Video: Say, why would the FBI be investigating a CIA director, anyway?

posted at 11:31 am on November 10, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Piers Morgan asked a pretty good question of former CIA agent Robert Baer on his show last night, and Baer is just as perplexed as Morgan.  David Petraeus suddenly resigned yesterday after the FBI discovered an extramarital affair with his biographer Paula Broadwell, but does the FBI routinely investigate the director of the CIA?  Baer tells Morgan, “There is something going on here,” apart from the sexual peccadilloes. Or could it be as simple as the old adage that “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”?

Baer tells Morgan that an affair with a biographer hardly represented a security risk.  At least “four or five” DCIAs in Baer’s time had sexual affairs that never warranted an internal security investigation, let alone an outside FBI probe.  Perhaps the issue of Broadwell attempting to access Petraeus’ e-mail could have touched something off, but shouldn’t that have been handled by internal CIA security?  This was, after all, Petraeus’ G-mail account, not a secure agency account.  And even if it was a secure agency account, wouldn’t that prompt an internal investigation rather than an FBI probe?

As Allahpundit noted in the Green Room as a teaser to this post, ABC’s Martha Raddatz says that the probe started outside the CIA, thanks to … a “fatal attraction” problem?

That prompted one of Raddatz’ followers to question Broadwell’s intellect:

I wouldn’t be surprised if this was true — people do some pretty dumb things, even intelligent people, when caught up in affairs — but it sounds rather odd.  However, not entirely odd, as Fox hears the same thing:

The FBI investigation that led to the discovery of CIA Director David Petraeus’ extramarital affair and his resignation Friday started when the agency began monitoring Petraeus’ email, Fox News has learned.

The agency was alerted that biographer Paula Broadwell, with whom Petraeus had the affair, may have had access to his personal email account.

The investigation began when someone reported suspicious emails allegedly from Broadwell to the FBI. The agency then determined that she allegedly had emailed a number of government employees. The FBI was at one point trying to determine whether any of the employees were being stalked, sources told Fox News. …

Source said the FBI investigation ended when the agency determined no criminal acts had been committed.

Marc Ambinder then answered the first question:

https://twitter.com/marcambinder/status/267292498513256448

https://twitter.com/marcambinder/status/267293341044068353

That does make sense.  The CIA can’t investigate domestic crimes outside of the agency; that requires the FBI.  One has to think that the FBI, which has a long rivalry with the CIA, had to find the situation somewhat amusing in the end.

On the other hand … who was stalking whom, here (emphasis mine)?

However, an FBI source says the investigation began when American intelligence mistook an email Petraeus had sent to his girlfriend as a reference to corruption. Petraeus was commander of U.S. Forces in Afghanistan from July 4, 2010 until July 18, 2011.

The investigation began last spring, but the FBI then pored over his emails when he was stationed in Afghanistan.

The woman who was having an affair with Petraeus is a journalist who had been writing about him.

Given his top secret clearance and the fact that Petraeus is married, the FBI continued to investigate and intercept Petraeus’ email exchanges with the woman. The emails include sexually explicit references to such items as sex under a desk.

Such a relationship is a breach of top secret security requirements and could have compromised Petraeus.

At some point after Petraeus was sworn in as CIA director on Sept. 6, 2011, the woman broke up with him. However, Petraeus continued to pursue her, sending her thousands of emails over the last several months, raising even more questions about his judgment.

Still, Paul Mirengoff has an even better point:

If so, then it seems that the affair started before Petraeus became the director of the CIA. The background check on Petraeus when he was being considered for the CIA job must have been incredibly thorough. And, since an affair with an embedded reporter would probably have been difficult to keep fully secret, even an ordinary investigation might well have uncovered word of it.

Thus, it may be that the White House knew of the General’s affair before he became the DCIA.

