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.
The White House discovered an affair (maybe with a man) when he was being vetted for CIA. After Benghazi, they held the affair over his head so he’d keep his mouth shut. Seeing the congressional investigations closing in on him, he resigns citing an affair and takes away the Obama administrations ammo to use on him.
Perfect cover up for Obama. Affairs are O.k. in the Democrat world and the right isn’t going to beat up on a military hero. I don’t buy this story either and Chris Wallace doesn’t need to be so sanctimonious.
The White House discovered an affair (maybe with a man) when he was being vetted for CIA. After Benghazi, they held the affair over his head so he’d keep his mouth shut. Seeing the congressional investigations closing in on him, he resigns citing an affair and takes away the Obama administrations ammo to use on him.
ReaganWasRight on November 9, 2012 at 3:17 PM
Plausible. If so, will he still dish? Hmmmmm.
conservative pilgrim on November 9, 2012 at 3:19 PM
A general removed (fired), an admiral removed (probably will be fired) and Petraeus forced or compelled to resign – all to either:
a)aid the Benghazi cover-up
b)ensure against a military coup
I think Obama is savy enough to keep military and intelligence people in revolving chairs to insure against any type of concensus or assembly against him. Because his agenda IS THAT EXTREME.
I think Obama is savy enough to keep military and intelligence people in revolving chairs to insure against any type of concensus or assembly against him. Because his agenda IS THAT EXTREME.
michaelthomas on November 9, 2012 at 3:19 PM
Ayeah. One of the very few things he does know is how to play both ends against the middle.
A. He’s had an affair and feels disgraced and is stepping down to take care of personal issues or …
B. He’s using the affair as an excuse to “innoculate” himself from the Benghazi fallout.
If it’s “B” – he must know the truth – all of the truth – will come out on Benghazi sooner or later. If he did wrong in Benghazi (and he probably did) … it’ll be revealed.
If he is taking the fall for Obama then Obama is so much more powefull than any of us could ever imagine.
cw10036 on November 9, 2012 at 3:23 PM
Obama has proven he knows how to play hardball. Everybody has seen it and knows it. Sometimes he uses a roundabout way (ATF, EPA, executive order, etc) to cut somebody off at the knee caps. He can compromise people illegally and be righted by a liberal judge when it finally gets to court. He’s a very good bluffer and truly understands the techniques of intimidation.
I really fail to see what the big deal about having an affair is. Most of the influential men of history have had them. Certainly Thomas Jefferson had at least one affair.
I’ll tell you that I personally knew a lot of guys who died in the Afghan and Iraq wars who were HEROS to this nation and some of them had had affairs. Some even multiple affairs. Knew even more who had visited prostitutes either infrequently or regularly.
Bad people? I don’t think so.
It’s just sex man. Why do you think all the guys who get caught end up staying with their wives (if she allows it)? It’s because men separate love and sex. They love their wives – even love the sex they have with their wives. However, we like variety. Speaking for me – I don’t think any one woman is capable of satisfying me sexually. My appetite for it is voracious – I love women what else can I say? I love ‘em all.
Obama has proven he knows how to play hardball. Everybody has seen it and knows it. Sometimes he uses a roundabout way (ATF, EPA, executive order, etc) to cut somebody off at the knee caps. He can compromise people illegally and be righted by a liberal judge when it finally gets to court. He’s a very good bluffer and truly understands the techniques of intimidation.
We’re not taking about the secretary of transportation here. The head of the CIA could take anyone down including a President.
I heard about it somewhere, but holy hell… relieving a General for trying to bring his people home…
Washington Nearsider on November 9, 2012 at 3:29 PM
I read it from an obscure news outlet, but that kind of news could only come from an obscure outlet. Does it sound plausible? To me, yes. It sounds exactly like how it would have gone down (IMO).
What at this point is “verified”? You have to connect dots right now.
He was fired during the Benghazi attack at the very moment that he told the White House he was sending help despite orders to stand down.
General Ham’s second-in-command received the orders directly from the White House to have him removed – while the Benghazi attack was happening
michaelthomas on November 9, 2012 at 3:26 PM
You’re worse than the Lame Stream man. That story was never verified. Had it been – it would have been ALL OVER HA. It might have received a mention – but it was never hyped here as fact.
