HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Paula Broadwell 'leaked s...

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:07 AM

Paula Broadwell 'leaked secret details of Benghazi probe during speech'

Paula Broadwell 'leaked secret details of Benghazi probe during speech' as it emerges Petraeus' testimony will be postponed
Former CIA director's alleged mistress talked about Libya at college lecture
Paula Broadwell, the author of General David Petraeus' biography, is widely thought to be the alleged mistress that caused Petraeus to resign
Broadwell said there were Libyan prisoners in American consulate at the time of the September 11 attack that left four dead including ambassador
Petraeus was scheduled to testify to Congress about timeline on Thursday
Now his replacement will fill in, but he may still be forced to talk




By Meghan Keneally and Lydia Warren

PUBLISHED:08:51 EST, 12 November 2012| UPDATED: 09:47 EST, 12 November 2012

Comments (1)
Share





.
.
Questions have emerged over whether David Petraeus' mistress leaked details of the CIA's investigation into the deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.


Suspicions over how much Paula Broadwell knew about the probe come as the CIA's former boss stepped down on Friday over the alleged affair, days before he was to testify in the investigation.

Officials say they expect he will still testify over the incident, which left four Americans dead on September 11 this year, yet it will be delayed. The new concern comes over what, if any, confidential information he shared with his biographer and alleged mistress.

SCROLL DOWN FOR VIDEO




Close: Paula Broadwell is thought to be David Petraeus' mistress and she spoke publicly about the government's handling on the attack on the Libyan embassy

Broadwell, a married army veteran who met Petraeus in 2006, was speaking at the University of Denver on October 26 when she was asked about the attack.

'Now I don’t know if a lot of you heard this, but the CIA annex had actually - had taken a couple of Libyan militia members prisoner and they think that the attack on the consulate was an effort to try to get these prisoners back,' she said, according to the Daily Beast. 'So that's still being vetted.'


In response, the CIA denied that claim on Sunday when the tape of Broadwell's talk surfaced, saying that it was not true. The agency confirmed that since 2009 they have not had the authority to detain prisoners.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2231734/David-Petraeus-scandal-Paula-Broadwell-leaked-secret-details-Benghazi-probe-speech-emerges-Petraeus-testify-hearing.html#ixzz2C1NOimiw
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

36 replies, 2429 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 36 replies Author Time Post
Reply Paula Broadwell 'leaked secret details of Benghazi probe during speech' (Original post)
elehhhhna Nov 2012 OP
warrior1 Nov 2012 #1
gordianot Nov 2012 #2
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #3
justiceischeap Nov 2012 #4
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #8
justiceischeap Nov 2012 #13
Bandit Nov 2012 #24
justiceischeap Nov 2012 #27
marlakay Nov 2012 #25
Horse with no Name Nov 2012 #5
sammytko Nov 2012 #6
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #10
Horse with no Name Nov 2012 #12
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #14
LisaL Nov 2012 #7
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #9
elehhhhna Nov 2012 #15
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #16
seabeyond Nov 2012 #11
ronnie624 Nov 2012 #18
seabeyond Nov 2012 #32
ronnie624 Nov 2012 #36
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #20
seabeyond Nov 2012 #34
elehhhhna Nov 2012 #26
seabeyond Nov 2012 #33
magical thyme Nov 2012 #17
flamingdem Nov 2012 #19
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #22
aletier_v Nov 2012 #30
magical thyme Nov 2012 #31
ronnie624 Nov 2012 #35
Coyotl Nov 2012 #21
wishlist Nov 2012 #23
TwilightGardener Nov 2012 #28
lanlady Nov 2012 #29

Response to elehhhhna (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:08 AM

1. didn't they break up before this

like about four month before? So if this is true, was it Petraeus that would be the leak. Stupid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elehhhhna (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:29 AM

2. This whole thing reeks like something from a really bad political spy thriller.

If involved stay off of small planes, slick roads write a confession give it to your lawyer. Also silence in charging the President personally or Pre election coverage on Fox News indicates something is seriously wrong with the whole episode.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elehhhhna (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:37 AM

3. There were Libyan prisoners at the consulate when it was attacked?!

Doesn't that explain the attack then? Presumably it was to free them (then the Ambassador would have been unintended collateral damage).

