Breaking: CIA Director Petraeus Resigning

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
Sure...........the guy can keep thousands of national secrets............and can't keep an affair secret?

I had an answer... Because that would require silencing the woman, permanently... And what goes for national secrets won't be permissible in personal matters.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Hefficide

The house cleaning and exodus begins. The fallout of Benghazi I would think.

Next will likely be Hillary IMO.

Are you saying that she was the Petraeus' girlfriend? Wow.

I think he meant Hillary would be the next to resign. But that's no secret, she has already stated that.

Originally posted by OneisOne

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Hefficide

The house cleaning and exodus begins. The fallout of Benghazi I would think.

Next will likely be Hillary IMO.

Are you saying that she was the Petraeus' girlfriend? Wow.

I think he meant Hillary would be the next to resign. But that's no secret, she has already stated that.

Come on, I said it in a jest. It's been a long week, I suppose.

FOX News's top notch intel corespondent Catherine Herridge is reporting that there had been an FBI investigation into another matter and that they came upon the Petreaus affair quite accidentally (yea sure ) - Herridge hinted at a possible set-up. BTW she's (the other woman) very attractive and military - pics on FOX - and apparently she worked closely with him. Recall Eisenhower and his female aide de camp? .......Anyway this story is much bigger than we may have first thought. Herridge says that rather than quieting things down this takes the Benghazi scandal to a whole new level. Pertaues is "lawyer-ing up" according to her.


Name - Paula Broadwell - she was his biographer FBI involved from beginning - suspected blackmail or some such thing!

Question - Did the affair have something to do with Petreaus's weird behavior regarding Benghazi?

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Come on, I said it in a jest. It's been a long week, I suppose.

You have my sincerest apologies buddhasystem!

I got piled on earlier for being sarcastic, so I know it stinks.

reply to post by xpert11


Nah - it says the biographer was his paramour.

SHE was military herself. US.

More reason I don't buy the blackmail security clearance OMG thing, but I do buy that these women are being used as pawns, most likely by their own agreement.

The story looks like he was having an affair with Paula, and she tried to hack his email. That's how the news of the affair 'broke' into the public, so he had to resign.

Yet, he was her 'subject' as well as her lover and they were together a lot. She knew he was married. He obviously had told her TONS about his life - It's all so convenient - I don't buy it. Maybe she did try to access his email - IF she was jealous that he had yet a 3rd lover.

Oh, if we don't start buying it, he might end up as popular with the ladies as Tiger Woods.

Originally posted by hadriana
reply to post by Guyfriday

 

I dunno, but the FBI is involved questioning the foreign witnesses in Benghazi as I understand it. Please correct me if I am WRONG.
Which is kinda weird to me...the whole jurisdiction thing.

But I guess you really shouldn't investigate yourself, huh?

This is exactly what I was getting at. I understand why the FBI would be involved with the investigation, but I was always surprised that they got the lead on it. Maybe it was Petraeus handing the FBI the case so that he could get an investigation going on himself (or at the very least have someone say that they were investigating him)

It's really sad when even the MSM is saying conspiracy on this.

Originally posted by neo96

Sorry not seeing it telling people to behave themselves so they chose to draw the line at infidelity?

Waterboarding,torture,murder,mayhem all totally acceptable.

Cheat on your wife oh hell no!

I don't get what is so hard to understand about this....

Waterboarding (redundant to mention as this falls in to the torture category), torture, murder, mayhem are all totally acceptable because they HELP the CIA. An agent, let alone the DIRECTOR having an affair HURTS the CIA. That's the distinction here. It's nothing to do with morals, it's to do with hurting the organization.

He broke the rules, of his own admission, so he's out. He probably would have been "asked" to step down anyway if the affair was found out, which might have been what actually happened.

An affair leaves a person weak to blackmail. You cannot have that in people who's job is to BE the blackmailer, not the blackmailee (not a word probably, but you get the idea)

Did his affair actually cause him to get blackmailed? We don't know. Maybe someone DID try and blackmail him, and instead of giving in he came clean and quit. If this is what happened I commend the man, that's some integrity right there.

Even if there was no blackmail, or attempt at blackmail, he still broke the rules. If you work for a trucking company and drive drunk but still don't hit anybody, that doesn't matter. Just because your lack of adherence to the rules didn't result in anything bad happening doesn't excuse you from breaking those rules in the first place. Try telling a cop who gets you for a DUI that you didn't hit anyone. So what. You still broke the rules, whether or not doing so caused damage doesn't matter.