I find it very difficult to believe that the kind of background check necessary for becoming DCIA would have failed to uncover the affair.  If the CIA didn’t learn of the affair in the first place, especially since it appears that Broadwell is hardly the model of discretion, doesn’t that call into question their ability to gather intel even in a fairly target-rich environment?  Or if they did, why would the FBI’s discovery of it require a resignation now, rather than a disqualification then?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Petraeus and Broadwell can both rot in hell. I feel sorry for her kids, they deserved better. Hope dad gets full custody.

clnurnberg on November 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM

Just noting that many people are taking these ‘news’ items as fact and drawing conclusions from them. Given what we know about the media and the leakers who feed them, is that a rational thing to do?

ElectricPhase on November 10, 2012 at 11:39 AM

Just wondering…what does the Speaker of House have to say about all this?

Nothing.

BobMbx on November 10, 2012 at 11:39 AM

This just gets sicker by the moment, doesn’t it?

While I have compassion for the aggrieved spouses, it appears that the sensational nature of this will be played up in order to blunt/prevent any credible testimony that Patraeus might give before Congress.

4Grace on November 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM

I find it very difficult to believe that the kind of background check necessary for becoming DCIA would have failed to uncover the affair.

Puppet mastery.

the_nile on November 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM

This whole mess sounds like something Brad Thor would write about in his novels? This is weird!
L

letget on November 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM

And now he doesn’t have to testify before congress about Benghazi, is what I’m reading elsewhere.

I haven’t seen any reason why.

Akzed on November 10, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Still, the White House, with concurrence by the FBI and Justice Department, held off on asking for Petraeus’ resignation until after the election. His resignation occurred three days after the election, avoiding the possibility that Obama’s ill-fated appointment of Petraeus could become an issue in the election.

FBI agents on the case were aware that such a decision had been made to hold off on forcing him out until after the election and were outraged.

“The decision was made to delay the resignation apparently to avoid potential embarrassment to the president before the election,” an FBI source says. “To leave him in such a sensitive position where he was vulnerable to potential blackmail for months compromised our security and is inexcusable.”

Michael Kortan, the FBI’s assistant director for public affairs, said he had no comment.

I posted this in the other thread, but it looks like the White House had known about this for months, at the very least! If so, and if they themselves used it as blackmail to make him tow the line on Benghazi, then this should be an impeachable offense! “Something smells rotten in Washington!”

texgal on November 10, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Idiots, politicians, but I repeat myself. This came from the top. It’s so machiavellian as to be inscrutable, but it came from the top.

Who is John Galt on November 10, 2012 at 11:42 AM

This guy is a stud. He and Christy should run on a ticket in 2012.

Rusty Allen on November 10, 2012 at 11:42 AM

I think the conclusions about the sleazy affair and emails are more rational than the “Petraeu is a saint who said no to blackmail in order to save the country and tell the truth” meme. He’s not a particularly honest man.
Hope Holly loses her 0 gig , too

clnurnberg on November 10, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Its amusing the press found out quicker what happened with Petraeus then Bhengazi.

rob verdi on November 10, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Hmmm,….FBI Investigation of the CIA,and yet,the FBI are taking
there sweet time on Benghazi,

and,its on Hopey’s watch!!

canopfor on November 10, 2012 at 11:42 AM

I’m having a hard time believing this has NO connection to the Bengazi coverup.

Mord on November 10, 2012 at 11:43 AM

This poor sick Republic is collapsing under the weight of its enormous stupidity and the lack of character and honor of its elected overseers. God help us because that’s about all we have left.

rplat on November 10, 2012 at 11:43 AM

I posted this in the other thread, but it looks like the White House had known about this for months, at the very least! If so, and if they themselves used it as blackmail to make him tow the line on Benghazi, then this should be an impeachable offense! “Something smells rotten in Washington!” texgal on November 10, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Would the senate convict Obooba after he was impeached?!

Akzed on November 10, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Aren’t you glad this didn’t come out before the election…you know like those Iranian jets firing on our drone..? And what else we don’t even know about yet?

d1carter on November 10, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Its amusing the press found out quicker what happened with Petraeus then Bhengazi.

rob verdi on November 10, 2012 at 11:42 AM

rob verdi:Precisely!:)

canopfor on November 10, 2012 at 11:43 AM

I’m having a hard time believing this has NO connection to the Bengazi coverup.