Furthermore, when did ANY US consulate become a jailing facility???





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #3)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:41 AM

4. One, the CIA has denied this and two, the compound where Stevens was

was a temporary facility but I suspect the CIA annex was permanent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to justiceischeap (Reply #4)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:46 AM

8. Oh I'm 110% sure the CIA would deny. Of course they'd deny. No consulate should be a jail

(or a rendition site??) I can't imagine the international ramifications of the US consulates and embassies being exposed as secret detention centers.

Broadwell's release of this info is incredibly relevant to the events in Benghazi (and most likely an enormous breach of confidentiality).

But it would completely explain why that particular location was targeted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #8)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:55 AM

13. Here's my best theory on this

The President didn't want to put boots on the ground in Libya. So, the CIA went in to work its "magic." The CIA was probably using that place to question Qaddafi supporters/terrorists and the Libyans knew of this (this goes back to the list of Libyans that were working with US leaked by Issa and the article below talking about finding shoulder-fired missiles).

I had read somewhere that the house that Stevens was at was a temporary "consulate." The CIA annex was about a mile away. So, if they were indeed trying to free detainees, they hit the wrong building.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/11/usa-libya-annex-idUSL1E8L9E1220121011

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to justiceischeap (Reply #13)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 12:02 PM

24. Except the two men killed trying to protect Stevens worked for Blackwater not the CIA.

I think we had Blackwater personel in Libya because we didn't want Government forces on the ground there...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bandit (Reply #24)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 12:15 PM

27. The USA has been using contractors for things like security

and additional manpower since the Bush admin. It's not surprising that those guarding Stevens or those that were killed were contractors--it's debatable whether that is wise but that's a whole other thing. The CIA annex and the temporary consulate were roughly a mile apart from one another. It was the CIA that went into the consulate to fight off and rescue the others there.

I think this still has more to do with the CIA than anyone is or can talk about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #8)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 12:12 PM

25. Just like in the movie Argo they told

The main CIA guy who went to Iran to take the 6 people out, if you get caught we will deny we even know you. And this is true story from our CIA past.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #3)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:42 AM

5. Prisoners in the embassy? You don't say?

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/envoy/cia-rendition-flights-exposed-mundane-billing-lawsuit-125537803.html

>>>snip
The CIA's super-secret rendition program--to whisk terrorist suspects in the dark of night to CIA black sites for interrogation--has been further exposed to the light of day in rather humble fashion: a billing dispute in upstate New York.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #3)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:42 AM

6. And where are the bodies?

Did they get out alive?

This woman is a whole bowl of fruit loop crazy!! Making up stuff just for attention or she really needs to get medical attention.

Just the fact that she took off to Afghanistan while she had infants at home is suspect. Yes, women go when IRS their duty, but she pulled strings to go see her lover.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sammytko (Reply #6)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:48 AM

10. Honestly, I don't think she's making that up. I really believe it.

It would explain a LOT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #10)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:55 AM

12. Inconvenient bodies can be made to disappear

especially in a consulate in Libya...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Horse with no Name (Reply #12)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:59 AM

14. Investigators didn't get there for a long time. Plenty of time to disappear inconvenient things

in the chaos following the event.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #3)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:43 AM

7. If these prisoners existed, wouldn't they also end up dead?

How would it free them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #7)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:47 AM

9. I have no idea. Nobody has any idea. "We" (the US officials) didn't get there for more than 24 hrs

after the event.

Who the hell knows what was left to see by then.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #3)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 11:04 AM

15. assume every counsulate is (poor) cover for the CIA

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elehhhhna (Reply #15)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 11:15 AM

16. No trouble assuming that. In fact, I believe that's a badly kept secret. But a detention facility?

That would be a whole other level of bad shit....

