CIA director David Petraeus resigns

pjl44pjl44 Posts: 9,488
edited November 2012 in A Moving Train
Because of an affair. Before he was scheduled to testify on the Benghazi attack next week. Which he won't be doing now. Accountability, transparency, hope, change. Yep.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/09/so ... ?hpt=hp_t1
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1345

Comments

  • CH156378CH156378 Posts: 1,539
    :corn:
  • hedonisthedonist Posts: 24,524
    Dumbass for throwing away 37 years because he couldn't keep his dick in his pants.

    I'm curious though, how does his resignation affect his ability to testify? Doesn't he still possess the knowledge regardless of whether or not he's still Director?
  • pjl44pjl44 Posts: 9,488
    hedonist wrote:
    Dumbass for throwing away 37 years because he couldn't keep his dick in his pants.

    I'm curious though, how does his resignation affect his ability to testify? Doesn't he still possess the knowledge regardless of whether or not he's still Director?

    That was my question. From the CNN blog:

    [Updated at 4:52 p.m.] Acting CIA Director Michael Morrell will testify next week before the Senate Intelligence Committee about the fatal attack in Benghazi instead of David Petraeus, according to the office of that committee's chairwoman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein.
  • hedonisthedonist Posts: 24,524
    pjl44 wrote:
    hedonist wrote:
    Dumbass for throwing away 37 years because he couldn't keep his dick in his pants.

    I'm curious though, how does his resignation affect his ability to testify? Doesn't he still possess the knowledge regardless of whether or not he's still Director?

    That was my question. From the CNN blog:

    [Updated at 4:52 p.m.] Acting CIA Director Michael Morrell will testify next week before the Senate Intelligence Committee about the fatal attack in Benghazi instead of David Petraeus, according to the office of that committee's chairwoman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein.
    Ah, thank you, I'd missed that.
  • aerialaerial Posts: 2,319
    He will either tell the truth about what happened or lawyer up......
    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
  • Ok... is this 1967?

    Why do we care about an extra-marital affair?

    I mean honestly... who cares? Does this really affect anyone here?
  • maybe that was the way to get out....or to cover up something bigger..
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • tybirdtybird Posts: 17,388
    Ok... is this 1967?

    Why do we care about an extra-marital affair?

    I mean honestly... who cares? Does this really affect anyone here?
    Your top spy should not have a blackmail worthy secret....not a moral issue in this case.
    All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a thousand enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, prince with the swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed.
  • tybirdtybird Posts: 17,388
    maybe that was the way to get out....or to cover up something bigger..
    One take is that the CIA was completely wrong in the intel leading up to 9/11/12 in Libya....so, maybe...
    All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a thousand enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, prince with the swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed.
  • hedonisthedonist Posts: 24,524
    Ok... is this 1967?

    Why do we care about an extra-marital affair?

    I mean honestly... who cares? Does this really affect anyone here?
    Of course not; I don't think anyone in this thread has implied that...although opinions fly all over the place, so why not here too?

    I was more concerned initially thinking he wouldn't be testifying.
  • pjl44 wrote:
    Because of an affair. Before he was scheduled to testify on the Benghazi attack next week. Which he won't be doing now. Accountability, transparency, hope, change. Yep.

    http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/09/so ... ?hpt=hp_t1


    ummmm.... he resigned and admitted to an affair without anyone publicly knowing about it first. How is that anything other than accountability or transparency? Would you have felt better if his affair was outed in the press and he resigned in a scandal? It's easy to admit something and resign after you are caught, he didn't do that.
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • marcosmarcos Posts: 2,112
    hedonist wrote:
    Dumbass for throwing away 37 years because he couldn't keep his dick in his pants.

    I'm curious though, how does his resignation affect his ability to testify? Doesn't he still possess the knowledge regardless of whether or not he's still Director?

    Yeah, she's not even that hot. But I suppose it was just an opportunity thing attraction.
  • tybird wrote:
    Your top spy should not have a blackmail worthy secret....not a moral issue in this case.


    Right... but the secret is out now so can't really blackmail him with it anymore.

    But I guess I see your point. That' a very good reason.

    I guess it's a bit different for say... a line worker at a GM plant than the guy who knows the names and addresses of the SEALs who took out Bin Ladin.
  • SmellymanSmellyman Asia Posts: 4,524
    tybird wrote:
    Your top spy should not have a blackmail worthy secret....not a moral issue in this case.


    Right... but the secret is out now so can't really blackmail him with it anymore.

    But I guess I see your point. That' a very good reason.