I think Holder is far more interesting than Petraeus, personally......

Originally posted by Guyfriday

But I guess you really shouldn't investigate yourself, huh? This is exactly what I was getting at. I understand why the FBI would be involved with the investigation, but I was always surprised that they got the lead on it. Maybe it was Petraeus handing the FBI the case

Why would Petraeus hand the case to the fbi, if their looking into his lover for hacking his e-mail???

Originally posted by James1982
Did his affair actually cause him to get blackmailed? We don't know. Maybe someone DID try and blackmail him, and instead of giving in he came clean and quit. If this is what happened I commend the man, that's some integrity right there.

My question is an "Affair" really happen, or is just an excuse for him to step down. If so it's a good excuse, everybody's going to be trying to hunt down the "Mystery Woman" while the real story takes place right in front of everybody's eyes.

reply to post by Guyfriday


Yep, I am in TOTAL agreement on that.
Normally the CIA would handle anything overseas as the FBI is 'domestic'

Domestic...snicker....

but the only witnesses were foreign nationals.

I still really think it was all about getting the Blind Sheikh back the the Muslim Brotherhood.
CIA didn't either have the right intelligence to make sure it down ok, or - to me more likely - they did not disseminate the information down far enough...but something happened and 'the hostage' got killed along with a couple of our guys trying to defend him. A bunch of foreign nationals died too.

And for some reason, Petreus and Obama or whoever was aware it was going on when it was going on, were just standing there probably crapping their pants a bit. Petreaus could have stood down intentionally to let Obama make a fool of himself. Could be two wrongs don't make a right. Just my working THEORY right now.

Originally posted by gangdumstyle
Why would Petraeus hand the case to the fbi, if their looking into his lover for hacking his e-mail???

edit on 9-11-2012 by gangdumstyle because: (no reason given)

Because I doubt that there was any investigation into Petraeus. Think about it; He gives the FBI a high profile case to single handly investigate, he gets someone to cover his tracks on this event.

reply to post by Hefficide


I have to agree with you here. The fact they are blaming this on an affair seems a bit off to me. And what do you know, this comes 3 days after the election? hmmmm......

I heard today as well that Hillary has put out a statement saying that her political carrer may be coming to a close. However, this is just hearsay so I do not know how accurate that is, althought, it was on talk radio. the reason they said was because she is just done with politics. However, I find that the frontrunner of the democratic party for 2016 would sit aside during this term.

thoughts?

reply to post by mmorse32


Hilary was directly involved in the negotiations for the blind sheikh.

www.theblaze.com...

www.commentarymagazine.com...

reply to post by hadriana


Like most people Petraeus thinks out his issues in a single style. With this in mind I'm going to go over his book; "The US Army & Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual" (inbn-13: 987-0-226-84151-9) and see if there are any tactics that are simular to what we're seeing going down. My guess is if there is, we can findout what he might be planning next.

Doesn't this support the assertion that Benghazi was a C.I.A. run operation?

I agree, Hillary MIGHT go. So..for sure this is an effort to rehabilitate U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice just in case she does. Rice may slot into Sec. of State. There was talk of John Kerry but that would leave his seat up for grabs in the Senate. After the Warren/Brown race, no one will want to risk that.

Petraeus will testify next week before Congress and, I bet, exonerate Rice's statements after the incident by chalking it up to bad intelligence.

I wonder if it has anything to do with this thread lol www.abovetopsecret.com...

Wouldn't it be interesting if he was somehow involved with this, same a Eric holder

Federal investigators have identified several dozen Pentagon officials and contractors with high-level security clearances who allegedly purchased and downloaded child pornography, including an undisclosed number who used their government computers to obtain the illegal material, according to investigative reports.

Pentagon that's us

reply to post by hadriana


interesting articles, thank you for the read!

seems like the puzzle pieces are coming together...

reply to post by digital01anarchy


Could be 3 wrongs don't make a right. (or a left for that matter)

There are big questions about the WEAPONS that ended up getting used in that attack.
They weren't 'oh let's go riot out of the blue' weapons.' They used 'let's plan this crap out well in advance' weapons

So is it just me, or does anyone else find it a bit hard to believe that it's so easy to hack the email of the director of the CIA?