General David Petraeus tipped over as the head of the CIA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick Donaldson

In another article she is said to have "considered running as a Republican Senator" and yet SPOKE at the DNC????

Another obfuscation!

---

This is probably so that if she's discarded, she was a republican and if she's given shelter and turned into a victim, she was a democrat.

One wonders...


Here's another clue.

Video: David Petraeus' Mistress Paula Broadwell Reveals Possible Reasons Behind Attack of U.S. Embassy in Libya

Share this with a friend


Follow us and never miss a story!

Tweet






http://www.opposingviews.com/sites/d...-Broadwell.jpg By Michael Allen, Mon, November 12, 2012

CIA Director David Petraeus' mistress Paula Broadwell may have been briefed on the truth behind the attack on the U.S. embassy in Benghazi, Libya by Petraeus himself (video below).
During a speech given by Broadwell at the University of Denver alumni symposium on October 26, she spoke of some information never made public about the attack, reports Russia Today.
Broadwell said: "Now I don’t know if a lot of you heard this, but the CIA annex had actually had taken a couple of Libya militia members prisoner. And they think that the attack on the consulate was an effort to try to get these prisoners back. So that’s still being vetted.”

Broadwell's speech was on YouTube until this weekend, but was removed, however, not before copies were made by various sources, including Russia Today.
The CIA denies Broadwell’s claims that it was holding anyone prisoner in Libya.

Broadwell also said a group of Delta Force operators could have been dispatched to provide reinforcement for the Americans in Benghazi, but were not.

WSJ is reporting (According to M. Kelly on FNC) that Patreaus was "pushed out" due to disagreements over Benghazi and NOT over the Affair. Just like I thought.

The Affair was simply leverage. I sincerely hope that he spills the beans.

Watch how fast the white hut will move to discredit him.

Problem is... this is a "CLASSIFIED BRIEFING".

You and me won't know.

Clearances, notwithstanding, neither of US has a "need to know" and only the Senators will get to hear anything, which of course they can't disclose to the public.

It's already effectively covered over.

From WSJ: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...294725084.html


Senate Intelligence Chairman Dianne Feinstein said Sunday she intends to investigate who knew what and when about l'affaire David Petraeus, and rightly so. The facts that are dribbling out suggest that all sorts of people knew about the CIA director's personal predicament—except the President for whom he worked.


If the leaks are correct, the FBI was investigating Mr. Petraeus for months. The unidentified sources claim that the bureau stumbled across the affair when his paramour, Paula Broadwell, sent a threatening email ...

In support of "discrediting the US military":

CBS/AP/ November 15, 2012, 11:31 AM
Leon Panetta orders military ethics review in wake of David Petraeus sex scandal

BANGKOK Citing a string of ethical lapses by senior military officers, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has asked the Joint Chiefs of Staff to review ethics training and to brainstorm on ways to steer officers away from trouble.


The move is a reflection of the depth of concern triggered by a series of misconduct cases in a military that prides itself on integrity and honor but has suffered an unusual number of stumbles after a decade of war.



In a memo to Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Panetta made no explicit reference to the David Petraeus sex scandal, which also has ensnared the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. John Allen.


Previously, Panetta has declined to describe the nature of the emails and other correspondence between Allen and Florida socialite Jill Kelley, which others have called flirtatious and potentially problematic for the Marine four-star general.


Sources have told CBS News that Paula Broadwell, Petraeus' biographer and mistress, allegedly sent an anonymous email to Allen warning him that Kelley was "a seductress."


Panetta's press secretary, George Little, said the memo was the product of internal Pentagon discussions that began before Petraeus announced he was resigning as CIA director because of an extramarital affair.


"I will emphasize very strongly that the secretary was going to embark on this course long before the matters that have come to light over the past week," Little said. He added that Panetta believes the vast majority of senior military officers serve with distinction and in accordance with ethical standards.


Panetta mentioned no specific cases of officer misconduct but noted in his memo to Dempsey that, "as has happened recently, when lapses occur, they have the potential to erode public confidence in our leadership and in our system for the enforcement of our high ethical standards. Worse, they can be detrimental to the execution of our mission to defend the American people."


