Featured Post

The Coup Attempt Continues

Some eight days before Trump's inauguration, and in the midst of the Russia hysteria, I wrote I have never seen such a pile on as the ...

Friday, November 9, 2012

Petraeus Affair Has A Whiff of Chicago

Does this sudden resigning of CIA Director Petraeus strike you as odd?

I hate big conspiracy theories. Having worked in the government for nearly 34 years, I know how the government leaks and creaks and is incapable of massive conspiracies. This, however, has all the smell of a little conspiracy; of a cheap Chicago hood conspiracy. Three days after the elections and a few days before scheduled testimony to Congress on Benghazi, Petraeus suddenly resigns because of an affair with his biographer, and makes it known that he will not testify.

So many questions, so very many questions.

Where to begin? How about why did the FBI have his biographer, Paula Broadwell, under investigation? It appears that she sought access to classified info. Why? Seems like a serous crime, but apparently the government will not file criminal charges. Why not? Did she cut a deal with the FBI to bring down Petraeus?

In the process of that investigation, the FBI found that Broadwell and General Petraeus, now head of the FBI's rival intel organization, had an affair. When did the affair occur? When did the FBI uncover it? They surely discovered it before the November 6 elections.

Did the FBI Director brief the White House about this looming scandal at CIA? When? Who got briefed? Could that have provided the Chicago hoods who run the White House the blackmail ammo to keep Petraeus in line during the Benghazi cover-up and scandal? Note the odd behavior and statements by Petraeus during the whole cover-up effort.

Did Petraeus decide he didn't want to play the game anymore, his sense of honor caught up with him, he confessed and resigned? If so, why apparently does he refuse to come before Congress as a private citizen?

How will this play out in the weeks, months, years ahead?

To paraphrase Bette Davis, “Fasten your seatbelts. It’s going to be a bumpy four years.”


  1. the chicago machine stole the 1960 election for jfk.

    jfk's father was part of the machine - going back to prohibition and through the family's ownership of the chicago mart.

    obama's first major endorsement - the one that out him on the map - was teddy's. and then caroline's.

    and joe biden is part of the machine, too.

    the machine got rid of obama's gop senatorial adversary, jack ryan - who was leading obama at the time in the polls. they "somehow" got the court to unseal the ryan divorce papers and he withdrew from the race.

    they are at it again with petraeus.

    (they probably stole the election from romney, too.)

    1. Election fraud needs to be thoroughly investigated. There are quite a few credible reports of irregularities in Ohio and other states coming out. I believe the Chicagoans do have the ability to set up fraud on a large scale, certainly enough to affect a close election.

      I agree that the timing and substance of the Petraeus resignation is remarkable. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

    2. I have NO doubt this election was stolen. Rasmussen and Gallup were not wrong (especially Gallup's internals showing an R+1 to R+3 electorate). Barone and Rove were not wrong. Romney's internals were not wrong. The huge crowds and enthusiasm Romney was drawing were not wrong.

      Name one election Obama has won legitimately. He pulls a legal or some type of dirty trick every time. When his months long character assassination finally lost steam, he tried to pull up crap on one of Romney's old associates. Unfortunately for Obama, Romney not only had no skeletons, he didn't even have a closet (hat tip Krauthammer).

      What the Romney camp was not anticipating, however, was the lawlessness to which these Chicago thugs would go to win.

  2. My thoughts exactly. Something tells me this is months old news. We may find that Petraeus himself did not know until Benghazi, when he found himself being blackmailed by an senior White House official like Valerie Jarrett ,or Obama himself.

    Wouldn't that be something. If true, I hope he spills it at the congressional hearing.

    Certainly, I think this is the way a master strategist would break the grip of blackmail in a circumstance like this. Do the standup thing; formally confess to the leverage being used to blackmail you, and then resign.

    This strikes me as the way out even if the blackmail leveraged against you was circumstantial; that it was just the appearance of impropriety impossible to defend against. Stealing the blackmailer's thunder and falling on your sword, even when confessing to a scandal that never quite happened, this is the path to freedom.

    What ever Petraeus did in this instance, he has atoned to the nation that will forgive and continue to listen to his thoughts and positions regarding the ultimate safety of our nation and the protection of our mutual interest.

