It’s been a rough few days. In light of this, let’s start with a little Disney, a la Ratatouille style. A favorite line involves a snarky little head chef at the Paris restaurant that serves as the setting of most of the movie, who made quite clear his distrust of the young Linguine’s sudden appearance. “Mark my words, ze whole sing is hiiiighly suspect!” Click here for a brief laugh. 🙂
Why the comedic commentary? Because though humorous, this silly line from that movie sums up well my sentiments surrounding Washington’s latest shenanigans. CIA Director General David Petraeus is now in the throes of quite a sex scandal. Oh, and surprise surprise- we’re fed the story that the Obama administration didn’t have a clue until Wednesday. . . just one day after the presidential election. And, ironically enough, right before Petraeus is to testify before the Congress on Benghazi.
Mark my words, kiddos, the whole thing is highly suspect.
Am I questioning the validity of the claims that Petraeus had this affair? No- not at necessarily. Let’s be real- sadly, these sordid extra-marital affairs are to Washington D.C. as apple pie and baseball are to Americana. I will say once, however, that for an individual with a virtually impeccable service record, and an ascension up the ranks of U.S. intelligence as astronomical as his was, it does seem a bit strange that he would be so cavalier with his own career- and more importantly, with his country. To have an affair while holding such an elevated position immediately places the person in a position to be blackmailed and used. I do find it a little odd that our nation’s top spy would be so naive as to assume nothing would come of his private behavior. That said- under all those medals and badges is a man, and all mankind is driven by the carnal nature. In other words, an affair isn’t out of the question, and I’ll leave it at that.
What concerns me most, however, is the timing of this revelation. Why blow the whistle now? Why now and now earlier? Why now if ever? Below is a timeline provided byTheBlaze.com. I want special attention paid to WHEN counter-terrorism advisor John Brennan found out about the affair, and when Petraeus was sworn in as Director of the CIA:
- Paula Broadwell meets David Petraeus at a Harvard University function (Reuters, Nov. 11, 2012).
- Broadwell decides to pursue a doctorate in public policy and conduct a case study on Petraeus’ leadership. Petraeus invites her to go on a run in Washington, D.C. (Reuters, Nov. 11, 2012).
- Petraeus is put in charge of the war in Afghanistan and Broadwell would visit and observe him in Afghanistan (Reuters, Nov. 11, 2012).
June 30, 2011:
- Senate confirms appointment of Petraeus as CIA director (Reuters).
August 31, 2011:
- Petraeus retires after 37 years in the U.S. Army (ABC).
- White House counter-terrorism advisor John Brennan reportedly became aware of a relationship between Petraeus and Broadwell, according to Fox News’s Jennifer Griffin and Adam Housley (Fox, Nov. 12).
Sept. 6, 2011:
- Petreaus sworn in as CIA director (CIA)
- At some point after taking office, Broadwell broke off affair but Petraeus continued to pursue her “sending thousands of emails over the last several months, raising even more questions about his judgment,” according to Newsmax chief Washington correspondent Ronald Kessler (Newsmax, Nov. 9).
- Broadwell and Petraeus extramarital affair started after he left military service and ended about four months ago. (Reuters, Nov. 11).
- Sometime within the past four or five months – one official said “early summer” – a woman complained to the FBI about harassing emails that were later determined to have been written by Broadwell. In the course of investigating that complaint, the FBI discovered an affair between Broadwell and Petraeus (Reuters, Nov. 11).
The White House was questioned about this, and much like Benghazi, we’re being fed lines so incredibly fallacious; they are an insult to our intelligence. The White House emphatically responded that the President knew nothing of this affair until Wednesday. Ah yes. I hear communications at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue are a little fuzzy as of late. Sort of like when communications that included confirmation that the terror group Ansar al-Shar’ia had taken responsibility for the Benghazi attacks somehow made it to the White House Situation Room . . .yet failed to reach the President…meanwhile he spends the next several weeks blaming some unknown YouTube video? Hmm. I’ve said this before, and clearly I’m going to say it again- either we have the most inept administration in our nation’s history, or we’re being lied to. . .again. Take your pick–though neither inspire confidence.
Back to our timeline. I asked you to pay close attention to WHEN counter-terrorism advisor John Brennan found out about the affair, and when Petraeus was sworn in as Director of the CIA. In the summer of 2011, Mr. Brennan was made aware of the affair which had been going on since shortly after Petraeus left active military service. Petraeus was sworn in to his position with the CIA that fall. Many of you may not be aware of what precisely goes on (and for how long) during the confirmation process for such a high level position . . . but suffice it to say that your EVERY action, from how many pieces of Halloween candy you stole from your kid brother at age 9, to that biology test you cheated on in the 10th grade, is cataloged, discussed and analyzed as to how it could potentially affect your job, and your country’s well-being. To assume that the affair was not uncovered is childish at best. THEY KNEW about the affair.
I heard it explained quite well this morning on the radio–sadly, I cannot remember by whom and thus I can’t give credit- but nonetheless: This is Chicago-style politics at its worst. The administration knew about the affair, and allowed the approval process to move forward regardless. . . for what? Run out to your mailbox, grab one of the letters, paint it black- and you’ve got it! Petraeus’ breach of conduct would prove useful to them. . . someday. You see, one person’s warts are someone else’s ticket out of a jam. That day has come, conveniently enough in the face of one of the worst scandals in American presidential history. Petraeus visited Benghazi shortly after the attacks, and is said to have compiled a report, which Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Diane Feinstein is said to have wanted to discuss as part of the pending Congressional investigation. Petraeus’ report on his findings is now delayed. Even if he testifies, and the report he gives contains damning evidence that the administration did in fact lie about Benghazi (which would put the President in an impeachment situation), will his testimony not be tainted by this whole sordid event? As Newsmax chief Washington correspondent Ronald Kessler has now thrown out there, Petraeus’ judgement is now in question. (Newsmax, Nov. 9). Petraeus could be as right as the day is long, but who will listen?
This brings me back to the little French chef I quoted in the beginning: hiiiiighly suspect. Why wasn’t the affair a problem when Petraeus was being confirmed for his CIA position? How is it possible that the intelligence community found out about it, yet somehow news of this nation’s CIA chief’s behavior never quite made it to the White House until shortly before the rest of us found out? How is it possible that Attorney General Eric Holder found out in late summer 2012, and yet never told the President? How is it that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper asked Petraeus to resign on NOVEMBER 6th. . . and yet we are somehow to believe that the President was FIRST TOLD about this entire affair on November 7th?
It’s interesting that the White House, after learning of a spin-off scandal involving General John Allen (Petraeus’ replacement in Afghanistan) and his inappropriate relationship with a woman– put HIS nomination on hold. Specifically, “prompting President Obama to put Allen’s nomination to become NATO’s supreme allied chief on hold.” (CNN) So let me get this straight- the White House puts his nomination on hold, (and rightfully so) over inappropriate emails; yet Petraeus’ affair sails through the nomination process for Director of the CIA? Of course, it is Petraeus, and not Allen, with pertinent (and likely damning) information on Benghazi. It was Petraeus, not Allen, who was set to testify before Congress about something that could lead to the President’s impeachment.
I think it’s safe to say Petraeus won’t be testifying on Benghazi before Congress anytime soon; nor will Secretary Hillary Clinton, who currently finds herself with a scheduling conflict that prevents her from being in the U.S. It’s too bad the rest of us can’t jet off to Australia for WINE TASTINGS whenever we want to get out of doing something difficult. Seriously- I’m not kidding. That’s where our Secretary of State currently finds herself.
Four Americans were murdered in Benghazi, and no justice has been served. And what are we talking about? The mucky details of an affair that should have been grounds for Petraeus’ disqualification MONTHS ago. Ask any good magician and they’ll tell you– the slight of hand is their only salvation. Without it. . . well, you know.
So- for those keeping track:
The White House lied about Benghazi by denying terror ties; the White House withheld information about Iran’s shooting at a U.S. drone until after the election; and now, the White House claims it knew nothing about the compromising position in which the nation’s CIA chief found himself until WELL after his confirmation, and conveniently– until after the election and before his Benghazi testimony.
Ah, what a tangled web we weave.
UPDATE: As of this morning, 11/14/12, it was revealed that the FBI raided Paula Broadwell’s house after it was “discovered” that she supposedly has classified documents at her residence. So let me get this straight- the FBI, which has been investigating the affair for MONTHS, JUST NOW found out that Broadwell may have these documents? You have got to be kidding. Sadly- this isn’t a joke- this is our reality. Welcome to the new normal.