A number of senior officers have faced disciplinary action this year for misconduct, including Gen. William "Kip" Ward, who was reduced in rank from four stars to three this week after investigators determined that he had misused government funds for lavish spending while commanding U.S. Africa Command.


Panetta told Dempsey to work with the chiefs of the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps to review ethics training for officers to determine whether they are adequate, and to provide views on "how to better foster a culture of value-based decision-making and stewardship" among senior officers and their staffs. That is another way of saying Panetta wants a game plan for ending the string of bad behavior.


He said the initial results of the chiefs' review, along with their recommendations, should be ready in time for Panetta to report to President Obama by Dec. 1. The text of the Panetta memo, which he signed on Wednesday, was provided Thursday to reporters traveling with the Pentagon chief, who was in Bangkok for talks with senior Thai government officials in advance of Mr. Obama's visit here this weekend.


"Beyond mere compliance with the rules, I also expect senior officers and civilian executives to exercise sound judgment in their stewardship of government resources and in their personal conduct," Panetta said. "An action may be legally permissible but neither advisable nor wise."


Panetta said he intends to raise these issues in a meeting next month with all of the military service chiefs, the services' civilian leaders and the generals and admirals who lead major commands like U.S. Central Command.


Dempsey said Thursday that he has been concerned for many months about an apparent slip in ethical standards within the military — both in the officer corps and in the enlisted ranks. In an interview with the Pentagon's internal news service, American Forces Press Service, Dempsey said he noticed disturbing trends last spring.


"In response to these issues I have communicated through a memorandum to every four-star in every service," Dempsey said. "I expressed my concern and encouraged their interest and their active involvement in helping us to understand what really is going on and what's not."


Ethics issues associated with the Petraeus and Allen matters were raised during Panetta's joint news conference Thursday with his Thai counterpart, Sukampol Suwannathat. The two spoke to reporters after signing an update to a 1962 U.S.-Thai statement framing the security relationship. The United States and Thailand are treaty allies — a relationship that Washington sees as a cornerstone of its security interests in Asia.


Panetta said he knows of no other senior U.S. military officers being linked to the Petraeus investigation, and he said he retains "tremendous confidence" in Allen.


"I am not aware of any others that could be involved in this issue at the present time," he said, adding that he wanted the American public to understand that the vast majority of military officers serve ethically.


"One thing I do demand," he said, "is that those who seek to protect this country operate by the highest ethical standards."


Asked whether any of the emails between Allen and Kelley are sexually explicit, Panetta said, "What I don't want to do is to try to characterize those communications because I don't want to do anything" to limit the ability of the Pentagon inspector general to conduct an objective review of the Allen matter.


Panetta ordered the investigation Monday after the FBI referred the matter to the Pentagon's top lawyer. Allen issued a statement through his lawyer saying he is committed to cooperating fully with the investigation.


Panetta also told reporters he could not rule out the possibility that the Taliban in Afghanistan would try to use Petraeus' admission of the affair for propaganda purposes. Petraeus, who resigned Friday from his post as CIA director, was Allen's predecessor as top commander in Afghanistan, leaving in summer 2011.


Panetta is the first U.S. defense secretary to visit Thailand since 2008. The U.S. has no troops permanently stationed in Thailand but it conducts regular exercises with the Thai military and has numerous other forms of cooperation.

Man, you have to ask yourself...was it worth it? Would you throw it all away for that luscious pair of ...well, you get the picture.

Patrice O'neal does a great bit on Cheating.

Pictures would be better than a literal description anyway... /chuckles

Silencing General Petraeus

By Judge Andrew P. Napolitano
Published November 15, 2012
FoxNews.com

The evidence that Gen. David Petraeus, formerly the commander of US troops in Afghanistan, the author of the current Army field manual, Princeton Ph.D. and, until last week, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, was forced to resign from the CIA to silence him is far stronger than is the version of events that the Obama administration has given us.

The government would have us believe that because the FBI confronted Petraeus with his emails showing a pattern of inappropriate personal private behavior, he voluntarily departed his job as the country’s chief spy to avoid embarrassment. The government would also have us believe that the existence of the general’s relationship with Paula Broadwell, an unknown military scholar who wrote a book about him last year, was recently and inadvertently discovered by the FBI while it was conducting an investigation into an alleged threat made by Broadwell to another woman. And the government would as well have us believe that the president learned of all this at 5 p.m. on Election Day.

