So - General Petreus, until lately viewed as a military manager on Eisenhower level, and perhaps a potential presidential candidate, has been forced to resign as Director of the CIA because … he was a bit Naughty in Bed. And this was discovered by … the FBI. Hmmm … is the spirit of J. Edgar Hoover still alive and well in the FBI … ? Yours from a Very Ugly Building on Pennsylvania Avenue, JR.
His lover, Paul Broadwell, was a tad psycho and began sending threatening emails to another married women whom she saw as a potential competitor for the ex-General’s affections. That women, and long time Petraeus Family friend, alerted the FBI and the scrutiny of Petraeus began. Sounds a bit like Californication character Hank Moody would call a “bunny boiler moment” referring to the 1987 film Fatal Attraction…
http://news.yahoo.com/petraeus-shocked-girlfriends-emails-friend-195605091--politics.html
It’s a bit sad that a star has fallen…
The friend of mine , who lived in Brooklin, wrote the sexual scandal is just a cover for the Petreus’s lay off.
The real resaon was a serious recent failures of CIA in middle east. The death of Chris Stevens and CIA’s problems in Syria with revolt caused to discharge the chief of intelligence.They just was waiting for the election’s end to avoid the political noise.
Since I posted first on this, I have heard some further details of this affair. It would not appear, on the face of it, that the folks from 935 Pennsylvania Avenue were at all anxious to follow up on their initial findings in the case. They were given little choice, however, following an extraordinary public statement by the Lady in Question, in which the fragrant Major of Reserve made several alleged “revelations” relating to CIA operations connected with the dreadful Benghazi affair, which the Agency was subsequently (and embarrassingly) compelled to refute. I really did find this statement extraordinary; far from being (as some have claimed) a clever career-enhancing gambit by an ambitious Major of Reserve, it struck me as a rather immature, undergraduate exercise in limelight-seeking of a severely career-limiting nature. I do not know what the situation is under US secrecy and military law but - for example - in the UK, an officer who did something like this would be regarded as in breach of Government confidentiality under their contract of employment, as well as (more seriously) in breach of the Official Secrets Act as amended. Also, as the source of the “revelations” in question, having disclosed the information to a person who did not have an official interest in knowing it, General P. himself could have been subject to similar accusations. In fact, they could both have ended up in prison. It will be interesting to see whether, in time, Congress manages to clarify the precise timeline. In any case, a sad affair that has cost the US a distinguished and valuable (if slightly foolish) public servant. Best regards, JR.
Nope. The two are unrelated. Journalists that are close to the Pentagon and the generals are saying that Obama didn’t want Petraeus’ resignation as he had done nothing illegal nor compromised classified info and that Broadwell as a secure person to have an affair with. But the “code of honor” that Petraeus lives by is sort of like the Samurai code and once wrongdoing or moral failings become public, he felt compelled to resign…
The thing is that neither Petraeus nor Broadwell are subject to military law, or as it is known as the United Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) in the U.S. Adultery is not illegal under civil U.S. law, only under military law. He was retired as a general and is now a civilian and the (now former) Director of Central Intelligence (DCIA). Broadwell is still considered a civilian even if a reservist, unless she commits adultery while called up to active duty. The only situation is that Petraeus could face UCMJ charges for adultery if it is found that he conducted the affair while on active duty when both were in Afghanistan when he was the commander there and she was researching her book. Right now the claim is the affair didn’t start until after he retired and became DCIA…
Remember, the FBI only probed the affair because of issues as to whether she could have “compromised” him into giving out classified info to foreign intelligence or was a security risk for blackmail. She wasn’t…
Incidentally, there is now another related sex scandal involving a U.S. Marine Corp General Allen, and the woman that originally tipped off the FBI about Broadwell sending her anonymous email threats…
That is interesting, Nick - thanks. There appears to be a difference between UK (and Irish) law in such matters as compared to the US. While our Official Secrets Acts have been modified to some extent in recent years, and while both the UK and Ireland have enacted Freedom of Information Acts (the Irish one is somewhat more permissive), nonetheless, all subjects and citizens are subject to a requirement under Official Secrets legislation not to disclose official information except as may be authorised by Government (Ministers) or as may be provided for under legislation and procedures governing Freedom of Information (a rather more limited concept here than in the US) on pain of potential criminal sanction. All civil servants in these jurisdictions (including military personnel) go through the procedure of “signing the Official Secrets Act”, which involves signing a declaration affirming their awareness of their duties as regards official secrecy (I have “signed” the thing myself three times). However, this is only a formality, probative of knowledge of these requirements in the event of one ever failing in these duties. While, as one may understand, official secrecy prosecutions are rare in Ireland, they have been quite common in the UK. Cases there have often arisen from pure accident; as for example when laptops containing confidential information have been lost through negligence. There was one case where a retired official, who had brought his work home from the office to catch up on a backlog, was prosecuted when a later occupant of his house discovered boxes of forgotten official papers in his former attic - a case of negligence, perhaps, but also of pure inadvertence, on the part of someone no longer a member of the civil service. Such cases have resulted in sentences involving dismissal from the service, fines, and (not infrequently) imprisonment, even when the officer concerned had retired. Is there no equivalent in the US ? I lack information on this point, myself. Thanks again, JR.
