Today’s Investigative Special Report – November 13, 2012 “Dealing With Today’s Law Enforcement Specialized Investigations” “Where Does Law Enforcement Fit In?” Former CIA Director Petraeus and President Barack Obama in the Thick of the Benghazi Investigation

By Lawrence W. Daly, MSc
Forensic Expert – Senior Author
What role did law enforcement play in the Benghazi, Libya and Director David Petraeus’s matter? It appears the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has been involved in both situations. To date the role and results of the FBI in the Benghazi investigation is unknown. Though in the Petraeus’s matter it appears they have been and continue to investigate several individuals.
Two FBI employees share a laugh with President...
Two FBI employees share a laugh with President Barack Obama during his visit to FBI headquarters. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Today the Whitehouse continued to dodge what specifically the FBI performed in their lengthy investigation of the Petraeus situation. When asked by a reporter today what has been transpiring with the Petraeus situation Jay Carney, the Whitehouse Press Secretary, referred him to the FBI. Instead of answering the question the Whitehouse continues to allow the cyclical lack of information.
The recent discovery that CIA Director David Petraeus resigned on Friday, November 9, 2012, from his position ‘citing personal reasons for the resignation.’ The personal issues surround the FBI’s discovery that Petraeus was having an affair with his biographer, Pamela Broadwell. Allegedly, Broadwell had sent some threatening and intimidating emails to an employee inside the CIA, Jill Kelley, a family friend of the Petraeus’s. This past week Broadwell’s residence was raided by the FBI. Previously Broadwell was interviewed by s
omeone in the FBI. The results of the interview with Broadwell are unknown.
General David Petraeus
General David Petraeus (Photo credit: Talk Radio News Service)
The resignation comes at a time where Petraeus was to testify on Thursday, November 15th in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Since Petraeus submitted his resignation the social media has focused on him not wanting to provide testimony to the Committee about his and everyone’s action in reference to the murder of four Americans at the Consulate in Benghazi, Libya on September 11th.
There are many hypotheses which should be considered reference why Petraeus submitted his resignation on Friday and why he now is refusing to testify in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee. They are as follows:
1.      Taking one for the team. It is always possible that Petraeus has agreed to take the responsibility for what happened in Benghazi. This is highly unlikely, but must be considered. The need for President Barack Obama to be as far distant from these murders is important. There are several reasons for this as the manner in which Americans have received information from the Whitehouse has been confusing, misleading, not forth-coming, and so forth. The President has been associated with or promoted much of the misinformation according to many reliable sources and social media outlets.
2.      Petraeus’s resignation may have nothing to do with the timeliness of him having to testify. The issue and analysis of the timeliness of the resignation has many people asking the question about the coincidence of why now since the FBI allegedly knew about the extramarital affair six months ago? No matter what the Whitehouse has to offer in way of an explanation it is difficult for people to believe they had nothing to do with one another.
3.      If Petraeus testifies the information he may provide may put the President in vulnerable and precarious situations. The need for Petraeus to testify is relevant and material because he knows who knew what. In the debate with Representative Paul Ryan and Vice-President Joe Biden, Biden stated that he and the President did not have any knowledge, he said, “…we weren’t told they wanted more security” at the diplomatic facility in Benghazi.
President Barack Obama and Vice President Jose...
President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
4.      It appears the allegation of Petraeus and Broadwell having an extramarital affair is true. However, the sex scandal appears to be driving the politicians from moving from the Benghazi incident to focusing on Petraeus. It seems reasonable and logical that both Petraeus and his extramarital affair with Broadwell are inter-related. How at this time is unknown.
There are numerous times where the President made statements that he knew nothing about what had occurred early on in Benghazi; that what occurred was in response to a videotape and they are investigating the matter. When the President spoke in front of the United Nations he repeatedly blamed the death of the four Americans on the videotape.
Further, the President did not call the act a “terrorist act” until many days after the incident. Although he did state that our country would not stand for terrorist acts. He didn’t directly state that the incident in Benghazi was a terror act. On Sunday, two days before the presidential election, CBS News released a video clip that provides an interesting dialogue. The clip is from President Barack Obama’s Sept. 12 interview with Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes. The newly released clip includes this exchange between the reporter and the president.
KROFT: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya Attack, do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?
   OBAMA: Well it’s too early to tell exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. We are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one-way or the other.  
In the debate with former Governor Mitt Romney, he told President Obama, “I want to make sure we get this for the record, because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror. The President responded by check the record. Social media outlets did check the records and the President was mistaken.