We now know that the existence of a personal relationship between Broadwell and Petraeus had been suspected and whispered about by his senior-level colleagues and by his personal staff in the military, who worried that it might become publicly known, since before the time that he came to run the CIA.

It’s obvious that someone was out to silence Petraeus. Who could believe the government version of all this?

-



We also know that when he was nominated to run the CIA, that nomination was preceded by a two-month FBI-conducted background check that likely would have revealed the existence of his relationship with Broadwell. The FBI agents conducting that background check surely would have seen his visitor logs while he commanded our troops and would have interviewed his military colleagues and regular visitors and those colleagues who knew him well and worked with him every day, and thus learned about his personal life. That’s their job.

And that information would have been reported immediately to President Obama and to the Senate Intelligence Committee, prior to Petraeus’ formal nomination and prior to his Senate confirmation hearing.

In the modern era, office-holders with forgiving spouses simply do not resign from powerful jobs because of a temporary, non-criminal, consensual adult sexual liaison, as the history of the FDR, Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, and Clinton presidencies attest. So, why is Petraeus different? Someone wants to silence him.

Gen. Petraeus told the Senate and House Intelligence Committees on Sept. 14, 2012 that the mob attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, three days earlier, was a spontaneous reaction of Libyans angered over a YouTube clip some believed insulted the prophet Muhammed. He even referred to that assault -- which resulted in the murders of four Americans, now all thought to have been CIA agents -- as a “flash mob.” His scheduled secret testimony this week before the same congressional committees will produce a chastened, diminished Petraeus who will be confronted with a mountain of evidence contradicting his September testimony, perhaps exposing him to charges of perjury or lying to Congress and causing substantial embarrassment to the president.

It’s obvious that someone was out to silence Petraeus. Who could believe the government version of all this? The same government that wants us to believe that FBI agents innocently and accidentally discovered the Petraeus/Broadwell affair a few months ago and confronted Petraeus with his emails a few weeks ago is a cauldron of petty jealousies. From the time of its creation in 1947, the CIA has been a bitter rival of the FBI. The two agencies are both equipped with lethal force, they both often operate outside the law, and they are each seriously potent entities. Their rivalry was tempered by federal laws that until 2001 kept the CIA from operating in the U.S. and the FBI from operating outside the U.S.

In one of his many overreactions to the events of 9/11, however, President George W. Bush changed all that with an ill-conceived executive order that unlawfully unleashed the CIA inside the US and the FBI into foreign countries. Rather than facilitating a cooperative spirit in defense of individual freedom and national security, this reignited their rivalry. FBI agents, for example, publicly exposed CIA agents whom they caught torturing detainees at Gitmo, and Bush was forced to restrain the CIA.

Isn’t it odd that FBI agents would be reading the emails of the CIA director to his mistress and that the director of the FBI, who briefs the president weekly, did not make the president aware of this? The FBI could only lawfully spy on Petraeus by the use of a search warrant, and it could only get a search warrant if its agents persuaded a federal judge that Petraeus himself -- not his mistress -- was involved in criminal behavior under federal law.

The agents also could have bypassed the federal courts and written their own search warrant under the Patriot Act, but only if they could satisfy themselves (a curious and unconstitutional standard) that the general was involved in terror-related activity. Both preconditions for a search warrant are irrelevant and would be absurd in this case.

All this -- the FBI spying on the CIA -- constitutes the government attacking itself. Anyone who did this when neither federal criminal law nor national security has been implicated and kept the president in the dark has violated about four federal statutes and should be fired and indicted. The general may be a cad and a bad husband, but he has the same constitutional rights as the rest of us.

No keen observer could believe the government’s Pollyanna version of these events. When did the CIA become a paragon of honesty? When did the FBI become a paragon of transparency? When did the government become a paragon of telling the truth?Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel. Judge Napolitano has written six books on the U.S. Constitution. His latest is “ It is Dangerous To Be Right When the Government Is Wrong: The Case for Personal Freedomhttp://global.fncstatic.com/static/v...ernal-link.png.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/...#ixzz2CJyd4GXa

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick Donaldson

Pictures would be better than a literal description anyway... /chuckles

---

Ya got any? She's about a 9 on the MILF scale.

