This is far more interesting than some of the other "reporting" we´ve seen today.

Explains his family´s relationship with the Kelleys (which goes way back).

Explains the shirtless photo sent years ago as a family prank (and what a ridiculous news picup that was!).

Explains how he became frustrated when he thought the investigation was going nowhere, so got to Eric Cantor through an intermediary.

Obie confirmed in his presser today things that had been speculated since 9/11. Susan Rice was doing a presentation when she appeared on the Sunday shows. She knew nothing about Benghazi, was just relaying intel she had been given (by whom?). "Don´t go after her, go after me!"

As Charles Krauthammer just said, he will regret some of the things he volunteered today when he panicked.

NOT without authorization from higher ups, he didn´t.
WHO gave the go-ahead? Eric Holder? The WH ?

I would love to see the time stamps on the general´s email exchanges, just to determine how they were spending their working hours.

Why was the UN ambassador sent to Sunday talk shows in the first place? It is the Secretary of State who oversees embassies and consulate personnel. Very strange selection by Zero.

If only we had more Agent Humphries. Had he not gone to Canter we still might not know about Petraeus. Agent Humphries may have a good case of retaliation under the Whistleblowers act. How did the FBI respond? By leaking a story about a photo, leaving the impression that it was recently sent and was sexual in nature. That´s it. Kill the messenger. His career is over. Another guy unemployed thanks to Obama.

Another guy who better avoid DC parks and any midnight walks in his neighborhood. I bet he knows way too much about who our real enemies are and B0 is attempting to neutralize him.

NYT´s fluff piece, to claim they are investigating the sex scandal, NOT Benghazi.

In what kind of "social relationships of families" do people send shirtless photos of themselves? This is just bizarre!

Anthony Weiner was also in a social relationship with people on social pages, was´t he?

The "shirtless" photo of him was taken posing between two shooting range targets. Apparently the families exchanged goofy photos once in a while.

Some are following the media´s kneejerk reaction to this information and have jumped to its being some kind of thing going on with Jill Kelley. How gullible we are, how eager we are to believe the worst at even a hint from the media. I thought we were smarter than that around here?

The media is on this story (predictably) like rabid dogs. If only they saw the need to expose a certain party before and now. Good luck on that!

That press conference was beyond creepy. The fawning press, especially the woman who seemed to want to get really close to the Prez.. and then the spirited defense of Susan Ric.

What was up with that? I´ve never seen him so passionate and roused out of his usual sleepy lethargy. And calling out two senators by name.

I wish I thought he would regret it, but he won´t. He will never be held accountable.

he sure wont be held accountable...
just look at the contradiction here...
tells Susan Rice to go out and push the video lie...but tells Romney in a debate that he used the word Terrorist while giving a talk from the Rose Garden regarding the Benghazie attack..
He is using two different explanations..and getting away with it.....

Senators McCain and Graham routinely drive us all to distraction, but Obama is stupider than I thought if he thinks they can´t hurt him.

I don´t believe a word of it

You´ve never asked yourself the essential question ...

"Why tell us?"

All should note that this report is coming from the New York Times. Nothing in the New York Times is to be believed without confirmation from a reliable source.

The media´s embrace of the "shirtless photo", with a purposely absent timeline reminds me of the trashing of the women from Clinton´s past.

If you go up against the libs, the press will punish you by maligning you and lying about you. Thanks to the "moron majority" that surround us, this works pretty well to erase the facts that were brought forward at great cost.

Not so sure the admin. would want to mess with this dude. Judging from the MacDill incident he knows to bring a gun to a knife-fight.

FTA, this sayes a lot: He has conservative political views and a reputation for being aggressive, they said. He clearly doesn´t fit in with Panetta´s and Petraus´s sissified, lavender loafered Army.

Re #8, here´s that now-infamous shirtless pic. He sent it to several friends, including one who is a Seattle Times reporter:

This photograph shows FBI Special Agent Frederick W. Humphries posing with target dummies following a SWAT practice. This is the "shirtless image" that has been alluded to in the investigation into emails that led to the resignation of CIA Director David Petraeus. Humphries sent the 2010 photograph to many people, including Tampa socialite Jill Kelley and a reporter at The Seattle Times.

http://seattletimes.com/ABPub/zoom/html/2019688946.html

Wow! This is dynamite!!! /s

Agree, #4. Note how 0bama phrases his answers. He said that Susan Rice was sent by "the White House" to do the press conferences, yet she "had nothing to do with Benghazi" (again, 0bama´s words). Who in "the White House" sent her?