    I guess it's a bit different for say... a line worker at a GM plant than the guy who knows the names and addresses of the SEALs who took out Bin Ladin.

    call me a conspiracy theorist, but I can gurantee they have way more to blackmail than a menial affair.
  • pjl44pjl44 Posts: 9,488
    pjl44 wrote:
    Because of an affair. Before he was scheduled to testify on the Benghazi attack next week. Which he won't be doing now. Accountability, transparency, hope, change. Yep.

    http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/09/so ... ?hpt=hp_t1


    ummmm.... he resigned and admitted to an affair without anyone publicly knowing about it first. How is that anything other than accountability or transparency? Would you have felt better if his affair was outed in the press and he resigned in a scandal? It's easy to admit something and resign after you are caught, he didn't do that.

    Nothing to do with the affair. As CIA director, he was scheduled to testify on the Benghazi attack next week. Now he's not. That's unsettling.
  • pjl44 wrote:
    pjl44 wrote:
    Because of an affair. Before he was scheduled to testify on the Benghazi attack next week. Which he won't be doing now. Accountability, transparency, hope, change. Yep.

    http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/09/so ... ?hpt=hp_t1


    ummmm.... he resigned and admitted to an affair without anyone publicly knowing about it first. How is that anything other than accountability or transparency? Would you have felt better if his affair was outed in the press and he resigned in a scandal? It's easy to admit something and resign after you are caught, he didn't do that.

    Nothing to do with the affair. As CIA director, he was scheduled to testify on the Benghazi attack next week. Now he's not. That's unsettling.

    I don't really see the big deal... The Deputy Director (now Acting Director) will testify. I'm sure they both got the same briefing and reports of what happened, and will divulge/not divulge whatever info that they want.

    Unless Michael Morell completely throws Petraeus under the bus, I think that this is a non-issue.
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    tybird wrote:
    Ok... is this 1967?

    Why do we care about an extra-marital affair?

    I mean honestly... who cares? Does this really affect anyone here?
    Your top spy should not have a blackmail worthy secret....not a moral issue in this case.

    and then there's this

    http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11 ... s-say?lite
  • pjl44pjl44 Posts: 9,488
    I don't really see the big deal... The Deputy Director (now Acting Director) will testify. I'm sure they both got the same briefing and reports of what happened, and will divulge/not divulge whatever info that they want.

    Unless Michael Morell completely throws Petraeus under the bus, I think that this is a non-issue.

    Wow. Would your opinion change if Morell fails to answer questions because he claims to not have the knowledge to do so? Also, why couldn't Petraeus appear before the committee anyway?
  • pjl44pjl44 Posts: 9,488
    norm wrote:
    tybird wrote:
    Ok... is this 1967?

    Why do we care about an extra-marital affair?

    I mean honestly... who cares? Does this really affect anyone here?
    Your top spy should not have a blackmail worthy secret....not a moral issue in this case.

    and then there's this

    http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11 ... s-say?lite

    Meh. Non-issue, apparently.
  • pjl44 wrote:
    I don't really see the big deal... The Deputy Director (now Acting Director) will testify. I'm sure they both got the same briefing and reports of what happened, and will divulge/not divulge whatever info that they want.

    Unless Michael Morell completely throws Petraeus under the bus, I think that this is a non-issue.

    Wow. Would your opinion change if Morell fails to answer questions because he claims to not have the knowledge to do so? Also, why couldn't Petraeus appear before the committee anyway?

    If he claims that he doesn't have knowledge of something, then yes, that's a problem. But how can the Deputy Director say that anymore than the Director could? And why start thinking conspiracy on what he is going to say before he even testifies?

    I'm guessing once Patraeus resigned, he wouldn't have the authority to speak on classified information? No idea there though.
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • norm wrote:
    tybird wrote:
    Ok... is this 1967?

    Why do we care about an extra-marital affair?

    I mean honestly... who cares? Does this really affect anyone here?
    Your top spy should not have a blackmail worthy secret....not a moral issue in this case.

    and then there's this

    http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11 ... s-say?lite

    ugh... I guess that answers the earlier question about why is an affair a big deal.
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • Ok... is this 1967?

    Why do we care about an extra-marital affair?

    I mean honestly... who cares? Does this really affect anyone here?
    Seriously. I rolled my eyes as soon as I heard the news. This is news? Maybe we'd be better off just assuming that anyone in high level office is having an affair from the get go so it can be non-news. The headlines can be about the officials that don't cheat. Although that's really sad too.

    Interesting timing to this though. How would it not raise questions?
    tumblr_mg4nc33pIX1s1mie8o1_400.gif

    "I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    pjl44 wrote:
    I don't really see the big deal... The Deputy Director (now Acting Director) will testify. I'm sure they both got the same briefing and reports of what happened, and will divulge/not divulge whatever info that they want.

    Unless Michael Morell completely throws Petraeus under the bus, I think that this is a non-issue.

    Wow. Would your opinion change if Morell fails to answer questions because he claims to not have the knowledge to do so? Also, why couldn't Petraeus appear before the committee anyway?

