General Discussion

DonViejo

(60,536 posts) Sun Nov 11, 2012, 07:55 PM Nov 2012

Timeline of Petraeus scandal scrutinized as Benghazi hearing looms

Timeline of Petraeus scandal scrutinized as Benghazi hearing looms

By Matt Williams, The Guardian
Sunday, November 11, 2012 13:19 EST

The dramatic downfall of CIA chief David Petraeus has given rise to political intrigue in Washington as a drip-feed of details concerning his clandestine affair mixes with serious questions over the timing of the resignation.

Over the weekend it emerged that his relationship with biographer Paula Broadwell was discovered by FBI agents while they investigated harassing emails she allegedly sent to a second woman, the identity of whom has yet to be revealed.

The scandal comes at a particularly sensitive time. Petraeus had been due to give evidence before a Congressional body this coming Thursday concerning the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi in which four Americans were killed, including America’s ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens.

It is now thought that Petraeus will not attend the session, robbing politicians of the opportunity to question an “absolutely necessary witness”, according to Peter King, chairman of the House homeland security committee.

more:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/11/11/timeline-of-petraeus-scandal-scrutinized-as-benghazi-hearing-looms/

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Timeline of Petraeus scandal scrutinized as Benghazi hearing looms (Original Post) DonViejo Nov 2012 OP

Why can't they grill him as a civilian? dixiegrrrrl Nov 2012 #1

Yep, he sure can testify. I'm guessing he will be asked to do so. nt DonViejo Nov 2012 #2

Well, they've figured out the 2nd woman--her name is Jill Kelley, she works as a mil liaison MADem Nov 2012 #3

"Every person involved (in the Petraeus scandal) is a Republican" riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #4

If you're the head of the CIA and can't even conceal an affair than you're a terrible head of CIA. JaneyVee Nov 2012 #5

dixiegrrrrl

(60,010 posts)

1. Why can't they grill him as a civilian?

Reply to DonViejo (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:04 PM

Nov 2012

If he is that damn important, he can still talk.

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)

2. Yep, he sure can testify. I'm guessing he will be asked to do so. nt

Reply to dixiegrrrrl (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:10 PM

Nov 2012

MADem

(135,425 posts)

3. Well, they've figured out the 2nd woman--her name is Jill Kelley, she works as a mil liaison

Reply to DonViejo (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:28 PM

Nov 2012

at State, and she is not rumored to be another "paramour." Instead, she and her husband are said to be friends of Dave and Holly from a few years back.

Feinstein said he might still be called--hell, if they can call a bunch of baseball players, they can find a reason to call a retired general/recently resigned CIA director.

Petraeus was the one sending his biographer sexually explicit emails--he's got a judgment problem in a big way (and that's the nicest way to put it).

Here's my take--I don't think this is necessarily a "One thing, but not the other" situation. He could be a horndog AND be responsible for sloppy oversight of his people and the security requirements of that CIA station in Benghazi.

Time will tell...

riderinthestorm

(23,272 posts)

4. "Every person involved (in the Petraeus scandal) is a Republican"

Reply to DonViejo (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:36 PM

Nov 2012

I really like this comment...

"Kind of hard to do (create a crisis for Obama) that when every person involved is a Republican. From the two women, to the whistle blower, to who reported the whistle blower. But I have 100% faith that the GOP won't let that get in the way."

Honestly, they will work hard to shift this as Obama's fault. Not sure how they'll figure that out but they will.

JaneyVee

(19,877 posts)

5. If you're the head of the CIA and can't even conceal an affair than you're a terrible head of CIA.

Reply to DonViejo (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:40 PM

Nov 2012

Reply to this discussion