King on Petraeus scandal: This is a “crisis of major proportions”

posted at 12:11 pm on November 12, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

On MSNBC this morning, Rep. Peter King, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee and member of the Intelligence Committee, discussed the sketchy timeline of the events leading up to David Petraeus’ resignation as head of the CIA and the questions that Congress is still looking to get answered.

Joe Scarborough for one is skeptical about the proffered narrative, to say the least.

KING: I don’t know how this rises to the level of an FBI investigation. … Once the FBI realized that it was investigating the director of the CIA or the CIA director had come within its focus or its scope, I believe at that time they had an absolute obligation to tell the president. Not to protect David Petraeus, but to protect the president. … The fact is he is a key part of the president’s foreign policy team, maybe more than any other CIA director in recent times. … And to have someone out there in such a sensitive position who the FBI thought perhaps could have been compromised or was under the scope of an FBI investigation who may or may not have been having an affair at the time, that to me had to have been brought to the president or certainly to the National Security Council. If not, the FBI was derelict in its duty.

SCARBOROUGH: Peter, it is mind-blowing to think that the director of the FBI knew about this from the summer, has almost daily contacts with the president of the United States, knows that the man who’s entrusted to, in effect, run the War on Terror, may be compromised? And he doesn’t say anything to the president of the United States for months? Somebody needs to be fired here. This is ridiculous.

KING: This is a crisis, I believe, of major proportions. … I’m not into conspiracy theories, but I certainly have questions. For instance, my first concern is with the FBI: Why they went ahead with the investigation and why they didn’t tell somebody above. If they did tell somebody above, it would have been Eric Holder. And in that case, Holder should have gone to the president.

As Ed already pointed out this morning, the timing of this latest debacle just gets curioser and curioser. Not only will Congress be investigating the FBI’s investigation of the former CIA director, but they’re not ruling out calling Petraeus to testify during the upcoming Benghazi hearings regardless of his resignation.

Operation Fast & Furious was reason enough to be up in arms over the way the president seems to be running his administration, but then came Benghazi and now this? It’s hard not to wonder what the heck is going on over there. I think I’m with Joe Scarborough on this one: “The FBI, the attorney general, everybody better get their story straight fast, because this doesn’t add up.”


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

I think I’m with Joe Scarborough on this one: “The FBI, the attorney general, everybody better get their story straight fast, because this doesn’t add up.”

Oh don’t you worry about that one, sister….we are and you’ll like it too!
@ValJarrett

ted c on November 12, 2012 at 12:13 PM

Time for a photo op, that will straighten everything out…

right2bright on November 12, 2012 at 12:14 PM

“The FBI, the attorney general, everybody better get their story straight fast, because this doesn’t add up.”

Just another in a long line of cr*p sandwiches we will be fed. Grand standing writ large.

chemman on November 12, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Nobody cares. This is going to end up looking like the witch-hunt thing with Lewinsky.

earlgrey133 on November 12, 2012 at 12:17 PM

“The FBI, the attorney general, everybody better get their story straight fast, because this doesn’t add up.”

Why? Contradictory stories never mattered before with this administration.

The Rogue Tomato on November 12, 2012 at 12:17 PM

KING: This is a crisis, I believe, of major proportions. … I’m not into conspiracy theories, but I certainly have questions. For instance, my first concern is with the FBI: Why they went ahead with the investigation and why they didn’t tell somebody above. If they did tell somebody above, it would have been Eric Holder. And in that case, Holder should have gone to the president.

Well, to that, maybe they start out with a posture that assumes “somebody above” might be involved.

Axe on November 12, 2012 at 12:18 PM

“The FBI, the attorney general, everybody better get their story straight fast, because this doesn’t add up.”

That’s a very corrupt suggestion.

It also implies an assumption OF CONSPIRACY.

I know people cringe at the use of that word, “conspiracy,” but that statement there quoted is saying, literally, that there needs to be a shared, homogenous testimony BY INDIVIDUALS CONSPIRING TOGETHER TO AUTHOR ONE.

Let them say what they say, disparate or not. The more homogenous the statements, the less credible they likely will be. Or, rather, the more “conspiratorial” in nature they can be considered to be.

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Executive privilege coming in short order

cmsinaz on November 12, 2012 at 12:20 PM

KING: This is a crisis, I believe, of major proportions. … I’m not into conspiracy theories, but I certainly have questions. For instance, my first concern is with the FBI: Why they went ahead with the investigation and why they didn’t tell somebody above. If they did tell somebody above, it would have been Eric Holder. And in that case, Holder should have gone to the president.