Not yet.... lol

I am loathe to make this prediction, but as Petraeus is set to testify tomorrow, I have to wonder if he will be found having "committed suicide" over being "distraught over the scandal". If reports are true and he will tell the truth, he is a liability to the White House, though I am sure the WH will claim his credibility is questionable.

He will tell the truth. The man is HONORABLE. He quit his job because of the situation... I don't believe he would do anything so rash to himself.... there are ways to Vince Foster someone though I am sure. But I have a feeling he won't go down without a fight.

You can bet your ass *I* wouldn't.

I noted someone changed the title. LOL

Rick, I was being very subtle. I for no instant believe he would actually take his own life and though he has had some mixed political baggage, the fact remains he is an honorable soldier. That I respect. His cheat sessions setup or naturally occurring are certainly about personal weakness and character in that area of life, but as a solider, he is a man I do honor. He will tell the truth and that is why I say he is a threat to the White House. I will be very saddened if he lies.

CBS News/ November 16, 2012, 6:15 AM
Petraeus testifying behind closed doors on Benghazi today

http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/201...10_620x350.jpg
U.S. Army Gen. David Petraeus, then-CENTCOM Commander, participates in a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Capitol Hill, December 9, 2009 in Washington, DC. / AP Photo/Mark Wilson



Updated 8:30 a.m. ET

Gen. David Petraeus is testifying before the House and Senate Intelligence Committees on the Libya embassy attack this morning, despite the ongoing FBI investigation into an extramarital affair that led to his resignation as director of the CIA.

http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/201...AN_220x157.jpg

Play Video
Petraeus to answer to Congress on Benghazi attack


The hearings are taking place early this morning in secure rooms in the U.S. Capitol - the House meeting began at 7:30 a.m. and the Senate hearing begins at 9 a.m. - and are closed to the public and the media. Petraeus is expected to answer questions about the CIA's knowledge and handling of the assault on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi that left U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead. Two of those Americans were with the CIA.


It was unclear at first whether or not Petraeus would testify at all on Capitol Hill at all, after he abruptly resigned from the agency amid news of his affair with biographer Broadwell.


Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calf., chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said on Wednesday that the focus of the hearing is specifically about the events in Libya, not the affair that led to his resignation.


"It's just on Benghazi. Our hearings are on Benghazi and the intelligence that preceded Benghazi and the intelligence that determined security," she told reporters.

• Timeline: How Benghazi attack, probe unfolded

Congressional investigators get access to telegrams, intelligence reports, and classified emails as they interview top security and Pentagon officials. Sources tell CBS News' Margaret Brennan that intelligence officials will show footage from an unmanned surveillance drone that was overhead during the assault.


The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which has oversight of the State Department, has already been briefed about the attack by Under Secretary Patrick Kennedy and Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security Eric Boswell.

Petraeus Scandal Reveals Massive Islamic Infiltration In Obama Administration


Jill Khawam Kelley was the hand-picked lobbyist for Muslim nations and their agenda at Central Command

Kelley, who is part of the soap opera that the Petraeus scandal spawned, was in charge of hosting parties and social events to push the Islamic agenda of Middle Eastern countries. She was seen by Muslim Mid-East nations, especially Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon, as the “go to” woman to push their agenda on top American generals. She was a lobbyist for their cause and, yet, wasn’t required to register as a lobbyist, like all others who host lavish parties for top American officials, like she did, in an attempt to influence U.S. policy in the Middle East.

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/...slim-obama.jpg
Gen. David Petraeus with the Arab Nations’ Agent of Influence at Central Command, Jill Kelley

Kelley, a dhimmi Christian Arab of Lebanese descent, was well known in the Muslim Arab embassies of Washington for doing their bidding and hosting their parties at and near MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, where our nation’s top generals are based. It’s where Central Command–the U.S. Armed Forces’ leadership over wars and military personnel Middle East–is headquartered.

