very important, or Super very important?”

Slade73 on November 15, 2012 at 8:59 AM

Michael Morell thinks that if i go testify and tell a big enough lie i will certainly get the directors job. Good luck with that approach.

RickinNH on November 15, 2012 at 8:59 AM

There were things going on at that compund which could not be revealed. Every action taken, or not taken, was to prevent these things from being found out.

Occam’s razor.

Bat Chain Puller on November 15, 2012 at 9:00 AM

I don’t give an F what the cia did or not do. Obama was watching this from the comfort of his living room. Why wasn’t he calling people and asking are we doing anything to help them and if not, why not?

Blake on November 15, 2012 at 9:00 AM

We will NEVER know the truth.

….and Jennifer Griffin or others like her had better learn like those in the U.K. are learning. There is a chill wind of tyranny blowing across the West.

Freedom is declining. Government power is rising.

LONDON (AP) — One teenager made offensive comments about a murdered child on Twitter. Another young man wrote on Facebook that British soldiers should “go to hell.” A third posted a picture of a burning paper poppy, symbol of remembrance of war dead.

All were arrested, two convicted, and one jailed — and they’re not the only ones. In Britain, hundreds of people are prosecuted each year for posts, tweets, texts and emails deemed menacing, indecent, offensive or obscene, and the number is growing as our online lives expand.

Lawyers say the mounting tally shows the problems of a legal system trying to regulate 21st century communications with 20th century laws. Civil libertarians say it is a threat to free speech in an age when the Internet gives everyone the power to be heard around the world.

“Fifty years ago someone would have made a really offensive comment in a public space and it would have been heard by relatively few people,” said Mike Harris of free-speech group Index on Censorship. “Now someone posts a picture of a burning poppy on Facebook and potentially hundreds of thousands of people can see it.

“People take it upon themselves to report this offensive material to police, and suddenly you’ve got the criminalization of offensive speech.”

http://www.myfoxny.com/story/20104567/in-uk-twitter-facebook-rants-land-some-in-jail#ixzz2CIdrNYG2

PappyD61 on November 15, 2012 at 9:01 AM

Kinetic Military Action only kicks in when Muslims are killing themselves.

Electrongod on November 15, 2012 at 9:01 AM

WHO ordered “Stand Down”?

WHO started the video lie?

I bet they are the same person and I bet his initials are BHO.

stenwin77 on November 15, 2012 at 8:58 AM

That implies that BHO is something other than the intellectually deficient and lazy bastard we’ve seen for four years now. IMO, this was a group decision based on political expediency of keeping the Arab Spring myth alive ahead of the election.

In short the decision to let those Americans die was based on campaign strategy and not the demands of the Presidency.

Happy Nomad on November 15, 2012 at 9:02 AM

I don’t believe a word coming from this administration, period. What is clear is that there was inadequate security, that Stevens was fearful of an attack, that our gov’t didn’t do all it could to protect them nor treat the attack with the seriousness it deserved. POTUS flew off to Vegas for fundraisers the next day, and they continued to tell the American people it was just the video.

Those are the facts, and those alone are an indictment of this admin and Obama’s “leadership”.

changer1701 on November 15, 2012 at 9:02 AM

If Morrell is going to insist on this “narrative,” then one has to ask why the CIA was in Benghazi to begine with and why is there so much cloak-and-dagger about this whole operation? Who or what is being protected here?

onlineanalyst on November 15, 2012 at 9:03 AM

Ed i wish you were at the WH Presser

cmsinaz on November 15, 2012 at 8:57 AM

……and were called upon.

Probably wouldn’t happen.

PappyD61 on November 15, 2012 at 9:03 AM

Only people with the answers are the survivors, in particular the other guys who were with Doherty and Woods.

budfox on November 15, 2012 at 9:03 AM

Well golly gee, we WOULD have sent reinforcements and gosh darnit we wanted to, but those guys taking heavy fire for 7 hours and dying, while we watched via live camera on the drone, well heck they just never ASKED us to!

AttilaTheHun on November 15, 2012 at 8:59 AM

OH you mean they have to ASK for it??…. someone forgot to put that in the memo….

o.O

ThinkingForMyself on November 15, 2012 at 9:04 AM

Petraeus speak up for the love of pete

cmsinaz on November 15, 2012 at 8:55 AM

Not going to Happen, Petraeus isnt going to change his testimony the Ratline(washington DC) always protects itself.

ChunkyLover on November 15, 2012 at 9:05 AM

But Morell’s explanation, as related by Lake, doesn’t make a lot of sense.

It does when you consider who would be held responsible for not requesting the help. Why, it’s Petraeus! You know, the guy who resigned and can now be used as the scapegoat.

Vince on November 15, 2012 at 9:06 AM

It’s difficult to imagine that the intelligence unit under fire off an on for seven hours would never have requested military assistance…

A willful suspension of disbelief

Looks like Obama found himself another patsy.

petefrt on November 15, 2012 at 9:06 AM

o/t

Jobless Claims Rise to 1-1/2 Year High

The number of Americans filing new claims for jobless benefits rose to 439,000 last week, much higher than analysts’ forecasts of 375,000 and the highest level since April 2011.

DJIA futures down 39.

In the week after the election, the Petraeus scandal has erupted and the real story on jobs is now being told.

Lie to win: The Obama motto.

Resist We Much on November 15, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Only people with the answers are the survivors, in particular the other guys who were with Doherty and Woods.

budfox on November 15, 2012 at 9:03 AM

Yes, why haven’t we heard from any of these people? Are they being suppressed, or threatened in some way?

Who is John Galt on November 15, 2012 at 9:07 AM

May they spin fast enough to screw themselves right into hell !

Lucano on November 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM

o/t

Jobless Claims Rise to 1-1/2 Year High

The number of Americans filing new claims for jobless benefits rose to 439,000 last week, much higher than analysts’ forecasts of 375,000 and the highest level since April 2011.

Resist We Much on November 15, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Sandy is being blamed.

Electrongod on November 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM

Sorry, but the CiC doesn’t have to wait for someone to ask for help during a terrorist attack before he takes action.

Wigglesworth on November 15, 2012 at 9:10 AM

OH you mean they have to ASK for it??…. someone forgot to put that in the memo….

ThinkingForMyself on November 15, 2012 at 9:04 AM

Right, even if it wasn’t “asked for”, why wasn’t it sent?

petefrt on November 15, 2012 at 9:10 AM

Probably pappy…. *sigh*

cmsinaz on November 15, 2012 at 9:10 AM

WHO ordered “Stand Down”?

WHO started the video lie?

I bet they are the same person and I bet his initials are BHO.

stenwin77 on November 15, 2012 at 8:58 AM

Naw..he didn’t come up with it, but he sure as Hell signed off on it….

Which pretty much sums up his entire Presidency….

Sorry Pri*k

BigWyo on November 15, 2012 at 9:11 AM

Sandy is being blamed.

Electrongod on November 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM

why not the Pubs? they control a whole third of the legislative branch

Slade73 on November 15, 2012 at 9:11 AM

and so the coverup begins. Problem is for Obama, it started to late, their are people and paper trail that shows the CIA is lieing.

God, we have the CIA, FBI, State department, department of defense, attorney general, ambassitor to the UN, generals, mistresses, press etc. covering up the malpractice of Obama in the murder of our 4 hero’s.

My view is pretty simple- During the campaign season Obama wanted to portray that he was great in fighting terrorism (getting bin laden) and that his moves in Libya were effective. When the terrorism happened in Libya it destroyed his meme. This is where obama made his fatal mistake, when our embassy came under attack, he chose to continue his campaign strategy rather than help our heroes.

This shows you the lack of character and home that ambitious punk in the white house is. In the end the truth will come out no matter how hard the press covers for him.

Danielvito on November 15, 2012 at 9:11 AM

It is not about the cia, it’s about obama policy failures – and state and defense who support them. Al Quada and terrorism are not dead – as barry wants us to believe, they are alive and well. It was not dealt a fatal blow, but attacked our embassy. It was barry and his cohorts who spread misleading information about the attack – sending his bff rice around to spread disinformation. Can we get him to testify, under oath what he knew and when did he know it ?

runner on November 15, 2012 at 9:11 AM

This is just another sheep that Obama has threatened to kneecap.

rplat on November 15, 2012 at 9:12 AM

o/t

Jobless Claims Rise to 1-1/2 Year High

The number of Americans filing new claims for jobless benefits rose to 439,000 last week, much higher than analysts’ forecasts of 375,000 and the highest level since April 2011.