Well, to that, maybe they start out with a posture that assumes “somebody above” might be involved.

Axe on November 12, 2012 at 12:18 PM

I agree with King’s suspicions and curiosity.

I also think that whatever investigation the FBI was engaged in, HOlder was aware of and did, indeed, inform Obama about. At the time.

Obama’s story or what’s being now said about him is that he “just” was informed or, presto, the “suddenly appearing issue” was made known to him, blahblahblah.

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 12:21 PM

I think, that somewhere, there is a tent with a camel in it waiting for a missile to go up its butt.

LoganSix on November 12, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Petraeus revelation began as cyber-harassment probe; investigation ended 4 days before election

The FBI and Justice Department’s decisions on the case were not governed by the political calendar, the official asserted.

That’s all you need to know, so just hesh up Erika, ya heah.

Flora Duh on November 12, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Do you remember in late October when Drudge was hyping a new a sex scandal headline to hit Obama campaign? Makes me wonder…

Fallon on November 12, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Isn’t it time to start calling for an independent prosecutor?

This is beyond Congress. We have the White House, Defense, State, CIA and FBI all involved in a massive scandal withholding information until after the election. Disgraceful.

monalisa on November 12, 2012 at 12:24 PM

So is this the convincer for Holder to resign?

docflash on November 12, 2012 at 12:24 PM

King on Petraeus scandal: This is a “crisis of major proportions”

“You mean cuzza all the sex and stuff, right?”
-NBC/CBS/ABC/CNN

CycloneCDB on November 12, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 12:21 PM

K. But as a general operating procedure, I’d prefer they sniff Holder at least once before opening their mouths to anyone about anything.

. . . if I had a scorecard that showed me the bad guys from the good guys, this would be a lot easier. Even baddish from goodish.

Axe on November 12, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Rep. Peter King, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee and member of the Intelligence Committee,

I’m curious what King and House are going to do about what they find. It’s a given that the Senate will be busy investigating and hearing and then they’ll write something up and then it’ll all just go away after they cluck about it for a while but nothing will actually result.

With the House, with King, they may take action and I’d like to know what that might be, where this’ll go.

Otherwise, Baby Baracky will just keep on keepin’ on and deny it was anything but “a natural protest” and put US Citizens in jail and ban videos and statements that “insult Islam” and blahblahblah…

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Do you remember in late October when Drudge was hyping a new a sex scandal headline to hit Obama campaign? Makes me wonder…

Fallon on November 12, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Wasn’t that the prostitute story involving Sen. Menendez?

changer1701 on November 12, 2012 at 12:25 PM

I’m going with the blown hostage-for-prisoner-swap theory

faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Which is why it broke after the election.

gophergirl on November 12, 2012 at 12:25 PM

So is this the convincer for Holder to resign?

docflash on November 12, 2012 at 12:24 PM

No, no, no. He gets a promotion. You obviously don’t know how things work around here.

LoganSix on November 12, 2012 at 12:26 PM

2 days: crisis mode, and lamestream has written more about Broadwell than they have in 2 months since Benghazi attack.

Brat on November 12, 2012 at 12:26 PM

SCARBOROUGH: Peter, it is mind-blowing to think that the director of the FBI knew about this from the summer, has almost daily contacts with the president of the United States, knows that the man who’s entrusted to, in effect, run the War on Terror, may be compromised? And he doesn’t say anything to the president of the United States for months? Somebody needs to be fired here. This is ridiculous.

It isn’t really “mind-blowing” considering this administration.

Joseph Russo III on November 12, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Nothing will come of this. These events are only acted upon if the media pushes for the truth in the story. Our media elected obama twice now. They have no desire to pursue anything that will make him look bad or make them look like they were wrong about him.

This will be a story if they can isolate it to Petraeus and make him the fall guy for Benghazi. That’ll be a twofor. They protect obama and drive the stake even deeper into a military man they hated.

The obama administration. They’re not laughing with us, they’re laughing at us.

hawkdriver on November 12, 2012 at 12:26 PM

2 days: crisis mode, and lamestream has written more about Broadwell than they have in 2 months since Benghazi attack.

Brat on November 12, 2012 at 12:26 PM

election is over.

Joseph Russo III on November 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM

For instance, my first concern is with the FBI: Why they went ahead with the investigation and why they didn’t tell somebody above. If they did tell somebody above, it would have been Eric Holder.