Mord on November 10, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Yup.

the_nile on November 10, 2012 at 11:45 AM

Is this the same FBI that took weeks to get to Benghazi..?

d1carter on November 10, 2012 at 11:46 AM

It’s going to be a very long four years.

gophergirl on November 10, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Aren’t you glad this didn’t come out before the election…you know like those Iranian jets firing on our drone..? And what else we don’t even know about yet?

d1carter on November 10, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Media cant risk Obamas political failures become politicized…

the_nile on November 10, 2012 at 11:47 AM

Normally one would fear blackmail over this from an enemy, not the POTUS. Oh wait!

Akzed on November 10, 2012 at 11:47 AM

I heard of Fox this morning that hill will be out of the country on the dates she was ‘asked’ to go before hearings? Wonder is she will ever be forced to testify? If she did, would she do the 5th?
L

letget on November 10, 2012 at 11:48 AM

The BIGGER question is:

WHO IN THE FBI HAS KNOWN ABOUT THIS FOR YEARS?

WHY WAS THIS NOT PRESENTED TO THE PRESIDENT WHEN
PETREAUS WAS BEING CONSIDERED, OR WORSE YET, VETTED
FOR CIA DIRECTOR?

AND WHO IN THE FBI SHOULD BE FIRED?

I think we all know the answer to that, which is why NO ONE in the FBI will be fired for not informing Obama of the General’s transgressions.

The General lost his Honor, but I firmly believe he fell on his sword and sacrificed his career rather than be blackmailed into lying about what happened in Benghazi!

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on November 10, 2012 at 11:48 AM

rplat on November 10, 2012 at 11:43 AM

^This.

Who is John Galt on November 10, 2012 at 11:48 AM

I agree with Lt. Col. Ralph Peters:

I don’t like conspiracy theories, I may be totally wrong, but the timing of this, again, right after the election and right before Petraeus is supposed to get grilled on Capitol Hill, it’s really smells.

kingsjester on November 10, 2012 at 11:48 AM

So,HilRod honours Ambassador Stevens,a couple of days ago,
and now Be-Tray-Us resigns!

Smacks of a concerted effort,by the WH,to get this behind them,
in any shape or form possible!!

canopfor on November 10, 2012 at 11:48 AM

An easily compromised Petraeus was less dangerous than a clean one to the regime. Not too hard a call.

clnurnberg on November 10, 2012 at 11:48 AM

A Dem Senator has Caribbean orgies with non Union hookers and it gets nary a mention.

A central figure in the Benghazi incident suddenly isn’t testifying and it’s cause an affair?

mmmmmm, smells like flowers

Slade73 on November 10, 2012 at 11:49 AM

……it’s the CIA for Obamas’ sakes.

Was this guy such a dope that he didn’t think his own emails were being read?

……very suspicious.

But who cares? No one.
The election is over, we’re all TEATERS now and move along.

PappyD61 on November 10, 2012 at 11:50 AM

At least “four or five” DCIAs in Baer’s time had sexual affairs that never warranted an internal security

Surprised that the head of the CIA can carry on any number of affairs without anyone doing a background check on the other party to ensure that’s no connection to a foreign government or criminal org. Although that does seem over-reaching.

Is there another, internal code of conduct that as long as the affair is with someone else with security clearance, it’s permissible?

bayam on November 10, 2012 at 11:50 AM

It’s going to be a very long four years.

gophergirl on November 10, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Sorry, darlin’ it’s gonna be longer than that. The Dark Ages come to mind….

Who is John Galt on November 10, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Well, that was a close one! I feel so much better that the FBI is great on investigating martial affairs.

moonsbreath on November 10, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Oh, please. There’s no way this was all a coincidence only DAYS away from Patreaus’ scheduled testimony. We didn’t all just fall off the turnip truck with a giant thud.

Murf76 on November 10, 2012 at 11:52 AM

…..and what about Menendez in New Jersey and his hooker scandal?

no problem for him. He got re-elected. No one cares.

PappyD61 on November 10, 2012 at 11:53 AM

I wonder what he’ll do now?