DJIA futures down 39.

In the week after the election, the Petraeus scandal has erupted and the real story on jobs is now being told.

Lie to win: The Obama motto.

Resist We Much on November 15, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Darn it! This is why we need to raise taxes on the rich!

/

Doughboy on November 15, 2012 at 9:13 AM

That implies that BHO is something other than the intellectually deficient and lazy bastard we’ve seen for four years now. IMO, this was a group decision based on political expediency of keeping the Arab Spring myth alive ahead of the election.

In short the decision to let those Americans die was based on campaign strategy and not the demands of the Presidency.

Happy Nomad on November 15, 2012 at 9:02 AM

Sad to think that this is closest to the truth. What have we become?

D-fusit on November 15, 2012 at 9:14 AM

They asked for Youtube to take down the video…

the_nile on November 15, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Sandy is being blamed.

Electrongod on November 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM

I know and the storm can be used for part of it, but BLS has made revisions for every month of Obama’s presidency and, if look back to December 2011, you’ll see a sharp DROP in first time claims down to under 400K. The figure stays in the 350K to 400K range from December 2011 until today — one week AFTER the election.

Resist We Much on November 15, 2012 at 9:16 AM

This is absurd.

forest on November 15, 2012 at 9:16 AM

runner on November 15, 2012 at 9:11 AM

Wait ’til it comes out that the weapons Benghazi ops ran from Libya to Syria are being used against our “ally” Israel.

But then again, will anybody care?

petefrt on November 15, 2012 at 9:16 AM

The Dems thought this was a political witch hunt that would disappear after the election – the President thought it was a bump in the road to his “flexibility” – When both turned out false, a sex scandal involving a Republican Guy (according to Chuck Todd) popped up.

Slade73 on November 15, 2012 at 9:17 AM

Goal: Protect Obama and his administration at all costs.

Method: Lie, deceive, ignore, obfuscate, select patsy for blame.

Team members: The left, Islamists, media, all democrats.

Alternate plan: Blame Bush and “the rich”.

darwin on November 15, 2012 at 9:17 AM

We have been subjected to so many lies by this administration that they are now beginning to blend into an amorphous mass of confusion and uncertainty.

rplat on November 15, 2012 at 9:18 AM

AP reported on 11/2 that the CIA denied it told its operatives to stand down and in fact dispatched two teams of operatives. Turn off Fox for a minute and read some news

US officials counter reports on Benghazi attacks
By By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press – Nov 2, 2012

plewis on November 15, 2012 at 9:19 AM

This whole thing is just a boot to the gut…

You get to thinking someone like Petraeus is one of the good guys….

Reminiscent of finding out Colin Powell is, indeed, just another hand wringing libtard…

crap…

BigWyo on November 15, 2012 at 9:20 AM

OT – need to vent for a second

I have a picture on my work computer desktop of the Tomb of the Unknown Solider. My coworker came by and said he can’t understand why we spend money on something like that. He’s okay with the 26 year old kids on health insurance but thinks guarding the Tomb is a “waste” of money.

I almost punched him in the nose.

gophergirl on November 15, 2012 at 9:21 AM

Ding ding ding wiggles

cmsinaz on November 15, 2012 at 9:22 AM

So how will they square what Morell says today vs. what Petreaus says today? Why would Petreaus continue to take bullets for the CIA if it didn’t happen? Maybe because he’s STILL being blackmailed? It’s just sick that Petreaus would throw away years of service for this POS in the Whitehouse.

BettyRuth on November 15, 2012 at 9:23 AM

So we’re to believe that no assistance was provided because the CIA never requested it? How does that square with Obama supposedly ordering his national security team to do “whatever was necessary” to aid the beleagured personnel in Benghazi?

Trafalgar on November 15, 2012 at 9:23 AM

Oh and as for the topic at hand – replace one liar with another.

These people have no soul.

gophergirl on November 15, 2012 at 9:24 AM

Where’s the Gorram video?!?!

Where’s the Situation Room Pic?!?!

Where’s the freakin’ anything that’s not misinformation?!?!?

Slade73 on November 15, 2012 at 9:24 AM

gophergirl on November 15, 2012 at 9:21 AM

You are a much better person than me, I would have dropped that SOB right then and there.

