David Petraeus Steps down from D/CIA

Yep, major security issue, so he did the right thing. I even give them credit for coming out with the actual reason and not making up something.

She is kinda hot though.

I bet she is a Russian/Chinese/Israeli spy.

Gorilla.800.lbs wrote:
I bet she is a Russian/Chinese/Israeli spy.

I wonder what that combo would even look like.

Like unstoppable deadly hotness.

clover wrote:
Like unstoppable deadly hotness.

QFMFT

Paleocon wrote:
Gorilla.800.lbs wrote:
I bet she is a Russian/Chinese/Israeli spy.

I wonder what that combo would even look like.

IMAGE(http://l.yimg.com/img.tv.yahoo.com/tv/us/img/site/48/00/0000024800_20060921190744.jpg)

Not a joke, Siberian and Mongolian ancestry.

There was an interview on the radio(GALATZ) with someone who met Paula Broadwell (can't recall his name) in somekind of a convention where they both presented their books. He finished his Doctoral work in King's college where she was doing her doctoral work so they had things to talk about . He said that he did ask her about how she got to Petraeus and she said it was networking. He said that he told her her book suffer from lack of criticism. He also said she talked a lot about her family when he went site seeing with her (or something like that). When he was asked if he suspected there was an affair going on between them he said "you'll have to use your imagination for that".

Other than that about the spy business can happen ;).

Nevin73 wrote:
Yep, major security issue, so he did the right thing. I even give them credit for coming out with the actual reason and not making up something.

She is kinda hot though.

Am I missing something because I don't find her that attractive at all. Sure I could see her being girlfriend material but certainly not hot enough to destroy a truly historical career over. Then again, I didnt think the hooker who the secret service guys sacrificed their careers and marriages over was good looking either.

jdzappa wrote:
Nevin73 wrote:
Yep, major security issue, so he did the right thing. I even give them credit for coming out with the actual reason and not making up something.

She is kinda hot though.

Am I missing something because I don't find her that attractive at all. Sure I could see her being girlfriend material but certainly not hot enough to destroy a truly historical career over. Then again, I didnt think the hooker who the secret service guys sacrificed their careers and marriages over was good looking either.

Oh I agree with this. Then again, I can't understand the guys who pay $5000 at the Bunny Ranch in Nevada.

I'm confused, was he giving state secrets to the lady he had on the side? Otherwise, I don't see the events matching up here.

The way it was explained on MeFi is that an immediate investigation has to happen, either by law or by administrative regulation, not sure which. And he loses his security clearance for the duration.

Not having security clearance is not tenable for the director of the CIA, ergo, he resigned.

jdzappa wrote:
Nevin73 wrote:
Yep, major security issue, so he did the right thing. I even give them credit for coming out with the actual reason and not making up something.

She is kinda hot though.

Am I missing something because I don't find her that attractive at all. Sure I could see her being girlfriend material but certainly not hot enough to destroy a truly historical career over. Then again, I didnt think the hooker who the secret service guys sacrificed their careers and marriages over was good looking either.

I think it all comes down to relative perspective. She may not be terribly hot in absolute terms, but relative to other available affair options in his circle, she might be the best thing out there. It is what my friend calls the "Valedictorian of Summer School" effect.

"[N]ot hot enough to destroy a truly historical career over"? Honestly? What, because Petraeus' actions would be somehow justified if you found her more attractive? Come on, guys.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/we...

This interview is pretty uncomfortable now.

I think she looks pretty hot here, in a Katee Sackoff kind of way.

Jayhawker wrote:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/we...

This interview is pretty uncomfortable now.

I think she looks pretty hot here, in a Katee Sackoff kind of way.

The biceps, definitely.

But just as power is an aphrodisiac in favor of men like Petraeus, female interest is an extremely powerful attractor to any man, even one in a position of power.

(Aside: The muscular cyborg actress should marry the mop-top Charlie Sheen replacement, just so their kids can bear the hyphenate "Kutcher-Sackhoff".)

bnpederson wrote:
"[N]ot hot enough to destroy a truly historical career over"? Honestly? What, because Petraeus' actions would be somehow justified if you found her more attractive? Come on, guys.

Thank you.

It's not like hotness is the sole thing that won him over. It's not like his inner monologue beforehand was like "dat ass...WORTH IT."

Common ground, shared backgrounds, intelligence, connection, trouble at home, stress, escapism...there's tons of reasons why people have affairs and very little of it has to do with the tap-worthiness of the new persuit.

Saw on CNN that some Congress people are unhappy that they didn't know about the investigation into Broadwell, they some whiny do-nothings aren't they?
I giggled at the title too.

H.P. Lovesauce wrote:
(Aside: The muscular cyborg actress should marry the mop-top Charlie Sheen replacement, just so their kids can bear the hyphenate "Kutcher-Sackhoff".)
I don't get it.

