|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 9, 2012 15:50:34 GMT -5
David Petraeus has resigned as director of the CIA after admitting he had an extramarital affair. According to his letter of resignation, Petraeus asked President Barack Obama on Thursday to allow him to resign, and on Friday the president accepted. Petraeus said in a statement that he had shown "extremely poor judgment" in having an affair.
I wish it were Eric Holder instead. I believe there will soon be vacancies in DoD and SoS. We can look forward to more misfits in the administration.
|
|
|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 9, 2012 15:54:30 GMT -5
Geithner to Stay at Treasury Through Obama Inauguration
|
|
|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 10, 2012 14:37:02 GMT -5
The following states that the FBI had been investigating Petraeus for some time. After reading this blurb, my first impression was that I would have expected the FBI to be a bit more discrete about the details of the investigation, but instead we get “love under the desk” . Something does not smell right. www.newsmax.com/Headline/petraeus-resigns-cia-affair/2012/11/09/id/463573 |
|
|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 10, 2012 14:42:23 GMT -5
LT. COL. RALPH PETERS: The timing is just too perfect for the Obama administration. Just as the administration claimed it was purely coincidence that our Benghazi consulate was attacked on the anniversary of September 11th. Now it’s purely coincidence that this affair -- extra-marital affair -- surfaces right after the election, not before, but right after, but before the intelligence chiefs go to Capitol Hill to get grilled. As an old intelligence analyst, Neil, the way I read this -- I could be totally wrong, this is my interpretation -- is that the administration was unhappy with Petraeus not playing ball 100% on their party-line story. I think it's getting cold feet about testifying under oath on their party-line story. And I suspect that these tough Chicago guys knew about this affair for a while, held it in their back pocket until they needed to play the card.
I don't like conspiracy theories, I may be totally wrong, but the timing of this, again, right after the election and right before Petraeus is supposed to get grilled on Capitol Hill, it's really smells.
|
|
|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 10, 2012 15:00:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 10, 2012 15:20:08 GMT -5
Petraeus Throws Obama Under the Bus
6:05 PM, Oct 26, 2012 • By WILLIAM KRISTOL
Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate
So who in the government did tell “anybody” not to help those in need? Someone decided not to send in military assets to help those Agency operators. Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No.
It would have been a presidential decision. There was presumably a rationale for such a decision. What was it? When and why—and based on whose counsel obtained in what meetings or conversations—did President Obama decide against sending in military assets to help the Americans in need?
|
|