D-fusit on November 15, 2012 at 9:25 AM

Let’s face it, the voters who showed up at the polls cared more about their free stuff, than the fact that the Commander in Chief left 4 souls twisting in the wind while they were slaughtered by islamic terrorists.

And the press in this country helped to keep this story buried so baracka claus could be re-elected.

karenhasfreedom on November 15, 2012 at 9:25 AM

I find it amazing that we ( including me ) still underestimate
these bastards .

Lucano on November 15, 2012 at 9:25 AM

Wait ’til it comes out that the weapons Benghazi ops ran from Libya to Syria are being used against our “ally” Israel.

But then again, will anybody care?

petefrt on November 15, 2012 at 9:16 AM

Libya borders Sudan. Israel got rid of a Libya weapons depot in Sudan that served Syria and Gaza. They knew.

runner on November 15, 2012 at 9:26 AM

OT – need to vent for a second

I have a picture on my work computer desktop of the Tomb of the Unknown Solider. My coworker came by and said he can’t understand why we spend money on something like that. He’s okay with the 26 year old kids on health insurance but thinks guarding the Tomb is a “waste” of money.

I almost punched him in the nose.

gophergirl on November 15, 2012 at 9:21 AM

You should’ve socked him. Sadly, I’m betting you’ll find that the majority opinion among the Left. They don’t respect the sacrifice made by our men and women in uniform and think that’d be money better spent handed out to the folks.

A sad commentary on where we are, and where we’re headed.

changer1701 on November 15, 2012 at 9:28 AM

It’s difficult to imagine that the intelligence unit under fire off an on for seven hours would never have requested military assistance to save the lives of the people in the compound — not impossible, perhaps, but certainly implausible.

But surely you understand that the guys in the building radio’ing back to HQ while under attack are not the guys that would actually make the call on what to send in and how to respond. It sounds as of you want to make these two facts mutually exclusive. Just because the guys on the ground, at what has turned out to be a CIA base of operations, were asking for “everything”, doesn’t exactly mean that the CIA, or command, requested it.

And does nobody here wonder what exactly it was the CIA was engaged in their at that annex? That perhaps, as with most things CIA and has historically been the case, they want to keep it a secret?

The CIA sometimes has to do dirty things. Those “rough men in the night” you hear about.

Does everything have to be a big conspiracy? Is truth your goal or politics? A question I feel should be asked more often.

Genuine on November 15, 2012 at 9:30 AM

Who authorized the “rescue” effort from Tripoli..?

d1carter on November 15, 2012 at 9:30 AM

So we’re to believe that no assistance was provided because the CIA never requested it? How does that square with Obama supposedly ordering his national security team to do “whatever was necessary” to aid the beleagured personnel in Benghazi?

Trafalgar on November 15, 2012 at 9:23 AM

Bingo !
Squaring that circle should produce an entertaining verbal dance.
Hope somebody askes the question.

Also, I wonder how DP’s testimony lines up with the new guy’s.
It is not behind closed doors because it repetitive.

Jabberwock on November 15, 2012 at 9:31 AM

if CIA was really running some detentions there, extra-legally, would they perhaps have NOT requested assistance, thinking that a full blown big mil response would uncover it. and that getting people out, leaving a few guys behind to hopefully tamp it down, and end it there without big mil presence. they guessed wrong; they’re couple guys couldnt contain it, and they were sacrificed. and presumably, knew the deal when they were left there. if all this is correct.

t8stlikchkn on November 15, 2012 at 9:31 AM

I, also, don’t believe Patreous will reveal anything other than what he is told. A) If he tells the truth now he will have perjured himself B) He has already dishonored himself and his country. Why would he turn good now?

1nolibgal on November 15, 2012 at 9:32 AM

So whom did Dear Leader “order” to give them all the assistance they needed, to assure their safety? And why did he do this if no assistance was requested? Did not Comrade Chairman Obama order the military to provide assistance? Were his instructions not followed?

Looks like Petraeus has been selected as the fall guy for Teh One, the guy who just canned him for something supposedly unrelated to Benghazigate, after likely misleading him he could keep his position, and that President Billy Jeff got away with without losing his position.

It’s The Chicago Way.