    If he claims that he doesn't have knowledge of something, then yes, that's a problem. But how can the Deputy Director say that anymore than the Director could? And why start thinking conspiracy on what he is going to say before he even testifies?

    I'm guessing once Patraeus resigned, he wouldn't have the authority to speak on classified information? No idea there though.

    yeah that's kinda what i'm thinking...the cia director has been called to testify as to what the cia knew re: libya...since he's no longer the cia director, he can't testify...now, if and when they want to know what petraeus knew, they'll call him



    if one wants to get their tin foil hats on, one can ponder when the white knew what of the affair...and did they hold up on it until after the election

    :corn: :lol:
  • Ok... is this 1967?

    Why do we care about an extra-marital affair?

    I mean honestly... who cares? Does this really affect anyone here?
    Seriously. I rolled my eyes as soon as I heard the news. This is news? Maybe we'd be better off just assuming that anyone in high level office is having an affair from the get go so it can be non-news. The headlines can be about the officials that don't cheat. Although that's really sad too.

    Interesting timing to this though. How would it not raise questions?

    My first reaction was that he waited until now not to disrupt the election. If a week before the election, Obama's CIA chief quits, it could have had a negative impact on him. I would bet that Petraeus (or anyone in a cabinet level postion) wouldn't want to do that to him.
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • Ok... is this 1967?

    Why do we care about an extra-marital affair?

    I mean honestly... who cares? Does this really affect anyone here?
    Seriously. I rolled my eyes as soon as I heard the news. This is news? Maybe we'd be better off just assuming that anyone in high level office is having an affair from the get go so it can be non-news. The headlines can be about the officials that don't cheat. Although that's really sad too.

    Interesting timing to this though. How would it not raise questions?

    My first reaction was that he waited until now not to disrupt the election. If a week before the election, Obama's CIA chief quits, it could have had a negative impact on him. I would bet that Petraeus (or anyone in a cabinet level postion) wouldn't want to do that to him.
    That makes sense. I guess I just don't understand why he's resigning because of this in the first place.
    tumblr_mg4nc33pIX1s1mie8o1_400.gif

    "I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
  • BinauralJamBinauralJam Posts: 14,158
    burn-notice.jpg

    "When You're a Spy..."
  • Who PrincessWho Princess out here in the fields Posts: 7,305
    ummmm.... he resigned and admitted to an affair without anyone publicly knowing about it first. How is that anything other than accountability or transparency? Would you have felt better if his affair was outed in the press and he resigned in a scandal? It's easy to admit something and resign after you are caught, he didn't do that.
    It wasn't in the press yet but the FBI was investigating him so I think it's safe to say it would have been public fairly soon. Maybe he was trying to head that off.
    "The stars are all connected to the brain."
  • JaneNYJaneNY Posts: 4,438
    ummmm.... he resigned and admitted to an affair without anyone publicly knowing about it first. How is that anything other than accountability or transparency? Would you have felt better if his affair was outed in the press and he resigned in a scandal? It's easy to admit something and resign after you are caught, he didn't do that.
    It wasn't in the press yet but the FBI was investigating him so I think it's safe to say it would have been public fairly soon. Maybe he was trying to head that off.

    So he kept what little control of the situation that he had left. I don't see a problem with that.

    I don't give a hoot who had an affair with who. The annoying thing is it is gong to be the lead story on every big news agency for the next few days, instead of more interesting things.
    R.i.p. Rigoberto Alpizar.
    R.i.p. My Dad - May 28, 2007
    R.i.p. Black Tail (cat) - Sept. 20, 2008
  • PJFAN13PJFAN13 Posts: 1,422
    General Petraeus only came forward with the revelation after the FBI discovered evidence of the affair while conducting an investigation into whether his computer was compromised - BY his "girlfriend"...(what secrets did SHE find out about, hmmm)

    This has nothing to do with being honorable or full of integrity or doing the right thing. The fact of the matter is he got caught red-handed.

    I would love to see the divorce numbers on CIA officials. I bet its huge. Gone all the time, living double lives, being paid to keep secrets...ripe profession for affairs I'd think...

    By all accounts, General Patraeus was an exceptional leader in both the intelligence field and battle field. Poor judgment on his part, which we expect more or better judgment from people in his position.

    That this resignation happened 3 days after Obama won re-election? 5 days before he was going to testify on the Benghazi disaster? Last night they said upon resignation, he loses his security clearance. Couldn't the new / interim head give him clearance to testify? Did the FBI keep this from Obama? I'm not sure the Obama team is happy at all - just opens the door for all kinds of questions...