I won’t believe any of the positive conspiracy theories here. I believed Breitbart’s kids had the Khalidi video or somehting because AB said that he’d be vetted this time. I was wrong. They had nothing. I keep waiting for the ball to bounce our way once…JUST ONCE with this crap. It’s never going to happen.
We are stuck with this guy and with the idiots that elected him. Period.
Petraeus’ wife, Holly, also works in the Obama administration, for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Isn’t this the a new bureau setup by Dodd/Frank? How did his wife manage to get a job there? He is a fine general but whoever thought this guy was conservative was crazy. Cronyism, affairs….the guy is a Democrat for sure.
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: « Previous 1 2
WTF? Since when do politicians resign because of an affair? Especially in a Democratic Administration.
WisRich on November 9, 2012 at 3:12 PM
Petraeus is not a politician.
celticdefender on November 9, 2012 at 3:16 PM
Face it, we’re never going to get the truth about Benghazi.
rcpjr on November 9, 2012 at 3:16 PM
With a girl or a boy? Perspiring minds want to know.
platypus on November 9, 2012 at 3:16 PM
Hmmmm! Do you think that outed him because he was going to spill on Benghazi?
texgal on November 9, 2012 at 3:16 PM
Everything is conveniently falling nicely in place for Obama.
Who needs a tinfoil hat when reality is so close to conspiracy?
portlandon on November 9, 2012 at 3:16 PM
Loose weenie syndrome
faraway on November 9, 2012 at 3:16 PM
If he were honorable he would have informed the public early and not aided in a coverup.
Sorry… I have to disagree he’s honorable.
kim roy on November 9, 2012 at 3:16 PM
Yup, a real coward.
the_nile on November 9, 2012 at 3:17 PM
Let the conspiracy theories begin. Here’s mine:
The White House discovered an affair (maybe with a man) when he was being vetted for CIA. After Benghazi, they held the affair over his head so he’d keep his mouth shut. Seeing the congressional investigations closing in on him, he resigns citing an affair and takes away the Obama administrations ammo to use on him.
ReaganWasRight on November 9, 2012 at 3:17 PM
Perfect cover up for Obama. Affairs are O.k. in the Democrat world and the right isn’t going to beat up on a military hero. I don’t buy this story either and Chris Wallace doesn’t need to be so sanctimonious.
BettyRuth on November 9, 2012 at 3:17 PM
He’s still culpable and he’s still subject to subpoenas so don’t get your panties in a wad just because he resigned.
Besides — he is much more likely to dish now too.
FlatFoot on November 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM
Plausible. If so, will he still dish? Hmmmmm.
conservative pilgrim on November 9, 2012 at 3:19 PM
Chicago thugs play hardball politics…
d1carter on November 9, 2012 at 3:19 PM
A general removed (fired), an admiral removed (probably will be fired) and Petraeus forced or compelled to resign – all to either:
a)aid the Benghazi cover-up
b)ensure against a military coup
I think Obama is savy enough to keep military and intelligence people in revolving chairs to insure against any type of concensus or assembly against him. Because his agenda IS THAT EXTREME.
michaelthomas on November 9, 2012 at 3:19 PM
I wonder why General Ham is retiring..?
d1carter on November 9, 2012 at 3:20 PM
Not hardly. he was part of the coverup.
a capella on November 9, 2012 at 3:20 PM
Oliver Stone, please pick up a white courtesy phone……
portlandon on November 9, 2012 at 3:20 PM
Ayeah. One of the very few things he does know is how to play both ends against the middle.
MelonCollie on November 9, 2012 at 3:21 PM
If he is taking the fall for Obama then Obama is so much more powefull than any of us could ever imagine.
cw10036 on November 9, 2012 at 3:23 PM
Soooo his knees are in danger then?
orbitalair on November 9, 2012 at 3:24 PM
He was fired during the Benghazi attack at the very moment that he told the White House he was sending help despite orders to stand down.