Regardless, it would explain the attack. It would also explain why the US didn't want extra security there, so they didn't draw attention to THAT site so it didn't look like a jail/detention (rendition?!) facility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elehhhhna (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:50 AM

11. why is she a mistress. they are both married, adulters, how does this make her a mistress? is he a

misteress?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #11)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 11:35 AM

18. A result of the gender bias inherent to a sexist society.

We are subconsciously more accepting of his adultery, and more inclined to harsh judgment of her adultery.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ronnie624 (Reply #18)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 12:44 PM

32. well then. i call bullshit.



lol

thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #32)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 01:00 PM

36. You had me there, for a second.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #11)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 11:40 AM

20. I made the same point in a different thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021797101

Why aren't we talking about Broadwell being charged with adultery under the UCMJ? Why are we only referring to Petraeus being charged, and Broadwell's always referred to as the "mistress"?




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #20)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 12:47 PM

34. i think they do equally go after the woman. as a matter of fact

i think about a year ago i read it is harsher on the woman. even if she is under.... ha ha, ya.... him. lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #11)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 12:13 PM

26. He's a "Mis take"

lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elehhhhna (Reply #26)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 12:45 PM

33. ahhh, i like mistERess. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elehhhhna (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 11:28 AM

17. Earlier that day, Fox news had claimed prisoners were temporarily held in an annex

And she referenced the Fox news broadcast earlier in her talk, so she *may* have been confusing their report in her memory. Or not. For all we know, she may have been the source for Fox, versus their making it up from scratch.

I'm also interested in knowing just what secret documents were found on her computer and how they got there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to magical thyme (Reply #17)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 11:36 AM

19. This is the story, she was referencing public information

and the documents on the computer seemed to be unrelated - she was a writer it could have been research, we'll see

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to magical thyme (Reply #17)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 11:43 AM

22. She does have a top security clearance, and she's active duty reserves.

It will be interesting if the documents on her computer are legit. Or if they are items she shouldn't have had.

Regardless, I believe Broadwell's in a lot of trouble. I hadn't heard that Fox had a report about the Libyan facility being a detention center. Why haven't the Freepers "heard" this then if their news station's put it out there? It explains WHY it was attacked (to free their Libyan friends), it also explains why the Ambassador wasn't the target (which has been repeated ad nauseum - a point they never seem to get).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #22)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 12:23 PM

30. freepers digging up more on this than DU

more motivation.
they see it as a means to nullify the election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #22)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 12:28 PM

31. I just saw it this morning...here's a link

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/11/alleged-petraeus-mistress-suggested-she-was-privy-to-state-secrets.html

(It’s possible Broadwell was confusing details broadcast ealier that day by Fox News correspondent Jennifer Griffen, who’d reported that three of the Libyan attackers were briefly held at the annex—not the consulate—before being turned over to a local militia.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to magical thyme (Reply #31)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 12:55 PM

35. In the video,

she says "the CIA annex had taken a couple of Libyan militia members prisoner, and they think that the attack on the consulate was an effort to try to get these prisoners back".

I don't think she was confusing details.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elehhhhna (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 11:43 AM

21. Questions have emerged ... Suspicions over how much Paula Broadwell knew .. The new concern comes

Let me guess, they plagiarized Fox

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elehhhhna (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 11:45 AM

23. Ten Libyan 'police' were killed according to early news reports

I have yet to hear any more about the ten Libyan 'police' allegedly killed according to early news reports on CNN and other media during the Benghazi attack. Later reporting only mentioned the four Americans. And it took quite a while for the possible CIA connections to be reported but because of CIA involvement, the truth will probably never come out fully.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elehhhhna (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 12:19 PM

28. Interesting to consider that she KNEW she was under investigation

by the FBI for possessing classified material, for having an affair with the CIA director, and yet publicly speaks on Libya and the CIA's role. You would think she would have laid low for a while, right? Why is she talking about Benghazi at all?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elehhhhna (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 12:23 PM

29. ex-CIA agent Robert Baer just told CNN

that she publicly disclosed classified tidbits at a conference last October where she was a keynote speaker. He thinks there's a big shitstorm coming at her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread