Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Ganja Ninja

(15,953 posts)
33. OK Here's what I think was going on.
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 11:33 AM
Nov 2012

The self described "social liaison" was arranging sex parties that Broadwell and Petraeus attended a time or two. I don't see either of them as villains. The only villains in all of this are the FBI agent that contacted Eric Cantor and Eric Cantor for not being forthcoming to the intelligence committee.

If she broke it off with Petraeus, why was she threatening the other woman... n/t Lucinda Nov 2012 #1
Cock blocking? JVS Nov 2012 #5
ya. i figure she was too much for the general and he broke it off. seabeyond Nov 2012 #7
So you're saying she was the villain? 4th law of robotics Nov 2012 #26
no. you are saying that. i do not see it anywhere in my post. nt seabeyond Nov 2012 #31
No, I asked you to clarify your position 4th law of robotics Nov 2012 #42
yes. she is a player. and no, she is not in a subservient role. the whole villian thing is seabeyond Nov 2012 #45
So they're both villains then? 4th law of robotics Nov 2012 #54
again... villian is all yours. as i clearly said villian is bullshit. nt seabeyond Nov 2012 #62
What are your thoughts on consent given the vast power disparity 4th law of robotics Nov 2012 #67
i really have no interest discussing my opinion with you. you do things like misrepresent seabeyond Nov 2012 #69
I've done nothing of the sort but if you feel you can't 4th law of robotics Nov 2012 #72
ah. a perfect example why i have no interest what so ever having a conversation with you. thank you seabeyond Nov 2012 #73
I think it's because you are not entirely clear on what a conversation is 4th law of robotics Nov 2012 #74
Heh ismnotwasm Nov 2012 #84
ya.... seabeyond Nov 2012 #86
Nice! ismnotwasm Nov 2012 #88
This is my POV as well. n/t Chan790 Nov 2012 #57
Your sexism knows no bounds, Seabeyond cthulu2016 Nov 2012 #30
Have you got any links to support that idea? LisaL Nov 2012 #36
thanks. lol. so will still sit back and wait, until we actually know. i thought it was still seabeyond Nov 2012 #40
no. it isnt about sexism. seabeyond Nov 2012 #38
Did you read Petraeus sent her thousands of messages? flamingdem Nov 2012 #53
I don't think that info is accurate. LisaL Nov 2012 #58
Too much for the General? Or maybe psycho-crazy? Bake Nov 2012 #92
My 2 cents: she actually felt protective of Petraeus. AngryAmish Nov 2012 #16
How do we know who broke up with who? LisaL Nov 2012 #27
Big mistake nichomachus Nov 2012 #76
Yep. I don't assume we have any real clue how this will all shake out, Lucinda Nov 2012 #80
I can tell you exactly how it will shake out nichomachus Nov 2012 #83
what i am seeing, that i find fascinating, is dismissing her to role of mistress. there is nothing seabeyond Nov 2012 #2
Really, it's gender-equality in some tawdry way. JohnnyLib2 Nov 2012 #10
yes. and as i am typing these posts i am lmao that it is me seabeyond Nov 2012 #19
He was in the more powerful position 4th law of robotics Nov 2012 #28
there is not a single damn thing that puts her in a mistress role. that simple. nt seabeyond Nov 2012 #44
Oh well if you say so 4th law of robotics Nov 2012 #47
it would be a fact. not an opinion. so ya. look up mistress. by the very definition that is not seabeyond Nov 2012 #49
Mistress (def) 4th law of robotics Nov 2012 #50
yes. games. then he would equally be a mastress, or a mister'ess. take your pick. seabeyond Nov 2012 #61
Sure, if that were a word he would be that. 4th law of robotics Nov 2012 #66
If their positions were reversed, she would not be refered to as a "mistress". Kaleva Nov 2012 #91
Sure are a lot of conservatives sucking on the government teat in this story. JVS Nov 2012 #3
Not the villain at all, in my opinion. MineralMan Nov 2012 #4
Well, Bush was a party frat guy too.. ananda Nov 2012 #9
+1 LiberalLoner Nov 2012 #11
that is crap MM. she has a career, education, connection, and knows what she wants. she is not seabeyond Nov 2012 #13
They're all the villains. MineralMan Nov 2012 #65
again, i dont catagorize it as villians. but, i do not see a victim. or one playing a subservient, seabeyond Nov 2012 #71
Of course not. They're all competent adults, professionally. MineralMan Nov 2012 #77
and THIS you and i agree totally on, is the bottomline and you said very well. nt seabeyond Nov 2012 #79
Thank you, Mineral Man Carolina Nov 2012 #89
Living a short time within the Beltway, it was the only Eleanors38 Nov 2012 #82
That 'at all' bothers me...is it ok to threaten people by email? HereSince1628 Nov 2012 #41
They're all villains to one degree or another. MineralMan Nov 2012 #68
It's at least an ugly, and very public, mess n/t HereSince1628 Nov 2012 #81
The "threats" don't appear to have been threats cthulu2016 Nov 2012 #78
Let's take gender out of it completely. Avalux Nov 2012 #6
Well said and the whole thing in a nutshell. n/t rzemanfl Nov 2012 #12
Pretty much 4th law of robotics Nov 2012 #29
She was the one making the THREATS. The THREATS. Poll_Blind Nov 2012 #8
Have we seen these threats? (serious question) cthulu2016 Nov 2012 #22
Who cares? BeyondGeography Nov 2012 #14
what do you mean, is this new info about that Allen guy? Whisp Nov 2012 #15
All this time I thought it was the general, maybe we read different news sources (nt) The Straight Story Nov 2012 #17
You haven't a clue about what is in play here, do you? cthulu2016, there's a lot going on Full bobthedrummer Nov 2012 #18
First Kelvin Mace Nov 2012 #20
In media terms she is hot. In media terms Katherine Harris was hot. cthulu2016 Nov 2012 #23
Gosh, this explains why I don't read/watch much Kelvin Mace Nov 2012 #93
Probably because she comes off as...not right. The day this TwilightGardener Nov 2012 #21
i am going along the same lines as you. nt seabeyond Nov 2012 #24
How did you came up with this? LisaL Nov 2012 #25
There are multiple villains in this sordid tale. nt geek tragedy Nov 2012 #32
OK Here's what I think was going on. Ganja Ninja Nov 2012 #33
Don't agree that she was a victim bongbong Nov 2012 #34
i agree with you. nt seabeyond Nov 2012 #48
She did publicly state her goal was to become National Security Advisor. Avalux Nov 2012 #52
That's another interesting brick in the conspiracy tower bongbong Nov 2012 #70
No she is not. She is the villaness. kelliekat44 Nov 2012 #35
Um, that's utterly predictable. See, History of Western Culture for the last several thousand years Starry Messenger Nov 2012 #37
Watch current nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #39
I don't really see what she did wrong-- apart from the affair. Marr Nov 2012 #43
Both of them are married. LisaL Nov 2012 #46
I didn't know she was married. Yes, that's pretty low-- however, Marr Nov 2012 #51
At least his kids are grown. LisaL Nov 2012 #55
I don't see how that makes a difference. Marr Nov 2012 #59
Really? LisaL Nov 2012 #60
that's good gang Nov 2012 #56
She was just another tool in the Petraeus myth making machine... deurbano Nov 2012 #63
Hey people, life is not a movie! Springslips Nov 2012 #64
I think she is 'a' villain, not 'the' villain. There are potentially a lot of villains here. stevenleser Nov 2012 #75
"She is certainly not the victim—there doesn't seem to be a victim..." Carolina Nov 2012 #85
not to mention seabeyond Nov 2012 #87
exactly Carolina Nov 2012 #90
It's not funny at all LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #94
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Funny how the sexually at...»Reply #33