5.      During his first Presidential term, President Obama has not used the words “Terror, Terrorism, or Terrorists. The reasons will not be known why he will not use these words until years from now. His Presidential campaign surrounded the theme that his administration had Al-Qaida on their heels, using the death of Osama Bin Laden as an indication for his opinion. The explanations are yet to have been revealed at this time why the President is leading the country in this manner.
6.      If the resignation of Petraeus would have been disclosed to the public prior to the Presidential election the information may have been harmful to Presidential Obama’s re-election bid. Former Governor Mitt Romney may have been able to use this information along with the other leadership problems in Obama’s administration during his first Presidential term. There appears to be a multitude of problems from the GSA to Homeland Security to Attorney General’s Office to the partying of CIA Agents and etc. There seems to be a pattern which has taken place during the President’s first term in office.
7.      President Obama’s reputation as an “ineffective leader” is something he does not want to be an aspect of his Presidential Legacy.
8.      The reasons for the FBI investigating Petraeus is something which would not be dealt with without the authority of the President. According to the social media outlets, the allegations about Petraeus having the extramarital affair were known by FBI Director Robert S. Mueller, National Intelligence Director James R. Clapper, and Attorney General Eric Holder.
English: U.S. Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the...
English: U.S. Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the commander of Multi-National Force – Iraq, walks with Sen. Barack Obama after Obama’s arrival to Baghdad International Airport in Baghdad, Iraq. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
9.      It is illogical and unreasonable to believe that the first time President Obama heard about the allegations against Petraeus was on Election Day. This is not how the President operates nor would those working for the President would have kept this information from him. The President would have immediately been made aware of the situation as soon as one of these three Directors was made aware of the situation.
10.  President Obama gives the appearance that he runs a tight ship and for him not to have known weeks or months in advance what was occurring with Petraeus prior to receiving his resignation is simply naïve and ignorant. There is an established chain of command which is in place for just these types of situations.
Once the extramarital affair was uncovered there would have been a time of meetings between the parties involved in the situation. President Obama and his advisors would have held meetings to determine what would be the best course of action.
If the FBI was truly investigating a complaint by a CIA employee, there will be an established timeline supported by written documents, emails, witness interviews, meetings, phone conferences, and any other type of facts and evidence which was uncovered. This is where the President needs to be careful about his rendition of when he became aware of Petraeus’s extramarital affairs, as well as his role in the Benghazi incident. Some social media outlets have alleged that Petraeus had been under investigation for some time, but the reasons for the investigations have yet to be made known to the public. It is possible the investigations by the FBI will never be made public citing confidential and national security reasons.
The investigation of the Benghazi incident and now the resignation of Petraeus continue to be a law enforcement issue. The investigation should be performed by law enforcement experts in the field to analyze all of the information from the beginning of both of these situations to today. The timeline will establish who was involved, who knew what, when they became aware of the information, who made decisions, and so forth.
Apparently the committees will continue to be the ears and voice of the people. Backdoor dealings or the appearance of any backdoor deals should and will cause the public to ask further questions about what happened and who was responsible. Petraeus may not appear for his scheduled testimony, but the committee does have subpoena power and may be able to force him to testify.
The Benghazi incident occurred over nine weeks ago and there has been too much happening in reference to obtaining the necessary information about what happened on September 11th. Specifically, what has happened since the event, and what roles everyone played prior to, during, and since? The investigation by law enforcement, which ever agency is responsible for both investigations is not complicated and the convoluted manner in which this has been handled to date is incompetent, unreasonable, illogical, and lacking in the basics of a law enforcement investigation. The Committee needs to quit complaining about the resistance they have received from the State Department and the Whitehouse and begin unpeeling the layers of bureaucratic nonsense.
As of today, which law enforcement agency is doing what is unknown? It is a guessing game of who is the leader of the investigation. A strong leader is necessary someone who has the ability to process the information and guarantee Americans are being told the truth and all of the facts. As the information comes to light, there will be a better understanding of what happened in Benghazi and with Petraeus.

Lawrence W. Daly
Kent, WA

Enhanced by Zemanta

This is


Post a Comment

All comments and feedback appreciated!

Criminology & Justice Headline Animator


Law Books




Serial Killers



Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...