Fox News
Expand
Browse All Video
Watch Live

You're watching...

What does Petraeus' testimony mean for Benghazi probe?

Details

  • Description

    Former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales weighs in

  • Duration 4:40
  • Date

Clips

Also in this playlist...

Editor's Picks

Auto-advance: ON

Auto-advance
View All

Transcript

This transcript is automatically generated

In General Petraeus is a key part in unraveling the questions behind the big -- terrorist attacks.

But what may be equally important is whether or not the current scandal.

Don't Petraeus is embroiled in that will in any way impede the release of information on the -- Gaza terror attack joining us now former US attorney general Alberto.

He says it's critical from the truth to come out thank you so much for joining us -- to have you here today.

It's going to be with you.

Talk for a moment about what transpired over the last -- week or so do you think that's.

Eric Holder hadn't.

An obligation.

To let President Obama know that there was an investigation going on over.

The CIA about General Petraeus and that he should not -- this information until after the election.

-- it -- for others to decide whether or not there was an obligation whether the allegations -- breach I'm not from my perspective.

This is something that I would have told President Bush because.

You know the president is also responsible for -- of our country.

For each of the agencies including the CIA for the appointment of David Petraeus.

And I think that he would have wanted to know that someone who is in charge of and I'm most of our nation's secrets.

Had exercised extremely poor judgment I think it's a bit of information that the president -- who would want to know.

About the CIA director I spoke with two former white house -- just last night about this and they both agree that they would have expected.

The attorney general to notify the white house of this kind of information.

What do you make of the testimony this week up from General Petraeus in those closed door sessions that are taking place in congress obviously we don't know.

All the exact details of what he told members of congress but some of the details have been coming out.

And the fact that -- claims it's he called this terrorist act from the beginning and someone.

May have added his talking points.

Well first thought you know you would add to lead and has talked about what's gone on in Israel that's extremely important and this that debating -- story is he's equally and an important and that's important for.

I think it for the congress to understand what exactly happened here and get to the bottom of this and that the American people know what happened -- of these four brave.

Americans who were killed.

Clearly -- you know it in this kind of attack overseas.

They're going to be conflicting stories.

In the beginning oftentimes initial stories are wrong.

What's interesting here though is that everyone seems to everyone seems to agree yes it was terrorism attack and yes we knew fairly -- early on there was a terrorism attack.

But for some reason some people refused to.

Refer to this as a possible possible terrorist attack and only talked about the fact that this was a response to this video why for example Susan Rice.

We've come out of the family and said said this was a response to the video.

And not talk about the possibility it was all that it might also be -- terrorism attack that's something that that I don't understand and I'm hopeful that congress.

We'll ask questions and get to the bottom of that question.

It's also -- clear why the White House continued to.

Say that it was a video that was responsible for.

The attack on the conflict as well days after the fact days after it was now known that -- -- apartment was monitoring the situation in real time.

And it was no more than 24 hours.

That disk was an act by people who work targeting the consulate.

And I understand that there may have been a second stream of intelligence that may have.

May have -- pointed toward this video as a possible basis for the attacks but to not talk about both.

Then it to me it is surprising and I think that's a question.

The members of congress to get to the bottom -- really quickly do you think we're at -- it ultimately get to the bottom of the situation do you think there should be a select committee for example to.

Ultimately.

-- prevail in the situation.

Well I've heard your previous guests and give them both sides of that that response.

-- perspective is this is this is -- responsible if congress.

Congressional is -- decide what is what is best here.

The I think the American people -- I think they're getting frustrated by virtue of the fact it's been two months and we still don't know exactly what happened here.

-- I think these hearings are important step forward and let's just I think we need to see how these you know what comes out -- these hearings.

And congress shall make some decisions about you know what's the best -- -- forward.

Stick to find out what happened -- -- always great to have you here thank you so much for joining -- for your insight we appreciate it.

You bet thanks for having me.

Load More