November 10, 2012

Petraeus fell because of the affair, the drone program, or Benghazi — which is it?

"Central Intelligence Agency Director David Petraeus resigned after a probe into whether someone else was using his email led to the discovery that he was having an extramarital affair," The Wall Street Journal reports, without naming sources. I selected some items from the article that relate to the time line:
It was the second national-security revelation to come to light in the two days after President Barack Obama won re-election. On Wednesday, the Pentagon acknowledged that Iranian fighter planes had fired on an unmanned reconnaissance drone five days before the election....

Mr. Petraeus was scheduled to testify before the Senate intelligence committee next week. Michael Morell, who was named acting director of the CIA after Mr. Petraeus's resignation, will appear instead....

Administration officials said the White House was briefed on the affair Wednesday by Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. Mr. Obama was informed Thursday by his staff and met with Mr. Petraeus that day. Mr. Petraeus then offered to resign. The announcement came Friday afternoon....

The computer investigation began late this spring, according to a person familiar with the investigation. Mr. Petraeus wasn't interviewed by the FBI until recently....

He presided over a moderation of the CIA's controversial drone program to take into greater account diplomatic sensitivities, a shift that sometimes put him at odds with the head of the agency's Counterterrorism Center.
Let's reorganize those facts:

1. Drones. Petraeus had moderated the drone program to make it more diplomacy-sensitive,  the head of the CIA Counterterrorism Center was not happy with that, and Iran fired on a drone 5 days before the election.

2. Benghazi. Petraeus was about to represent the CIA in testimony before Congress and now he will not.

3. The gmail account. This problem dates back to last spring, but Petraeus was only interviewed about it recently, the White House was briefed on Wednesday and Petraeus was confronted and pushed/fell into resignation in the next 2 days.

Given the timing of these 3 sets of facts, it's hard to believe Petraeus left because of the affair or the problem with his gmail. It seems much more likely to have to do with the drones or Benghazi.

By the way, who is the head of the CIA Counterterrorism Center?

Roger, which is the first name of his cover identity, may be the most consequential but least visible national security official in Washington — the principal architect of the CIA’s drone campaign and the leader of the hunt for Osama bin Laden. In many ways, he has also been the driving force of the Obama administration’s embrace of targeted killing as a centerpiece of its counterterrorism efforts.

Colleagues describe Roger as a collection of contradictions. A chain-smoker who spends countless hours on a treadmill. Notoriously surly yet able to win over enough support from subordinates and bosses to hold on to his job. He presides over a campaign that has killed thousands of Islamist militants and angered millions of Muslims, but he is himself a convert to Islam.

His defenders don’t even try to make him sound likable. Instead, they emphasize his operational talents, encyclopedic understanding of the enemy and tireless work ethic.

“Irascible is the nicest way I would describe him,” said a former high-ranking CIA official who supervised the counterterrorism chief. “But his range of experience and relationships have made him about as close to indispensable as you could think.”

Critics are less equivocal. “He’s sandpaper” and “not at all a team player,” said a former senior U.S. military official who worked closely with the CIA. Like others, the official spoke on the condition of anonymity because the director of CTC — as the center is known — remains undercover.

147 comments:

LoafingOaf said...

I'm not up to speed on this story. Why does resigning over an affair mean he can't testify?

The Drill SGT said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Drill SGT said...

LoafingOaf said...
I'm not up to speed on this story. Why does resigning over an affair mean he can't testify?


Maybe the requests for testimony are not by name, but by position. Congress: We want the Director to come up to the Hill and testify on the CIA's position on X. CIA: The Acting Director will be happy to do so. That other guy? He's gone....

The Drill SGT said...

a couple of things I find interesting:

GMAIL account. OK, what for. Does he use it for personal emails? fine, but then why does the FBI care? yeah, i guess there is a chance that his biographer could impersonate him, but if it's only personal, unclass stuff, why is it the FBI's concern.

Does he, like the WH, use GMAIL for official business to avoid the NARA archiving, OCI, and FOIA? Surely the CIA is exempt from all those.

Does he use it for classified? Do way Jose, I can not believe that.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

The Drill SGT said...

Does he use it for personal emails? fine, but then why does the FBI care?

I would assume that anyone with the kind of access to classified material that he had would be watched closely to make sure they were not selling secrets or in other ways compromising security. If he suddenly starts emailing an additional set of contacts, they would notice it.

J2 said...



It's the gun-running through Turkey to Syria.

sydney said...

I am wondering why someone would use Gmail for top secret business or any government business. My understanding is that Gmail is not very secure.

When I initially heard it was over someone using his email account, I thought that was very bad. But that needs to be clarified. Personal email or official email account?

LilyBart said...


He was so incredibly upfront about the affair. There was no discreet 'leaving to spend more time with his family'.

It occurs to me that he was diffusing any potential blackmail opportunities by coming out with the full, ugly truth.

Michael said...

Drill Sgt. The FBI thought he might be blackmailed because a hacker had discovered his affair. Spooks, you know.

Michael said...

J2. I agree that Syria and gun running are the likely back stories

The Drill SGT said...

Drones over Benghazi.

Apparently we were applying these kindler, gentler drone rules of engagement (ROE) over Libya. We told them we were flying armed drones over the Gaddafi WMD dumps, but we told them our drones over the urban AQ training camps were unarmed.

When the attack came, we diverted an unarmed drone to Benghazi from another mission, and then, because it was an urban target, we launched a unarmed replacement from Sigonella, Sicily. So when things turned ugly in the early morning, we were caught with a limp-dick drone, instead of one with a weapons load.

I don't believe for a moment that Sigonella only had the capability to launch unarmed drones. It was the ROE and a decision up front to NOT break our deal with Libya that kept us from being in a position to support the SEALs with a Drone strike.

What we should have done is launched an armed replacement, because Libya would never know, unless we needed it, and then who cares. Alternately, lie to them and say it was diverted from a WMD mission...

We forgot to consider YAHOO.

You Always Have Other Options...

If you do some prep.

sydney said...

That description of the Counter Terrorism Chief is unsettling.

EDH said...

Does this timeline in any way eliminate the possibility that Petraeus was being blackmailed by the White House?

Otherwise, might that explain Patreeus's prior testimony before congress, the CIA-issued talking points cited by the White House to shore-up the claim it was the video, and why they don't seem to want him to return to testify?

Petraeus’s Sudden Resignation
Lawmakers considered calling for his resignation in late October.

Congressional Republicans were furious with Petraeus for what they described to THE WEEKLY STANDARD as “misleading” testimony he gave to the House Intelligence Committee on September 14.

In that session, Petraeus pointed to a protest over an anti-Islam YouTube video as a primary reason for the attacks on the U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya, despite an abundance intelligence pointing to a preplanned terrorist assault on the U.S. consulate and CIA annex there.

Other members of Congress were particularly interested in questioning Petraeus about why crucial details about those attacks were left out of “talking points” the CIA prepared for lawmakers and executive branch officials.

Among those details: the existence of a communications intercept between two al Qaeda-linked terrorists discussing the attacks. The level of frustration with the CIA and Petraeus had led several top Republican lawmakers to consider calling for his resignation in late October.

Bob W. said...

"Show me a hero and I will write you a tragedy". F. Scott Fitzgerald

Pastafarian said...

He offered his resignation, and Obama immediately accepted it.

That's odd. I thought things like that didn't matter; that the republicans who dogged Clinton over his affairs (and perjury, and alleged rapes) were just political hacks.

So clearly the administration didn't set this affair up; but they watched Petraeus like a hawk and when they found out about it, they used it to get rid of him, in the only window they had (after the election, but before the hearings.)

Subpoena him by name to testify. It might not reveal anything-- maybe the administration still has other leverage on Petraeus (maybe his brother in law has tax problems, or he has children in the military).

Let's see what happens.

garage mahal said...

Affairs, drones, and Benghazi. Fill in the dots!

David said...

Newsmax, which broke the story, is saying that WH knew of the affair for months and held off firing until post election for political reasons. They report that WH asked him to resign, and that the investigating FBI agents were "outraged" by the delay,

If true this raises the clear implication that WH was using the affair to silence Petraeus.

Lots of stink. Something's rotten.

EDH said...

"Affairs, drones, and Benghazi. Fill in the dots!

The dots are there, pretty much already filled-in.

The question: how are the dots connected?

The Drill SGT said...

Ignorance is Bliss said...
I would assume that anyone with the kind of access to classified material that he had would be watched closely to make sure they were not selling secrets or in other ways compromising security. If he suddenly starts emailing an additional set of contacts, they would notice it.


Thoughts:

1. I am pretty sure that the FBI doesn't read the emails of the WH staff who use GMAIL to leak to the NYT, else we'd have less leaking. They have much the same clearances as the DCI. I doubt the FBI reads the DCI DMAILS, because the CIA would learn of it.

2. You can bet that the CIA cyber guys are very interested in protecting General P's email accts, from everybody, including the FBI, who they don't like much.

3. I have to take a poly every couple of years, so do FBI guys (at least to get hired). CIA and NSA, absolutely. How often, I don't know. I wonder if the DCI does? How would he answer the question:

"Director, is there anything, to your knowledge, in your background, that could make you vulnerable to blackmail?"

rhhardin said...

At least the drones show that Obama is worried about the bad guys organizing, which is a plus.

How that goes with general encouragement of the Arab spring is unclear.

Possibly it's just a stupid plan, taking out the bad revolutionaries and hoping the rest of them will be good.

That's not a stable form of political power distribution.

Tank said...

La la la.

Nothing to see here.

It's all good.

The con continuessssssss.....

I'll be eating Italian tonight, with a nice bottle Pinot Noir. Why worry when we've got VERY competent, honest people, with the greatest integrity, in Washington running things so nicely.

Is the MSM interested? Then, neither am I.

La la la.

Pass the bread sticks, will ya?

David said...

sydney said...
That description of the Counter Terrorism Chief is unsettling.


For sure. We should have really nice and merciful people in charge of hunting down and killing people.

AllenS said...

Roger, which is the first name of his cover identity

but he is himself a convert to Islam.


What the fuck?

Pastafarian said...

David, if that's the case and Petraeus was being strong-armed for the last six months, I wonder if he would be willing to admit to that, if he is subpoenaed.

Hagar said...

Petraeus did not need to state the reason for his resignation, unless he had already been blackmailed with exposure. Such threats could have come from anywhere within the administration, including his own shop.

The administration is apparently now also leaking salacious details - true or not - which looks like attempting to destroy his credibility before he eventually appears before Congress.

Stand by for further bulletins!

Darrell said...

The new director testifies--

"Sorry. Don't know a thing about it. I'm new, you know. Haven't had time to read what's there. Don't have my new security clearance and haven't been confirmed yet in the Senate. My new office is kind of nice. And that espresso machine is great. Anything else you'd like to know?

Mitchell the Bat said...

The smart money is on Roger being an anacronym for some sort of supercomputer.

Saint Croix said...

The computer investigation began late this spring

The FBI has known about his affair since the spring, thus Obama has known about his affair since the spring.

He's resigning right after the election and right before his testimony.

Come on, people. You know this stinks.

The Drill SGT said...

Apparently the affair began while he was in A-Stan and continued into his CIA time.

So, He should have had an FBI confirmation investigation, and a CIA background Investigation, AND a POLY.

No way, the runors of an affair didn't show up. How many hot reporters spend hours one-on-one (in either a vertical or horizontal position) in Kabul?

The WH knew before he took the job.

He's leaving, because they attempted to work the strings.

I suspect Valerie J, or my favorite sleazy sycophantic lobbyist/lawyer Donilon...

Marshal said...

Colleagues describe Roger as a collection of contradictions. A chain-smoker who spends countless hours on a treadmill. Notoriously surly yet able to win over enough support from subordinates and bosses to hold on to his job. He presides over a campaign that has killed thousands of Islamist militants and angered millions of Muslims, but he is himself a convert to Islam.

I hope every word of this is a lie, since these details are sufficient, when combined with the qualifications necessary for the job, to narrow the list of possibilities quite drastically. Once again we see the media only cares about covert identities when useful to attack non-leftists.

Roger J. said...

AllenS--not sure how my name came up--didnt weigh in on this issue

Roger J. said...

oops--AllenS--I wasnt the roger they were looking for :)

Aphrodite said...

What concerns me is that the director of the CIA, our top intelligence agency, David Petraeus, was foolish and reckless to memorialize his sexual affair in emails which were quickly uncovered by the FBI. Emails!

Another proud graduate of the Watergate School of Spying. Petraeus passed the taping of doors but failed email deception.

Did he want to become exposed? How can you explain this lapse of technical judgment? If he was this foolish in his personal life was he reckless in his judgment of CIA affairs?

Coincidently, speaking of Watergate, of course it was a routine investigation of Petraeus which uncovered the emails.

David Petraeus will be silenced on Benghazi and will follow the party line if forced to testify.

JAL said...

So Drill Sgt., my old buddy, you do stuff you can't talk about also, I see.

What's with the October 2012 sign up on Blogger? You write like the old Drill SGT.

As for Petraeus?

Deeply, deeply disappointed. (But I had wondered why we hadn't heard from him.)

Ann Althouse said...

@Drill You wrote:

"When the attack came, we diverted an unarmed drone to Benghazi from another mission, and then, because it was an urban target, we launched a unarmed replacement from Sigonella, Sicily. So when things turned ugly in the early morning, we were caught with a limp-dick drone, instead of one with a weapons load."

Did you mean "armed" in that first "unarmed"?

holdfast said...

Given that the CIA "team" has been characterized by groupthink and failure, "not a team player" is an accolade.

Still the description could be so much BS, and the head of the CTC is really a Mormon woman with a limp.

holdfast said...

I think "unmanned drones", in the scientific sense, is a pretty good description of the Obama administration.

JAL said...

@ Marshal 8:19 AM

Also my thoughts.

Of course the CIA is known for disinformation.

But I had same reaction -- only "fact" they eliminated was is that he is black.

AprilApple said...

I agree with St. Croix.


Ann Althouse said...

"Did you mean "armed" in that first "unarmed"?"

I think I get it.

You meant what you wrote.

Hagar said...

The blackmail was perpetrated by someone(s) of a mentality that expected it to succeed and he/she/they were not prepared for Petraeus to go nuclear.

Ali Karim Bey said...

THIS IS NOT RELEVANT. At least he had an affair with the woman.

GOP hates woman and minorities.

WITNESS more women and more minorities voted in 2012 THAN IN 2008.

Today, Apple shoppers do not get in the line. They order ONLINE.

Voters/Dedicated do not attend rallies. They work as they have already decided.

GOP has NOTHING to offer. NOT-A-THING.

IN 2016, the POTUS or VPOTUS, YES, will be Kirsten Gillibrand. Remember her.

IT will take decades to get out of the mess caused by Ryan (NOT ROMNEY - he is a nice guy).

THE ultra-conservatives in GOP are KILLING THE PARTY.

GOP must be INCLUSIVE and DIVERSE PARTY.

Get more women - accept their needs and interests. They have the SAME RIGHTS as men.

Get more scientists - without science we would be a backward country. Learn to ACCEPT.

Get more minorities. This country was built by minorities. Understand your past.

Etc. Etc. Etc.

ThomasD said...

"That description of the Counter Terrorism Chief is unsettling."

That's because the person it describes does not actually exist.

It's a construct, meant to confuse.

Ali Karim Bey said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Strelnikov said...

Maybe he was fired because he was having sex with Broadwell during the Benghazi crisis (That's right: He's an eight hour man.), while Loeb was operating the drones - just for fun. I hope it wasn't the other way around.

LarsPorsena said...

Blogger holdfast said...

Given that the CIA "team" has been characterized by groupthink and failure, "not a team player" is an accolade.

Still the description could be so much BS, and the head of the CTC is really a Mormon woman with a limp.

11/10/12 8:31 AM
___________________________________

This WAPO story is a not too clever bit of disinformation. The real head of CTC is a defrocked Maronite Christian priest with an entomology PHD..

Hassell Anderson said...

Why would the FBI suddenly start investigating Petraeus' gmail account? Did some enterprising FBI agent wake up one day and say to himself "hey, I wonder who CIA Director Petraeus is emailing these days?"

What would would trigger the FBI to launch this investigation in the first place? It seems likely to me that the FBI was tipped off by someone who had knowledge of the affair and wanted it exposed.

ThomasD said...

"...he/she/they were not prepared for Petraeus to go nuclear."

The guy, who in his last appearance before Congress toed the party line - blaming it all on a video, is not going to go nuclear.

If he changes his story now the Obama lap dogs in the MSM will use every sordid detail to destroy not just his credibility, but him and his wife.

Petraeus has been compromised in every sense of the word. Whatever is behind this you'll never get it from him.

TWM said...

Surmise all you wish, but this is about Benghazi. Subpoena him and appeal to his honor (Yes, he has honor even though an imperfect man) to tell the truth.

It would be interesting.

EDH said...

Time to put Patraeus on "suicide" watch?

Fat Man said...

Guys who play around outside of their marriages are not rare, and they don’t start doing it all of a sudden at the age of 60. If they do it at 60 they did at 50, and 40, and so on. The explanation is just as lame as it could possibly be.

exhelodrvr1 said...

Do any of the Obama supporters here think it was OK to delay the announcement (the 19 hour response) and the hearings until after the election, or do you think that information should have been available to Americans prior to them voting?

Palladian said...

"Roger" is a completely made-up character.

TWM said...

"What would would trigger the FBI to launch this investigation in the first place? It seems likely to me that the FBI was tipped off by someone who had knowledge of the affair and wanted it exposed."

The decision to investigate to the D-CIA would require the highest of approvals. In other words Barry would have to sign off on it unless they thought he was somehow involved as well.

TWM said...

"Do any of the Obama supporters here think it was OK to delay the announcement (the 19 hour response) and the hearings until after the election, or do you think that information should have been available to Americans prior to them voting?"

Not to be mean, but that's a silly question. Of course they think it was okay.

Levi Starks said...

Ok, you can call me a nut, but what actual evidence do we have that an affair actually happened?
If you ask me, the whole thing is just too neatly packaged. I'd like to see some reaction from the offended spouses. In order to judge the validity of this story I'm going to need to see the performance of each of the characters.

Palladian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Roger J. said...

Palladian--LOL--appreciate the vote of confidence--BTW Palladian--how are you holding up in light Hurricane Sandy--hope all is well

Palladian said...

"Roger" is a completely made-up character.

Just in case it isn't obvious, I didn't mean Roger J when I made the comment above; instead I was referring the chain-smoking, treadmill-running, sandpapery, Islamist-killing, Muslim convert, head of the CIA Counterterrorism Center "Roger".

In fact, the first person I pictured when reading that description was Barack Obama.

Roger that!

The Drill SGT said...

JAL said...
So Drill Sgt., my old buddy, you do stuff you can't talk about also, I see.

What's with the October 2012 sign up on Blogger? You write like the old Drill SGT.


My new firm, (LOL) uses GMAIL as our corporate email service. My Blogger account got hosed in the conversion of my accts.

I'm the same The Drill SGT from 2003 or so. The one who borrowed your blue star, for my wife until she retired, then i went to the USMC bumper sticker

exhelodrvr1 said...

TWM,
I know - I just want them to acknowledge that they are OK with campaigns of lies, misinformation, and missing information.

EDH said...

Maybe in order to obtain a high national security clearance, you should be required to have a hot wife.

Does "matronly" leave too much to chance?

Hagar said...

It was nuclear.

Party loyalty has its limits, and sex sells!

Palladian said...

Palladian--LOL--appreciate the vote of confidence--

At least I hope it's not you!

BTW Palladian--how are you holding up in light Hurricane Sandy--hope all is well

Thanks for asking! We're all fine here. I was lucky, I didn't lose power or take on flood water here on my elevated spot in Brooklyn, but of course, things elsewhere around town are still a bit of a mess.

Peter Hoh said...

The latest: Did Broadwell's husband write letter to the NYT's ethiscist column?

Link

tiger said...

Benghazi.

Why?

1) Clinton the POTUS, stayed in office after an affair; why would a person in a subordinate position be forced to retire?

2) Obama supports drone killings - one of the few things he and I agree on - so with Patraeus is only following orders from his boss

3) That leaves Benghazi. And today with H. Clinton's announcement that she won't testify to Congress it shows the wagons circling to protect Obama. What a lying bastard.

The Drill SGT said...

Hassell Anderson said...
What would would trigger the FBI to launch this investigation in the first place? It seems likely to me that the FBI was tipped off by someone who had knowledge of the affair and wanted it exposed.


you want a juicy conspiracy? would not be the first time the CIA insiders leaked against an outsider boss

One former CIA official called Mr. Morell an "odds-on favorite," adding that "he would bring over three decades of experience inside the agency. He's the consummate straight shooter. He's very well liked inside the agency. He has enormous street cred on Capitol Hill. He projects an image of calm."

Saint Croix said...

Another proud graduate of the Watergate School of Spying.

Yeah! Worst spy ever. Use code words, moron.

The missile in the valley. Same Bat-time, same Bat-place.

Palladian said...

Critics are less equivocal. “He’s sandpaper” and “not at all a team player,” said a former senior U.S. military official who worked closely with the CIA.

I don't wanna touch sandpaper!

Levi Starks said...

At one time sexual indiscretion was considered (both hetero, and homo) was considered a sign of moral weakness, and thus was considered a reason to preclude a person from positions of high responsibility. I'm pretty sure we're past those days, especially after the Clinton administration, and more recently revelations about JFK and his pool parties.
But wait... it's about the e-mails you say? Fine, if actual law and rules of protocol regarding classified information were violated then we need to investigate, and determine whether or not only whether Gen. Petraeus should resign, as CIA director, but whether he has committed offenses that would strip him of rank, and pension.

madAsHell said...

Roger sleeps with Julia.

pm317 said...

I think "unmanned drones", in the scientific sense, is a pretty good description of the Obama administration.

Thread winner!

In another note, we have to believe Obama came to know of this only on Wednesday?!! when there was an FBI investigation was going on? We are not stupid like his voters are.

BTW, I read in another article, that the FBI started watching his email because something about corruption was flagged and then these other emails became evident.

Or may be FBI wanted to know what CIA was up to in Syria. I heard they don't talk to each other.

Levi Starks said...

If the American people have been offended, you don't get to just walk away.

shiloh said...

Althouse, your con lemmings were quite astute at predicting 2012 presidential election results, so they should have equal success predicting the why's and wherefore's of Petraeus.

Indeed, your con flock has always been more efficient at inane obsessing, than critical thought.

Re: Patraeus maybe the CIA's unwavering regulations re: adultery and classified info security weighed heavily on Petraeus decision to resign as he is a man of honor and personal responsibility.

Let the Althouse speculation continue unabated! :)

Pogo said...

What difference does any of this make?

The majority of Americans don't give a shit. It's not a scandal when no one cares. Obama could have assassinated the ambassador himself and John Stewart would laugh lovingly.

One pawn is dead. Hundreds of pawns have just been laid off. This is what the majority wants. They're not ashamed of any of this, but proud.

They're having a big old laugh about this in the White House and the networks. Any ankle-biting criticism makes it even funnier.

pm317 said...

Palladian,

you beat me to it! First thing that popped out in my head when I read that.

Rick O said...

Richard Nixon resigned 2 years after winning 520 electoral votes and 61% of the popular vote. It was because of Watergate, which basically was illegal activity as part of a campaign (and its attempted cover-up) of a campaign he would have won anyway.

But that was then, and he was a Republican with a Democrat Congress.


pm317 said...

Pogo, you're right.

jr565 said...

As loafing oaf asked, why would having an affair preclude you from testifying?
Sorry he's going through that, but that doesn't negate his role in beho ghazi which everyone is in the dark about. Just as he was forthright about charting on his wife, he should be forthright about whatever role he or the CIA played.

Hari said...

A few legal questions:

It seems to me that the reason Patraeus had to "resign" is not because he broke any civilian law by having an affair, but because he broke military law by having an affair.

If this is correct, shouldn't he have resigned his commission, whether or not he resigned from the CIA?




Diogenes of Sinope said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
pm317 said...

In fact, the first person I pictured when reading that description was Barack Obama.

That makes sense. Obama didn't call the Counterterrorism guys while watching Benghazi massacre. He IS the kill list.

shiloh said...

"If this is correct, shouldn't he have resigned his commission, whether or not he resigned from the CIA?"

He already resigned from the military when he became CIA director.

Petraeus relinquished command of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan on July 18, 2011 and retired from the U.S. Army on August 31, 2011.

Diogenes of Sinope said...

I never believe anything from the Obama administration without neutral independently verifiable corroboration.

Hari said...

Siloh,

Thanks. I was thrown off by the fact that half the pictures in the media are still showing Patraeus in uniform.

Clyde said...

It explains why Petraeus was carrying the administration's water after the attack by blaming the video.

As I commented elsewhere, I expect that he and the Mrs. will be at a marriage counseling camp in Idaho or Montana until after the hearings, just as Hillary is going to be unavailable.

deborah said...

f""Roger" is a completely made-up character."


Straight out of a LeCarre novel. But lol about Roger sounding like Obama...maybe the author was having a bit of fun.

Carl said...

A lot of this stuff strikes me as implausibly naive, even for journalists with the characteristic 250 millisecond attention span.

(1) Obviously the DCI does not use GMail, or indeed any commercial e-mail provider, for any kind of work-related communication. The one thing the United States has plenty of is secure electronic communications facilities. WHich don't even have physical connections to the commercial Internet.

So if the FBI were really looking at use of his GMail account, it's not because national security stuff was in it -- he's way too careful for that (although there is the counter-example of John Deutch, he was a professor, not an ex-field officer). And if they'd found even a hint of it, they'd have arrested him the same day. Whatever they were looking for, it was piddling stuff, and for all we know, he asked for it himself.

(2) If he didn't disclose the affair when he got his security clearance, he is in unbelievably deep trouble -- like, prison-time trouble. That doesn't seem to be the case, from the reactions of everybody from the President to Senator DiFi, so a reasonable assumption is that he did disclose it, and that therefore the Obama Administration knew all about it at least as long ago as when he moved to Langley.

This business of being "shocked, shocked" to find it all out on Wednesday is just another pack of Obama lies, not even very cleverly done. Oooo, look, they even gave us a "timeline" for extra versimilitude, if you're n00b enough to buy this baloney. Indeed, they must have had a little chuckle drafting that up.

(3) Doesn't the flimsiness of this remind anybody just a little of any other recent fan dance by Team Obama? They might as well have said Petraeus resigned over a Youtube video -- there's a hint. They have a signature style, and their fingerprints are all over this. If any weird loose ends turn up, you can be sure the President will look America firmly in the eye with a scowl, jabbing with the claw-like right hand, and assure us, after we let him be clear, that he's going to get to the bottom of this.

(4) I'm amused by "Roger." I heard he speaks three languages (English, Swahili and Greek), has a mole on his left buttock, and walks with a slight limp from a bullet wound received during his secret spy training. Oh, and he doesn't always drink beer, but when he does he prefers Dos Equis.

Saint Croix said...

At one time sexual indiscretion was considered (both hetero, and homo) was considered a sign of moral weakness, and thus was considered a reason to preclude a person from positions of high responsibility.

I don't think the concern is "moral weakness" so much as vulnerability to blackmail and coercion.

I imagine a high percentage of people who commit adultery do so in secret, and would not want their spouse to know.

So here's the question. Why did Petraeus announce his adultery? This not only causes pain to his wife, it also causes a very public humiliation.

The answer is obvious.

His secret was no longer secret. And the people who knew his secret could not be trusted to keep it.

His assumption, then, was that his secret would be leaked to the media in order to discredit him.

Perhaps it was already leaked. And so Petraeus went ahead and confirmed it.

So what we know, then, is that people in the administration were in the process of using this information to destroy Petraeus. Or he assumed they would do so.

So that's why he confessed, and resigned.

Remember who Petraeus is, a master of strategy. He will not be manipulated. This move, a public confession and a resignation, is tactical, in my opinion.

Of course there are moral considerations, too. You stop the affair and confess to your wife (and maybe your priest) for moral reasons.

But to confess to the media? That's not moral. That's strategic.

Michael K said...

Does anybody still remember Clinton's DCI who was doing CIA stuff on his home computer ?

This story stinks but we'll never know.

Nathan Alexander said...

Petraeus is a threat to Obama and his plans to fundamentally remake the country on socialist principles.
He "knows where the bodies are buried" regarding Benghazi.
Petraeus' announcement that "orders to stand down did not come from the CIA" very nearly derailed Obama's re-election...with a less biased press, a deeper investigation would have plumbed the truth of that statement at a critical time in the re-election campaign.
Obama couldn't fire him then, tho.

But Petraeus is also a war hero. He was neutralized from being VP by making him head of the CIA, and now neutralized from a 2016 run by being forced to resign.

Why is it that anyone who is a threat to Obama or his plans gets discredited with sexual matters?

Put another way, why are democrats so selectively prudish?

Clearly, never make a deal with the Obama machine, because the offer s step one of their plans to destroy you and destroy your life.

Obama supporters have embraced a man with no honor and no integrity.

Saint Croix said...

You know how Obama puts off things until the last minute? For instance, he did nothing on Fast and Furious until the very last minute, when he used executive privilege to hide the documents.

My guess is that Obama did nothing with Petraeus until the very last minute. He's been focused on the campaign and winning the campaign. And then, after the election, he goes to Petraeus and says, "This is what you need to say in your testimony." And when Petraeus pushed back, then Obama hit him with the adultery.

And that's when Petraeus resigned. And told the media about his adultery.

I have no knowledge, of course. Just a guess based on the personalities involved.

pm317 said...

Obama supporters have embraced a man with no honor and no integrity.

Yes. And they don't even have an inkling. They are that STUPID.

comatus said...

Ah. The threefold nature of the pejorative "pussy." It applies, you see, in all three cases.

comatus said...

Ah. The threefold nature of the pejorative "pussy." It applies, you see, in all three cases, in three different ways.

Sadly, none of its positive applications are in sight.

comatus said...

Ah. The threefold nature of the pejorative "pussy." It applies, you see, in all three cases.

Tank said...

La la la.

Nobody cares.

Pogo is right.

Palladian said...

Ah. The threefold nature of the pejorative "pussy."

Ah. The threefold nature of your comment(s).

pm317 said...

OK, moving on,

Will Patraeus spill the beans on Benghazi or anything else? I asked this yesterday, now that his cat is out of the bag, will he force the stink out of Obama? If not, what kind of a patriot is he? A possibly coward one?

Saint Croix said...

It explains why Petraeus was carrying the administration's water after the attack by blaming the video.

IIRC, Petraeus never blamed the video. You'll need a link for that.

We can separate out the shits from the good guys by the people who blamed the video.

Texan99 said...

Pogo said: "What difference does any of this make?

The majority of Americans don't give a shit. It's not a scandal when no one cares. Obama could have assassinated the ambassador himself and John Stewart would laugh lovingly.

One pawn is dead. Hundreds of pawns have just been laid off. This is what the majority wants. They're not ashamed of any of this, but proud.

They're having a big old laugh about this in the White House and the networks. Any ankle-biting criticism makes it even funnier."


That is exactly how I feel this week. I'm hoping I won't continue to feel this way indefinitely.

pm317 said...

@Carl:They have a signature style, and their fingerprints are all over this.

Yes. Many of us picked up on that signature style in Dem Primary 2008. And warned the country but nobody was listening.

Like @Nathan Alexander said, Obama is not a man of honor and integrity. This is very sad but more than that, it is going to be disastrous for the US.

Saint Croix said...

Will Petraeus spill the beans on Benghazi or anything else?

It doesn't seem like he's in a secret-keeping mood.

I asked this yesterday, now that his cat is out of the bag, will he force the stink out of Obama?

Nothing can force the stink out of Obama!

If not, what kind of a patriot is he? A possibly coward one?

What a stupid thing to say.

edutcher said...

The holes in this one are coming, you will pardon the expression, fast and furious.

Roger J. said...

oops--AllenS--I wasnt the roger they were looking for :)

Unless the J stands for Jolly.

shiloh said...

Althouse, your con lemmings were quite astute at predicting 2012 presidential election results, so they should have equal success predicting the why's and wherefore's of Petraeus.

Maybe the little weasel can tell us to where those 8 million voters disappeared.

So, where were you hiding out 10/5 - 11/5 when the Romster was winning?

Sheep wrangler for Moslem porn?

Maybe just the sheep.

Darrell said...

Saint Croix--on top of things like all our Lefties. . .

In that session, Petraeus pointed to a protest over an anti-Islam YouTube video as a primary reason for the attacks on the U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya, despite an abundance intelligence pointing to a preplanned terrorist assault on the U.S. consulate and CIA annex there.

Read the comments....(hint)7:51AM

Saint Croix said...

I was thrown off by the fact that half the pictures in the media are still showing Patraeus in uniform.

The media really doesn't like the military. Or, more specifically, they like throwing some shit on the uniform.

Darrell said...

I thought that shiloh fell into that tuna boiler at the Bumblebee factory on the night shift. Packed in oil instead of Spring Water as I recall.

Who the Hell know who's using his name now.

Saint Croix said...

Saint Croix--on top of things like all our Lefties.

You think I'm a leftie?

Darrell said...

If you don't know that Patraeus was spouting the party line on the YouTube video, it's not out of the question.

Darrell said...

The FBI was not spouting the party line. For the first time in along time. Perhaps they weren't jazzed about playing Inspector Clouseau in Libya.

Saint Croix said...

If you don't know that Patraeus was spouting the party line on the YouTube video, it's not out of the question.

Don't design any bridges with that logic, okay?

I said IIRC, so my mistake. I asked for a link if I was wrong. Thanks for the correction.

And I stand by what I said. Anybody who blamed the video is a shit.

edutcher said...

Darrell said...

I thought that shiloh fell into that tuna boiler at the Bumblebee factory on the night shift. Packed in oil instead of Spring Water as I recall.

My compliments.

Saint Croix said...

His name is spelled Petraeus.

Not "Patreeus" nor "Patraeus."

Anybody who spells it wrong is a socialist.

Saint Croix said...

I'm going to bring some order to this hippie sloppiness.

You got that, soldier?!

pm317 said...

@Saint Croix, If not, what kind of a patriot is he? A possibly coward one?

What a stupid thing to say.
----------

I don't think it is. I want the damn beans spilled. But the people who have them are silenced forever one way or another. I am fed up. The country is not in good shape. Put the country first for a change. I am very disappointed in the Clintons, especially Bill Clinton. But may be they were blackmailed too. That is the signature style of Obama.
{I admit I have been sloppy spelling Petraeus' name. too many vowels}.

Darrell said...

Petraeus gets autocorrected. Obama becomes "ABM." Get with the 21st Century. Technology so smart it's stupid.

If there was an edit feature in addition to the delete, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Delete gets it out of order and makes it look like there is something underhanded afoot.

shiloh said...

"Put another way, why are democrats so selectively prudish?"

Whereas evangelicals er cons er Reps had no problem w/Sanford/Ensign/Larry Craig/Vitter etc. who were in no way pressured to resign in disgrace.

And Anthony Weiner who did not actually cheat on his wife :D did resign because of liberal pressure.

Indeed, the con/evangelical hypocrisy re: adultery, although predictable, is highly amusing.

Forgiveness is a virtue lol or some such nonsense.

Darrell said...

When an American Embassy is attacked and the local government can't or won't put a stop to it, any agreement on unarmed drones goes out the window.

Anyone sending an unarmed drone to the fight would be kicked out of the building by me, down the concrete steps. Twice. Anyone bringing it up during the discussion during the crisis would be escorted out of the room.

edutcher said...

shiloh said...

Put another way, why are democrats so selectively prudish?

Whereas evangelicals er cons er Reps had no problem w/Sanford/Ensign/Larry Craig/Vitter etc. who were in no way pressured to resign in disgrace.


You mean like your boy, Willie?

Where were you hiding out 10/5 - 11/5 when the Romster was winning?

Hillary's tackling dummy? (gotta keep those cankles in shape)

Huma's mustache trimmer?

Enquiring minds want to know.

sydney said...

You are all assuming the affair was with the woman. There are two authors listed on that biography. One was a man.

Cedarford said...

rhhardin said...
"At least the drones show that Obama is worried about the bad guys organizing, which is a plus."

==================
Yes!

And the prime fear Obama and Hillary and Petraeus and Rice and Jarrett had - is that these organized bad guys could suddenly become a real threat. By forming a disorganized mob that "engages in an act of senseless violence over a video".



kentuckyliz said...

OK, so where is the poll:

Would you do Petraeus?

Yes, in a romantic way

Yes, in an animalistic hot way

Yes, in a hate-rape way

No

kentuckyliz said...

Anyway, poll question aside:

I question the timing. (tm)

Petraeus may be foolish but he's no fool.

This is a pre-emptive strike, refusing to be played.

He still has some power (the awful truth) and no one holds anything over him. His sin is out there, and he resigned. So he can't be exposed or fired any more.

So, will Hillary be charged with contempt of Congress?

kentuckyliz said...

I would do Petraeus. He has a lovely smile, and he looks great in uniform with the jaunty beret. Me love you long time.

Nathan Alexander said...

Remember that Petraeus was the general who won the counter-insurgency in Iraq.
He was slated for destruction no matter what he did, because he made it harder for Obama to find away to leave Iraq with dishonor (but Obama did find a way!), he made all the Democrats lies about Iraq being unwinnable, unnecessary, etc, fully clear as the politically-expedient prevarications they were.

Nathan Alexander said...

So remember, the brilliance of the Alinsky method is they can even use your patriotism and sense of responsibility against you.

Hagar said...

"When thieves fall out, the honest man comes into his own."

Have a seat and pass the popcorn!

Hagar said...

Note that one set of leaks say the e-mails were discovered because the lady kept after Petraeus after the "affair," and another says it was because Petraeus kept after the lady after she broke it off.

Does not look like this leaking campaign is very well organized!

AllenS said...

"Gird your loins" -- Joe Biden

Well, did Petraeus do that, or didn't he?

AllenS said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AllenS said...

Roger J. said...
AllenS--not sure how my name came up--didnt weigh in on this issue

11/10/12 8:21 AM

Roger J. said...
oops--AllenS--I wasnt the roger they were looking for :)

Roger, too bad that it wasn't you that they were talking about because the least that I would have expected out of you, my friend, would the taking of names, and the kicking of some asses.

William said...

I don't know what the back story is, but I do know that there is a back story. St Croix hypothesis sounds plausible, but it's all just speculation at this point. And perhaps that the point: to roll the Benghazi, You Tube video and Petraeus story into a gnarly wax covered knot.......I don''t mean to dump on Petaeus, but shouldn't the CIA director have sufficient craft and guile to carry on an affair in a discreet way. And shouldn't Obama have had sufficient craft and guile to engineer Petraeus' removal in such a way as not to generate another thousand rumors. This is another anaconda in the Benghazi cluster fuck.

Mamie said...

pm317 said:

Obama supporters have embraced a man with no honor and no integrity.

Yes. And they don't even have an inkling. They are that STUPID.”

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I don’t think they’re stupid at all. It’s just that like embraces like.

Jake Diamond said...

Given the timing of these 3 sets of facts, it's hard to believe Petraeus left because of the affair or the problem with his gmail. It seems much more likely to have to do with the drones or Benghazi.

Why is it that you boobs don't learn from your mistakes?

LilyBart said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
gbarto said...

"I don’t think they’re stupid at all. It’s just that like embraces like.

I have a colleague, an Obama supporter, who couldn't understand why so much money was spent on the election. I responded, "because it's worth it," and laid out how changes in government policy barely tangential to our industry could dramatically shift the fortunes of our company. She was horrified by my cynicism but had to concede that campaign contributions could, after all, be an investment, and not even in a blatant quid pro quo.

Unfortunately, a lot of Obama supporters are not mean, nasty people hell-bent on dragging the country down. They are earnest, well-meaning and naive about how high the stakes get to shape government policy when government policy shapes so much. These people need education, not disparagement, if only to discourage them from the notion that voting once every four years and tuning out the rest of the time is the way to turn the country around. It would hardly be a bad thing if more voters, left or right, brought a little more cynicism to the process - limited hope for what government can do is inherently conservative!

With respect to Petraeus, his testimony was likely to damage the White House, the Clinton machine or the CIA. Three organizations with top-notch skills at smearing their enemies. He was right to resign because plainly he was compromised. The only way he could have avoided having the affair smeared all over the place was to take full responsibility, then shoot himself in the head before anybody questioned his motives.

Steve Koch said...

Petraeus dishonored himself by participating in the Obama Benghazi cover up when he testified to the House Intelligence Committee on September 14. "In that session, Petraeus pointed to a protest over an anti-Islam YouTube video as a primary reason for the attacks on the U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya, despite an abundance intelligence pointing to a preplanned terrorist assault on the U.S. consulate and CIA annex there.". Petraeus also said it was a flash mob that attacked the consulate when he already knew the name of the terrorist group did the attack (the logo of that group was on the trucks they used to blockade the streets around the consulate. The drones provided that info while the attack was going on).

Quote was from weekly standard:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/petraeus-s-sudden-resignation_662200.html

The paper trail of the murdered ambassador's pleas for adequate security has been leaked. A key question to resolve now is whether it was Petraeus or Hillary (or both) who botched the Benghazi security arrangements, they have pointed fingers at each other via leaks to the press.

Another key question is whether Obama voted "present" during Benghazi, thus hindering the military in rescuing the murdered Americans.

Petraeus now has a chance to do the right thing and come clean.

Re: Hillary, the House will drag her in to testify, at latest when she leaves her current job in early January. Should be interesting and could destroy her reputation.

It will be interesting to see if there are any intelligent, ethical Benghazi comments from dems on this site. So far it seems like these guys are 0 for Benghazi. If you behave contemptibly you should expect to be treated with contempt.

Mamie said...

In response to my lame effort at being pithy, gbarto said: “…a lot of Obama supporters are not mean, nasty people hell-bent on dragging the country down. They are earnest, well-meaning and naive about how high the stakes get to shape government policy when government policy shapes so much. These people need education, not disparagement, if only to discourage them from the notion that voting once every four years and tuning out the rest of the time is the way to turn the country around.”

You’re right.

I was aiming my comment at the resident lefty commenters here at Althouse, not at all Obama supporters. Should have made that clear.

Joe said...

It seems conservatives have been embracing Petraeus for years, yet I'm mystified as to why. Yes, he found the right strategy in Iraq, but he blew it with Afghanistan and hasn't demonstrated any great competence since.

I think he's lying about the CIA incompetence in regards to Benghazi. I again raise the possibility that Petraeus and the CIA have been lying to everyone, including the president. History supports that view.

abdulla99 said...

The functionality of live interactive access to a distant computer—such as virtual private networks—is working much better with the new generation of satellite Internet service than in the past.


yourlocalinstaller

دردشة ومنتديات عراقنا said...

اجمل دردشة عراقية رومنسية ترفيهية يظم كافة العراقيين والعرب والاجانب
شات عراقنا
دردشة عراقنا
جات عراقنا
شلة عراقنا
عراقنا
شات العراق
دردشة عراقية
شات كيكه
دردشة عبدالله
جات
دردشة
منتدى دردشة عراقنا
منتدى عراقنا
google

دردشة ومنتديات عراقنا said...

اجمل دردشة عراقية رومنسية ترفيهية يظم كافة العراقيين والعرب والاجانب
شات عراقنا
دردشة عراقنا
جات عراقنا
شلة عراقنا
عراقنا
شات العراق
دردشة عراقية
شات كيكه
دردشة عبدالله
جات
دردشة
منتدى دردشة عراقنا
منتدى عراقنا
google

James Allen said...

Very informative post, I live in UK and feel we miss out a lot as all the major bookish events occur in the US. Even the events that do occur over here would be impossible for me to attend so I have to make do with making individual, personal connections.
humiliation phone sex

James Allen said...

My opinion is a general one. I love in this blog all topics written by the blog author. Nice blog and nice type of expression. For my part for the blog author: I decorate him with twelve stars. Very nice blog.
phone sex sluts

billinmissouri said...

Why am I hearing last night that Petraeus was in Benghazi for an inspection of the CIA House and met with the ambassador and all evolved while he was there. It is said he was aware of concerns over security both from his CIA People and the embassy. Got this from a reliable source.

city said...

thanks for sharing.

billinmissouri said...

City, Thanks for the Sharing Response. However My question on The Gen having been in Benghazi shortly before the attack for an inspection was not commented on. Was this True.
my Blog is at http: billinmissouri.blogspot.com

Thanks, Bill