General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJane Mayer:A Petraeus Puzzle: Were Politics Involved?
The director of the C.I.A. has resigned over an extra-marital affair two days after a Presidential election in which the Agencys role in Libya was of burning concernwhat is really going on here?
There seem to be some potentially fascinating political aspects of this story that have yet to be explored. Why, for instance, did this news explode publicly when it did? Both the New York Times and the Washington Post report that the F.B.I. had found, after months of investigation, that neither retired General David Petraeus, now the former director of the C.I.A., nor the woman with whom he was evidently involved, his biographer Paula Broadwell, had broken any laws. Congressional intelligence officials reportedly want to know why they were not informed earlier that the F.B.I. was investigating Petraeus. But what I am wondering is why, if the F.B.I. had indeed concluded that they had no criminal case, this matter was brought to anyones attention at all.
(snip)
According to the Times, approximately two weeks ago, F.B.I. investigators confronted Petraeus personally about the matter. After talking to him, they were satisfied that there were no breaches of national security or other crimes involved. It was then, the Times reports, that Petraeus certainly became aware of the investigation, if he had not known of it before. Interestingly, he did not offer his resignation at once, raising the question of whether he would have resigned at all if he hadnt been asked to when the issue was about to become public. With the election two weeks away, and the C.I.A.s potential intelligence failures in the fatal ambush of Americans diplomats in Libya a campaign issue, Petraeus surely recognized that if he resigned, the scandal would shake the Obama Administration, perhaps giving more fodder to its Republican critics in what appeared to be an extremely close election.
The Times uses the word murky to describe what happened next, and there are many puzzling aspects. But according to the Times, at the end of October, a week or so after the F.B.I. investigators confronted Petraeus, an unidentified F.B.I. employee took the matter into his own hands. Evidently without authorization, he went to the Republicans in Congress. First he informed a Republican congressman, Dave Reichert of Washington state. According to the Times, Reichert advised this F.B.I. employee to go to the Republican leadership in the House. The F.B.I. employee then told what he knew about the investigation to Eric Cantor, the House Majority Leader. Cantor released a statement to the Times confirming that he had spoken to the F.B.I. informant, whom his staff described as a whistleblower. Cantor said, I was contacted by an F.B.I. employee who was concerned that sensitive, classified information might have been compromised. But what, exactly, was this F.B.I. employee trying to expose? Was he blowing the whistle on his bosses? If so, why? Was he dissatisfied with their apparent exoneration of Petraeus? Given that this drama was playing out in the final days of a very heated Presidential campaign, and he was taking a potentially scandalous story to the Republican leadership in Congress, was there a political motive?
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/11/david-petraeus-paula-broadwell-were-politics-involved.html
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Libya was only a "burning concern" with Fox mouthbreathers. A tragedy, but non issue for the vast majority. And, I don't see how a Petreaus mistress scandal affects Obama at all.
CTyankee
(63,892 posts)scandal, others (particularly in Washington) might see it differently. Republicans were trying very hard to make Benghazi an issue that could tip the election their way, so it makes sense to me that Mayer would look at it in a different light. I do agree with you that it wasn't the big issue the republicans tried to make it. But the republicans were pretty desperate...
Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)Melinda
(5,465 posts)her REAL peers that is, take this investigation. Smells like politics to me, and it's got GOP stench all over it.
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)global1
(25,225 posts)I'm sure there are a lot of BushCo appointees/employees still with the FBI. Could this informant have been one of them? I agree with this Jane Mayer that something 'murky' is going on. Add to this story the reaction of Broadwell's father; the pic of Broadwell with Rove; Fox News making a big deal about this story in the last weeks to election day; Rove's meltdown on Fox about Ohio - if these things aren't all tied together - somebody that is a novelist - could have a best selling book on their hands.
Then the other thought I had - was a sting operation going on behind the scenes to pick off Rove? Was Rove trying to orchestrate an October Surprise and was somebody on to him? Hmmmm.......