Petraeus Resignation due to FBI Investigation
(Newsmax) The investigation began last spring, but the FBI then pored over his emails when he was stationed in Afghanistan. The woman who was having an affair with Petraeus is a journalist who had been writing about him.
Given his top secret clearance and the fact that Petraeus is married, the FBI continued to investigate and intercept Petraeus’ email exchanges with the woman. The emails include sexually explicit references to such items as sex under a desk. Such a relationship is a breach of top secret security requirements and could have compromised Petraeus.
A lot of words have been written about this already: more speculation than reporting, perhaps. The truth is, we have very little to go on: the FBI is hardly an objective news source these days, if it ever was. Many have wondered at the timing and the entire set of supposed events, such as this story at Freedom Outpost.
I have commented on this already, because it seemed strange to me that he would do something like this, in essence betraying his oath. However, several people have pointed out that he is behaving like a typical political general (consider, for example, the very POOR example of General of the Army D.D. Eisenhower and his driver, in World War 2. Others have pointed out the steep decline in morality of all types in the military in the last 20 years, accelerated by recent White House and Congressional actions and now almost certain to go unreversed. Colin Powell and Alexander Haig are both cited as examples.
Actually, being involved with a reporter is even more disgusting and surprising, given the antipathy of senior military officers towards the press in both Mesopotamia and Afghanistan in the past decade.
And to be truthful, the idea that such a thing demands a resignation as far as the White House is concerned is a little baffling. The administration is so well known for its double-dealing, its lies, its broken promises, and numerous illegal and unconstitutional actions, that I cannot see a mere adulterous love affair triggering anything at all except a few winks and nods and grins from the palace guard surrounding the First Citizen.
The Freedom Outpost article and others handily dismisses the idea that this has anything to do with Bengazi, although there are still so many questions to be answered on that, and Petraeus could be a key witness in that mess. So is this some sort of backhanded way of bribing him NOT to spill the beans, by letting him step aside gracefully? Or is this a way of making sure that he becomes the fall-guy for what happened in Libya, now that he is no longer the CIA’s boss? If he DID have the affair, then his morals are obviously highly suspect, if not completely discredited. A man who betrays his wife is capable of ANY betrayal, of ANY sin, of ANY breach of trust and faith, with nation, comrades, family, and all else. (Yes, I know that some do truly repent of a one-time mistake and sin, but those seem to be in the very small minority.)
Of course, this is 21st Century America: not that far removed from the times of Tiberius, Caligula, and Nero in spirit (if not in time). Was this
Of course, this is 21st Century America: not that far removed from the times of Tiberius, Caligula, and Nero in spirit (if not in time). Was this a modern version of the Princeps dealing with a dangerous but useful tool who was finally too dangerous to keep around, and must be sent into exile, or worse? Was this journalist actually a honey-trap used to create a way of dealing with such a dangerous but useful tool? Given the recent press revealing salacious details about several general officers who are accused of sexual misconduct more serious than the usual claims “he leered at me,” and the close ties between the press and the current regime, I have to wonder if these recent revelations were part of a set-up to conveniently shuttle a dangerous man off the stage? Or is it even more Roman in nature than that? Will the disgraced officer soon “commit suicide” in remorse over his behavior? The press can spin that anyway they (or the regime) want.
If, on the other hand, he did NOT have the affair, then what did the administration (or some other unknown party) have to hold over him or threaten him that he would admit to a sin that damages his reputation and service so badly? Perhaps we are seeing a version of Hitler’s demand that Rommel save his family by disposing of himself? And perhaps for the same reason: a plot to remove a tyrannical, lawless “elected” dictator?
We know that the current administration is a past master at manipulating the media (in part because the media WANTS to be manipulated by them), and this is a perfect situation to do that. One thing that is clear is that the timing is very good: Petraeus waited (or was made to wait) to resign until after the election was safely over. So, what is next?
Whatever it is, I don’t think we’ll like it.