November 12, 2012 at 8:29 pm #605566November 12, 2012 at 8:32 pm #777189
because it put him in a compromising situation regarding the CIA…you know, that blackmail thing …he’s supposed to know better than that. But..he is, like all of us only human.November 12, 2012 at 8:42 pm #777190
Hmm. I guess the blackmail thing makes sense. Seems to me like he could admit the affair (no blackmail opportunity) and continue to do his job.November 12, 2012 at 8:52 pm #777191
My impression was that the fact he used a non-secure gmail account was a problem. Hackers could get into that account and possibly get other information that would allow them to hack into CIA accounts. Bad judgement on his part.November 12, 2012 at 8:59 pm #777192
There was an article I read this morning that indicated nothing he did was illegal. Just not in good form. I think they are looking to see if the affair started while he was still active military. I heard that could be an issue.November 12, 2012 at 9:22 pm #777193
Many things were done wrong. First a civilian had access to his personal CIA e-mail account, Her letters to the yet another “woman” also went via internal government e-mail. That is in itself a security breach. Second, while few can rise to the levels of trust and security… his oath of allegiances included the one to his wife. Second, when you are a spook, you are required to self report if you are a philanderer. In this case the law requires that any senior intelligence officer who may be compromised, is immediately reported to the Senate … by the FBI… which it now appears, like most of the record of this DOJ, did not do at the insistance of the White House. I guess skeeter, the solemn oath of a trusted intelligence officer means nothing? He made two of them… one included the one to his wife. And his children… nice way to protect the two young children of his paramour too… standing up for the family. No, the head of Centcom, CIA is not like all of us. That’s why we don’t tolerate men of no honor. Pillow talk is old espionage trade craft. This administration lacks a moral compass. Hope he enjoyed it. She is a pig, he is a dog. The FBI it now seems was told not to report until after the election.. like Benghazi… what a dream team.November 12, 2012 at 9:37 pm #777194
Well now I’m really curious. If he did indeed break the law, then that’s a whole other matter.November 12, 2012 at 9:52 pm #777195
Kootch is wrong. His CIA email was not compromised, nor was his personal gmail account. It started as an FBI investigation into a cyber harassment charge, which let them to Broadwell’s email account, which revealed the affair.
“The FBI investigation found only a personal drama and no security issues connected to the affair, and no charges are expected, reports CBS News correspondent Bob Orr.”
And, congress can absolutely still compel him to testify about Benghazi even after he has resigned. They can and they will.
At question, from my understanding, is what level of access Broadwell was improperly granted as a biographer, private citizen and secret mistress.November 12, 2012 at 10:18 pm #777196
So, kootch, is it your view that the crumbling of Petraeus’ honor is the result of him becoming a member of the Obama administration? Fascinating, does the losening of morals work like cooties, or ringworm? Can you get it from a toilet seat?
What is interesting to me about this tempest-in-a-teapot over filandering, is that a FBI agent told Dave Reichert about it first, and then, on Reichert’s advice, told Eric Cantor.
Sounds like the long knives were out for General Dave, I guess he’s just not a Washington player.
Tom Delay only spanked lobbyists for working with the Democrats, now the Rs will pummel one of their own who works for the other side. And a big deal military hero, at that.November 12, 2012 at 10:34 pm #777197
And they ‘re trying to link prior knowledge about Benghazi somehow to all of this. Yeah, right. It’s all an evil conspiracy. Kootch, you will stoop to anything to make Obama the devil incarnate. Your guy lost fair and square – get over it!November 12, 2012 at 11:48 pm #777198
Affairs are considered blackmail material, as is debt. So was being gay, while that was still illegal. So having a blackmail vulnerability is very bad for someone in a sensitive position, even if it’s nothing illegal and is not being exploited.
I’m not sure what the position is once the supposed blackmail material is revealed. Could Petraeus have simply told the President and his wife, taken his lumps from her, and stayed on?November 13, 2012 at 12:52 am #777199
In 1942 John F. Kennedy was having an affair with a married woman. Her name was Inga Arvad, a columnist for the The Washington Post. The juicy gossip caught J. Edgar Hoover’s eye because Arvad was a former Nazi sympathizer and a suspected spy. The FBI had had her house bugged for months.
It is said that Kennedy’s notorious father, Joe, was worried about the damage to his son’s future prospects, and the result was a deal with Hoover that got young Lt.j.g. JFK assinged to PT-109, a dangerous assignment which allowed Kennedy to rise to hero status, with a bad back from a torpedo attack.
I guess JFK could never have become Director of the CIA, too bad for him.November 13, 2012 at 12:53 am #777200
As historian Juan Cole explained on today’s Democracy Now!, Petraeus was in a no-win situation due to the failure of the counterinsurgency in Iraq and Afghanistan. I’m guessing he needed to take the fall for that, but couldn’t go down for the failure of the counterinsurgency since that would have called the last 11 years of U.S. foreign policy into question, including, and most importantly, those years when Obama was in charge. So they dug up an affair and had him fall on that sword.
Read/watch here:November 13, 2012 at 1:31 am #777201
My question is why do all of these supposedly intelligent people leave e-mail trails of their transgressions? Is it arrogance or are they not as smart as we’ve been led to believe?November 13, 2012 at 1:55 am #777202November 13, 2012 at 1:55 am #777203
Re: JFK’s sexual indiscretions (#12)
They didn’t end in 1942 but continued (probably without interruption) until his assassination. One of them was Judith Exner, a woman connected to the mafia.
So yeah. I think you could make a case that JFK was a security risk. Doesn’t mean he was a bad Prez. But he was known to take stupid risks, and his sexual affairs are proof of that. (See also: “Bay of Pigs”)
But here’s another historical titbit for ya, and this one should put to rest the idea that who the POTUS sleeps with isn’t anyone’s business but his own . . .
After being elected President, JFK thought he might like to get him a new FBI director.
Huh-uh. Nothing doing. J. Edgar calmly explained to him that if he got fired, he’d call the press and hand them the “Kennedy File.”
So that meant the country was stuck with J. Edgar.
Which meant that the country was also stuck with Hoover’s “COINTELPRO” domestic spying program, which was being used to harass Martin Luther King and other Black leaders whom Hoover considered to be communists.
All because ole JFK couldn’t keep his pecker in his pocket.*
Still think this shit isn’t important?
*I’m not letting the other Presidents off the hook here. Hoover probably had the goods on all of them.November 13, 2012 at 2:02 am #777204
That’s a bit of circular argument, isn’t it DBP?
J. Edgar Hoover has “the goods” on presidents and other officials because he knows about their sex lives (and other minutiae). So, don’t have sex where JEH doesn’t want you to, particularly with Clyde Tolson.
How about just telling gossips like Hoover that we don’t give a damn.
I know I don’t give.
Keeping peckers in pants isn’t the problem, the problem is irritating snoops who keep gossiping.November 13, 2012 at 3:06 am #777205
Maybe in some fantasy world – mine for example – you can shtup whomever you want without consequence. But in the real world, it’s never worked out.
BTW, JFK wasn’t worried about JEH. He was worried about JQP. And rightly so.November 13, 2012 at 3:34 am #777206
Well, of course not, but you career and livelyhood shouldn’t be at risk for being human.
Is that the “real world” you seem perfectly comforatble with?
Since, from what I gather, the supposed character and moral fiber of the fallen is what is at issue.
Why does a guy who, basically, kills for living need to be so upright in the sex department? Is snuff to be enough?November 13, 2012 at 3:50 am #777207
Inspired by c@lbob’s last paragraph, I find it interesting that killing on the scale of a CIA director is celebrated, yet “cheating” on a spouse of many years will get you fired. Homo Sapiens is not biologically monogamous, yet that is the urge we are supposed to repress, with the urge to kill fellow human beings institutionalized. I know which one I would like to see more of in the world and which should carry virtually no penalties.November 13, 2012 at 4:20 am #777208
Imagine a world where Supreme Allied Commander and President Dwight Eisenhower had resigned because he was banging his driver.
Es könnte sehr unterschiedlich gewesen sein.
There was a time when a General’s worth was judged by his performance in the field. He wasn’t hired to be a good husband, he was hired to get a job done.
I would much rather have a leader who produces results and cheats on his wife that one who is a faithful failure. But that’s just me.
Of course, with the nature of the CIA, he has been compromised.
It is weird to me that he has enough professional integrity to remove himself (as he was not fired), but lacks the personal integrity to find himself here in the first place.November 13, 2012 at 5:45 am #777209
I give him credit. He was human and made a mistake. He did not lie that he had the affair (as many others would or have. ((Hi Bill))). I looked up the CIA code of ethics. He broke them.
There are a lot of levels to this. I want to know what Dave Reichert’s thoughts on this are. One FBI agent passed along information which then went to Cantor, after the FBI agent ended up being taken off the case. But he kept Reichert apprised of more information. Should be interesting.
I will add this. What is wrong for holding people accountable for their actions? Or has political correctness erased those standards too?!November 13, 2012 at 5:56 am #777210
This originally had nothing to do with him. It started with an investigation of harrassing emails from one woman to another…and in the end, this came out. The investigation was never about him, and he did nothing illegal But ultimately this is all resting on his shoulders. What about the woman he was sleeping with, who sent the emails saying “stay away from my man” Therein lies the problem. She did this to him by being a lovesick b*tch. Definitely not the roll of the “other woman”. If you’re going to play at that game, you have to realize what it is that you’re playing. Or don’t play at that game.
Bad stuff all around…and makes me wonder about Petraeus’ judgement, if he didn’t realize that she would do something like that. No, he let his tiny brain fog up his judgement…and it raises a lot of questions about his judgement in general…November 13, 2012 at 6:40 am #777211
oh the old democratic washing machine is in spin cycle. Well so far today, the FBI has found classified documents on her computer. Much the eternal humiliation of her husband and children… they raided their house and took her computers. Then, we find.. (just to keep you updated) she announces at U of CO seminar, that shades of Dubya, the CIA has a little detention program going in Benghazi.. against executive order… 13941, This ‘everything is a-ok” spin in Libya is far from over. Well,.. you make a good point JaN we have the director of the CIA poking an imbalanced nut case.. who threatens another women she thinks might be doing Petraeus too. My oh, my… you better believe Bhengazi is at the center of this… Where is Hilary? Australia to “coordinate” their defense cuts, post Peru… When ya all gonna call it a poo poo pie? Glad there was some sex involved now the mainstream media will get involved. I see open hearings… including the entire command of the state department, CIA, DOJ. … perfect. Love sick bitch…? oh that is too precious.. Spodie that would be all well and good… except we have seen the cleaning house of multiple senior officers for screwing the little helpless blossoms under their command. She is also .. an Army reserve officer.. called to active duty at least three times… she was a subordinate. That is against the UCMJ.
I am amazed.. this is one flawed administration… character means nothing to them. Jan David Koresh would have love you as a devotee…. right up until the inferno. This will stun some of you… but there are trusts reserved for a very few. Trusts that require you think more about things than your dipping your Johnson into a ” sleep yer way to the top, imbalanced subordinate. He sure as hell did illegal things… you don’t screw the help in the US military. Now ,, I will at least give her more status than Paula Jones.. who was as powerless and such a low pay grade as to make it abuse. This was a West Point graduate… she knows the rules on fraternization… as does he. Yes indeed when you submit for your “Q” clearance and above,…. you do indeed roll out of the bedsheets and tell all.November 13, 2012 at 9:34 am #777212
I knew there were gonna be some sad wingers around here on Nov 7. Watch them try to huff and puff on this clusterf**k. I have another theory about this event that involves neo-cons, the CIA, B Netanyahu, and the recent failed Presidential candidate. I’ll tell you about it sometime.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.