[...] Six current or former White House officials, who all spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, said Rice remains close to President Barack Obama and shares many of his views on foreign policy. They emphasized that the president hasn’t made a final decision, and Clinton may remain in her post for some months into Obama’s second term.
Rice is thought to be the president’s preferred choice over two other strong candidates, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry of Massachusetts and National Security Adviser Tom Donilon, according to the current and former administration officials [...]
She was getting caught up in this Libya mess (And Issa will make a lot out of this) but she is believable to me. I no not what that exactly means, but I really like her.
This will be history, this will be something to see and as you have expanded the new changes ahead; what could be more intriguing except of course the 'cliff' we must evade regarding our financial situation.
I never liked Petraeus.
But what do I know? It is not like I read the entire file.
Adultery was the last reason I had foreseen as far as his retirement. They are saying on MSNBC that the disclosure was made a few days before the General's statement.
Foreign policy always becomes of more import AFTER an election.
Not likely to happen, though stranger things have, but The only not-crazy or otherwise unqualified Republican candidate was Jon Huntsman and he might make a good Sec. of St.
Good for him. Keeps the affair from becoming an unnecessary distraction for both the CIA and the Obama administration. Also sets a good example for other public servants who are indiscreet in their personal affairs.
The repubs have been searching for some huge scandal; Issa is just foaming at the mouth for a scandal (and he is one of the biggest felons in Congress today); and there aint nothing there as far as our POTUS.
I have read that the CIA is responsible for this misinformation regarding Libya; the House hearings will continue anyway but you can bet your bottom dollar or even your bottom the repubs aint gonna blame this mess on the General.
Take a look at Artappraiser's take on all this.
The cabinet is gonna change and we shall see history in the making!
There is a clue where some wingers are going to try to go with this on Drudge; he just changed his headline on it to
Was Slated to Testify on Benghazi Next Week...PETRAEUS RESIGNS OVER 'AFFAIR'
Note the editorial quotation marks are a part of the message. Now, as your Fox link suggests, that means those choosing to go in this direction are going to have to say the FBI is in on the inventing the affair....
Current word (and it may not be true) is that the affair was with his biographer, the extremely attractive, and married, Paula Broadwell. Try to watch this Jon Stewart interview without cringing. I dare ya.
The biographer for resigning CIA Director David Petraeus is under FBI investigation for improperly trying to access his email and possibly gaining access to classified information, law enforcement officials told NBC News on Friday [....]
I suspect that someone in the military with an axe to grind ratted out David Petraeus for having an extramarital affair. I am told that President Obama tried to talk Petraeus out of resigning, but Petraeus took the samurai route [....]
One story is that his girlfriend is being investigated for having access to his email.
He is at this moment being apologized for, on TFV, as being a man of honor that needed to fall on his sward. Maybe.
But maybe his girlfriend used her special access to the General to get access to his email and that means our biggest major dude spy fucked up bad.
His personal life does could be separated from his professional life but his carelessness, if that is what happened, is in the category of major fuck up.
It's the biographer/author of the book on him who's under investigation unless you are asserting she is the 'scarlet woman' too.
Once his affair was 'outed' he would have immediately lost his security clearance based on the law of the land (blackmail, 'pillow talk', etc. - doubtful the lady had been vetted and also held high security clearances since the one he has as head of CIA is shared by only a handful (POTUS for one).
So it seems that you can have an affair and even though you SHOULD technically resign, you don't necessarily HAVE to, and your boss might even try to talk you out of it.
But if it's an affair with a much younger person who used access to you to write a bestseller, and then that person tries to access your CIA emails, you probably have to fall on your (ahem) sword.
In general, I believe we should ignore people's affairs.
Other than those of generals.
And their war-loving freak sidekicks.
Seriously, these two are the sort of uniform-wearing smooth-talking ultra-tough-lifestyle assholes I want to see on the front lines.
That said, I would just like to say, "All In?"
Seriously. You named the biography of the man you're sleeping with "All In?"