However, there are some flaws in this fiction. Did Ambassador Stevens only request help from the CIA when he realized his life was in danger? Were all his requests routed through and screened by the CIA? Did the State Department only request assistance and help from the CIA? All of this seems highly unlikely.

farsighted on November 15, 2012 at 9:32 AM

Does everything have to be a big conspiracy? Is truth your goal or politics? A question I feel should be asked more often.

Genuine on November 15, 2012 at 9:30 AM

yeah, cause no one called this a political witch hunt

just go bury your head in the sand, you clearly enjoy it

Slade73 on November 15, 2012 at 9:33 AM

Turn off Fox for a minute and read some news

plewis on November 15, 2012 at 9:19 AM

OK comrade, doubleplusgood news from the Ministry of Truth today!

tom daschle concerned on November 15, 2012 at 9:33 AM

BTW. When did it become necessary to request aid TO SAVE YOUR LIFE !!!!

Jabberwock on November 15, 2012 at 9:33 AM

BTW. When did it become necessary to request aid TO SAVE YOUR LIFE !!!!

Jabberwock on November 15, 2012 at 9:33 AM

As soon as Mohammed Obama signs onto directive 18/19 at the UN and Christians officially get made into criminals.

tom daschle concerned on November 15, 2012 at 9:35 AM

This needs to be investigated by a special joint committee. One investigative committee taking testimony from all concerned no matter which agency was involved.

d1carter on November 15, 2012 at 9:36 AM

Well the American people have proven themselves dumb enough to believe any rediculous lie, they did elect and then reelect the I cannot ever tell a truth Obuma, so why not more rediculous lies.

aposematic on November 15, 2012 at 9:36 AM

Anyone think about the fact we lost an very high ranking Admiral, and 3, 4 star generals in the past month?

Ever think that this is an Alinsky full frontal attack on our military?

karenhasfreedom on November 15, 2012 at 9:37 AM

According to a source who debriefed those who were at the CIA annex that night, “When they asked for air support, they were told they could have an unarmed drone.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/11/military-timeline-from-night-benghazi-attack-begs-more-questions/#ixzz2CIlBhO1G

lynncgb on November 15, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Anyone think about the fact we lost an very high ranking Admiral, and 3, 4 star generals in the past month?

Ever think that this is an Alinsky full frontal attack on our military?

karenhasfreedom on November 15, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Mohammed Obama is emplacing Sharia compliant leaders in the military.

It is about to get real fun.

tom daschle concerned on November 15, 2012 at 9:38 AM

So whom did Dear Leader “order” to give them all the assistance they needed, to assure their safety? And why did he do this if no assistance was requested? Did not Comrade Chairman Obama order the military to provide assistance? Were his instructions not followed?

farsighted on November 15, 2012 at 9:32 AM

if DL didnt know about the detentions, which he surely wouldnt if CIA was running them extra-legally, keepng him of course out of the loop, as it appears most things get done in dc now, everyone has to work around DL, then DL says “uh, so am i supposed to say, give them all they want? is that right?”. panetta says, yes sir, thats right, thats what you should say. and petreus, who is covering the presence of the detention, doesnt ASK. he got most of them out, the 30 in tripoli, leaves a few behind to secure annex. certianly doesnt want big mil there, as anyone who knows how this works, once big mil shows up, its a mess, everything gets out. just spitballong here. but i think most of the scandals we’ll see for the next 4 years will be everyone with any repsonsibility working around potus. and potus basically unknowing of anything substantive. which is bascially the way its been the last 4 years.

t8stlikchkn on November 15, 2012 at 9:38 AM

Wouldn’t there be written authorization from the POTUS “to do whatever was necessary” to keep the Americans safe..?

d1carter on November 15, 2012 at 9:39 AM

You guys are just not thinking like Democrats. One must be very literal and very specific so the words can be parsed to your advantage.

…the agency never requested Europe-based special operations teams, specialized Marine platoons, or armed drones on the night of the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, Libya…

is much, much different than, “Send Help Now!”

Mitoch55 on November 15, 2012 at 9:39 AM

Ever think that this is an Alinsky full frontal attack on our military?

karenhasfreedom on November 15, 2012 at 9:37 AM

The left has been putting it’s people in the miltary for years. I’m sure they have people in high positions by now.

darwin on November 15, 2012 at 9:39 AM

If Petraeus tells the truth he might as well as well pop a cyanide pill
because they will destroy whatever is left of his life . They will take
his pension , prosecute him , throw him in jail and the same with the
girlfriend .