Petraeus would have signed something similar. As far as the classified information thing, I think it’s rather convoluted here since the woman his affair was with wrote his biography centered on his time as a U.S. Army general, and she was with him while he was the commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan. So his bio, All In! (a title that already is the butt of jokes) has long since been read and I assuming it was vetted and has no real sensitive information in it. It seems the FBI concluded that there was no exchange of secrets and the affair had nothing to do with compromising national security. The only real issue here for Petraeus is whether he could be called back to active duty to stand trial for adultery provided there is any evidence of a sexual relationship between he and Broadwell while he was an active military person as a General in the U.S. Army. As a civilian DCI, he has no legal prohibitions to cheating on his wife. Of course, there are plenty of civil consequences arising in divorce proceedings. But the CIA is probably not a moral arbiter and regards this sort of thing as a personal matter once it is clear there are no security implications and it was clear that Paula Broadwell was not a “honeypot” of an FIS. Though, I am guessing there would be some suitability issues regarding his security clearance and technically he could have it rescinded…
Do you imply that “bushido code of honor” work only when moral fallings become public?
Journalist that close to Pentagon might be just in plot , sharing the views close to offficial line. We can’t know for sure all the matter, just coz it classified.( and it must be classified). However there exist an oppinion of independent observers.
http://grtv.ca/2012/11/petraeus-affair-and-benghazi-cover
James Corbett - editor of The Corbett Report.
The “operation to take down Petraeus may be motivated by backdoor political dealings,” says Corbett.
…
He also says that a change in the top at the CIA may lead to policy changes in regard to Afghanistan and drone strikes in neighboring Pakistan
It becomes clear now that there is the indication that he will not be testifying in upcoming congressional hearings into what happened in Benghazi in September. And because of that, some key information about what happened in Benghazi might not come to light – including some interesting information which just emerged recently, in fact last month, that general Petraeus’ alleged mistress, Miss Broadwell, was giving speeches about how the CIA annex in Benghazi was being used as a secret prison, which is why it was attacked in September. So there are some very big things which are emerging right now and it looks like the operation to take down Petraeus at this particular moment might be motivated by some of those backdoor political dealings, rather than the sex scandal that it is supposedly made out to be.
…
RT: I’m just curious, this operation to remove Petraeus, who do you think is behind this? Do you blame the Obama administration, or are there other forces at hand here?JC: I think it would be too early to speculate on that, and it depends how the events play out to see whether there is more information coming out on that. It depends, for example, if he does end up testifying at the Benghazi hearings, for example who is ultimately selected to replace him – and there are some interesting characters in the running for that. John Brennan’s name has been thrown around, and he was the CEO of a company called Analysis Inc back in 2008, when one of the people working for Analysis Inc was a contractor for the State Department who accessed President Obama’s passport records illegally, and one of the key witnesses in that case got covered up entirely. So there are some interesting connections around the people who may be slated to replace Petraeus.
Pretty much, yes.
Journalist that close to Pentagon might be just in plot , sharing the views close to offficial line. We can’t know for sure all the matter, just coz it classified.( and it must be classified). However there exist an oppinion of independent observers.
http://grtv.ca/2012/11/petraeus-affair-and-benghazi-cover
It’s getting far too messy to be a plot. If they wanted Petraeus’ resignation, they would just have asked for it without any need to out his secret affair. A lot of Obama’s cabinet is simply moving on after the election and Petraeus could simply have said he wanted to spend more time with is family or something…
I gather that Petraeus’s successor in Afghanistan is now in trouble for having been caught with his combats down. Whatever about keeping a mistress who is in the habit of describing supposedly secret operating procedures on the public broadcasting media, I was not aware that merely keeping a mistress - or even adultery - was a crime against military or civil law. Where would that leave … er … having a spouse ? Whatever the views of particularly well dried-up old lawyers might be, it is hard to deny that following that approach, being married is, practically speaking, a security risk. Mind you, military history may suggest other alternative approaches to sexual matters likely to prove less problematic in security terms; however, the ones I can think of are even less likely to find approval with the average Tea Party member than adultery … Yours from the Chastity Belt Manufactuary, JR.
Yes, Gen. Allen of the U.S.M.C. He had some “flirty” email exchanges with the woman, Jill Kelley, that complained of being harassed to her FBI Agent friend named Agent Humphries. It’s beginning to stink a little bit of a borderline, self-important (and possibly hypocritical) FBI Agent who also sent a photo of himself shirtless to Jill Kelley. Here’s a link to the Washington Post article:
The chief of CIA isn’t a person who you can to dismiss or move in shade without any visible reason. Especially for your political opponents.The Petraeus was a man whose perfect professional reputation has been build up by mass media. So the sexual affair could be the “lesser evel” for him and for Obama’s command finally. I mean, better be dismissed for affair then for pure professional incompetence.
One matter that has been receiving some comment on this side of the Big Pond is the apparent cluelenessness of senior military officers - not to mention the head of the CIA - as to the insecurity of communications by ordinary email - let alone through social media. The most junior mailroom clerk at Langley would, I think, be aware of this; not, apparently, the Big Boss and his friends ! Best regards, JR.
Recently Petreus had a group of young liberals follow him to his new teaching job chanting some BS about war criminal and crap like that. I’m sorry but those little liberal bastards should know what sacrifice is about and it doesn’t involve a university professor crying about US Policy, it involves the ones that have to carry it out.