Have you no shame, ma'am? At long last, have you no shame?
by Q-thingie (not verified) on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 10:38am
I realize this might rub some people the wrong way, as it also applies to (Bill) Clinton, but when you have access to top secret information, I don't think it's too much to expect you to show the proper level of discretion. Whether it's an affair or some other action that could be used against you for blackmail if it became public, it is relevant. Relevant doesn't mean necessarily being fired (or impeached), but it does mean that it shouldn't just be ignored.
Maybe violating his own personal code together with the professional embarrassment shattered his confidence enough to prompt him to resign but seriously, how likely is it that if it were just an affair, he would have resigned over it? and how likely that the FBI would be investigating it? The whole thing just screams security breach.
From what I've read, it's a mandate that if there is an extra marital affair discovered, there is an immediate loss of security clearance. This is due to many issues, one being the real possibility of someone attempting to use this for blackmail in an attempt to get classified data, etc. In this instance, the FBI's investigation is concerned about her ability to obtain access to his computer, specifically emails, et al.
In reality, due to the regulations and standards in place - especially in his case where he has the top security clearance, I don't see how he had another viable option - he could have, of course, offered to step aside temporarily if and until the investigation proved there was no breach, but that's not something I believe he even considered.
He was the head of the CIA, not many others have his clearance and data access.
I think we need to be somewhat circumspect here until all the facts are known.
Circumspection is good but will all the facts ever be known?
For the record whatever the facts turn out to be, my estimation of Petraeus' character, specifically his honor, is greatly enhanced by his resignation even if the breach is simply having an extra marital affair. We tend to accept that soldiers are ready to die in service of their country but how many have the strength of character to risk their hard-earned reputations?
I understand your stance, but without facts anything one may state is only assumptions and thus, does more harm than good for any to speculate.
In this case for sure, I think it would not serve any positive or productive purpose to enter into throwing opinions on what may or may not have happened.
Found the new article at the NYT quite interesting on the intersecting lives of 3 people which do happen to have amounted to more than a hill of beans in this world
(By Scott Shane, Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Peter Baker withThom Shanker, Michael R. Gordon and David E. Sanger contributed reporting from Washington, and Viv Bernstein from Charlotte, N.C.)
Examples:
She recounted how she had first e-mailed Mr. Petraeus about her doctoral dissertation and then showed up in Afghanistan, where he helped her in what she called a mentoring relationship, as he had many young officers. She said she and Mr. Petraeus shared an interest in fitness and that he took her running.
“That was the foundation of our relationship,” she said. From time to time, they would go running in Kabul. “For him, I think it was a good distraction from the war.”
From her many profiles and interviews, Ms. Broadwell, who was born while Mr. Petraeus was a West Point cadet, emerges as a younger, female version of him: travel to 60 countries; service in intelligence, special operations and with an F.B.I. counterterrorism task force; Harvard degree; wife of a physician; mother of two boys.
Once Mr. Obama took office, he did not speak regularly with Mr. Petraeus, preferring to restore what he considered the normal chain of command. For his part, Mr. Petraeus disdained some of the president’s aides, once telling an associate that David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s political guru, was “a complete spin doctor,” Bob Woodward later reported in a book. Mr. Petraeus was effectively banned by the administration from Sunday talk shows but maintained private communications with journalists and lawmakers.
A key moment in the turnaround of the tense relationship between the president and the general came when Mr. Petraeus met with Rahm Emanuel, then Mr. Obama’s chief of staff and his lookout for possible rivals. In roundabout ways, not quite explicit but understood by both men, Mr. Petraeus assured Mr. Emanuel that he had no intention of running for president, according to people informed about the conversation.
But amid the media storm, many friends and admirers of the family thought of Holly Petraeus, his wife of 38 years, herself descended from a distinguished line of military officers. In a March 2012 profile, USA Today referred to her as “Army royalty,” noting that her great-great grandfather fought in the Civil War and the Indian Wars, and that her great-grandfather and grandfather had also served — a point she herself made while testifying before the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs in February 2011.
“I come from a military family, one that has a tradition of service going back to the Revolutionary War,” she said then. “My father served in the Army for over 36 years, fighting in both World War II and Vietnam. Two of my brothers also served in Vietnam and, of course, my husband is currently serving. And I’m a military mom as well.”
Mrs. Petraeus has carved out a prominent role for herself as an advocate for the financial education of military families.
