You may have touched upon something.
Who monitors the head of the CIA?
Congressional Oversight Committee perhaps or the White House, but the White House security is less rigorous than the CIA.
There is a different gamesmanship ongoing here.
There isn’t a secure chain of command with commensurate OPSEC. Instead it’s an intel maneuver warfare. Observe how Obama bounces all over the playing field. It’s obvious that he is a liar, but he continually isn’t held accountable.
If enemies of the US are concerned about those who might oppose them, and they occupy the Administration from within, how would they defend their position?
They would mold the center of gravity of reporting into conventional mechanisms in a chain of command, then monitor the reporting system. They placed Petraeus in the post after they had tooled up to monitor him. They let any intel which might implicate the traitors flow naturally to the security of the senior intel position, while they monitored the info flow.
By removing Petraeus, they are moving either to substitute another target into the position or they have adequate confidence of control to place their own in the position. They are maneuvering to overcome all systems of checks and balances for absolute power.
IN A NUTSHELL, there it is. And, they don't care who knows it anymore, as the MSM's have their backs.
Lies, and Lies to cover Lies. Remember it was said of Slick Willie, he lies even when he don't have to. Hillary as well. "When a lie is said often enough, people believe it". Axelrod and the gang know this....so Stall with the lies, their base understands lies, it's just who they are.
Anyone recognize a: "Nicolae Carpathia", any of this?
Gen. Petaerus was HAD. I do not for one minute believe he would be used the way he was. jmo