RolandofGilead wrote:
H.P. Lovesauce wrote:
(Aside: The muscular cyborg actress should marry the mop-top Charlie Sheen replacement, just so their kids can bear the hyphenate "Kutcher-Sackhoff".)
I don't get it.

If you pronounce it Cut-cher, it makes it snicker-worthy.

mudbunny wrote:
RolandofGilead wrote:
H.P. Lovesauce wrote:
(Aside: The muscular cyborg actress should marry the mop-top Charlie Sheen replacement, just so their kids can bear the hyphenate "Kutcher-Sackhoff".)
I don't get it.

If you pronounce it Cut-cher, it makes it snicker-worthy.

That's debatable.

Maybe Petraeus gave Paula a job in the CIA as a temptress (the woman that gets the "bad guy" into a death trap)and he needed to evaluate her skills on the second interview . Later he had to monitor the progress of her training. When her performance wasn't up to par he gave her a few private lessons . This way they kept the relationship purely professional.

It's starting to seem as though there was more here than just an affair. We will see what comes out in the news cycles in the next few weeks. I have a feeling this will lead to the unearthing of some CIA missteps. I've already heard of some "nonlegal detentions" that were uncovered in Libya in this mess.

Nomad wrote:
It's starting to seem as though there was more here than just an affair. We will see what comes out in the news cycles in the next few weeks. I have a feeling this will lead to the unearthing of some CIA missteps. I've already heard of some "nonlegal detentions" that were uncovered in Libya in this mess.

I think you are looking for this thread.

Jayhawker wrote:
Nomad wrote:
It's starting to seem as though there was more here than just an affair. We will see what comes out in the news cycles in the next few weeks. I have a feeling this will lead to the unearthing of some CIA missteps. I've already heard of some "nonlegal detentions" that were uncovered in Libya in this mess.

I think you are looking for this thread.

Yes, this is the more important thread which examines his love life.

Greg wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:
Nomad wrote:
It's starting to seem as though there was more here than just an affair. We will see what comes out in the news cycles in the next few weeks. I have a feeling this will lead to the unearthing of some CIA missteps. I've already heard of some "nonlegal detentions" that were uncovered in Libya in this mess.

I think you are looking for this thread.

Yes, this is the more important thread which examines his love life. :-)

And the impact of his affair on his job and whether information was held back prior to the election. There is plenty of stuff to discuss without going into what someone has "heard." Maybe there is a legitimate news source for what Nomad referred to, but all I saw was a blurb on a web site called Hot Air (I'm not making that up!), and Nomad didn't even offer that up.

So yeah, this kind of random speculation that Nomad posted is much more appropriate to the thread on the conspiracy theories regarding Benghazi.

Jayhawker wrote:
Greg wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:
Nomad wrote:
It's starting to seem as though there was more here than just an affair. We will see what comes out in the news cycles in the next few weeks. I have a feeling this will lead to the unearthing of some CIA missteps. I've already heard of some "nonlegal detentions" that were uncovered in Libya in this mess.

I think you are looking for this thread.

Yes, this is the more important thread which examines his love life. :-)

And the impact of his affair on his job and whether information was held back prior to the election. There is plenty of stuff to discuss without going into what someone has "heard." Maybe there is a legitimate news source for what Nomad referred to, but all I saw was a blurb on a web site called Hot Air (I'm not making that up!), and Nomad didn't even offer that up.

So yeah, this kind of random speculation that Nomad posted is much more appropriate to the thread on the conspiracy theories regarding Benghazi.

This is what I am talking about. It's not just Benghazi...

CNN wrote:
Also a video has surfaced of a speech by Broadwell in which she suggested the Libya attack on September 11 was targeting a secret prison at the Benghazi consulate annex, raising unverified concerns about possible security leaks.

jdzappa wrote:
Honestly it could be a mutual decision between Obama and Petraeus. Wait until the election is over and quietly resign, or else.

I'm not sure how it would be acceptable to keep a compromised person in such a sensitive spot just to avoid making waves during an election though.

Actually I find it extremely improbable that the DCI was compromised and under investigation and no one in the DoJ or the administration was told.

Unofficially, I'm sure a lot of people knew. Officially, ever since J. Edgar Hoover, the FBI is under a lot of pressure, legally, not to tell anyone anything about ongoing investigations because the information be used for, surprise, political blackmail. The only people that are informed ar those that have access to information that the FBI needs for its investigation.

We do know that Eric Cantor knew before the election. This was not hidden from Republicans.

Jon Stewart was on it last night.

http://www.salon.com/2012/11/13/must...

MilkmanDanimal wrote:
Er, um, sometimes proofreading is important.

I'm sorry but I feel in the interest of honest discourse, I really laughed hard at that.

But yeah, huge lack of professionalism there. They probably look like complete idiots.

It is truly bizzarre the number of total fails that continue to pop up in relation to this story.