Fallout From The Resignation Of CIA Director David Petraeus
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-11-13/fallout-resignation-cia-director-david-petraeus
Fallout from the resignation of CIA Director David Petraeus. Challenges for the Obama administration as it builds a new team.
Guests
Michael O'Hanlon
senior fellow and director of research of the foreign policy program at the Brookings Institution and co-author of "Bending History: Barack Obama's Foreign Policy."
Evan Perez
reporter at The Wall Street Journal.
Rachel Smolkin
White House editor for Politico.
Mark Jacobson
senior adviser at Truman National Security Project.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
At a time when the USA is facing serious financial decisions, it is quite astonishing that the Diane Rehm Show is concerning itself with a tawdry affair involving a member of the Obama administration. What is interesting about this matter? It may appeal to the prurient interests of some people, but Diane Rehm's audience surely has other matters on its mind. Leave this to People magazine and the National Enquirer.
...And every other news outlet.
I think it's a damn shame, but it IS news.
Perhaps the media is tired of the fiscal cliff. More likely someone is looking for a "gotcha" moment to say the White House withheld the news of Petraus until after the election. If the news had been released sooner would that have raised the level of the campaign discourse? So, the first question to ask today might be, "Why is the Petraus affair important?"
please focus on the challenges of rebuilding their team. Replacing Petraeus, Panetta, Clinton...
According to the last 6" of a Washington Post article titled, "Petraeus didn't plan to resign from CIA", Eric Cantor was "concerned" when he learned that the FBI had decided that there was no basis for criminal charges against Petraeus and Broadwell. Cantor apparently contacted FBI Director Mueller on Oct. 31 and 1 week later the FBI advised Clapper of the investigation. Clapper met with Petraeus' and asked for his resignation. Was Cantor's primary interest national security or the possibie impact that this scandal might have had on the election?
I agree, Tom! The D.R. Show increasingly seems irrelevant.
Paula Broadwell and CIA director are clearly smart people so why communicate via email. And Broadwell threatening Mrs. Kelley via email Kelley tells FBI agent, FBI agent alerts Rep Reichart to Cantor about an ongoing investigation. Will this FBI agent be fired over notifying a Rep about an ongoing investigation?
Mrs. Kelley had to know Petraeus would be exposed. Who is in the spectrum of people who would have liked seeing Petraeus taken down?
Will we ever know if Broadwell or Kelley were actors in a larger conspiracy?
I think Republican Reps are right that Petraeus should be required to testify in front of them about the Benghazi attack. Totally agree with them. Petraeus was the head spy master at the time of the attack. He should be required to testify
The D.R.Show has no new facts about the Gen. Petraeus matter; why broadcast/produce a show now? Why are we not hearing more about the US Embassy investigation hearings; and Sec. Hilary Clinton’s absence?
While I agree that this is "tawdry" another power broker going down because of his wienie. But clearly there is much more there. Sure seems like a "honey pot" affair. Paula Broadwell almost entrapping Petraeus come on emails about their affair, then Broadwell threatening Mrs. Kelley, Kelley contacting her friend who was an FBI agent, the FBI agent alerting Rep Reichert about an ongoing FBI investigation then goes to Cantor. Seems odd. Cantor has other agendas. This string of events SHOULD be under deep investigation. "honey pot" something else is going on. Seems like Broadwell, Kelley, FBI agent who spilled the beans while an ongoing investigation was taking place could easily have another agenda.
Why should she care what happens to the General as long as she sells more books? It's not like he was going to dump his wife for her.
Tom Deacon wrote:
"At a time when the USA is facing serious financial decisions, it is quite astonishing that the Diane Rehm Show is concerning itself with a tawdry affair involving a member of the Obama administration. What is interesting about this matter? It may appeal to the prurient interests of some people, but Diane Rehm's audience surely has other matters on its mind. Leave this to People magazine and the National Enquirer."
Tom, we'll just take you as representative of all the Obama sychophants on this mb who believe that the administration of the great one could never do anything wrong.
Here's why it's "interesting". Because there were national security interests at stake. That's why. Duh. This is like saying that the Lewinsky affair was "just about sex" when it was about a President lying under oath. This is like saying that Watergate was just a petty break-in when it was really about a President lying to the American people and trying to cover up his wrong doings. When the head of the CIA, one of the most secretive agencies in the WORLD is having secret sex he is subject to blackmail and security breaches. And when Broadwell mentions security issues related to Benghazi that were not available to the general public in a speech, that is not just "People magazine and the National Enquirer" level stuff.
S Edward Burns. So now no Petraeus testifying, no Hillary Clinton. Ruh roh the Obama administration is hiding something big. I line up with the Republicans on this one...Petraeus should be required to testify.
This "rogue" FBI agent...will he be fired and deeply investigated? Are we sure there are no national security issues. Has this really been made clear? And could the CIA be saying that there are no "national security issues" while still deeply investigating?
As listeners to the show regularly; we are likely to all be wondering when Diane will begin to discuss how the women in the resignation matter are being characterized.
As a military spouse, I disagree with those who believe that this was a personal matter. The leaders in our Army can not be held to a different standard than the soldiers.
Even if the time line works out to show the affair offically started after he left the army it began in some form while he was still in the Army.
As a spouse it is crucial for us to trust the Army to do everything that it can to make service help to keep our families intact and not create a culture that destroys families.
Even though this scandal has been opened up to the public would the FBI really tell the American public if there was a national security breach or if there is still an ongoing investigation? Would they really tell us this?
Diane if Congress work this aggresive on JOBS, DEBT, IMMIGRATION and the ECONOMY we would be better off as a country. We are all talkng as if it is okay for one to have an Affair, for a Nation that demonise gay marriage.
I am disturbed that Ms Broadwell sent strang emails to another person. It seems a bit unhinged.
Diane "where has morality gone in high places" "what has happened Micheal" Come on Diane you are acting like this has never happened before. During the Clinton era the Cleveland Plain Dealer went through all of our Presidents and what is known about affairs etc. Three quarters of them are known to have affairs. It has not really changed
kathleen wrote:
S Edward Burns. So now no Petraeus testifying, no Hillary Clinton. Ruh roh the Obama administration is hiding something big. I line up with the Republicans on this one...Petraeus should be required to testify.
This "rogue" FBI agent...will he be fired and deeply investigated? Are we sure there are no national security issues. Has this really been made clear? And could the CIA be saying that there are no "national security issues" while still deeply investigating?
Rep Reichert was on the Homeland Security Committee (Wikipedia) included below
110th Congress
Reichert was a member of the House Committee on Homeland Security, the Subcommittee on Border Maritime and Global Counter-terrorism, and the Ranking Minority Member on the Subcommittee on Intelligence Information Sharing and Terrorism Risk Assessment. He was a member of the House Committee on Science and Technology. Also, he was a member of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, with membership on the Subcommittee on Aviation and Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.[14]
Based on that alone it is not rogue that an FBI agent would disclose information to him on something like this.
That being said, IF it turns out there are no National Security issues then a good soldier and CIA director has been forced to retire for no good reason. I am a republican but only fiscally, I couldn't care less who he had a relationship with as long as he does his job well and does not open himself up to blackmail from any source.
I was quite surprised that the first topic today was the Petraeus story. I am disappointed by the regurgitation of what is already known. I agree with others that there are many more pressing issues that deserve Ms. Rehm's airtime and considerable talent.
How sad America's main news has been reduced to "Supermarket Checkout Reading"... AGAIN!
Clinton should have resigned as well. Double standard here in my view.
Many of us think the America we knew seems to have vanished.
The Fall of Rome comes to mind. Bread and Circus tme for perhaps at least 51%.
A song from MY FAIR LADY comes to mind:
"Just you wait, 'enry 'iggins, just you wait! "
Question: Though we don't, as yet, know if national security was compromised, it seems, at least at this point, that classified documents/information were in play. This is clearly a failure at the highest levels, of those who have been entrusted with the responsibility of maintaining a secure United States. In light of this scandal and possible security breach, how might this influence the Bradley Manning defense/prosecution? Though these cases are not exactly parallel, both may, in fact, deal with the same sort of classified breach, one intentional and ideologically driven, the other careless and possibly self-serving.
Manning has been vilified and tortured during his initial imprisonment. We can be assured that nothing of the sort will happen to Gen. Petraeus or Ms. Broadwell. Is this the difference between the unequal treatment dealt out to enlisted personnel and commissioned officer, something known by anyone who has ever served, especially by those in the enlisted and junior officer ranks?
This started as an investigation into threatening anonymous e-mails that were received by a woman. How exactly did this expand into private and personal e-mails on the woman's account to now ensnare General Allen? By what authority did the FBI go into her private and personal e-mails? Once the source of the threatening e-mails was discovered, why expand the investigation, especially once it was determined there were no national security implications.
As a retired Major with over 21-years of service to my country, I am appalled at the favorable treatment being given to General Petraeus by the press and the general public.
Are we to believe there is a lower acceptable standard of conduct for a "brilliant" leader than for other leaders?
There is a glaring double standard in the military - General officers are slapped on the wrist for this type of behavior while a Major or Lieutenant Colonel guilty of this offense would be kicked-out of the military.
Most military officers would feel little sympathy for General Petraeus.
This Veteran agrees as well.
If he has prosecuted his suborinate service members for adultry, a felony that carries jail time for service members then why should he walk?
No security interests would appear to have been threatened by Petraeus jumping into bed with his biographer.
Moreover it would appear that it is also not a criminal offense to cheat on your wife.
Blackmail would ONLY be a risk if the world gives a damn about Petraeus and his paramours.
Apparently this poster is fascinated by the sexual activities of others, something which has made endless money for The National Enquirer, of course. Whether it is a suitable subject for this programme or not is a matter of opinion.
It seems to go without saying that adultery is worthy of resignation for a person in Petraeus' position. Oddly enough, according to those on the left during the Lewinski scandal, adultery is not worthy of resignation for our Commander in Chief.
Petraeus was the Head of the CIA, where the very basis of the organization is to find out all information that's hidden. I must be against the majority thinking that he should have resigned or been removed.