Posted on 11/10/2012 8:15:04 AM PST by RoosterRedux
Obama named Petraeus to CIA because he was known as a man with integrity, and it kept him off the VP list for 2012. The real question will be, how long has the FBI known? Did they find out during his vetting, (they would have asked him) or did it subsequently come to their attention. And what foreign intelligence agencies knew? Iran, Pakistan, Muslim Brotherhood? That would be more disturbing.
The double standard is this: If Petraeus were a Democrat, this whole thing would blow over (no pun intended) and he’d be ready to run for office by the next election cycle (think Clinton, Barney Frank, Elliot Spitzer, etc). But as a Republican, he’s pretty much done, I would expect.
Would love to see some of them, please.
So, who can have sympathy for a Godless, souless, leftwingtard apparatchik ~ if that's what she is. Does anyone know any different?
With arms like that, her claws must REALLY hurt.....
I despise anybody that cheats on their spouse. I have been married for 29 years and have never ever thought about doing that. In my business over the years I’ve known clients and acquaintances that have cheated and carried on affairs and it just kills me that I can’t say anything. Most of the participants are single women after high profiled Corporate men at the top and are leaches. They know exactly what they are doing.
Let’s not forget that WikiLeaks has gotten access to a lot of emails etc. And the Chinese have been trying to hack the DoD websites for a long time. What if one of them found these emails.
If it turns out that a foreign entity had knowledge of this and this impaired Petraeus’ decision making, then it becomes treasonous.
Try looking up murder wheeler dumpster ~ that’s the method the obamistas use ~ purely KGB but they want it to look mob.
I’m not saying I’m condoning it and it’s something I wouldn’t have done but I think I understand why it happened:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/11/10/article-2230697-15F1761C000005DC-939_306x423.jpg
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/11/10/article-2230697-15F1E715000005DC-365_306x423.jpg
General Eisenhower and General Patton both had mistresses. So that was ok?
That happened every time they wanted an in person hearing on their appeal for a postage deficiency, or we were writing a regulation that affected them.
You mean those girls?
Some of them are simply amazing
yep. i watch the vid of her on john stewart that was at the story link. she’s something else. she’s former military. guess she doesn’t care about the honor code either.
Why isn’t she a victim?
Good post!
I nearly hurled when I read the closing sentence of the article, saying that Petraeus was the “victim” of seduction.
B.S.! If he’s a victim of anything, it’s the weakness of his own moral character and his willingness to engage in a deception that compromised the security of our nation.
The hubby is on my list as ALSO A SUSPECT.
An alternative hypothesis is he's an agent who was tiring of P4 and wanted someone more loquacious in the job.
Remember, they let these imbeds live here, and work real jobs ~ they enjoy their careers and the spying stuff is secondary. The control would cut an agent loose to fend for herself ~ provided he'd arranged to kill the agent and the target as well.
The timing is very interesting, however.
“Of course. It’s all her fault.”
She is being painted as the evil “seductris” of a decent man (like Clinton was in regard to Monica). I’m not sure this a entirely fair. It takes two to tango.
They both messed up, and it is something that can happen to just about anyone if they are given opportunity and do not guard themselves. I feel sorry for both, but more so for their spouses....they are the ones that really get publically humiliated.
He has resigned and will have to go low profile for some time....although be an adulterer is a plus for a democrat (like Clinton). She is going to be treated foreever as the slut that shagged Petraeus....she is ruined.
Quite frankly, I would like to see this go off the news. It is now a “family” matter for both parties and no longer my concern.
I do still think Petraeus should be compeled to testify...he WAS CIA director when the Libya mess happened. He doesn’t have to “represent” the CIA, just what he knows.
I guess we know why she titled the book, “All In”.
lol
But, of course, as Krauthammer pointed out, now that it is about sex, it will be all over the news. Will it get us any closer to understanding Benghazi? I doubt it. Benghazi now becomes just a subtext to the salacious stuff the press really loves.
But, of course, as Krauthammer pointed out, now that it is about sex, it will be all over the news. Will it get us any closer to understanding Benghazi? I doubt it. Benghazi now becomes just a subtext to the salacious stuff the press really loves.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
