Via Instapundit;
Okay. Just so we’ve all got our history right:
1990′s: Use an ill-timed military exercise to divert attention from the botched handling of an extramarital affair.
2010′s: Use an ill-timed extramarital affair to divert attention from the botched handling of a military exercise.
A more comprehensive dissection from Victor Davis Hanson.
Something evil this way comes! Why should all this preclude him from hearings on Benghazi? It is a terrible thing to see something so beautiful as the American Dream, come to such a disgraceful end, as it seems headed.
Where there is smoke there is fire. But what people need to understand is that Obama does *not* play by the rules and has not respect for them.
Obama voters you made your bed, now lie in it fools.
How convenient that this goes public after the election.
The timing stinks. Even if he’s guilty of infidelity, which I and many others never condone.
A good soldier will always throw himself under the bus for his country. On the other hand, considering Obama is probably the worst commander in chief…in history, there could be a few million bucks moving under the table here. The truth will come out either way.
Correct me if I am wrong?
But I thought an affair outside wedlock was a win in the democrats corner,
or in this case a medal on Gen Petrayus chest,
It Is All In…. Yes!
He needs to build on this sex symbol of manhood and become the darling of the 19-65 year old single dingbat/democrat women.
Pssst, General!
Also mention that you will free the illegal hispanic/slaves and your political future is secure.
Last evening, whilst having a birthday lunch with my sister, an educated, middle class musician and teacher who is better informed than most in the UK, my phone interrupted the discourse with a siren, as Dudge put out the news of the resignation on a siren. Intrigued she asked what it was, I had a quick luck and chuckling I told her Petreaus had resigned and it would likely be to avoid the Benghazi fall out, though of course he’s claiming its due to an extra-marital affair.
She looked thoughtfully at me and said, ” I guess I should know what Benghazi is but I don’t”
And there my friends speaks an avid news junkie who still believes and gets all her knowledge from the BBC.
What was the name of that other republic that went down the tubes? Oh right,Rome.
Patreaus,Clinton,Obama…Nero,Caligula,Ceasar.Pity,but I got me free phone,food stamps,and healthcare!
Blast,
How did look become luck, need coffee obviously.
The thing about setting the bar low is that sooner or later the lower ranks start repeating the process. Here’s what I mean.
If the guy sitting in the desk where the buck supposedly stops plays fast and loose with the rules it sends a message to his direct reports that the “what in it for me” behaviour is not only given a pass, its expected. The behaviour only gets exponential as it flows down hill, like most things that flow down hill.
In such an environment eventually the ability to control and command takes a hit. What we are witnessing is not so much the problem but the symptom. We don’t have proof of wrong doing, as all it will take now is one individual testifying under oath in front of a public hearing. The noise coming from the white house news service has a reverse relationship that exponentially increases its volume when that moment gets too close for comfort.
I still suspect Petreaus figured out this info was going to be leaked prior to or during his testimony, so he jumped intstead of waiting to be pushed.
Trouble is, that this tactic has a diminishing return, as more individuals figure out they might be the next target, they also decide to get out of Dodge, leaving the adminstration without a competent team when the next crisis hits.
The masses that Obama promised great things to will be less than kind, and will be looking for someone to blame.
Stock up on ammo and dry goods.
Winter is coming.
Good points joseph. That was my assumption as well.
O: ‘You talk about Benghazi, and I’ll talk about your fling-thing’
P: ‘I’ll talk about my fling-thing, then I’ll talk about Benghazi.’
If you just spent a billion dollars to win an election you can not get impeached soon thereafter. All your hard work will be Joe Biden’s good fortune. Petraus had to go and if he insists on testifying you might have to take further steps to ensure what he knows does not become public knowledge.
No, no, no.
He will NOT talk about Benghazi. The announcing of the affair and resignation was only the first step of the process.
He was most likely told to resign, and if he didn’t, or did and still talked about Benghazi, criminal proceedings against him and his mistress would be the next move by the administration.
Petraeus sealed his fate as a Bush-era hero who got into bed with Obama. It was never going to end well.
barry will never get impeached. The current makeup of the Senate would never vote for impeachment. And the thought of the clown in the Oval Office would scare them silly.
Let us see now,
About 2-4 years ago, senators called baseball players to testify, about things that happened years ago. They had no problem getting them to testify. These things, basically, affected only those that testified. Nothing earth shattering, just a blow of wind.
Here you have major transgressions, incompetence –total, not only run of the mill so to say-on a colossal scale, cover-up on a colossal scale, ignorance of the mass media. And everybody thinks that they can’t get a retired general to testify?
Are you kidding me?
I would not be the least bit surprised to learn that Petraeus was compromised deliberately.
There has always been something “OFF” with the narrative about Patraeus.
I suspect that he was kept in play “because” the powers that be had a hoold over him. If so… perhaps P will finally rebel and let loose on those pigs in Washington.
I fear the Right will retreat more and more into the realm of conspiracy theories to avoid facing reality.
Hey QPee
define YOUR reality for us
The emails include sexually explicit references to such items as sex under his desk.
–
I think the poor Seals misunderstood him when he yelled:
Here I Come!
In the British and Canadian secret services, employees are bound to a 25 to 35 year secrecy oath. In other words,they are NOT to discuss anything about the business for that period after they quit or retire.
Failure to keep that oath can and will result in the arrest and imprisonment of the person, severity of the sentence is commensurate with the level of security clearance.
Petraeus is undoubtedly bound by the same type of oath,which makes this scenario perfect for the administration,he can’t talk, he’s sworn an oath.
The security of the Nation is at stake,y’know, and there’ll be plenty of MSM shills to repeat THAT until it becomes the truth.
Petraeus resigns just after Obama is safely back in the saddle and it’s all over an extramarital affair? Yeah, rrriight.
Oh cool! From the Aspen Ideas website:
Served in intelligence did she? Served on the FBI JTTF? If true, she would have a clear understanding of the risk their “relationship” represented to the General, and to the national security.
Who’s wagging here? The tail or the dog?
Victor Davis Hanson has some great questions and as Liz J says, yeah, rrright.
It is not only Denmark that has something rotten, so does D.c.
larben, I would suggest that certain types of Obama supporters want nothing else but the American Dream to die. The rest are largely the bread and circuses crowd.
The question is will America even have a real armed forces after obama, or just a Politically correct bunch of pansies like their leaders? Make no mistake he hates the military but loves the TSA.
Matters not a wit if P testifies, nor does it make any difference if any facts are discovered.
Look beyond this scandal and think for a moment what is going through the mind of military personnel. Would it be possible that on this day, a day to honor the sacrifice of those who run toward the battle, that there are a majority of military men and women that are doing a gut check?
Could they be considering that of all their commanders, whom do I trust? Which one is going to have my back? Which of them, when the fight gets a little hot, will call for back, or instead of waiting, come in and get me? Most importantly, who at the top would abandon me and my troops in the field?
Should I take a bullet for this?
Matters not a wit if P testifies, nor does it make any difference if any facts are discovered.
Look beyond this scandal and think for a moment what is going through the mind of military personnel. Would it be possible that on this day, a day to honor the sacrifice of those who run toward the battle, that there are a majority of military men and women that are doing a gut check?
Could they be considering that of all their commanders, whom do I trust? Which one is going to have my back? Which of them, when the fight gets a little hot, will call for back, or instead of waiting, come in and get me? Most importantly, who at the top would abandon me and my troops in the field?
Should I take a bullet for this?