Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
What rules did he break?
"While affairs may be commonplace in Washington, when they involve the director of the CIA, things can take on a different tone.
Analysts say there is no evidence that a security breach occurred as a result of the affair, but that hasn't stopped discussion that Broadwell could have gained access to classified information as a result of what she has routinely described as "unprecedented access" to Petraeus.
That discussion seemed to gain momentum Monday thanks to comments Broadwell made in a speech last month at the University of Denver.
"I don't know if a lot of you have heard this, but the CIA annex had actually taken a couple of Libyan militia members prisoner and they think that the attack on the consulate was an effort to get these prisoners back," Broadwell said.
A senior intelligence official told CNN on Monday, "These detention claims are categorically not true. Nobody was ever held at the annex before, during, or after the attacks."
http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/12/us/pet...ion/index.html
Call me crazy her story makes a lot more sense than the various ones which we have been told. I wonder where she got the idea about that secret CIA prison?
|
you mean her story that a senior intel official said wasn't true? hell, anyone can make up stuff. maybe she watches too many movies.
and if you're wondering about people 'covering up' the whole sordid mess:
Last month Republicans thought that Barack Obama’s feckless team had failed Americans in Benghazi. Now they know that the FBI was on to Petraeus this summer, and that the director was talking to the bureau about an affair during the hottest stretch of the scandal.
Those facts are going to prompt more questions. Two House Republicans learned of a scandal that was ensnaring national security figures, and did not run to the press with it.