CIA Director David Petraeus stepping down...

[KChiefer]

...supposedly due to extramarital affair.

Carrie Mathison is such a minx!

-------------------------
3:02PM EST November 9. 2012 - NBC reported Friday that CIA director David Petraeus has resigned from the CIA, citing an extramarital affair.

NBC's Andrea Mitchell said the resignation was submitted in a letter dated Friday and was accepted by the White House.

In a letter, Petraeus noted that he had been married for 37 years and had exercised "extremely poor judgment' in conducting an extramarital affair.

Petraues took over as head of the CIA in September of 2011 following his tour as head of allied forces in Afghanistan.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...n-nbc/1695271/

[VAChief]

Originally Posted by WoodDraw

That this "scandal" died away months ago, yet Republicans still think they have Watergate 2.0 in their hands. It's just a bit funny to watch.

Under Reagan, in a little less than a year and a half 320 were killed by three different terrorist attacks on our U.S. Embassy and military barracks in Beirut. The day after the 3rd attack Reagan continued on the campaign trail.
It took 2 years to get an official report on those security failures.

I don't remember any of the kind hyperbolic rhetoric toward Reagan that Obama is getting, even though the loss of life dwarfs this recent attack. Also, did we ever get justice for those multiple attacks on our Embassy personnel and GI's? Nope, we eventually withdrew. Can you imagine the reaction if Obama had made that decision in 1984?

[scott free]

Originally Posted by Chiefspants

Petraeus' bio now has an unfortunate title, to say the least.

The more i look at her, the more she disgusts me.

In that pic she has the kind of eyes that say "had the title planned all along"

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by KChiefer

Why aren't people like Lindsey Graham and McCain as or more upset about the meningitis outbreak (death toll 33, 480 sick)?

Was the President behind that too?

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by WoodDraw

That this "scandal" died away months ago, yet Republicans still think they have Watergate 2.0 in their hands. It's just a bit funny to watch.

Yeah, you're right, we only impeach Presidents over serious shit. Like blowjobs.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by VAChief

Under Reagan, in a little less than a year and a half 320 were killed by three different terrorist attacks on our U.S. Embassy and military barracks in Beirut. The day after the 3rd attack Reagan continued on the campaign trail.
It took 2 years to get an official report on those security failures.

I don't remember any of the kind hyperbolic rhetoric toward Reagan that Obama is getting, even though the loss of life dwarfs this recent attack. Also, did we ever get justice for those multiple attacks on our Embassy personnel and GI's? Nope, we eventually withdrew. Can you imagine the reaction if Obama had made that decision in 1984?

Here's one problem comparing this with the Beirut attack on the marine barracks, imo:

We armed AQ-linked jihadis and some of those arms and jihadis went into Syria. The ambassador who was killed was reportedly CIA and coordinated arming them. I also heard they were really in a CIA compound too. Something is very strange about us even working with these kind of people. It makes me wonder if AQ, originally created by the CIA, may be on the payroll. Ya' know the way MEK is in Iran. I know we have to work with undesirables at time, but we're supposed to be in a WoT right now. Some of these things do not add up.

The other thing is Reagan took full responsibility for what happened in Beirut admitting it was a big mistake to put our troops in the middle of that conflict. He didn't cover it up. If you read his autobio he says he feels it was the biggest mistake of his presidency. Really though, that was a peacekeeping mission, not workin' with the enemy.

Plus the Democrats went after RR for Iran-Contra.

[ROYC75]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

R's get your conspiracy hats on. Jill Kelley and Broadwell made repeat visits to the white House

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...FcwmUw&cad=rja

Which one of the Obama's did they do ? You got the inside scoop ?

[dirk digler]

oh well

David H. Petraeus, the former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, told lawmakers on Friday that classified intelligence reports revealed that the deadly assault on the American diplomatic mission in Libya was a terrorist attack, but that the administration refrained from saying it suspected that the perpetrators of the attack were Al Qaeda affiliates and sympathizers to avoid tipping off the groups.

Mr. Petraeus, who resigned last week after admitting to an extramarital affair, said the names of groups suspected in the attack — including Al Qaeda’s franchise in North Africa and a local Libyan group, Ansar al-Shariah — were removed from the public explanation of the attack immediately after the assault to avoiding alerting the militants that American intelligence and law enforcement agencies were tracking them, lawmakers said.

The talking points initially drafted by the C.I.A. attributed the attack to fighters with Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, the organization’s North Africa franchise, and Ansar al-Shariah, a Libyan group, some of whose members have Al Qaeda ties.

Mr. Petraeus and other top C.I.A. officials signed off on the draft and then circulated it to other intelligence agencies, as well as the State Department and National Security Council.

At some point in the process — Mr. Petraeus told lawmakers he was not sure where — objections were raised to naming the groups, and the less specific word “extremists” was substituted.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Plus the Democrats went after RR for Iran-Contra.

As they should of.

He could have been impeached. Sold arms to our enemies to take the profits and arm some rebels the congress already told him specifically to not arm. Think about that for a second............ The President secretly provided arms to people who have sworn death to us.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

As they should of.

I wasn't commenting on the worthiness of it.

He could have been impeached. Sold arms to our enemies to take the profits and arm some rebels the congress already told him specifically to not arm. Think about that for a second............ The President secretly provided arms to people who have sworn death to us.

Since you want to get into it:

Actually, that has some disinformation. It was because the House passed the Boland Amendment and they felt it was circumvented. Iran-Contra actually never involved any govt money and the Boland Amendment, which was alleged to be violated had legal issues, one being that it did not cover the NSC and was not even a criminal statute. IIRC there was questions about it's Constitutionality.

No court ever made a determination whether Boland covered the NSC, and because it was a prohibition rather than a criminal statute, no one could be indicted for violating it.

And let's face it the Obama regime is supplying arms to AQ linked jihadis and MEK was de-listed under Obama but Bush was using that terrorist group in Iran. Besides, we do trade arms for hostages.

[ROYC75]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Besides, we do trade arms for hostages.

Unless it's Mexico, we let them kill our border agents and civilians.

[KChiefer]

Originally Posted by patteeu

Was the President behind that too?

Was he behind the Benghazi attack?

[go bowe]

Originally Posted by Radar Chief

Charlize Theron. I’d low crawl a mile of broken beer bottles and antifreeze for just a sniff of her still warm panties.

crawl?

pffffffffffft! that's why they invented atv's...

[J Diddy]

Originally Posted by listopencil

Yeah, you're right, we only impeach Presidents over serious shit. Like blowjobs.

It has become my opinion as of late that the Right wing is a party of do it my way or I'm taking my ball or going home, be it secession or silly impeachment attempts.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Here's one problem comparing this with the Beirut attack on the marine barracks, imo:

We armed AQ-linked jihadis and some of those arms and jihadis went into Syria. The ambassador who was killed was reportedly CIA and coordinated arming them. I also heard they were really in a CIA compound too. Something is very strange about us even working with these kind of people. It makes me wonder if AQ, originally created by the CIA, may be on the payroll. Ya' know the way MEK is in Iran. I know we have to work with undesirables at time, but we're supposed to be in a WoT right now. Some of these things do not add up.

The other thing is Reagan took full responsibility for what happened in Beirut admitting it was a big mistake to put our troops in the middle of that conflict. He didn't cover it up. If you read his autobio he says he feels it was the biggest mistake of his presidency. Really though, that was a peacekeeping mission, not workin' with the enemy.

Plus the Democrats went after RR for Iran-Contra.

Congratulations for discussing Reagan's autobiography without distorting it.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

As they should of.

He could have been impeached. Sold arms to our enemies to take the profits and arm some rebels the congress already told him specifically to not arm. Think about that for a second............ The President secretly provided arms to people who have sworn death to us.

Ironic, given the rumors we're hearing about Benghazi and Syria.