When a friend of mine said that he thought the financially troubled Khawam sisters, Kelley and Natalie Khawam, were spies for Lebanon and the Arab world, I originally expressed skepticism. I believed that these twin sisters with obvious twin nose jobs were merely bimbo gold diggers in slutty outfits, who used their Delilah ways to first nab rich husbands, and then nab idiotic top American generals to participate in Lifetime-Channel-worthy bitter child custody disputes. But then I learned that Ms. Kelley, who was until this week under the radar, was quietly involved in pushing the agenda of Muslim Arab nations on our nation’s top generals with whom she’d grown close by design. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Ms. Kelley got her hooks into our two top generals in the Middle East, David Petraeus and John Allen. I’m now convinced that my friend, lawyer Gary Welsh of Advance Indiana, who has excellent instincts, was correct.

I’ve long written about the infiltration of Central Command at MacDill Air Base in Tampa by Islamic terrorists. Islamic Jihad founder and convicted Islamic terrorist, Sami Al-Arian, was an instructor on the Middle East to our top generals at MacDill Air Force Base AT THE VERY SAME TIME that he was planning mergers and terrorist attacks in Israel with “the brothers of HAMAS” and while he was bringing Muslim illegal alien Islamic terrorists to the U.S. Al-Arian’s friend and co-conspirator, Ramadan Abdullah Shallah (one of those Al-Arian brought here), who became the Secretary-General of the worldwide Islamic Jihad terrorist group, was also a lecturer at MacDill and also taught our top generals his poisonous views on the Middle East and Israel. FBI and INS agents who investigated Shallah and Al-Arian were alarmed at the influence these two top Islamic terrorists had over CentCom. They were also alarmed to find many books on the inner workings of MacDill in Shallah’s house when they raided it.

So when people ask me how I think these women were able to insert themselves into top generals’ lives and topple them (along with, apparently, the men they married), I think back to the fact that our top generals gladly allowed top terrorists to infiltrate Central Command as alleged “professors” on the Middle East. And when generals like Petraeus and Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr. openly attack Israel and America’s relationship with Israel, people like Jill Khawam Kelley and Al-Arian and Shallah are the reason why. Khawam Kelley isn’t an innocent socialite. She’s an agent of influence for Arab Muslim nations.

The Washington Post reports:

A military officer who is a former member of Petraeus’s staff said Kelley was a “self-appointed” go-between for Central Command officers with Lebanese and other Middle Eastern officials. . . . At the parties Jill Kelley hosted at her Tampa mansion, guests were frequently treated to the indulgences of celebrity life: valet parking, string quartets on the lawn, premium cigars and champagne, and caviar-laden buffets.

The main recipients of the largess were military brass — including some of the nation’s most senior commanders — based at nearby MacDill Air Force Base.

Kelley flaunted her access to these military VIPs. . . . The investigations of Petraeus’s and Allen’s actions, nonetheless, have raised questions about how Kelley, a woman with no formal military role, cultivated such close ties to two of the nation’s most revered generals.

One former aide to Allen, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity given the sensitivity of the case, suggested that Kelley had become a de facto social ambassador among high-ranking personnel at MacDill, home to the U.S. Central Command and Special Operations Command.

The Wall Street Journal reports:

Middle Eastern diplomats in Washington also knew Ms. Kelley, who came from a Lebanese immigrant family and who helped arrange social activities when dignitaries from the region visited Tampa, diplomats said. She also sometimes attended parties at Washington embassies.

I guarantee you that Jill Khawam Kelley wasn’t hosting visits from dignitaries from Israel. And, other than those from Israel, every single “Middle Eastern diplomat” in Washington is a Muslim, most of them Muslim Arabs. And all of them Muslims with an agenda that is anti-Israel and anti-Western. And definitely not in America’s best interests. They come to Tampa for one reason and one reason only–to ingratiate themselves with the top military brass at CentCom at MacDill.

And Jill Khawam Kelley was their social director in that mission.