General Ham’s second-in-command received the orders directly from the White House to have him removed – while the Benghazi attack was happening
michaelthomas on November 9, 2012 at 3:26 PM
“Betrayus”, indeed.
totherightofthem on November 9, 2012 at 3:28 PM
We’ll see how this plays out …
A. He’s had an affair and feels disgraced and is stepping down to take care of personal issues or …
B. He’s using the affair as an excuse to “innoculate” himself from the Benghazi fallout.
If it’s “B” – he must know the truth – all of the truth – will come out on Benghazi sooner or later. If he did wrong in Benghazi (and he probably did) … it’ll be revealed.
HondaV65 on November 9, 2012 at 3:28 PM
Was that ever verified?
I heard about it somewhere, but holy hell… relieving a General for trying to bring his people home…
Washington Nearsider on November 9, 2012 at 3:29 PM
WTF? Supposedly an aide to Princess Fauxcahontes.
NotCoach on November 9, 2012 at 3:31 PM
Why now? How long have others known about the affair?
faraway on November 9, 2012 at 3:32 PM
Obama has proven he knows how to play hardball. Everybody has seen it and knows it. Sometimes he uses a roundabout way (ATF, EPA, executive order, etc) to cut somebody off at the knee caps. He can compromise people illegally and be righted by a liberal judge when it finally gets to court. He’s a very good bluffer and truly understands the techniques of intimidation.
michaelthomas on November 9, 2012 at 3:34 PM
I really fail to see what the big deal about having an affair is. Most of the influential men of history have had them. Certainly Thomas Jefferson had at least one affair.
I’ll tell you that I personally knew a lot of guys who died in the Afghan and Iraq wars who were HEROS to this nation and some of them had had affairs. Some even multiple affairs. Knew even more who had visited prostitutes either infrequently or regularly.
Bad people? I don’t think so.
It’s just sex man. Why do you think all the guys who get caught end up staying with their wives (if she allows it)? It’s because men separate love and sex. They love their wives – even love the sex they have with their wives. However, we like variety. Speaking for me – I don’t think any one woman is capable of satisfying me sexually. My appetite for it is voracious – I love women what else can I say? I love ‘em all.
HondaV65 on November 9, 2012 at 3:36 PM
cw10036 on November 9, 2012 at 3:36 PM
No that’s all tin foil sh1t that was NEVER verified.
HondaV65 on November 9, 2012 at 3:37 PM
I read it from an obscure news outlet, but that kind of news could only come from an obscure outlet. Does it sound plausible? To me, yes. It sounds exactly like how it would have gone down (IMO).
What at this point is “verified”? You have to connect dots right now.
michaelthomas on November 9, 2012 at 3:38 PM
You’re worse than the Lame Stream man. That story was never verified. Had it been – it would have been ALL OVER HA. It might have received a mention – but it was never hyped here as fact.
It is not fact until we have verified it.
HondaV65 on November 9, 2012 at 3:39 PM
No you don’t. You can be responsible and stop slandering people with rumors and innuendo.
I hope I never see you b1tching about the Lame Stream and their disgraceful journalistic practices.
HondaV65 on November 9, 2012 at 3:40 PM
I won’t believe any of the positive conspiracy theories here. I believed Breitbart’s kids had the Khalidi video or somehting because AB said that he’d be vetted this time. I was wrong. They had nothing. I keep waiting for the ball to bounce our way once…JUST ONCE with this crap. It’s never going to happen.
We are stuck with this guy and with the idiots that elected him. Period.
-Eeyore
CycloneCDB on November 9, 2012 at 3:42 PM
michaelthomas on November 9, 2012 at 3:43 PM
I’m making comments on a blog. I’m not broadcasting “news” to millions of people between McDonald’s and Ford Trucks commercials.
So cool down.
michaelthomas on November 9, 2012 at 3:46 PM
Isn’t this the a new bureau setup by Dodd/Frank? How did his wife manage to get a job there? He is a fine general but whoever thought this guy was conservative was crazy. Cronyism, affairs….the guy is a Democrat for sure.
Rocks on November 9, 2012 at 4:15 PM
Color me skeptical.
petefrt on November 9, 2012 at 5:11 PM
kim roy on November 9, 2012 at 3:16 PM
Maybe you’re right…sadly.
PattyJ on November 9, 2012 at 5:18 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2