Reports are still sketchy, but it sounds like they didn’t know it was Petraeus until pretty far down the road.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324073504578113460852395852.html

Ms. Kelley didn’t know who sent the emails. Some appeared to be accusing her of an inappropriate relationship but didn’t name Mr. Petraeus. Agents determined the emails were sent from an account shared by Ms. Broadwell and her husband, who live in North Carolina, the officials said.

Followed by:

They learned that Ms. Broadwell and Mr. Petraeus had set up private Gmail accounts to use for their communications, which included explicit details of a sexual nature, according to U.S. officials. But because Mr. Petraeus used a pseudonym, agents doing the monitoring didn’t immediately uncover that he was the one communicating with Ms. Broadwell.

By late summer, after the monitoring of Ms. Broadwell’s emails uncovered the link to Mr. Petraeus, prosecutors and agents alerted senior officials at FBI and the Justice Department, including Mr. Holder, U.S. officials say. The investigators never monitored Mr. Petraeus’s email accounts, the officials say.

So it sounds like once they found out Petraeus was involved the higher ups were notified.

jonknee on November 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Are you not entertained?

ElectricPhase on November 12, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Do you remember in late October when Drudge was hyping a new a sex scandal headline to hit Obama campaign? Makes me wonder…

Fallon on November 12, 2012 at 12:22 PM

That was about Bob “I so cheap and horny” Menendez.

hawkdriver on November 12, 2012 at 12:30 PM

At what point does congress put 2 and 2 together and realize this situation may have had an impact on the events of September 11, in Benghazi?

h a p f a t on November 12, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Don’t te too excited, its only about the Sex. (read Vagyna)

Benghazi goes nowhere -
Petraeus dummies up -
Life is good.

Lucy is still holding the football.

We are Pravda.

FlaMurph on November 12, 2012 at 12:31 PM

Funny how the timing of this whole Petraeus scandal is breaking at a very convenient time for Obama by sucking all the oxygen out of the Benghazi story.

Requiem for the Mainstream Media, All hail the New Media.

SWalker on November 12, 2012 at 12:31 PM

, that to me had to have been brought to the president or certainly to the National Security Council.

Wait one minute please, would this information have been told to King Obama in his daily security briefings that he never attended?

JPeterman on November 12, 2012 at 12:31 PM

Wasn’t that the prostitute story involving Sen. Menendez?

changer1701 on November 12, 2012 at 12:25 PM

That’s the story that eventually came out and was quickly forgotten about. What I couldn’t understand then is, what did Menendez have to do with the campaign, other than being a Dem?

Flora Duh on November 12, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Nothing a beer summit or photo-op won’t fix.

portlandon on November 12, 2012 at 12:32 PM

So it sounds like once they found out Petraeus was involved the higher ups were notified.

jonknee on November 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM

And 51% of Americans yawn and ask “is there any free sh!t for meeee?” They don’t care about this or anything else just themselves.

VegasRick on November 12, 2012 at 12:32 PM

If the election taught us anything it’s that Obama can do just about anything he wants. He could declare martial law tomorrow and the Senate and media would back him up. It’s gonna be a long four years.

tommyboy on November 12, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Nobody cares. This is going to end up looking like the witch-hunt thing with Lewinsky.

earlgrey133 on November 12, 2012 at 12:17 PM

So you don’t think lying under oath is any big deal.

katy the mean old lady on November 12, 2012 at 12:32 PM

My people

- Eric Holder

rogerb on November 12, 2012 at 12:34 PM

According to the WSJ Broadwell had “classified documents” on her computer.

Are we supposed to believe that that’s just hunky dory with the FBI and CIA?

Flora Duh on November 12, 2012 at 12:35 PM

OT but did you guys hear that “Elmo is running for the border?”

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/11/12/voice-sesame-street-elmo-denies-had-gay-sex-with-minor/

VegasRick on November 12, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Isn’t it time to start calling for an independent prosecutor?

This is beyond Congress. We have the White House, Defense, State, CIA and FBI all involved in a massive scandal withholding information until after the election. Disgraceful.

monalisa on November 12, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Patton would have them all shot.

VorDaj on November 12, 2012 at 12:36 PM

I predicted that Petraeus would not be subpoenaed on Benghazi after he resigned. And he won’t. The Rs want to get on with “governing” i.e. doling out some Ocare jobs and stash. Yes, the republican pols also get a big fat share of the OCARE goodies. And, of course, amnesty needs to get done.

This “scandal” is nothing compared to what happened on 9/11 and the admin’s response for weeks afterwards but ,ALAS , this “scandal” is going to be the final word.

3rd party, where are you?!? Let the R suckers keep sucking those MSM lollipops.

40% the country doesn’t vote. We are close to last in voting % for democratic nations.

BoxHead1 on November 12, 2012 at 12:37 PM

So the lesson here is everyone involved better all start telling the same set of lies.

HornHiAceDeuce on November 12, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Nobody cares. This is going to end up looking like the witch-hunt thing with Lewinsky.

earlgrey133 on November 12, 2012 at 12:17 PM

So you don’t think lying under oath is any big deal.

katy the mean old lady on November 12, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Oh come on katy, you should know by now that lying is only lying when a conservative does it.

SWalker on November 12, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Petraeus revelation began as cyber-harassment probe; investigation ended 4 days before election

The FBI and Justice Department’s decisions on the case were not governed by the political calendar, the official asserted.

That’s all you need to know, so just hesh up Erika, ya heah.

Flora Duh on November 12, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Qualifying statement first:

I’m not a Scientologist but I do understand a smidgen of what their organizational methods are.

Now my comment about the above:

Petraeus was “ripe” for discovery, in the sense that anyone and each is ripe for exposure as to the liabilities in each of our lives.

Scientology uses this sort of practice to, sort of, “leash in” people when they “go off” or stray from the CoS theology or what the rest of us would call their requirements or regulations for behavior as a member.

They first capture or make note of who you are, what your liabilities are, what your life’s details consist of, including issues or acts or such that you’re sensitive about and don’t necessarily feel comfortable being made public but might share in a confessorial relationship (such as what the CoS is, similar to, say, if a Catholic goes to Confession and shares with a Priest what they feel compromised about in themselves, only with Catholicism, the Church doesn’t write it down and save it for purposes of controlling your behavior later as they deem they want to while the CoS does do that)…

Anyway, by the sheer fact that Petraeus had these “variations” in his intimate relationship as a married man and as a member of the military (before being CIA head), those details could be used by others to modify his behavior and decisions. It’d be blackmail if a nefarious entity did that, while it’s the privilege of a superior or employer, so to speak, to do that with an underling and Petraeus is considered an underling to President when with the CIA and to the Joint Chiefs and military code when with the military (adultery while in the military is a violation of that code).

So it’s certainly possible that he was being coerced or still is because of his personal, private “details”…

He resigned but we don’t know if he did so because he was coerced or that he was getting out in front of coercion and acting first to remove leverage to avoid being coerced…

I don’t know but am just saying that Petraeus’ adulterous actions (this is all we know about so far) were enough to render him vulnerable to a variety of compromises. Maybe he acted the hero and resigned to avoid being compromised, maybe he resigned because he was presented with a worse scenario (“resign or we’ll do something…”).

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Before we get our collective panties in a wad over this; did Romney vet Petraeus for VP and know about this affair?

meci on November 12, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Slightly OT:

Broadwell also was a gun model for the KRISS arms company. Source.

TXUS on November 12, 2012 at 12:39 PM

That’s the story that eventually came out and was quickly forgotten about. What I couldn’t understand then is, what did Menendez have to do with the campaign, other than being a Dem?

Flora Duh on November 12, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Wasn’t Menendez running for re-election? I thought Drudge meant a campaign in general (Menendez’s), not necessarily Obama’s (though maybe I’m not remembering it right).

changer1701 on November 12, 2012 at 12:40 PM

This is going to end up looking like the witch-hunt thing with Lewinsky.

earlgrey133 on November 12, 2012 at 12:17 PM

.
Big difference:

It’s in the best interests of Obama for Petraeus to be as guilty as he can possibly convince the people.

The dominant “journalist community” is on Obama’s side, so Petraeus is GUILTY.

listens2glenn on November 12, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Before we get our collective panties in a wad over this; did Romney vet Petraeus for VP and know about this affair?

meci on November 12, 2012 at 12:38 PM

pretty moot, dont you think? The question would be valid only if Petraeus wasn’t the DCIA in the Obama Administration…. and if Romney had won, I think. .02cent

ted c on November 12, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Nothing a beer summit or photo-op won’t fix.

portlandon on November 12, 2012 at 12:32 PM

A guillotine would work a lot better.

VorDaj on November 12, 2012 at 12:40 PM

The eSTAB repubs have decided to surrender and give the Butcher of Benghazi cover for all of this. Oh, they’ll put on their little show for the sheeple, but then they’ll sweep it under the rug, just like they did with Fast & Furious. Morning Schmoe and his Libs in repub clothing are the biggest problem in the Govt. It’s clowns like him, Boehner, McConnell, McCain, Graham & the rest of the eSTAB-Conservatives-in-the-Back repubs, working with the Traitor-in-chief, who are Betraying this Country and selling out the people, for the sake of maintaining power, in such a cowardly and criminal fashion, they deserve the jail cell as bad as the Butcher of Benghazi!
Fight the Obama Enemy media or Kiss the Constitution Goodbye: http://paratisiusa.blogspot.com/2012/09/an-open-letter-to-those-who-should-know.html?spref=tw

God Bless America!

paratisi on November 12, 2012 at 12:42 PM

“What, me worry?”

-Maynard Barack G. Krebs Obama

totherightofthem on November 12, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Looks like the prisoner at the CIA compound may be true:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/11/fox-news-confirms-us-was-holding-prisoners-at-benghazi-annex-video/

Mitsouko on November 12, 2012 at 12:43 PM

According to the WSJ Broadwell had “classified documents” on her computer.

Are we supposed to believe that that’s just hunky dory with the FBI and CIA?

Flora Duh on November 12, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Good lord, she had Top Secret clearance

faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Im starting to lose track of all the Obama scandals. Will this one be ignored and swept under the rug like the others? Are we to believe Obama knew nothing of this, operation fast and furious, or the calls for more security in benghazi??

Jack_Burton on November 12, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Well, I think all of you SoCons need to shut up and evolve on this, too. They were both adults. After all, their behavior didn’t hurt anybody./sarc

kingsjester on November 12, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Looks like the prisoner at the CIA compound may be true:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/11/fox-news-confirms-us-was-holding-prisoners-at-benghazi-annex-video/

Mitsouko on November 12, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Do we still have the prisoners?

Or were they swapped for the Ambassadors dead body?

faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:44 PM

According to the WSJ Broadwell had “classified documents” on her computer.

Are we supposed to believe that that’s just hunky dory with the FBI and CIA?

Flora Duh on November 12, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Broadwell ALSO had access to and used a “personal email account” that belonged to Petraeus.

Imagine that, a person able to log into the head of the CIA’s email account, send, receive and read emails, which Broadwell did (she used his ‘private/personal email account’ to write those emails that are said were “threatening” to the woman in Florida who contacted the FBI about it, so the story goes).

Broadwell’s story, so far, suggests an intelligence operation as to Petraeus, NOT limited to “an affair”. I mean by that that she sure embodies a “personal hacking” experience of the person of Petraeus. It’s very, very weird to me that Petraeus would allow it, if that’s what he did knowingly, and certainly that he’d get intimately involved with anyone to that extent while certainly being aware of the code of conduct he was sworn to uphold.

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 12:45 PM

That was about Bob “I so cheap and horny” Menendez.

hawkdriver on November 12, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Who, it should be noted, got reelected. Just when I think “We the People” can’t get any more ignorant/insane/infantile, whatever, they go and prove me wrong.

totherightofthem on November 12, 2012 at 12:45 PM

That’s the story that eventually came out and was quickly forgotten about. What I couldn’t understand then is, what did Menendez have to do with the campaign, other than being a Dem?

Flora Duh on November 12, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Exactly.

Fallon on November 12, 2012 at 12:46 PM

So you don’t think lying under oath is any big deal.

katy the mean old lady on November 12, 2012 at 12:32 PM

I never said I didn’t, but most Americans don’t care. Look at the results of 2012 election

Elizabeth Warren-LIAR elected Senate
Jesse Jackson Jr.–re-elected in a landslide.

Americans don’t care about this. They don’t care about Benghazi. They don’t care about Fast & Furious. They only care about who has more money than them and how to get more free stuff.

earlgrey133 on November 12, 2012 at 12:46 PM

With modest orchestration by Congress this could turn out great.

First, drag the appropriate administration representatives before Congress to testify and in so doing leave a trail of goat pearls

Second, get Mrs. Clinton on record.

Lastly, Mr. Petraeus testifies as the clean up batter in light of all the foregoing bull substance.

Ta da!

Mason on November 12, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Looks like the prisoner at the CIA compound may be true:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/11/fox-news-confirms-us-was-holding-prisoners-at-benghazi-annex-video/

Mitsouko on November 12, 2012 at 12:43 PM

yes but it was all caused by a video /s

Joseph Russo III on November 12, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Before we get our collective panties in a wad over this; did Romney vet Petraeus for VP and know about this affair?

meci on November 12, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Petraeus was never vetted for the VP post, except in Drudge’s fantasies :)

jimver on November 12, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 12:37 PM

All of that simply to say that there are pictures of Petraeus somewhere in thigh-highs and a garter belt. [going to bathroom to scrub my brain now]

CycloneCDB on November 12, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Well, I think all of you SoCons need to shut up and evolve on this, too. They were both adults. After all, their behavior didn’t hurt anybody./sarc

kingsjester on November 12, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Puh. Sarc tagger. :)

Axe on November 12, 2012 at 12:48 PM

If the election taught us anything it’s that Obama can do just about anything he wants. He could declare martial law tomorrow and the Senate and media would back him up. It’s gonna be a long four years.

tommyboy on November 12, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Four?! You’re an optimist, bro.

Archivarix on November 12, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Broadwell ALSO had access to and used a “personal email account” that belonged to Petraeus.

Imagine that, a person able to log into the head of the CIA’s email account, send, receive and read emails, which Broadwell did

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Yea, imagine that. DP and his mistress set up a single email account to share.

Get some coffee. Remain Calm!

faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:50 PM

I’m nauseated by all of these scandals, including Beghazi and just about every other item on the plate today.

What a disgrace to the United States of America our leaders have become!

disa on November 12, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Good lord, she had Top Secret clearance

faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Why?

JPeterman on November 12, 2012 at 12:50 PM

The obama administration. They’re not laughing with us, they’re laughing at us.

hawkdriver on November 12, 2012 at 12:26 PM

I agree…

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 12:51 PM

I wonder if any liberals ever feel uneasy with whats going on.

rob verdi on November 12, 2012 at 12:52 PM

What we need is a Beer Summit. That’ll clear it up.

Idfaciam on November 12, 2012 at 12:52 PM

I’m nauseated by all of these scandals, including Beghazi and just about every other item on the plate today.

What a disgrace to the United States of America our leaders have become!

disa on November 12, 2012 at 12:50 PM

All according to the plan of Obama’s mentor (Alinsky)…

The goal is to foment enough public discontent, moral confusion, and outright chaos to spark the social upheaval that Marx, Engels, and Lenin predicted

— a revolution whose foot soldiers view the status quo as fatally flawed and wholly unworthy of salvation.

Thus, the theory goes, the people will settle for nothing less than that status quo’s complete collapse

— to be followed by the erection of an entirely new system upon its ruins.

Toward that end, they will be apt to follow the lead of charismatic radical organizers who project an aura of confidence and vision, and who profess to clearly understand what types of societal “changes” are needed.

faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Good lord, she had Top Secret clearance

faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Why?

JPeterman on November 12, 2012 at 12:50 PM

She was DP’s biographer. She was in intelligence. She was a major. I could go on.

faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Good lord, she had Top Secret clearance

faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Why?

JPeterman on November 12, 2012 at 12:50 PM

My first thought, too: “why” that clearance? Who granted it to her and why?

She said her goal was to be National Security Adviser, from an article I read yesterday. Her academic framework certainly shows that’s what she had in a goal.

But for being so well educated, she sounds very dumb. It shows how vanity stumbles people into assuming they’re not over their heads when they are.

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 12:54 PM

I wonder if any liberals ever feel uneasy with whats going on.

rob verdi on November 12, 2012 at 12:52 PM

NO! nothing , except a crying Petraues appearance on the View or Ellen, will come of this. The liberals are not, nor should they be, worried.

BoxHead1 on November 12, 2012 at 12:55 PM

She was DP’s biographer. She was in intelligence. She was a major. I could go on.

faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:54 PM

The biography has already been written and published.

She was in intelligence.

She was a major.

Past tense on all.

JPeterman on November 12, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Good lord, she had Top Secret clearance

faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Why?

JPeterman on November 12, 2012 at 12:50 PM

She was DP’s biographer. She was in intelligence. She was a major. I could go on.

faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Being a “biographer” doesn’t qualify one to top-security level clearance. Just saying. Though I have read about her academic and military cred so you’re right that she had achieved an above-average level academically. It still doesn’t explain her clearance.

About that book, “ALL IN,” bio. she authored on Petraeus, I haven’t read it but those who have have said it was badly written to the extent that they couldn’t finish reading it (“a mess” someone said, another said, “couldn’t finish it, terribly written” and similar).

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 12:58 PM

I agree with King’s suspicions and curiosity.

I also think that whatever investigation the FBI was engaged in, Holder was aware of and did, indeed, inform Obama about. At the time.

Obama’s story or what’s being now said about him is that he “just” was informed or, presto, the “suddenly appearing issue” was made known to him, blahblahblah.

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Yep, little Bammie and Jarrett knew about this the same hour that the moron Holder did, and the conversation probably started with “we scored some major dirt on Petraeus.”

slickwillie2001 on November 12, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Wait.
I thought sex was no big deal, as long as he’s doing his job. Right?
At least that’s what we were told when it was a President of the United States and an intern.

dverplank on November 12, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Benghazi?

Nothingburger. Politicians getting their panties in a wad all over some dead American Heroes left to die by the Administration?

Move along people. We need free stuff. And by the way, as mentioned earlier even the New York Times has now admitted it. If Texas is lost. It’s over. Aheeeeemmmm, it’s already over for the gop. Texas will just seal the coffin.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/12/us/politics/first-republicans-must-find-common-ground-among-themselves.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

In addition to losing both the popular and electoral votes for president, the Republicans lost nearly every swing state. Although the race was far closer than in 2008, Mr. Romney won two million fewer votes than Mr. McCain did against Mr. Obama that year.

Democrats, once fearful of losing the Senate, gained one seat there and four in the House. They also added seats in state legislatures.

The Republicans’ only bright spot, other than maintaining the House majority, came in governors’ races. They picked up a long-elusive seat in North Carolina, bringing their total to 30, the most by either party in 12 years.

The longer-term concerns for Republicans were revealed in exit polling. While Mr. Romney won the votes of 59 percent of whites, 52 percent of men and 78 percent of white evangelicals, Mr. Obama claimed 55 percent of women, 60 percent of voters under 30, 93 percent of African-Americans and more than 70 percent of Latinos and Asians.

Although the president’s majority shrank nationally, he won a larger proportion of Latino and Asian votes than in 2008. Among Latinos, Mr. Romney’s share of the vote fell 17 percentage points below the 44 percent won by George W. Bush in 2004.

Perhaps most ominous, the Latino share of the total vote rose to 10 percent from 8 percent in 2004, and the Asian share rose to 3 percent from 2 percent. The electorate is now 28 percent nonwhite, more than double the figure from two decades ago. That growth is certain to continue; in 2011, births to nonwhites outnumbered births to whites for the first time.

“It’s stunning that Republicans won the white vote by 20 points and still lost,” said Alan I. Abramowitz, a political scientist at Emory University who writes about polarization. Unless Republicans reverse the trend, he said, the rising strength of Latinos could doom the party’s ability to map a winning electoral strategy. Colorado and Nevada could soon join California and New Mexico as noncompetitive states for Republicans in presidential elections, with Florida not far behind.

“And eventually Texas,” Dr. Abramowitz added. “Not 4 years or 8 years from now, but in 12 or 16 years Texas is going to become a swing state. And if Texas becomes a swing state, it’s all over.”

There is NO OPPOSITION PARTY in D.C. This is why stories like the Fiscal Cliff and Benghazi and Fast and Furious, Solyndra etc are going nowhere.

Abandon the gop now.

PappyD61 on November 12, 2012 at 1:00 PM

I wonder if any liberals ever feel uneasy with whats going on.

rob verdi on November 12, 2012 at 12:52 PM

I think they’re mostly concerned about the wife’s biceps, who’se posting at HuffPo, who Justin Bieber is dating, if they can buy the new iPhone soon and if they’ll get a raise in ’13 on their EBT card. You know, stuff that matters.

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 1:01 PM

the libs have somthing on pete king. he’s always accusing someone of this or that and you never hear any conclusion.

what has peter king ever done? appear on morning joe.

what are we….idiots?

renalin on November 12, 2012 at 1:01 PM

I’m just excited for the video that sparked this scandal to come out! SPOILER ALERT: I hear the acting is much better in this one than the Mohammed video…

TheAudacityofNOPE on November 12, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Somebody needs to be fired here.

We had our chance last Tuesday, and blew it.

rbj on November 12, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Wait.
I thought sex was no big deal, as long as he’s doing his job. Right?
At least that’s what we were told when it was a President of the United States and an intern.

dverplank on November 12, 2012 at 12:58 PM

It only matters if you can be bribed/blackmailed for intelligence information…which is why this is such a big deal. Petraeus has intelligence info that is valuable and worth blackmailing him. At least now we know why Obama avoids his security/intel briefings at all costs. If he doesn’t have itel there’s no reason to blackmail him. Everyone’s a winner!

CycloneCDB on November 12, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Paula Broadwell’s father: ‘This is about something else entirely, and the truth will come out

Lawdawg86 on November 12, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Interesting…

the_nile on November 12, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Good lord, she had Top Secret clearance

faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Why?

JPeterman on November 12, 2012 at 12:50 PM

She worked for an FBI Joint Terrorist Task Force and the US Special Operations Command, she’s a former counterterror operaive, but my understanding is that all her assignments/experiences are at past tense, I don’t think she was having TS at the time Benghazi happened. She did say though that she had access to some classified info (some journalists do too) that she needed for her book about Petraeus. she is also a Major in the Army Reserve, so it’s not unusual for them to give her access to some classified info in her capacity as a researcher and given that she was vetted in the past and held TS clearance and counterterror jobs.

jimver on November 12, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Would the media since getting Obama elected attempt to restore their reputation by taking him down? Their ideology would not take a blow and at some point self preservation takes over hmmm…

Poor Mika was she sitting on a pine cone?

Theworldisnotenough on November 12, 2012 at 1:05 PM

About that book, “ALL IN,” bio. she authored on Petraeus, I haven’t read it but those who have have said it was badly written to the extent that they couldn’t finish reading it (“a mess” someone said, another said, “couldn’t finish it, terribly written” and similar).

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 12:58 PM

If you discount all of the one star reviews that just popped up over at Amazon in the past 3 days, I suspect you are right on the book being poorly written.

All In: The Education of General David Petraeus

The book is overpriced too.

JPeterman on November 12, 2012 at 1:06 PM

There is NO OPPOSITION PARTY in D.C. This is why stories like the Fiscal Cliff and Benghazi and Fast and Furious, Solyndra etc are going nowhere.

Abandon the gop now.

PappyD61 on November 12, 2012 at 1:00 PM

They need a forceful reminder.

the_nile on November 12, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Paula Broadwell’s father: ‘This is about something else entirely, and the truth will come out

Lawdawg86 on November 12, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Gahh, Broadwell is assumed to be qualified for, and holds, a top secret security clearance, is engaged in tongue-sharing with the Head of the CIA ***AND SHE’S TELLING HER FATHER ABOUT THE DETAILS***.

It sounds like they’re all a bunch of nutcases. Her FATHER knows the hidden details AND he’s talking to the press?!?! How screwed up IS that.

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Good lord, she had Top Secret clearance

faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Top Secret, Bottom Secret, and Victoria’s Secret.

Archivarix on November 12, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Look at the shiny object, the sexy shiny object…

right2bright on November 12, 2012 at 1:09 PM

JPeterman on November 12, 2012 at 12:50 PM

She worked for an FBI Joint Terrorist Task Force and the US Special Operations Command, she’s a former counterterror operaive, but my understanding is that all her assignments/experiences are at past tense, I don’t think she was having TS at the time Benghazi happened. She did say though that she had access to some classified info (some journalists do too) that she needed for her book about Petraeus. she is also a Major in the Army Reserve, so it’s not unusual for them to give her access to some classified info in her capacity as a researcher and given that she was vetted in the past and held TS clearance and counterterror jobs.

jimver on November 12, 2012 at 1:04 PM

You forgot: AND she’s sharing all that top secret information with her father, a basketball coach, who is speaking freely to the press…

My impression is she’s sleeping around to get those “top secret security clearances” and likely especially talented at what Petraeus referred to as her “below the desk” activity.

BECAUSE OTHERWISE she sounds like a beer truck without brakes OR driver.

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 1:10 PM

About that book, “ALL IN,” bio. she authored on Petraeus, I haven’t read it but those who have have said it was badly written to the extent that they couldn’t finish reading it (“a mess” someone said, another said, “couldn’t finish it, terribly written” and similar).

Lourdes on November 12, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Sounds like she got the title right…

right2bright on November 12, 2012 at 1:10 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3