The collapse of the dazzling career of CIA Director David H. Petraeus was triggered when a woman with whom he was having an affair sent threatening e-mails to another woman close to him, according to three senior law enforcement officials with knowledge of the episode.
The recipient of the e-mails was so frightened that she went to the FBI for protection and help tracking down the sender, according to the officials. The FBI investigation traced the threats to Paula Broadwell, a former military officer and a Petraeus biographer, and uncovered explicit e-mails between Broadwell and Petraeus, the officials said.
When Petraeus’s name first surfaced, FBI investigators were concerned that the CIA director’s personal e-mail account had been hacked and security had been breached. But the sexual nature of the e-mails led them to conclude that Petraeus and Broadwell were engaged in an affair, the officials said.
The identity of the woman who received the e-mails was not disclosed, and the nature of her relationship with Petraeus is unknown. The law enforcement officials said the e-mails indicated that Broadwell perceived the other woman as a threat to her relationship with Petraeus [....]
Why are FBI anonymice telling WaPo this now? I suspect it's because Fox News et.al. are piling on the suggestions that this is all a phony FBI story ginned up in order for Petraeus to resign before testifying on Benghazi (just heard as much from Fox News on in the background.)
WASHINGTON, [....] Meanwhile, new details emerged on Saturday about developments in the final days leading to Petraeus' departure from atop the CIA.
Clapper was notified by the FBI on Tuesday evening about 5 p.m. - just as returns in the U.S. presidential election were about to come in - about "the situation involving Director Petraeus," a senior intelligence official said. Clapper and Petraeus then spoke that evening and the following morning.
WHITE HOUSE NOTIFIED WEDNESDAY
"Director Clapper, as a friend and a colleague and a fellow general officer, advised Director Petraeus that he should do the right thing and he should step down," the official said.
Clapper is a retired Air Force lieutenant general; Petraeus served nearly four decades in the U.S. Army.
On Wednesday, Clapper notified the National Security Council at the White House that Petraeus was considering resigning and President Barack Obama should be informed, the official said.
U.S. law enforcement and intelligence officials agreed to discuss the Petraeus matter only on condition of anonymity because of the issue's sensitivity and because it is the subject of a law enforcement investigation.
Once Petraeus' name turned up in the investigation, the importance of the FBI inquiry was immediately escalated, as investigators became concerned the CIA chief somehow might have been compromised, the law enforcement official said.
However, the official and two sources briefed on the matter said no evidence has turned up suggesting Petraeus had become vulnerable to espionage or blackmail [....]
Several officials briefed on the matter said senior officials at the Pentagon, CIA and Congress knew nothing of the FBI's investigation of Petraeus until Thursday afternoon at the earliest, and some key officials were not briefed on the details until Friday.
There is no evidence at this time that anyone at the White House had knowledge of the situation involving Petraeus prior to the U.S. presidential election on Tuesday, which saw Obama elected to a second four-year term.
Another U.S. government security source said it was not until Friday afternoon that some members of the House and Senate intelligence oversight committees were notified about Petraeus' resignation by Clapper's office.
The congressional committees were told that it was a personal issue that Petraeus had to discuss with his wife. When pressed, a representative of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said it involved another woman. [....]
[....] 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 hadn’t been asked to when the issue was about to become public [....]
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.[....]
Comments
don't forget, more changes coming, too:
by artappraiser on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 4:10pm
I like Rice.
I have always liked her.
She was getting caught up in this Libya mess (And Issa will make a lot out of this) but she is believable to me. I no not what that exactly means, but I really like her.
This will be history, this will be something to see and as you have expanded the new changes ahead; what could be more intriguing except of course the 'cliff' we must evade regarding our financial situation.
I never liked Petraeus.
But what do I know? It is not like I read the entire file.
Adultery was the last reason I had foreseen as far as his retirement. They are saying on MSNBC that the disclosure was made a few days before the General's statement.
Foreign policy always becomes of more import AFTER an election.
Again, history is what we are witnessing.
by Richard Day on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 4:23pm
Not likely to happen, though stranger things have, but The only not-crazy or otherwise unqualified Republican candidate was Jon Huntsman and he might make a good Sec. of St.
by A Guy Called LULU on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 6:28pm
Good for him. Keeps the affair from becoming an unnecessary distraction for both the CIA and the Obama administration. Also sets a good example for other public servants who are indiscreet in their personal affairs.
by EmmaZahn on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 4:45pm
One aspect of this really gets to me.
The repubs have been searching for some huge scandal; Issa is just foaming at the mouth for a scandal (and he is one of the biggest felons in Congress today); and there aint nothing there as far as our POTUS.
I have read that the CIA is responsible for this misinformation regarding Libya; the House hearings will continue anyway but you can bet your bottom dollar or even your bottom the repubs aint gonna blame this mess on the General.
Take a look at Artappraiser's take on all this.
The cabinet is gonna change and we shall see history in the making!
by Richard Day on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 4:58pm
There is a clue where some wingers are going to try to go with this on Drudge; he just changed his headline on it to
Was Slated to Testify on Benghazi Next Week...PETRAEUS RESIGNS OVER 'AFFAIR'
Note the editorial quotation marks are a part of the message. Now, as your Fox link suggests, that means those choosing to go in this direction are going to have to say the FBI is in on the inventing the affair....
by artappraiser on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 6:54pm
Current word (and it may not be true) is that the affair was with his biographer, the extremely attractive, and married, Paula Broadwell. Try to watch this Jon Stewart interview without cringing. I dare ya.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-january-25-2012/paula-broadwell
by erica20 on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 6:42pm
by artappraiser on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 7:37pm
I just got the
that Tom Ricks is sure to have some poop on what's going on; here's what he says:
by artappraiser on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 8:45pm
When I was a kid, during the Cold War, I was constantly being told that Nikita had been head of the KGB.
That was supposed to tell me everything about communism and totalitarianism and...whatever.
Nikita turned out not to be that bad a guy! He and Jack saved the world so to speak.
Then an old head of the CIA not only made it to the Vice Presidency but to the Presidency.
So conspiracy theories shall prevail or at least not die out completely.
Again, I have not read all of the files since I have no security clearance at all.
I do find it strange that we lose a CIA head because of a dalliance?
Oh well...
Such is life!
by Richard Day on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 9:04pm
One story is that his girlfriend is being investigated for having access to his email.
He is at this moment being apologized for, on TFV, as being a man of honor that needed to fall on his sward. Maybe.
But maybe his girlfriend used her special access to the General to get access to his email and that means our biggest major dude spy fucked up bad.
His personal life does could be separated from his professional life but his carelessness, if that is what happened, is in the category of major fuck up.
by A Guy Called LULU on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 9:15pm
It's the biographer/author of the book on him who's under investigation unless you are asserting she is the 'scarlet woman' too.
Once his affair was 'outed' he would have immediately lost his security clearance based on the law of the land (blackmail, 'pillow talk', etc. - doubtful the lady had been vetted and also held high security clearances since the one he has as head of CIA is shared by only a handful (POTUS for one).
by Aunt Sam on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 10:13pm
So it seems that you can have an affair and even though you SHOULD technically resign, you don't necessarily HAVE to, and your boss might even try to talk you out of it.
But if it's an affair with a much younger person who used access to you to write a bestseller, and then that person tries to access your CIA emails, you probably have to fall on your (ahem) sword.
Good to know.
by erica20 on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 9:34pm
This is only about your second paragraph.
If she succeeded in gaining access then he was negligent big time with presumably very sensitive classified documents..
by A Guy Called LULU on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 9:50pm
Well, as aunt Sam points out, we don't know any of this for sure. So I'll hang back a bit on the conclusions.....
a couple of hours ago it appeared the guy had had an affair with his own wife! (Per msnbc)
by erica20 on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 12:00am
http://warincontext.org/2012/11/09/petraeus-obama-extra-marrital-affairs...
by A Guy Called LULU on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 10:35pm
The reports I've read all say the identity of the lady is not disclosed, this guy is making assumptions without factual foundation.
by Aunt Sam on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 11:16pm
It's just now being reported that the biographer/author was the woman he had the affair with............
Sad, very sad - we humans are so human. sigh.
'nuff said.
by Aunt Sam on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 3:28am
by Richard Day on Fri, 11/09/2012 - 11:12pm
by EmmaZahn on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 8:05am
In general, we should ignore people's affairs.
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 2:49am
In general, I believe we should ignore people's affairs.
Other than those of generals.
And their war-loving freak sidekicks.
Seriously, these two are the sort of uniform-wearing smooth-talking ultra-tough-lifestyle assholes I want to see on the front lines.
That said, I would just like to say, "All In?"
Seriously. You named the biography of the man you're sleeping with "All In?"
Have you no shame, ma'am? At long last, have you no shame?
by Q-thingie (not verified) on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 10:38am
I realize this might rub some people the wrong way, as it also applies to (Bill) Clinton, but when you have access to top secret information, I don't think it's too much to expect you to show the proper level of discretion. Whether it's an affair or some other action that could be used against you for blackmail if it became public, it is relevant. Relevant doesn't mean necessarily being fired (or impeached), but it does mean that it shouldn't just be ignored.
by Verified Atheist on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 10:54am
Yes, for all their "tolerance" I've yet to see "progressives" restrain themselves from gloating over a Republican/conservative affair.
There's always an exception why these things are too important /hypocritical to ignore.
Meanwhile, I see a great need for people to get laid. A need that reaches across the divide, trumps election cycles and partisan bickering.
Of course orgasms threaten national security, as they should.
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 3:41pm
Generally, yes, however....
Maybe violating his own personal code together with the professional embarrassment shattered his confidence enough to prompt him to resign but seriously, how likely is it that if it were just an affair, he would have resigned over it? and how likely that the FBI would be investigating it? The whole thing just screams security breach.
by EmmaZahn on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 11:43am
From what I've read, it's a mandate that if there is an extra marital affair discovered, there is an immediate loss of security clearance. This is due to many issues, one being the real possibility of someone attempting to use this for blackmail in an attempt to get classified data, etc. In this instance, the FBI's investigation is concerned about her ability to obtain access to his computer, specifically emails, et al.
In reality, due to the regulations and standards in place - especially in his case where he has the top security clearance, I don't see how he had another viable option - he could have, of course, offered to step aside temporarily if and until the investigation proved there was no breach, but that's not something I believe he even considered.
He was the head of the CIA, not many others have his clearance and data access.
I think we need to be somewhat circumspect here until all the facts are known.
by Aunt Sam on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 12:15pm
Circumspection is good but will all the facts ever be known?
For the record whatever the facts turn out to be, my estimation of Petraeus' character, specifically his honor, is greatly enhanced by his resignation even if the breach is simply having an extra marital affair. We tend to accept that soldiers are ready to die in service of their country but how many have the strength of character to risk their hard-earned reputations?
by EmmaZahn on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 1:05pm
I understand your stance, but without facts anything one may state is only assumptions and thus, does more harm than good for any to speculate.
In this case for sure, I think it would not serve any positive or productive purpose to enter into throwing opinions on what may or may not have happened.
by Aunt Sam on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 1:23pm
Found the new article at the NYT quite interesting on the intersecting lives of 3 people which do happen to have amounted to more than a hill of beans in this world
Petraeus, Seen as Invincible, Self-Destructs
(By Scott Shane, Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Peter Baker withThom Shanker, Michael R. Gordon and David E. Sanger contributed reporting from Washington, and Viv Bernstein from Charlotte, N.C.)
Examples:
by artappraiser on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 3:11pm
Appears there may have been a little bit of Fatal Attraction-type craziness by Broadwell involved in causing all of this:
Why are FBI anonymice telling WaPo this now? I suspect it's because Fox News et.al. are piling on the suggestions that this is all a phony FBI story ginned up in order for Petraeus to resign before testifying on Benghazi (just heard as much from Fox News on in the background.)
by artappraiser on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 4:10pm
Yup, FBI sources are trying to make it clear that nobody else in government knew about this until after the election was almost over or over:
by artappraiser on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 8:16pm
from Name of Other 'Other' Woman Revealed @ Greg Mitchell's Pressing Issues blog, Nov. 11.
by artappraiser on Sun, 11/11/2012 - 7:02pm
by artappraiser on Mon, 11/12/2012 - 11:51am