Kelley’s sister, Natalie Khawam, was married to a top Bush administration official, Grayson Wolfe, Director of Broader Middle East Initiatives and Iraqi Reconstruction at the Export-Import Bank of the United States, and frequently accompanied him on trips to the Middle East, including to Pakistan. Before that position, Wolfe was the Bush-installed Manager of the Private Sector Development Office of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad, Iraq. How many of the Khawam’s insider Arab Muslim friends did he give sweetheart contracts to? Before It’s News has more and asks more questions about the consulting and contracting firm that Wolfe now heads. Although they are now embroiled in a bitter custody fight over their son, you have to wonder what influence Khawam had on him and what was done in the Middle East. She recently sued her former employer, a Jewish lawyer, Barry Cohen, but gave up after her lawsuit was shown to be phony. Cohen struck back and found that Khawam engaged in bankruptcy fraud.

My friend wasn’t so far-fetched when he insisted the Khawam chicks are modern day Mata Haris for the Muslim Arabs.
Just look at what they’ve accomplished for the Muslim Mid-East, all of it under the radar . . . until Paula Broadwell had the stupidity to send her threatening e-mails and Jill Khawam Kelley had the stupidity of complaining about it to shirtless FBI agent Frederic Humphries. source – Debbie Schlussel

I heard last night she was "of Lebanese Descent" - meant to mention it, but was doing some other things at the time...

Jill Khawam Kelley, huh? She should be sent far far away as a security risk. Just looking at her smarmy, arrogant face makes my skin crawl.

I thought the same thing. She's got a lot of "arrogance" going on in every shot of her I've seen thus far. A few of the images show her smiling, most of them show some hint that she's "above" all this and doesn't grasp what is happening...

According to what I am about to post, this was a COVERUP like you couldn't believe (Not the affair, that's a nothing as far as I am concerned... it's the deaths that were being covered up)


By Stephanie Condon /
CBS News/ November 16, 2012, 9:29 AM
Rep. King: CIA story on Benghazi changed

Former CIA Director David Petraeus told the House Intelligence Committee today that it's unclear why the Obama administration's original talking points on the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, don't match the CIA's original talking points.

http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/201...16_220x157.jpg

Play Video
Petraeus testified CIA story on Benghazi changed, King says


House Intelligence Committee member Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., told reporters that Petraeus insisted today that he was clear with Congress from the start that the event was a terrorist attack. However, King added, Petraeus said that after the CIA prepared its talking points, they were vetted by agencies including the Justice Department and the State Department, but "no one knows yet exactly who came up with the final talking points."


"The original talking points prepared by the CIA were different than the final ones put out," King said. Originally, he said, they were "much more specific on al Qaeda involvement."


The talking points are a source of controversy because U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice used them to describe the nature of the attack on CBS' "Face the Nation" and other shows on Sept. 16. Republicans have attacked Rice, who is considered a possible nominee to replace Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, for suggesting the attack was the result of spontaneous protests.


CBS News obtained the vetted CIA talking points given both to Rice and members of the House intelligence committee on Sept. 15, and they make no reference to terrorism being a likely factor in the assault.


Petraeus briefed lawmakers on Sept. 14 about the Benghazi attack, and at that time, King said, Petraeus attributed the Sept. 11 attack to a spontaneous uprising spurred by backlash against an anti-Muslim video.

• Lawmakers get first look at Benghazi attack video
• Timeline: How Benghazi attack probe unfolded

King said that Petraeus and the intelligence community gave that explanation "based on reports they were getting at the time."


However, King added, "They also at the time -- prior to Sept. 14 -- also had information there was involvement of al Qaeda affiliates, and that was not made clear in their presentation."


Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, D-Md., didn't agree with King's take on Petraeus' Sept. 14 testimony.


Ruppersberger told reporters after the hearing, "My recollection was ... [Petraeus said] it was the result of the protest... but he also said in the group there were some extremists and some were al Qaeda affiliates."


King said the hearing was "cordial" and that Petraeus' recent resignation, prompted by his extramarital affair with his biographer Paula Broadwell, was only briefly addressed at the beginning of the hearing.


It was "made clear at the start that would not be the focus of the questioning," King said.


"The only thing he did in the beginning of his testimony is he did express deep regret to the committee for the circumstances for his depature" and reassure the committee that the Libya attacks had nothing to do with his resignation, said Rep. Jim Langevin, D-R.I.


The original version of this article identified Rep. King as the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. He's the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee.