31
   

CIA Chief Petraeus resigns as result of extra-marital affair

 
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 07:17 am
Andrea Mitchell is reporting that 2nd woman has a close friend who works in the local FBI office and was asked, as a friend, to investigate these anonymous emails. It started as a local FBI investigation and went up from there. The investigation ultimately determined that it was a personal matter. It was THEN that this same local Tampa agent took it to a friend of his in the republican party and someone in the US House. Then it went to Cantor. This was two weeks ago. Stay tuned.
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 07:33 am
@JPB,
Quote:
Um, so the most recent news that came out was a Fox News report by Jennifer Griffin. I got it on a distribution list I'm on, and it has some pretty insightful stuff in it, if you want to look for it."


And this was a woman having an affair with the top CIA guy?

Quote:
[UPDATE: The CIA has denied holding prisoners at the annex, according to the DailyBeast's Eli Lake. The Washington Post's Greg Miller adds in a tweet, "CIA adamant that Broadwell claims about agency holding prisoners at Benghazi are not true."]

Broadwell also said flatly that forces at the CIA annex had requested backup from a special Delta Force group she called the CINC's in extremis force. It was not clear whether she was basing her comments on an Oct. 26 Fox News report by Jennifer Griffin, or whether her information came from elsewhere. (Griffin refers to it as "Commanders [sic] in Extremis Force," but does not mention Delta Force or any Libyan prisoners.)

A CIA spokeswoman disputed the Fox News account at the time, saying, "no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate." The agency later released a timeline of that evening's events that cast doubt on Griffin's story; the Pentagon also released its own timeline.


Quote:
Well, just to create some context for those in the room. As you know, the ambassaador in Benghazi was killed along with a couple of security agents who happened to be CIA security, paramilitary forces. That just came out today in Fox News.

But the challenge has been the fog of war. And the greater challenge is that it's political hunting season, and so this whole thing has been turned into a very political sort of arena, if you will.

But the facts that came out today were that the ground forces there at the CIA annex, which is different from the consulate, were requesting reinforcements.

They were requesting the, what's called the CINC's in extremis force -- a group of Delta Force operators, our very, most talented guys we have in the military. They could have come and reinforced the consulate and the CIA annex that were under attack.

Now, I don't know if a lot of you heard this, but the CIA annex had actually, um, had taken a couple of Libyan militia members prisoner and they think that the attack on the consulate was an effort to try to get these prisoners back. So that's still being vetted.


from JPB's link
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 07:35 am
@JPB,
Pretty amazing Cantor didn't say anything two weeks ago.
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 07:40 am
@revelette,
If I was to give him the benefit of the doubt I'd say he determined there was no political capital with the information. He certainly determined there wasn't enough political capital to use it before the election. If I was to listen to my gut I'd say that the House Republicans are trying to turn Benghazi into an impeachable offense and this might play into that future narrative.
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 07:48 am
@JPB,
It is a strange twist, but gosh, I hope we don't go through that whole impeachment thing again for so many reasons that have nothing to do with Obama as a President personally.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 08:17 am
Investigation of Patraeus affair a "crisis" of "major proportions" - Peter King (R-NY)

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/267285-rep-peter-king-calls-petraeus-affair-a-crisis-of-major-proportions

And, so it begins.
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 08:29 am
@JPB,
how they're going to avoid pulling in Republicans who have known about the investigation for some time will be something to watch
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 08:32 am
@JPB,
There is a lot of things that are not clear as to whether for example the FBI did get access to Petraeus email account with or without a warrant or they just found copies of his email on Paula Broadwell computer hard drive.

They might not have even needed a warrant to gain access to her computer as a hell of a lot of people will roll over when someone with an FBI badge show up at their door.

Lot of details missing here to say the least.
revelette
 
  2  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 08:57 am
@ehBeth,
Other than Cantor who has known about this for two weeks (amazing he told no one else) what other republicans knew about this for some time?
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  2  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 09:00 am
So what have we learned? Besides nothing? "Stiff dick has no conscience"
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 09:01 am
Quote:
4. Why weren’t Obama and congressional committees told earlier?

Members of Congress haven’t said much beyond a few press releases praising Petraeus that went out Friday afternoon. But they’re more than a little frustrated that they didn’t learn about the affair and the investigation until this week.

Still, the FBI has said this wasn’t a criminal investigation of Petraeus. If Petraeus hadn’t done anything actionable to warrant dismissal, then members will have to explain what they think should have been reported. Should they have been told there was a possibility that the CIA director’s email had been hacked and that he might be in a compromising situation?

“We were told they were not going after Petraeus and they sort of came across it in some unrelated fashion,” said one congressional staffer, who asked not to be named.

The staffer said intelligence committee members would expect to know if the CIA director himself were being probed, but that doesn’t sound like what was happening here — at least initially.

“If they were investigating Petraeus directly, of course, they would have to let the committee know,” the aide said. “It depends how they came across it and when.”

Steve Aftergood, who studies intelligence issues for the Federation of American Scientists, noted that by law Congress must be informed about “significant intelligence activities or failures, but ‘significant’ is left undefined and in the eye of the beholder.”


“Beyond the letter of the law, there’s a prudential obligation to keep the committees ahead of the curve and, evidently, they don’t feel that job was fulfilled in this case,” Aftergood said. “There’s also a question of whether it’s wise to inform more people about the existence of the investigation when you’re not sure where it’s headed. I’m not absolutely certain the FBI should have gone to Congress earlier.”

Aftergood noted that what the situation might boil down to is that “anything affecting the CIA director is of interest.”


source
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 09:04 am
Here's some things for men to remember when selecting someone outside your marriage to screw:
1) Once you have screwed, the woman in question knows you can't be trusted.
2) Some women don't care about that.
3) Some women do.
4) Always ask, before unsnapping any bra straps, if the woman is a bunny boiler.
5)Listen to the way she laughs (or doesn't) to determine whether she has you by the nuts.


Write these down and look at them several times a day, they have to become instinctive. If you wait until your dick is hard, there won't be enough blood going to your brain to remember anything.

Joe(Say...I was going to ask you something, but nevermind.)Nation


0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 09:06 am
@ehBeth,
Yes, it will.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 09:07 am
@BillRM,
According to Andrea Mitchell they got a warrant.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 09:09 am
@revelette,
Of greater interest to me is that appropriate committee members were not informed but Eric Cantor was.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 09:17 am
@revelette,
It is, but it's also to his credit that he didn't go public with the information or leak it. Perhaps he consulted the Romney campaign and they nixed the notion.

If there is an investigation, I see no reason why Cantor should be called to testify, not-with-standing any self-serving immunity members of congress may have voted themselselves.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 09:19 am
@JPB,
My understanding is that Cantor was informed by a whistle-blower, and not officially by the FBI.
revelette
 
  2  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 09:21 am
@JPB,
If members of congress are irate because they were not informed of all this before the eleventh hour so to speak, why are they not irate of Cantor for not telling the relevant members of congress who deals with this sort of thing when he first found out two weeks ago?
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 09:24 am
@revelette,
Maybe they are. Would you really expect them to go public with such a sentiment?
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 09:24 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
It was supposedly the same local Tampa agent who was a friend of Jill Kelly's.
 

Related Topics

General David Petraeus - Question by gollum
well that's a thought - Discussion by dyslexia
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/01/2024 at 09:03:55