    1. He may have "atoned to the nation" in your opinion, not in mine however Petraeus agreed to serve under a Marxist Megalomaniac and carry hussein's detestible water for him. He did lie about Benghazi and you only have to look at his hang-dog expression while doing it to know HE KNEW he was lying to the American people!!
      He can be brought before Congress and MADE to testify, whether he likes it or not. He is far from attaining nobility or from being any kind of hero to this nation.

    2. Fair enough. He who swims with Dead Fish will certainly stink from the experience.

      It's not just Obama but the duplicitous university, foundation, and institutional culture he represents and whose values he embodies. In this sense Romney proved he is little different. In the end, Obama gave Romney the rope to swing like a hapless male with the best intentions, no ideas, and no courage to do the ugly things.

      If this cartelization of our federal government is to stop, it will be stopped by devoted mutualists, not Republicans and their provincial buffoons.

      We are in an era of unprecedented anti-mutualism. We are in an era of institutional hegemony and the malignant amplification of power converted to federal policy and law by elitist experimentalists who are made disproportionately powerful by their institutions they preside within. Not one of these institutions is an American citizen. Not one of these institutions can vote. WTF are they doing hijacking our election process.

      The cartel of union media is one of the big problem. If Romney would have had a pair, when he was done recognizing the institution sponsoring the debate and the commission members who facilitated it, he should have turned to the moderator to thank and recognize them, and then ask them about their union membership, and then also recognize the union for allowing its member to moderate the debate along with recognizing the corporate employer, characterizing the moderator properly as 1) somebody's employee paid to be there; 2) a union member whose could not be there unless they were a union member in good standing.

      The 5th Column conducting the outgoing sedition of our political processes operates only because they are exempt from meaningful investigation and prosecution.

      Without equal enforcement and equal prosecution under the law, we are but a husk of the nation we claim to be. Romney is but one of the many pretty, smiling faces whose cowardice, silence and codependent enabling made this failed generation what it has become: hopelessly duplicitous and disingenuous.

      We where a nation where the sanctity of the individual was the central unifying principle. We were all "the each" that held G_d given rights, inalienable. Our founders built a hysteresis of mutualism to create our remarkable model of representative government for the very purpose of staying the advent of mob rule and elitism that always comes with the decent of a people into a tyranny of the masses.

      They have used the false sciences of the Prussian era to create classes and minorities.

      Our nation was founded on the ideal that we are each a minority of one. This was also the premise and teaching of Martin Luther King; not the indemnity from personal character but instead the honest measure of it. The fatal conceit of our modern racialist era has the law, our major institutions and governments practicing Phrenology in abject defiance of our founding principles and the overwhelming body of science that finds no such thing as "race" in the genetics of Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

      Without a return to the principled dynamic mutualism of Eaches inspired by the Native American cultures of that era; the principles that animated and guided our nation's revolution, independence and constitutional republic, we will become slaves to the elites who control the universities, the foundations and institutions of media and the political expenditures that protect them from bankruptcy and the irrelevancy they deserve.

  3. In this era of Obama, we are all Christopher Stevens.

    1. Paul Vincent ZecchinoNovember 10, 2012 at 7:51 AM

      Magnificent. If you don't mind, I'd like to use that with attribution.

      You've succinctly described this regime.

    2. I have never felt a knot in my gut level of fear from a presidential administration like I do with this one. Certainly, I have been more pleased with some than others. But this one just makes me want to go off the grid until it ends. What I fear most, however, is that these bastards are inflicting some serious internal damage to our great nation from which we will not be able to recover. And I think it is all malice aforethought.

    3. Had Romney had the balls in the debates to summarize Benghazi in those terms, he would have won the election.

      He might have actually beaten the implanted "drop out" algorithm coded to ignore ballots cast for Romney in a self-modifying non-obvious outcome changing frequency of selective non-counting.

      Instead, Romney put vanity before courage and was provincial to a fault in surrendering the election with the signs of fraud everywhere.

      It's a palpable insult when all that's left to say about a man is "Gee. What a nice guy."

      Romney put our nation first exactly how?

      Romney is the era of Obama.

      We are all Christopher Stevens.

  4. DiploMad, Jennifer Griffin is reporting that there was an FBI investigation going on in Afghanistan when Petreaus was still there, separate from Petreaus, when they learned of his infidelity. And we also know that background checks on anyone who is being considered for such a high office are provided to the President before he makes his recommendations for any lofty position. That is just SOP.