    This will be interesting...
    11.30.93~10.2.96~9.13.98~9.1.00~8.25.00~7.3.03~7.5.03
    7.9.03~9.28.04~10.1.05~5.12.06~5.13.06~5.27.06~5.28.06
    8.5.08(EV)~10.9.09~5.21.10~6.20.11(EV)~7.5.11(EV)~7.9.11(EV)
    11.21.13~8.27.16(EV)~11.14.16(TOTD)~4.13.20~9.27.20~9.26.21~10.2.21
    2.15.22 (EV)~2.25.22 (EV)~2.27.22 (EV)~5.3.22~5.7.22~9.17.24~9.29.24
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    FBI probe of Petraeus triggered by e-mail threats from biographer, officials say
    By Sari Horwitz and Greg Miller, Saturday, November 10, 11:17 AM

    The collapse of the dazzling career of CIA Director David H. Petraeus was triggered when a woman with whom he was having an affair sent threatening e-mails to another woman close to him, according to three senior law enforcement officials with knowledge of the episode.

    The recipient of the e-mails was so frightened that she went to the FBI for protection and help tracking down the sender, according to the officials. The FBI investigation traced the threats to Paula Broadwell, a former military officer and Petraeus biographer, and uncovered explicit e-mails between Broadwell and Petraeus, the officials said.

    When Petraeus’s name first surfaced, FBI investigators were concerned that the CIA director’s personal e-mail account had been hacked and security had been breached. But the sexual nature of the e-mails led them to conclude that Petraeus and Broadwell were engaged in an affair, the officials said.

    The identity of the woman who received the e-mails was not disclosed and the nature of her relationship with Petraeus is unknown. The law enforcement officials said the e-mails indicated that Broadwell perceived the other woman as a threat to her relationship with Petraeus.

    Attempts to reach Broadwell and her relatives have been unsuccessful and she has not made a public statement since she was linked with Petraeus on Friday.

    All three senior officials who described the impetus for the investigation spoke on condition their names be withheld because aspects of the inquiry are ongoing.

    Petraeus, a retired four-star Army general who was once seen as a potential presidential candidate, said on Friday that he was resigning as CIA chief because he had been involved in an extramarital affair. He has been married for 37 years and has two children. Broadwell is married and has two children.

    In an e-mail message sent to a longtime friend on Friday night, Petraeus expressed regret for letting down his family — and the nation. The friend, who described the contents of the message on the condition of anonymity, said Petraeus conveyed profound remorse in the message.

    “He was deeply sorry for the pain he has caused his family,” the friend said. “He also noted how much he loved his job at the agency. He said he really relished the intellectual challenge there.”

    The timing of the resignation has caused a controversy, with members of Congress and others questioning why the disclosure was not made until after Tuesday’s election. Some have also complained that the FBI did not notify the White House and senior members of Congress earlier that the CIA director was under investigation.

    The law enforcement officials did not provide an exact time line for the investigation, but they said that the inquiry started at least several weeks ago. They said investigators thought they were dealing with a routine harassment case until they discovered the e-mails were traced to a private e-mail account belonging to Petraeus.

    The initial concern was that someone had broken into the CIA director’s e-mail account, leading to concerns about potential security breaches, according to the officials. As the investigation proceeded and more e-mails emerged, along with Broadwell’s role, FBI investigators realized they had uncovered an affair between Petraeus and Broadwell, the officials said.

    The investigators first interviewed Petraeus about two weeks ago, the officials said. Petraeus was told at the time that no criminal charges would be forthcoming and the idea of him resigning was not raised, the officials said.

    One of the law enforcement officials said Justice Department officials were unclear on what steps to take next because they had determined that there had been no crime and no breach of security.

    It was not until Tuesday that the Justice Department notified James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, that compromising material about Petraeus had been uncovered as part of an investigation, according to a senior intelligence official. Clapper then spoke with Petraeus and told him to resign.

    “Director Clapper learned of the situation from the FBI on Tuesday evening around 5 p.m.,” the intelligence official said. “In subsequent conversations with Director Petraeus, Director Clapper advised Director Petraeus to resign.”

    The official declined to say whether Petraeus had considered resigning at that point, but he said it was quickly clear to Clapper that stepping down was “the right thing to do” for Petraeus.

    The official said that Clapper has been fully briefed on all aspects of the FBI investigation and has not called for the DNI or CIA to conduct a follow-on probe or damage assessment -- indicating that Clapper does not see the case as a security threat.

    “There are no investigations beyond” that initiated by the FBI, the intelligence official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

    The official also would not address why the DNI and others weren’t notified of the FBI investigation -- and its link to Petraeus -- earlier.

    “This is a very personal matter, not a matter of intelligence,” the official said. “There are protocols for this. I would imagine things have to cross a certain threshold before they are reportable.”

    Clapper told the White House late on Wednesday and no action was taken until Thursday morning, when Obama was informed. Petraeus came to the White House later on Thursday and offered his resignation. The president accepted it on Friday.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... story.html

    hope no bunnies were harmed
    1fatal_attraction.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.