Mend things with Holly?
Write a creepy tell all?
Go away for a bit and end up 0′s Secretary of State?
Run off to a psych hospital and come back “renewed” and clean?
Live in obscurity?
Off himself?

clnurnberg on November 10, 2012 at 11:53 AM

The election is over, we’re all TEATERS now and move along.

PappyD61 on November 10, 2012 at 11:50 AM

How do I get on the teat? And where’s your D61 – I want it to go off nearby. Very nearby.

Who is John Galt on November 10, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Would the senate convict Obooba after he was impeached?!

Akzed on November 10, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Is this a trick question? Lol Of course not, but maybe, just maybe zero would be forced to resign. At the very least we could see some justice being served and some vindication for the corruption of zero and his administration. A girl can hope, can’t she?

texgal on November 10, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Just noting that many people are taking these ‘news’ items as fact and drawing conclusions from them. Given what we know about the media and the leakers who feed them, is that a rational thing to do?

ElectricPhase on November 10, 2012 at 11:39 AM

This, this, 100X this

BettyRuth on November 10, 2012 at 11:54 AM

A girl can hope, can’t she? texgal on November 10, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Sure, but you’re a woman and should know better…

Akzed on November 10, 2012 at 11:57 AM

I wonder what he’ll do now?

Mend things with Holly?
Write a creepy tell all?
Go away for a bit and end up 0′s Secretary of State?
Run off to a psych hospital and come back “renewed” and clean?
Live in obscurity?
Off himself?

clnurnberg on November 10, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Maybe call up that freaky ex Governor from South Carolina, (Sanford?) and go to lunch; compare notes.

BettyRuth on November 10, 2012 at 11:57 AM

O/T but another government shenanigan:

L.A. Cancels Plans to go after Parole Violators

Hardest hit: Nakoula Nakoula, now sentenced to one year in jail for offending the king…er, for violating parole.

PattyJ on November 10, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Mark Sanford looks like the saner adulterer here. At least his affair was based on reality and he’s not GLenn Close in drag.

clnurnberg on November 10, 2012 at 12:00 PM

why would the FBI’s discovery of it require a resignation now, rather than a disqualification then?

He wasn’t going to be testifying about Benghazi then.

As for

Such a relationship is a breach of top secret security requirements and could have compromised Petraeus.

Yeah, but having MULTIPLE affairs didn’t disqualify JFK, LBJ or Slick Wille.

Guess that job doesn’t require the same amount of integrity.

GarandFan on November 10, 2012 at 12:04 PM

mmmmmm, smells like flowers

…Jennifer??

Hammie on November 10, 2012 at 12:04 PM

If he’s not going to or doesn’t want to testify after the affair comes out, it makes one wonder what else is there that hasn’t come out yet. I thought it awfully strange at the time when Zero picked the general to be head of the CIA since at one time he had been thought of as the next big thing for the GOP. They already had this crap on him and knew it might come in handy in the future.

Kissmygrits on November 10, 2012 at 12:04 PM

The stink is just starting.

It will reach to Benghazi and into the Oval Office.

Barack will have to change his middle name to Milhouse.

profitsbeard on November 10, 2012 at 12:05 PM

She had access to his gmail account… “he” sent her thousands of emails harassing her… Maybe “he” was the she.

Akzed on November 10, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Akzed on November 10, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Nice try. But “he” could have changed his password. And what the heck is the CIA director doing using sloppy old gmail?

clnurnberg on November 10, 2012 at 12:08 PM

If he’s not going to or doesn’t want to testify after the affair comes out, it makes one wonder what else is there that hasn’t come out yet. I thought it awfully strange at the time when Zero picked the general to be head of the CIA since at one time he had been thought of as the next big thing for the GOP. They already had this crap on him and knew it might come in handy in the future.

Kissmygrits on November 10, 2012 at 12:04 PM

+100

texgal on November 10, 2012 at 12:09 PM

Message from General David H. Petraeus (US Army Retired)

Statement to Employees from General David H. Petraeus (US Army Retired)

November 9, 2012

Yesterday afternoon, I went to the White House and asked the President to be allowed, for personal reasons, to resign from my position as D/CIA. After being married for over 37 years, I showed extremely poor judgment by engaging in an extramarital affair. Such behavior is unacceptable, both as a husband and as the leader of an organization such as ours. This afternoon, the President graciously accepted my resignation.

As I depart Langley, I want you to know that it has been the greatest of privileges to have served with you, the officers of our Nation’s Silent Service, a work force that is truly exceptional in every regard. Indeed, you did extraordinary work on a host of critical missions during my time as director, and I am deeply grateful to you for that.

Teddy Roosevelt once observed that life’s greatest gift is the opportunity to work hard at work worth doing. I will always treasure my opportunity to have done that with you and I will always regret the circumstances that brought that work with you to an end.

Thank you for your extraordinary service to our country, and best wishes for continued success in the important endeavors that lie ahead for our country and our Agency.

With admiration and appreciation,

David H. Petraeus

Posted: Nov 09, 2012 02:50 PM
Last Updated: Nov 09, 2012 02:58 PM
Last Reviewed: Nov 09, 2012 02:50 PM
====================================

https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statements/2012-press-releasese-statements/statement-to-employees-from-petraeus.html

canopfor on November 10, 2012 at 12:10 PM

This guy is a stud. He and Christy should run on a ticket in 2012.

Rusty Allen on November 10, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Well.. there were lots of people who wanted Petraus to run in 2012… I guess we know why that didn’t happen now.

The stink is just starting.

It will reach to Benghazi and into the Oval Office.

Barack will have to change his middle name to Milhouse.

profitsbeard on November 10, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Seriously.. You know two words that scare me to death.. President Biden.

Illinidiva on November 10, 2012 at 12:10 PM

I wonder what he’ll do now?clnurnberg on November 10, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Become a Democrat, run for president and win!!

Deano1952 on November 10, 2012 at 12:13 PM

Booooooooooosh made him do it. Stay out da Bushes.

soghornetgunner on November 10, 2012 at 12:13 PM

mmmmmm, smells like flowers

…Jennifer??

Hammie on November 10, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Well-played.
Next UP. “Ah Need A Broad, Rick”
~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on November 10, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Can he refuse to comply with a subpoena?

Key West Reader on November 10, 2012 at 12:16 PM

profitsbeard on November 10, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Seriously.. You know two words that scare me to death.. President Biden.

Illinidiva on November 10, 2012 at 12:10 PM

A neutered dottard would just coast to ineffectual retirement.

profitsbeard on November 10, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Nice try. But “he” could have changed his password. And what the heck is the CIA director doing using sloppy old gmail? clnurnberg on November 10, 2012 at 12:08 PM

How often do you check your gmail sent box?

Akzed on November 10, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Become a Democrat, run for president and win!!

Deano1952 on November 10, 2012 at 12:13 PM

I always thought that Petraus was a Democrat.

Illinidiva on November 10, 2012 at 12:17 PM

I wonder if Petraeus and Broadwell were using the gmail account the way terrorists do, that is, preparing a draft but not sending it and then the other person can log on and read it and do a reply draft, etc. This would explain how she got his log in. Because I can’t really understand why he would have given her the log in otherwise. Unless she guessed it or whatever. But he would be able to tell if she was actually sending emails to other people from that account unless she was deleting the sent ones or something.

It’s also possible that somehow the husband got the gmail info and he’s the one who went in and sent the emails to stir things up. Or maybe Holly Petraeus did it. We really have no idea how many people had access to the account.

Petraeus is old and weird looking. He projects zero sex appeal. It really must be true that power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.

Bennett on November 10, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Dude damn near pissed away his entire life.

Bishop on November 10, 2012 at 12:20 PM

However, Petraeus continued to pursue her, sending her thousands of emails over the last several months, raising even more questions about his judgment.

I call BS on this.

“Thousands” means at least 2000.

“Several months” means probably at least three.

So let’s say 2000 emails over 100 days. That’s 20 a day. From a Four Star General who is now the DCI? Not likely. Doesn’t makes sense. Even 10 a day for 200 days doesn’t make sense.

As with much of the rest of the story, it doesn’t add up or make sense. Add in the Benghazi connection, another story that doesn’t make sense, and it keeps getting stranger and stranger.

farsighted on November 10, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Petraeus is old and weird looking. He projects zero sex appeal. It really must be true that power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.

Bennett on November 10, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Broadwell had stars in her eyes, methinks.

(And maybe other uncomfortable places as well...)

profitsbeard on November 10, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Petraeus to the CIA was a case of keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Obama knew Patraeus was compromised, and could play this card on him when needed.

IF we had a truthful media, this would be part of the story. Since we don’t all this will become is the personal distruction of a onetime American hero. They love that stuff!

Rockshine on November 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Can he refuse to comply with a subpoena?

Key West Reader on November 10, 2012 at 12:16 PM

No, and I suspect he won’t even try. I think he’s about ready to drop a dime on the WH over Benghazi, and why he got in front of the affair story and resigned.

TXUS on November 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Akzed on November 10, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Um, at least every day.

clnurnberg on November 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM

FYI… Broadwell on CSPAN2-BookTv in August.

farsighted on November 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Well…I just feel like Axelrod’s involved in this somehow. Surely, it’s not a coincidence.

But, this makes two well known generals that have been discredited or released or whatever since Obama took over (McChrystal being the other). If this had been under a Republican president, he would absolutely be called on it. What is it they used to say about Bush – “he may not have known, but it happened under his watch.”

I notice, too, how the media is making it sound like he was caught in the middle of an affair when, actually, it ended over a year ago.

sydneyjane on November 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Still all hearsay. Too many leaks for my taste. We now have heard more about this than why a video and a street riot was blamed for a coordinated attack by no less than three heavily armed teams against an embassy and a CIA safe house in Benghazi.

pat on November 10, 2012 at 12:27 PM

I notice, too, how the media is making it sound like he was caught in the middle of an affair when, actually, it ended over a year ago.

sydneyjane on November 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Why should we believe that it ended over a year ago?

Bennett on November 10, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Rockshine on November 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Always liked Tommy Franks better. More masculine too

clnurnberg on November 10, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Glad this came out after the election. America definitely didn’t need this distraction prior to Tuesday.
I know give fox news and the right wing blogs 100% permission to fire away on this Bengazi conspiracy.

loveofcountry on November 10, 2012 at 12:29 PM

farsighted on November 10, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Yeah, it doesn’t make sense that he’d be sending that kind of volume of emails. On the other hand, if Paula had access to his email account, and was Fatal-Attraction pissed off at him, she could’ve sent the emails via the account to herself and immediately deleted them right after sending.

TXUS on November 10, 2012 at 12:31 PM

loveofcountry on November 10, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Awwww. You made a funny. Here, have a banana. Now, go back to the kiddie table. Adults are trying to have a conversation….and it’s about your head.

kingsjester on November 10, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Akzed on November 10, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Um, at least every day. clnurnberg on November 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Why, don’t you know what’s in it?!

I just this minute looked at mine for the first time ever. I have emails in it going back to 2010.

Akzed on November 10, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Or, over. LOL.

kingsjester on November 10, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Hmm. In this article, she is the pursuer and “harasser.” But in this article, Petraeus is the unhinged one sending her thousands of emails. The second article clearly alludes to Petraeus being “distracted” by the woman and hinting at him being unable to do his job effectively. The stories conflict with one another, but we can see where this is headed. See “Benghazi Debacle,” Fall Guy, Scape Goat. conservative pilgrim on November 10, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Akzed on November 10, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Seriously.. You know two words that scare me to death.. President Biden.

Illinidiva on November 10, 2012 at 12:10 PM

Won’t happen for at least three reasons.

1. Obama’s Palace Guard, AKA the MSM, will ignore it, downplay it, dismiss it, call it playing politics, do all it can to divert attention elsewhere, etc.

2. The GOP learned their lesson when they impeached Billy Jeff for lying under oath in a court of law. It backfired.

3. The Dems have the Senate.

The best that can happen is keeping Obama and his admin off balance and on the defensive as much as possible, helping to minimize the further damage they will do. That is, assuming it isn’t already too late.

farsighted on November 10, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Patraeus would have already had the clearance necessary from hs career in the military and then it would have transferred to the CIA with only maybe some lateral access issues, but his basic investigation would have been done.

Sven on November 10, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Why was it necessary to humiliate his wife publicly? He could have given any excuse. It makes blackmail from someone the most plausible explanation, imo. Broadwell? The administration? If he was still planning on testifying, I would give him some credit. At this point I find his behavior deplorable and she sounds nutty.

poli-nana on November 10, 2012 at 12:38 PM

O/T: Because we all need a laugh after a long week:

Let’s hear it for the Dalai Lama!

Here’s the video.

Dopenstrange on November 10, 2012 at 12:38 PM

I find it very difficult to believe that the kind of background check necessary for becoming DCIA would have failed to uncover the affair. If the CIA didn’t learn of the affair in the first place, especially since it appears that Broadwell is hardly the model of discretion, doesn’t that call into question their ability to gather intel even in a fairly target-rich environment? Or if they did, why would the FBI’s discovery of it require a resignation now, rather than a disqualification then?

Since when has the Obama admin cared about intel? Our policy is now drone strike as a first resort because if we capture them we’d have to put them on trial in New York, so better, politically, to just off them and everything else in the blast radius. That’s why Obambi is so popular in the Middle East, you have to hope you have the discretion to keep at least 10 ft back from an Al-Queda operative every waking moment of your life or you might be blasted into oblivion as collateral.

BKennedy on November 10, 2012 at 12:39 PM

why would the FBI’s discovery of it require a resignation now, rather than a disqualification then?

If the background check revealed the affair back in 2011, maybe it was seen as leverage to use against Petraeus in the future, when/if needed?

steebo77 on November 10, 2012 at 12:40 PM

A Dem Senator has Caribbean orgies with non Union hookers and it gets nary a mention.

A central figure in the Benghazi incident suddenly isn’t testifying and it’s cause an affair?

mmmmmm, smells like flowers

Slade73 on November 10, 2012 at 11:49 AM

Actually, it smells like Chicago.

pilamaye on November 10, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Why was it necessary to humiliate his wife publicly? He could have given any excuse. It makes blackmail from someone the most plausible explanation, imo.

poli-nana on November 10, 2012 at 12:38 PM

I agree, it does.

As does his coming forward with it and resigning just days after the election, and coincidentally just days before he was scheduled to testify under oath before Congress on Benghazi, which he will not now be doing.

This isn’t all just a great big bundle of coincidences.

farsighted on November 10, 2012 at 12:43 PM

The investigation began when someone reported suspicious emails allegedly from Broadwell to the FBI.

However, an FBI source says the investigation began when American intelligence mistook an email Petraeus had sent to his girlfriend as a reference to corruption.

Which is it?

Did the FBI begin investigating because Broadwell was emailing Petraeus’s friends and colleagues, as the first quote suggests?

Or was Petraeus’s Gmail account already being monitored prior to the emails Broadwell sent to Petraeus’s friends and colleagues, as the second quote suggests? If so, on what grounds?

steebo77 on November 10, 2012 at 12:46 PM

When a POTUS improperly used a cigar, the Dems didn’t think it compromised anyone and demonized anyone who persued it.

MechanicalBill on November 10, 2012 at 12:48 PM

if Petraeus exercised bad judgment by having an extramarital affair, then it isn’t a stretch that his judgement about Benghazi could have been careless as well. Even if he’s subpoenaed by Congress to testify, the only thing we may gain is questionable truths and the picture Barky wants him to paint.

On the other hand, if Petraeus still has a modicum of honor left and would be willing to tell the truth about Benghazi, what else could Barky and Co have on him to ensure that if subpoenaed he’d hold to their version of events? Puzzling.

Slainte on November 10, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Say, why would the FBI be investigating a CIA director, anyway?

I’m sure Holder and his boss had nothing to do with it, just like Fast & Furious.

Akzed on November 10, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Rembember the story that Obama floated that Romney wanted PETRAEUS as VEEP?

Maybe Petraeus was having his emails read by ORCA? :-)

Speaking of ORCA……and how we wasted money on the Romney campaign.

Sources also said that arrogance played a big role, saying that the Romney campaign was a hostile battlefield of egos in which these consultants viewed any opposition to their world view as coming from an enemy. This apparently led to the ORCA program “receiving no stress test, no usage during super saturdays and no ability to have a Plan B or C when everything hit the fan.”

“The brain trust of the Romney campaign was so arrogant that they refused to change strategy. It was clear in June were SOL,” said one email.

Another source that closely studied the Obama campaigns GOTV efforts as compared to ORCA said bluntly that “the Obama training manuals made ORCA look like a drunken monkey slapped together a powerpoint” adding that we must duplicate and improve what they accomplished to have any hope for the 2014 & 2016 ground game.

But the failures in what was described as a “tightly wound consultant culture” didn’t stop there.

Stu Stevens of the Stevens and Schriefer Group was said to not be chasing poll numbers with the media buy strategy and appeared instead to be doing little more than “throwing darts at a dartboard.” At best using false numbers provided by ORCA; at worst milking the cash cow of the Romney campaign.

mmmm.

Have these gop TEATERS now moved over to the RUBIO/JEB BUSH 2016 camps?

PappyD61 on November 10, 2012 at 12:51 PM

I call BS on this.

“Thousands” means at least 2000.

“Several months” means probably at least three.

So let’s say 2000 emails over 100 days. That’s 20 a day. From a Four Star General who is now the DCI? Not likely. Doesn’t makes sense. Even 10 a day for 200 days doesn’t make sense.

As with much of the rest of the story, it doesn’t add up or make sense. Add in the Benghazi connection, another story that doesn’t make sense, and it keeps getting stranger and stranger.

farsighted on November 10, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Gmail has an instant messenger, so it’s also possible Petraeus (or someone using his account) sent thousands of short, one-sentence messages, rather than thousands of paragraphs-long emails. That would take considerably less time.

steebo77 on November 10, 2012 at 12:51 PM

No, and I suspect he won’t even try. I think he’s about ready to drop a dime on the WH over Benghazi, and why he got in front of the affair story and resigned.

TXUS on November 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM

That’s what I think as well. I always admired him, I hope he has a shred of decency to do what he can to help us get rid of Urkel.

Key West Reader on November 10, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Say, why would the FBI be investigating a CIA director, anyway?

Say, why would hundreds of FBI files on American citizens that should have never left FBI HQ go missing and mysteriously turn up on a table in Billy Jeff’s and Shrillary’s WH and no one knows how they got there, anyway?

farsighted on November 10, 2012 at 12:56 PM

I always thought that Petraus was a Democrat.

Illinidiva on November 10, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Well, then he is half-way there!!

Deano1952 on November 10, 2012 at 12:56 PM

linky to above full article.

http://www.redstate.com/2012/11/09/campaign-sources-the-romney-campaign-was-a-consultant-con-job/

PappyD61 on November 10, 2012 at 12:52 PM

I think it was infiltrated by Urkel’s team. I will never believe otherwise.

Key West Reader on November 10, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Everything old is new again.

The emails include sexually explicit references to such items as sex under a desk.

That’s romantic! What’s next, the janitorial closet? Behind a dumpster? How about a public restroom?

Paul-Cincy on November 10, 2012 at 12:59 PM

ust wondering…what does the Speaker of House have to say about all this?

Nothing.

BobMbx on November 10, 2012 at 11:39 AM

What does Boehner have to do with this????

royzer on November 10, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Gmail has an instant messenger, so it’s also possible Petraeus (or someone using his account) sent thousands of short, one-sentence messages, rather than thousands of paragraphs-long emails. That would take considerably less time.

steebo77 on November 10, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Not saying it’s not possible, theoretically. I could rig something up to send thousands of, or tens of thousands or more, emails in a day.

I’m saying it doesn’t make sense that either one of them would do something like that in any way it could be done. As far as I can tell, neither one of them are loons.

farsighted on November 10, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3