The Patraeus Affair Maybe A Real Life "Enemy Of The State"

In "Enemy of the State," a high level bureaucrat engaged in an unauthorized operation that involved assassinating a senator. When Will Smith's character came into possession of that information, the power of the state was unleashed on him. Everything about Benghazi points to the unauthorized use of power, and an attempt to cover it up.

Pursuant to Executive Order 13491, issued by the President in January 2009, the CIA was stripped of their authority to detain people. Yet, Paula Broadwell, mistress of CIA Director, David Patraeus, told an audience at the University of Denver, on October 26, that the Benghazi attack on the Consulate was initiated by Libyan militia, who were attempting to free their comrades, who were being held by the CIA in the Benghazi annex.

In addition to her characterization of the Benghazi attack, two Fox News reporters, Jennifer Griffin and Adam Housley claim that, besides Libyan militia, the CIA was holding prisoners from Africa and the Middle East at the Benghazi facility. . .

If these assertions are true, the operation at Benghazi was in direct defiance of an executive order, issued by the Commander-In-Chief.

If the CIA was hiding detention activities, that are in violation of President Obama's Order, it would make sense that they would:

Provide the President with a bogus explanation of what took place at Benghazi, which they did. The CIA provided the President with the following: “The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U.S. Consulate and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.”

Tell CIA operatives, who could be potential witnesses against them to "stand down," while the Consulate was in distress, which they are accused of doing. "Three urgent requests for military assistance sent from the CIA annex were all denied; CIA operators were apparently told to “stand down” rather than respond when shots were heard around 9:40 p.m. on September 11."

Ask the press not to report that the two former Navy Seals were CIA operatives, which they did.  "Some news organizations, including the Associated Press, The New York Times and The Washington Post . . . agreed not to publish the information. . . .
CIA officials insisted that other lives would be endangered,"

Wait until after the election to inform President Obama because, being Republican, they expected Romney to win, and they probably thought Romney would not hold them accountable.
Tuesday, November 6, 2012 - 5 p.m. by the FBI:  Director of National Intelligence James Clapper - Clapper advised Petraeus to resign, but he did not advise President Obama until the day after the election, November 7th.

It is amazing that media and Republicans know that David Patraeus had a mistress, but they accept that she did not become his mistress until after he left the military, when it would not be illegal. They know his mistress had classified information,  but they accept that he did not give it to her, and they aren't interested in learning how she got it. They know that possession, or dissemination of classified material is a crime, but they kind of ignore it. They know that he was accused of holding prisoners at Benghazi, in violation of an executive order, but a CIA denial seems to be good enough.  In effect, they exit all roads that lead to a painful outcome for Daniel Patraeus.  Indeed, they haven't even questioned how the CIA came to provide the President with a report that mischaracterized the Benghazi event, but for Susan Rice, merely speaking the words that they wrote, well then, off with her head!

The Republicans are using Benghazi to dig a ditch for the President, but it may turn out that David Patraeus, and some others that Republicans like, will end up in it.

ADDENDUM - AND A SIGNIFICANT NEW FACT:

Arutz Sheva, an Israeli news outlet published a partial transcript of Broadwell’s speech, in which she attributed the Benghazi attack to Libyan Militia, in an attempt to free their comrades who were being held there. 

Does the Israeli reporting suggest that foreign entities perceived Broadwell as a source of CIA secrets?

Could the whole incident have been staged by the CIA, to cover up the destruction of evidence, which they believed had to be destroyed since the Israeli report would probably lead to an investigation of the Benghazi Consulate?

Destruction of evidence makes sense of the intruders going to the Consulate building before going to the Annex — both locations may have contained evidence.

It doesn't make sense that a militia, intent on getting away, would stop to burn the place down.  It is more likely that people, intent on destroying evidence, would burn the facility?

Follow me on Twitter