{"id":13928,"date":"2012-11-16T17:08:19","date_gmt":"2012-11-16T17:08:19","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2012-11-16T17:08:19","modified_gmt":"2012-11-16T17:08:19","slug":"petraeus_changes_his_benghazi_story","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2012\/11\/16\/petraeus_changes_his_benghazi_story\/","title":{"rendered":"Petraeus Changes His Benghazi Story"},"content":{"rendered":"

RUSH: Well, General Petraeus did change his story. He changed his story. Look, I\u2019m starting with this \u2019cause I was wrong. I thought he would stick with what he said in his first round. He changed his story. Doesn\u2019t matter. Not gonna matter a hill of beans, but he changed his story.<\/p>\n

<\/line>Hi, my friends. How are you? It\u2019s El Rushbo here. It\u2019s Friday, and you know what that means.<\/line><\/p>\n

JOHNNY DONOVAN: And now, from sunny South Florida, it\u2019s Open Line Friday!<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

RUSH: Okay. For those of you who are new to the program, Monday through Thursday, callers on this program, when we take \u2019em, have to talk about things I care about, or they don\u2019t get on. And if they lie or cheat, try to talk about things I don\u2019t care about, we politely hang up on \u2019em in a way you never hear. They\u2019re gone. But on Friday, whatever you want to talk about is okay with me. It doesn\u2019t matter whether I care about it or not. Friday is your day. You can define what the program is all about. When we go to the phones, the telephone number is 800-282-2882, and the e-mail address, ElRushbo@eibnet.com<\/a>. <\/line>Now, Petraeus is claiming that he\u2019s saying what he told \u2019em in the first briefing, but there\u2019s no transcript of that. Everybody is of the belief that Petraeus, in the first briefing, went along with the regime and said that it was a spontaneous protest due to the video. I mean, that\u2019s what he said. Now he\u2019s saying, no, that\u2019s not what I said at first, but there\u2019s no transcript. We have this from Peter King, congressman, New York. General Petraeus is saying that he always thought it was terrorism. Today is the first day, though, that we are learning that he always thought it was terrorism.<\/line><\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: Now back to Petraeus and back to Benghazi and the select committee and why there had better be one. Petraeus is saying, and Peter King from New York, the congressman, is saying that it was terrorism from the get-go, that he always thought it was terrorism. He\u2019s not really changing his testimony here, which, of course, is curious because all of us — you, me — have been under the belief since September 13th that Petraeus went out and said that it was a video, like everybody else in the regime. <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Well, let\u2019s review some of the histoire. On September 14th, three days after the attack at Benghazi, Petraeus told members of Congress that the video was the problem, the video is what caused a protest, which led to the attack on the embassy in Benghazi. Today, November 16th, so just a little over a month, it\u2019s being said for him that his September the 14th story, he\u2019s massaging that now and saying he meant or tried to convey on September 14th that it was terrorism, it was always terrorism. And I suspect the answer here lies in something Bill Kristol said on Fox earlier this week. <\/p>\n

See, Kristol is the leader of the neocons. He knows these guys. Kristol said that somebody told him, Congress or somebody, that he ran into Petraeus at that original hearing, September 14th, and said, “What really happened?” Petraeus said, “You want the real version or you want our version?” And he said Petraeus said it\u2019s terrorism, there\u2019s no question, but we\u2019re saying it\u2019s the video. Kristol said something like this on Fox earlier this week. So therefore Kristol could confirm that it\u2019s on record, “Oh, yeah, Petraeus said back then that it was terrorism all the way, but he had to say something else.” <\/p>\n

But here\u2019s the other thing. Greta Van Susteren on her blog at Fox says: This is why I don\u2019t believe it. If that were true, if on September 14th he told members of Congress that it was the video that was the problem and then today he\u2019s saying he\u2019s always thought it was terrorism, if that\u2019s true, that he was committed to telling the American people the truth on September 14th, and it was terrorism, it was Al-Qaeda, why didn\u2019t he correct the false story much before today? Why wait until today? He could have issued a public statement or even made a private call to friends in the media, but he let it survive for over a month that his interpretation was the video. But if he\u2019s now saying, no, no, no, first day out of the box it was terrorism, Greta is saying, if that\u2019s true, why didn\u2019t he later correct the false story before now? <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

He had so much opportunity to correct the record. He had to know what was being said by others in the press and by members of the House and Senate. He could have corrected it publicly or even privately to those who continued the silly story in order to stop them. Why didn\u2019t he? If he knows that it was terrorism. Here\u2019s what she\u2019s getting at. If he knows and if he thought it was terrorism and he\u2019s watching Susan Rice <\/a>out there on the five TV shows say it\u2019s the video, and he\u2019s watching Obama say it\u2019s the video, if he\u2019s watching every Democrat say it\u2019s the video, why not get a statement out, “No, no, no, it\u2019s not the video.” Because the false stories continued after that congressional testimony on the 14th. <\/p>\n

Susan Rice on September 16th on five different shows: It\u2019s the video. Obama went on Letterman: It\u2019s the video. Obama went on The View: It\u2019s the video. Obama at every fundraiser event that he had: It\u2019s the video. And there were countless other times where this video story was spread. So Petraeus had lots and lots and lots of chances to stop this story and correct it, and he didn\u2019t. And so why? Well, I know what you\u2019re yelling at the radio, “Rush, he\u2019s the CIA director. Works for the regime. You can\u2019t go out and undercut the regime.” He did today. “Yeah, but he\u2019s not with the regime now, Rush.” The election\u2019s over. There\u2019s all kinds of reasons.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: Again, timeline. Bill Kristol earlier this week said, quote, “Somebody told me that General Petraeus,” on the Hill that day, September the 14th, “Director Petraeus,” I should say, “said privately to one of the members of Congress, ‘This is what happened in Benghazi. Do you want the official line or do you want the real truth?'” So on September 14th, according to Kristol, Petraeus said to a member of Congress, “You want the official line, or do you want the truth?” If Petraeus had told congressman on September 14th the truth, everybody would have run to the microphones and said the CIA just said that it was a terror attack. <\/p>\n

(interruption)<\/p>\n

You don\u2019t think they would have? Of course they would have. We\u2019re in the middle of a campaign. If Petraeus had told them — and he didn\u2019t. He followed the official line. He told them that it was a video. At the time the video was first mentioned as an excuse, it had 200 views on YouTube, back in June sometime. Now, why didn\u2019t Petraeus object to Al-Qaeda being left out of the talking points? Because there\u2019s another bombshell that\u2019s happened here, and it comes from Peter King. Here it is this morning in Washington, King spoke to reporters about the closed door hearing in which Petraeus testified.<\/p>\n