    So Obama had to know that the General had been involved in a little extracurricular activity in Afghanistan with his biographer. But my guess is that Petreaus didn't know that the Chicago machine knew. I don't think a man who is smart enough to reach Four Stars would allow himself to be put in that position if he knew the Chicago machine knew. The word is being put out that the FBI was worried about Petreaus being blackmailed. Well, he was, only by the administration, and that explains why he testified that the Benghazi attack was due to a obscure film no one ever heard of.

    I think he just decided to stop playing the game.

    But here is my question: why did Petreaus wait until two days after the election? Did the administration threaten to leak the scandal to the NYSlimes but cut a deal and agreed to let him cop to his violation of the UCMJ if he would not announce it until AFTER the election?

    Obama is now claiming he didn't know. If that is the case, it is because Valerie Jarrett kept it from him and held that card close to her vest until she needed it. The Benghazi scandal is not going away like Obama would like for it to. Perhaps Jarrett pulled her trump card on Petreaus and that is why he mislead Congress and he finally said "Enough". Maybe honor, in spite of his weakness as a man, is finally his trump card.

    Make no mistake; he will testify, most likely with legal representation now.


    1. O-J did it. The Mullet Queen strikes again.

      It has and will continue to happen to all who swim with The Dead Fish.

      They will all eventually become "we".

      We are all Christopher Stevens.

    2. Perhaps he waited because he thought Obama was going to lose. Little did he know that they would steal the election...

  5. In any case, I am sadly disappointed in the character of Petreaus. Michael Yon has written many excellent articles and interviews with him and I thought that he was a man of integrity and honor. Now I find that he has the self-control of a teenager.

    1. It may seem incredible, given what has been said. However, we really don't know what happened yet. The point about admitting to something he did not do as a preemptive tactic makes sense. They were going to smear him anyway. The action Petraeus took was a flanking action that inverted the relative strategic dynamics to his favor. There is no way this was a last move, this was a brilliant tactical counter-attack. We may yet learn the blackmail smear was based on evidence entirely circumstantial developed solely for the exact purpose for which it appears to have been used.


My hunch is Petraeus got sandbagged out of the blue with the accusation and "file" by Jarrett in the last 3 weeks or so, having never heard a rumble it was coming; something done specifically by Jarrett to shut Petraeus down and make him sing the party anthem as scripted. That he was surprised and ensnared in a blackmailing seems to be confirmed by the rather odd dynamic coming out of the CIA in re what is beginning to look like a White House sanctioned murder-by-neglect of Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi.

      The unexplained tasking of an FBI investigation could be nothing more than a Jarrett hit-squad formed to dig up information and build accusation set-pieces to allow selective accusations enabling blackmail of key officials who are feared to be disloyal to the crown or might otherwise go off the reservation. This implies some highly improper and potentially unlawful unilateral actions involving foreign interests (Obama.com, et al, anonymous illegal credit card donations; arms & drug smuggling; money laundering; futures fraud; campaign fund corruption; foreign government financial sponsorship of the Obama reelection campaign) or other foreign national tamperings with our nation's foreign policy, whether or not such resulted in a form of electioneering or racketeering directly tilting the 2012 election.


That The Mullet Queen has to keep some very powerful career professionals on the Obama Reservation singing from the party hymnal as she directs is not a conspiracy theory; not implauseable; not without reasonable concern.

      To effectively wield the necessary degree and quality of dictatorial, predatory and effective administrative power would likely require a dedicated covert team tasked with officially unofficial serial espionage to spy upon career professionals working in or around the Ms-administration. How else could The Mullet Queen ensure she absolutely knew and could correctly calculate what leverage she did or did not have to coerce whatever compliant behavior was required from the career and appointed professionals she was tasked with policing and silencing when necessary? The picture that seems to be forming portrays The Mullet Queen as tasked with protecting a misadministration that may yet be shown to have been serially engaged in a network of ongoing criminal enterprises misusing the veil of legitimacy provided by official policy and the offices themselves.

      They already appear to some to have trampled and rendered selective and arbitrary the sacred construct of equal protection under the law on which our nation was founded. We saw an ugly glimpse laid bare arising from Gunwalker and Fast and Furious; demonstrating for some onlookers an apparent predisposition in the defense of lawlessness, and a seditious elitism of which worrisomely may also permeate the superior culture of the WH and its transnational stakeholders.

      As of yet, I have trouble identifying how the best interests of individual Americans are being served by the apparent cartelization of our national government in this second phase of the Obama era.

      Clearly, there is much more here than meets the eye.

    2. Thank you for bringing up Jarrett....I believe her to be the power - and the evil - behind the throne.

  6. You are right on.

    Patraeus stated the CIA did nothing to prevent action being taken to prevent help being made available for the beleaguered Americans in Benghazi. This threw the ball back to State and the White House. Patraeus didn't fall on his sword as he was supposed to. More recently CIA comes up with a timeline that concludes rescue was impossible, that F-16s didn't have time to be aremed and fly the 400 miles to Benghazi (ignoring drones already in the air). Was this most recent statement done under duress? Was Patraeus told to follow the party line at the hearings or certain information would leak out?

    Did Patraeus refuse and then submit his resignation, preempting the admindtration's blackmail story? As you point out, the timing is too coincidental.

    1. Was Patraeus told to follow the party line at the hearings or certain information would leak out?


      Did Patraeus refuse and then submit his resignation, preempting the admindtration's blackmail story? As you point out, the timing is too coincidental.


  7. Mr. Mad, you are the only one so far asking questions about Broadwell - the same ones I want answered.

    When I read his Dear Barack resignation letter, my first gut reaction was: Petraeus wants OUT. Wants to remove himself from everything. Which by the way I think is a steaming pile of bullshit. But it may have been his best option, and he may be keeping certain options "open."

    What a tawdry, awful mess. I'm so embarrassed for everyone involved, and for our nation. But then again, it fits right into our whole "new" direction. It ain't morning in America, it's bar time and the real party is just getting started.

    1. Paul Vincent ZecchinoNovember 10, 2012 at 7:47 AM

      Agree. The gutter culture elected a chicongo MOB lounge act, complete with filthy clowns and dirty tricksters.

      This is what they do, smear their enemies with sexual innuendo.

      Petraeus cut them off at the knees by going public first.

      Brilliant: Go public immediately. Never threaten to do so, as that only allows the rats to craft your doom. Go public immediately, take the truth to the American people. We like underdogs and detest gutless conniving bullies.

      The communist chicongo MOB believes that cunning and treachery are the same as courage and lasting integrity.

      They're not.

      The communist chicongo MOB is an Oedipal Cody Jarret, standing atop the gas tank in 'White Heat' telling Ma he's 'top of the world'.

      These rats are so obvious it's pathetic.

      For forty years, many have adored a gutter culture. At last, they hired a gutter lounge act to dominate them.




      IN SECRET.




  8. Another question about Broadwell: a Slate article characterizes her book as "a valentine" and "hagiographic." Well duh, she was sleeping with the guy. But I wonder how her publisher views the revelation of the affair? Doesn't it completely undermine the book, the publisher, potential sales...?

    1. This little scandal will make book sales go through the roof!

    2. Broadwell was probably a 'plant' by the 'Chicongo' (great word!) MOB in the first place? That is how the mob sets out to blackmail someone to begin with.

  9. This will go exactly nowhere because the media is not going to cover it. Without a doubt, the right side of the blogosphere will be up in arms over it, but once again, the Hydra that is ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN is simply not going to touch it.

    I wish I was wrong about this, but I'm not.

    1. Paul Vincent ZecchinoNovember 10, 2012 at 7:39 AM

      But we are. We are covering it. The media to which you refer is considered a laughing stock, a pitiful old drunken harlot ignored by citizens who know the truth, spending her nights alone in a fourth floor, cold water, walk-up, gumming her fish sticks.

      Yeah, the lemmings and shiftless dolts still watch them but most people do not.

      We are the media. You. Me. That fat guy behind the tree. All of us who for more than thirty years have been sick and tired of being lied to by these TV clowns who get their marching order from the NYSLIMES and WashFaux.

      No one is fooled. Check the blog comments all over the web. Americans see the timing as stupendously coincidental, oh so convenient to a regime which stinks of fear.

      The rats may likely get away with much worse during their era of 'more flexibility', but neither they nor their manhattan marxist media courtesans no longer fool the American people they've for so long held in contempt.

      Truth, as does murder, outs - always.

      Nothing remains buried forever.

      Our influence counts. Let's use it.

    2. This exactly the story the legacy media hates. They know it is a hot story and you are correct, they are trying their darndest to bury it. But people are hungry for it. And these news junkies know Fox News is only a click away and comes on right after ABC/CBS/NBC finish their shows. FNC ratings have recently hit new highs. The legacy media simply can't hide the Benghazi story. It will get legs.

      Incidently the latest leaks of Patraeus's emails of "sex under the desk" do not come from him. They are being leaked by the White House to destroy his credibility. This is how they play the game when The One is threatened. Expect more from Patraeus. He is a great general, truly great.

    3. A quick check and search of Google News shows that the MSM are devoting a lot of of coverage to this. They are also attempting to trivialize it, bury it in salacious detail, and present it as just another sex scandal. The real job of the alternative media, plus Fox, will be to ensure that the story is not trivialized and that the focus remains on the conduct of the White House, the CIA, the Department of Defense, and the Department of State while the Benghazi debacle was unfolding and afterward. We can only wish that they are equal to the task.

    4. Corky, are you so desperate that you have to invent, AND accrue a convoluted, honorable virtue to a dishonorable married man who has, as far as we are being told, had a illicit affair and kept it secret until after the election of a Marxist anti-American tyrant?

  10. Wish he would have suddenly decided a week ago.

    1. It wouldn't have mattered. Chicago had this election in the bag from day one. No incumbent has ever legitimately won reelection with half the baggage Obama carried.

  11. The only member of the administration who knows the meaning of shame has left the building.

  12. Since when do Democrats resign over an affair?

  13. Paul Vincent ZecchinoNovember 10, 2012 at 7:31 AM

    Not even a week into the Curse of the Second Term, and already the rats are going cannibalistic?

    How very tiresome of them.

    This is not a conspiracy theory. This is straightforward criminal behavior. If one views this regime thru a forensic lens, one clearly sees it.

    The chicongo MOB protects itself from those who will expose it by digging up or merely fabricating sexual innuendo about them.

    The anointed did this to his political opponents in chicongo. What's changed? Nothing.

    Petraeus may have gone public to thwart the regime's threats to out and thus discredit him.

    And what coincidential timing, eh? Simply stupendous: right on the eve of blowing the lid off the Benghazi treason.

    Just a coincidence. Yeah. Right.

    Predators reveal their worst fears by that which they do to others. Someone at the top is very insecure, fearful over their true nature being revealed. Perhaps that's why they always smear their enemies of which they have many, as being guilty of sexual misconduct.

    This regime during its era of 'more flexibility' will make the old soviet union seem as a walk in the park.

  14. I like your line of thoughts;
    Why was there a FBI probe?
    Who ordered it and when?
    What was the chain of briefing of the results?
    When was Patraeus aware of it and who informed him?
    Why did he resign now?
    A quick thought. Is the FBI under the DOJ? I can't remember. If so look at Holder.

  15. Paul Vincent ZecchinoNovember 10, 2012 at 7:57 AM

    The same old chicongo communist MOB trick: smear those who tell the truth.

    Blackmail fails when the mark goes public. Petraeus just beat these dirty little chicongo MOB freaks at their own tawdry game. Brilliant.

    As you have said, Diplomad, in a contest twixt the State Department or for that matter Defense, and the gutless punks of the chicongo MOB, bet on State and Defense every time.

    Straightforward trumps criminal, always.

    "Blackmail's not so pure nor so simple. It can bring a lot of trouble to a great many people, and the blackmailer often finds himself in jail at the end of it."
    - Colonel Julyan, the Magistrate
    "Rebecca", c. 1936, Daphne DuMaurier

  16. As Director of the CIA he would know that the
    govt. would know everything about all the nooks and crannies of his life, including his affair.

    So, what did he think was going to happen?

  17. If I were in the General's "shoes" I would fear for my life.
    The mob is very capable of eliminating problems like this with a few bags of cement and a boat ride on the lake. It would not be the first time!!

  18. Dip, you're right about the government's inability to keep secrets--if the media is complicit. During my brief time at State, one of the first things I was told was, "Don't write anything that you don't your name on when it hits the papers." It seems that the only secret America can keep are the academic records and publications list (apart for two self-serving "otterboggerfees") of "the most brilliant POTUS ever".