Lucano on November 15, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Sorry, resolution 16/18

tom daschle concerned on November 15, 2012 at 9:42 AM

I, also, don’t believe Patreous will reveal anything other than what he is told. A) If he tells the truth now he will have perjured himself B) He has already dishonored himself and his country. Why would he turn good now?

1nolibgal on November 15, 2012 at 9:32 AM

Thank you for your concern, but he was not previously under oath.

katy the mean old lady on November 15, 2012 at 9:42 AM

Do you think this guy would be acting CIA director if he wasn’t in the tank for Obama?

The rationale I’m reading is akin to a woman in a house that is being held hostage by an armed intruder and is under the threat of death but the police won’t come to her aid until she picks the phone up and dials 911.

Who cares if they didn’t request military assistance. It was obvious they were in need of assistance. Why wait to be invited?

The lies just keep on coming. Pretty soon, they’ll collapse under their own weight.

iamsaved on November 15, 2012 at 9:43 AM

The only reason we will find out the truth is the GOP has the house and subpoena power. If the democrats controlled all three branches we would never know the truth.

Can you imagine the wall Obama, Harry Reid & Pelosi would put up.

Danielvito on November 15, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Anyone think about the fact we lost an very high ranking Admiral, and 3, 4 star generals in the past month?

Ever think that this is an Alinsky full frontal attack on our military?

karenhasfreedom on November 15, 2012 at 9:37 AM

I think it’s a way to undermine the military in order to soften up the public for Pentagon cuts. Those are the only cuts the Left ever endorses, but they know how they usually play politically. Might be different, though, if they can lower people’s opinion of our armed forces…

changer1701 on November 15, 2012 at 9:46 AM

Danielvito – The only reason we will find out the truth is the GOP has the house and subpoena power.

That supoena power worked out well with Fast and Furious didn’t it? Who’s going to enforce it? Holder?

iamsaved on November 15, 2012 at 9:47 AM

It is clear why he would say that. Those CIA operatives who went to assist after being told to stand down are now discredited or rogue and cannot be considered “legitimate” CIA ‘requesters!’ Barry will always have a demented twist to the truth. There is much evil in Washington these days.

wepeople on November 15, 2012 at 9:53 AM

Anyone think about the fact we lost an very high ranking Admiral, and 3, 4 star generals in the past month?

Ever think that this is an Alinsky full frontal attack on our military?

karenhasfreedom on November 15, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Director of Central Intelligence and four-star General David Petraeus:

Forced to resign, FBI criminal investigation ongoing and a courts martial/Federal prosecuton for adultery, disclosure of classified materials, perjury, or lying to the Federal government.

Commander of the International Security Assistance Force, nominee for NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, Four-star General John Allen:

Nomination from SACEUR post put on hold, FBI and military investigations ongoing.

Four-star General of AFRICOM Carter Ham:

Obama announced that he would replace General Carter Ham with General David Rodriguez at AFRICOM on 19 October 2012 with no reason given.

You probably haven’t heard about the 4th Four-star General…

Four-star General Ward, one of the highest-ranking African-American generals ever:

Stole money to furnish his house and take his wife and him on lavish shopping trips. Routinely roared through town in a motorcade.

He didn’t get fired.

He wasn’t court-martialed.

He is not being prosecuted for embezzlement, fraud, larceny or theft.

He was allowed to “retire” as a three-start General.

Hmm. What might account for the difference in treatment???

Resist We Much on November 15, 2012 at 9:54 AM

At that point,

they called again for military support and help

because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied.

They shouldn’t have had to call TWICE for support. Support should have been sent as soon as they heard they were under attack, with the president finding out 50 minutes into the attack. NEO operations have been conducted all over the world, even in hostile environments. I trained for them when I was in the military under this very scenario.

Hostile Environment. Noncombatants may be evacuated under conditions ranging from civil disorder, to terrorist action, to full-scale combat. Under such conditions, the JTF must be prepared for a wide range of contingencies. The JFC may elect to deploy a sizable security element with the evacuation force or position a large reaction force, either with the evacuation force or at an intermediate staging base (ISB). In addition to normal functions associated with noncombatant evacuations (embarkation, transportation, medical, and services), the JTF may be required to conduct a forcible entry operation, establish defensive perimeters, escort convoys, participate in personnel recovery (PR) operations, and perform the screening of evacuees normally accomplished by DOS officials.

And there is also this:

Military Response. Normally, the JFC receives authorization from the supported CCDR before using any forces and facilities in a foreign country for protection and evacuation. However, if a JFC receives a request from the ambassador or responsible US diplomatic representative to provide assistance and the delay in obtaining authorization would jeopardize the safety of US citizens, the JFC should respond to the extent deemed necessary and militarily feasible.

A responsible US dimplomatic representative would have been Doherty or Woods when they called for assistance, since delaying did jeopardize their safety. This was already in place and has been for years! Why it wasn’t adhered to baffles me. This is what needs to be asked.

Patriot Vet on November 15, 2012 at 9:54 AM

iamsaved on November 15, 2012 at 9:47 AM

This is different Holder is now in the crosshairs. He “supposedly” withheld from the president that Obama CIA director was being investigated by the FBI.

That’s why I have hope, Every part of Obama’s adminstration, State, Attorney general, FBI, CIA, Department of defense, White house are all involved at the highest levels. Plus, the 4 dead heroes will be a clarion call to the truth seekers.

Danielvito on November 15, 2012 at 9:54 AM

Anyone think about the fact we lost an very high ranking Admiral, and 3, 4 star generals in the past month?

Ever think that this is an Alinsky full frontal attack on our military?

karenhasfreedom on November 15, 2012 at 9:37 AM

I think it’s a way to undermine the military in order to soften up the public for Pentagon cuts. …

changer1701 on November 15, 2012 at 9:46 AM

Devastating cuts. So deep and wide that even Panetta is shocked.

Not to worry, Lurch will be okay with it.

petefrt on November 15, 2012 at 9:57 AM

I have a picture on my work computer desktop of the Tomb of the Unknown Solider. My coworker came by and said he can’t understand why we spend money on something like that. He’s okay with the 26 year old kids on health insurance but thinks guarding the Tomb is a “waste” of money.

I almost punched him in the nose.

gophergirl on November 15, 2012 at 9:21 AM

I’m sorry you didn’t respond with a “what do you mean by that?” “How is it a waste of money?” These people are cowards. You don’t have to punch them in the nose, you only have to challenge them directly and they slink away like the scum that they are.

IMO, the reality is that your co-worker probably has no clearly defined idea what is and is not a waste of taxpayer money. It’s socialization among liberals and not thought that provoked that response.

Happy Nomad on November 15, 2012 at 9:57 AM

But Morell’s explanation, as related by Lake, doesn’t make a lot of sense.

It makes a lot of sense. Petraus had to report through the chain of command which includes an intelligence czar, a political appointment with little intelligence experience or none. Adding that layer to the intelligence community a few years ago was a disaster as I suggested on these pages years ago.

burt on November 15, 2012 at 9:58 AM

That’s why I have hope, Every part of Obama’s adminstration, State, Attorney general, FBI, CIA, Department of defense, White house are all involved at the highest levels. Plus, the 4 dead heroes will be a clarion call to the truth seekers.

Danielvito on November 15, 2012 at 9:54 AM

First step in staging a coup and becoming a dictatorship- throw the existing government in utter turmoil. Just saying.

Happy Nomad on November 15, 2012 at 9:58 AM

Anyone think about the fact we lost an very high ranking Admiral, and 3, 4 star generals in the past month?

Ever think that this is an Alinsky full frontal attack on our military?

karenhasfreedom on November 15, 2012 at 9:37 AM

I read that the current total is 14!!

If one looks at history, dictators have always replaced generals
with “those of their own kind”, those that are willing to play
by the dictator’s rules.

Amjean on November 15, 2012 at 9:59 AM

The definition of “Treason” should be read to these a##holes before they are sworn in to testify, along with the punishment for same.

scgas on November 15, 2012 at 10:02 AM

I wonder what the Administration has on Morell to get him to play ball? Cheating on his wife? A gay relationship? Just another useful tool.

Deano1952 on November 15, 2012 at 10:07 AM

I wonder what the Administration has on Morell to get him to play ball? Cheating on his wife? A gay relationship? Just another useful tool.

Deano1952 on November 15, 2012 at 10:07 AM

The desire to become permanant Director of the CIA.

Happy Nomad on November 15, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3