    I wouldn't be surprised about Petraeus resigning over a personal scandal. He does strike me as an honorable man. Nor do I go in for conspiracy theories, for I'm a firm believer in Murphy's Law, the Peter Principle, and Original Sin, although not necessarily in that order.

    But I am intrigued about Holder, Rodham-Clinton, and Petraeus all tending resignations so soon after the triumph of their chief. I have a very sneaky suspicion that the way Benghazigate was handled, Rodham-Clinton senses that a critical mass of the public senses that the whole policy of supporting the "Arab Spring" (rather than standing back and saying, "it's all other peoples' internal affairs) has backfired badly, and is likely to only create more trouble for the USA. Rodham-Clinton probably knows that she needs to distance herself from an administration that may well collapse in its second term if she wants to save both her party and her media-proclaimed right to become the first female POTUS.

    1. re: " Rodham-Clinton probably knows that she needs to distance herself from an administration that may well collapse in its second term if she wants to save both her party and her media-proclaimed right to become the first female POTUS."

      PJ Media reports that she has just turned down an opportunity to testify about Benghazi.


  19. So this administration kept Patreus on a short leash by blackmailing him with his extramarital affair? Belevable, but what could they possibly have on Hillary and Bill to keep them on a short leash? No sexual affair would scandalize the public regarding either of them, yet they were clearly on a short leash.

    I think there's something more to this. Obama and his mob have kept people in line who would seem to have more to gain by getting out of the administration. I think this rot will prove to be a lot deeper than an extamarital affair.

    Now the question, if the nature and extent of the mob's blackmail leaks out, is what will it take for serious talk of impeachment to gain currency? Probably too much to hope for. . .

  20. I think all of you, including DiploMad, are missing the power play going on here. Let me expand:

    no one, and I do mean, NO ONE, is every nominated for a lofty position like Director of the CIA without two things: an extensive questionaire filled out by the candidate being considered for the position and b) an intensive background check done by the FBI that can tell you what that person ate for lunch in kindergarten. DiploMad can confirm this.

    Two things possible: Petreaus was not honest about the affair on the questionaire, the Oval Office was aware of the affair due to the FBI background check, the Oval Office never revealed to Petreaus that it was aware of the affair and held on to that information like a trump card for future use. Enter Benghazi.

    Now out comes the trump card. Petreaus has two choices; go along with the "It was the video" meme being put out by the Oval Office or have the trump card leaked to the NYSlimes, et al. My guess? Petreause first decided to play along with the "video" meme, but later his honor did get the best of him, and he was scheduled to testify early next week in front of Congress. Option? Out himself and make the affair public. That way he controls the dialog. The whole "I was weak, turned my back on my family values, but now I have to make restitution to my wife and family, and the only way I can do that is by restoring my honor by being truthful." Petreaus knows that he can survive infidelity. He could not survive being complicit in what I think was really going on in Benghazi; Fast and Furious, Syrian Style.

    Now for the component that everyone is missing: when Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Ty Woods and Glen Doherty were received at Andrews with Obama and Hillary holding court there, who was missing and who was there? David Petreaus was missing. He was not there, although there was a CIA connection to at least two of the Americans were killed. Who was there? COLIN POWELL.

    Now, anyone want to tell me why Colin Powell, now a private citizen that holds no position in the Federal Government, would have been at Andrews that day? We know that Powell was a Republican for political expendiency only. We know that Powell allowed the administration to be hung out to dry over the Valerie Plame Game, when he was fully aware of who gave her name to Novack the very morning of the article. We know that Powell was given the chance by President Bush to just quietly resign in lieu of being fired. Powell showed no loyalty to the administration he worked for, there is no reason he would have any loyalty to a fellow officer and gentleman.

    Powell has never met a camera he didn't love. Where is he now?


    1. re: "Powell has never met a camera he didn't love. Where is he now?"

      SE Asia with Dear Leader?

  21. "Does this sudden resigning of CIA Director Petraeus strike you as odd?"

    Yes. Any CIA Director who can't keep his affairs secret should resign.

    "Powell has never met a camera he didn't love. Where is he now? "

    Short-listed for CIA Director?

  22. It's intriguing that a couple of sources seem to indicate Broadwell was a CIA agent.

    From Diane Dimond's article at The Daily Beast:


    To say Paula Broadwell is an overachiever is an understatement. She grew up in North Dakota, graduated from West Point and worked in military intelligence. She studied Arabic in the Middle East—Jordan in particular—and specialized in counterinsurgency, counterterrorism, and geopolitical analysis. This is not a field that includes many women, so the stunning Broadwell likely stood out among her peers.


    This is not typically the greatest source (Daily Mail Online/UK)... and maybe it's just carelessly written:


    She has more than a decade of military service and nearly two decades of work in counterterrorism and counterinsurgency.


    An affair with a *subordinate CIA employee* might make a resignation almost inevitable - or it is possible that Petraeus stepped down because he felt his leadership and integrity had been compromised.


  23. Fresh news in the WaPo:

    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.


  24. This is beginning to sound more like a scorned lover than the Chicago Mob.

    1. Doesn't matter. K.T. McFarland said on Fox today that when she was in Afghanistan during that time, it was pretty well common knowledge that Petreaus was playing hanky-panky.

      The thing that is important is that the Oval Office is now claiming it didn't know. That is pure b/s. It knew. Obama knew. Hell, after the FBI background check, he knew what Petreaus ate for lunch in kindergarten, and he still nominated him for the Director's position.


  25. I will not be the slightest bit surprised to find at some point that Paula Broadwell purposely enticed Petreaus into an affair to use him as a scapegoat later, in an Obama admin., to become public knowledge when the time was right. Petreaus fell for the ploy, and the possible onslaught of a female that he just couldn't resist. Weren't there Russian, very attractive spys found out to be operating here in the US? When they were uncovered, they immediately dissapeared back to Russia.

    The co-author of Broadwell's book on Petreaus was the very, extremely liberal, known to be an extention of the Obama admin. rag known as the Washington Post, or better known as the Washington Compost. It was the WaPo who was outed as the Journolisters early on in the Obama admin. That current editor is Vernon Loeb.

    Anyone see some possibility that Broadwell was an Obama plant, and has now served her purpose. I understand there will be no penalties for Broadwell, or any charges against her. She has a husband who is a radiologist, and two young sons. Have you heard anything at all about her family? Broadwell was an Obama plant to take down Petreaus, at the appropriate time. Didn't Clinton call him Gen. Betrayus in the NY Times. Petreaus was made a hero by Bush, and of course everything is still Bush's fault.

    1. Anyone see some possibility that Broadwell was an Obama plant, and has now served her purpose
      Absolutely, yes.
      You couldn't find a better match if you had hired the Millionaire Matchmaker

  26. Powerline has a link to the Charlotte Observer's article on Paula. She's no shrinking violet. How did she have time to have 2 children? Maybe her hubby tried to access the General's emails. Where's my scorecard?

  27. Holy double entendre Batman. The title of Broadwell's book - “All In: The Education of General David Petraeus” - takes on a whole new meaning, doesn't it?

    - Augustus

  28. If the General is forced to testify about Benghazi, he had better watch his back. I fear for his well-being. A suicide over his loss of honor would be too plausible for the Chicagoans not to contemplate.

  29. At a University of Denver “Alumni Symposium” held back in October 2012, Paula Broadwell, revealed information about the CIA Annex that has not come to light in the past.

    “Now I don’t know if a lot of you heard this, but the CIA annex had actually had taken a couple of Libya militia members prisoner. And they think that the attack on the consulate was an effort to try to get these prisoners back. So that’s still being vetted.”

    Video needs to be copied before it "disappears".

  30. Hi DiploMad,
    Usually I do not read article on blogs, but I would like to say that this write-up very pressured me to check out and do it! Your writing taste has been surprised me. Thank you, quite nice article.

    Wilson Peter
    matchmaker Chicago

  31. Hello DiploMad,
    Your place is valuable for me.Thanks!

    cheap cosmetics

  32. hello. I fear for his well-being. A suicide over his loss of honor would be too plausible for the Chicagoans not to contemplate.chicken houses

  33. hello.The only member of the administration who knows the meaning of shame has left the building.Tank Cleaning

  34. This comment has been removed by the author.

    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  35. hey...this is very good blog..i like it your blog.i am very thanks full to you.
    Inventory of Hazardous Materials

  36. this is good blog published i'll get fair info.
    chicken coop kits

  37. If the General is forced to testify about Benghazi, he had better watch his back. I fear for his well-being. asbestos australia