Now-former CIA chief Petraeus resigns over affair

Need I say it? Forgive me, guys, if I come across as being preachy. I acknowledge I can come across that way, or even sounding too much like the advice-giving, annoying guy who sits at the bar (think Cliff Claven from Cheers) and just goes on. I totally cop to it. I never intend to come across that way. I hope you all can forgive this less-than-diplomatic aspect of myself.

Self-deprecation now complete, here goes: For GOD'S SAKE, GUYS, NEVER DO IT WITH YOUR COWORKERS! (Barring of course if it's a job req't-- say you work in XXX films, whatever. Well, you get the idea.) Now I know I really have no right to say that. And you are all adults and really, I have no place telling other fellows where and to whom they ought to... well... you know. This is just about concern for your lives, that's all. I have seen it before, and it matters not if she is your superior or subordinate. You can count on one hand the number of times it ends well for the man if he has sex with someone he works with, much less "a relationship". Or as one fellow I used to work with once said, "No fishing off the company pier". Sums it up.

Now that I have said that, I am putting on my 007 cap and asking myself some questions. More to it, I am exercising some imagination with a dose of deduction.

Fact: Obama was presumably re-elected to office as of Wed. AM, this week.

Fact: News outlets report that Obama refused Petraeus' resignation for a full 24 hrs. before accepting it, trying to get him to change his mind.

Fact: The argument made publicly about his doing this is that it was needed to keep him from being in an extortable position and if he admitted it publicly to keep that from happening, he would lose the credibility he needed to be the CIA chief; so there was only one way out: admit the affair and resign.

Fact: News reports that the FBI kicked off the whole matter when they were tipped that he may be having an affair, in contravention of the behavior code of conduct for high-level CIA officials.

Fact: Petraeus was scheduled to testify before Congress next week over the "Benghazi incident" (See just one story on it here, if you need to.)

Sorry if I missed anything out.

OK, just what adds up here? Not a lot, IMJ. Here we go:

If the FBI was tipped off to his having had an affair, it was not in the last 72 hrs., I can pretty much guarantee that. Even if it was, I doubt a man like Petraeus would act so fast on it and if he did, it would not be a sudden resignation of his post. What did happen in the last 72 hrs. though was that Obama was re-elected. If it is true that Obama refused Petraeus' resignation for 24 hrs. (which I doubt), that would mean Petraeus tendered it on Thursday morning, only one full day after Obama's re-election was all but confirmed by the reports from the states' polling precincts.

Sounds to me like he was just waiting to see if the president was re-elected, or, if he was fine with that, perhaps he wanted to wait to keep Obama from having to deal with the embarrassment so close to election day. Either way, there can be no doubt the actual resignation was delayed in support of the president's re-election or because Petraeus didn't want to continue to serve as CIA chief while Obama remained president*.

Now, he resigned because he was having an affair and this was something that was not only non-reg but also extortable? And that was the reason? And the FBI was the nudge in the matter? Not buying it. Not for one second.

President Kennedy used to not just be a philanderer, but he wrote the book on it. He used to get the Secret Service to supply him with women. Everyone in law enforcement in DC and in the covert services (CIA, etc.) knew about it. Everyone around him knew about it apparently except Jackie Kennedy. Yet Kennedy had the highest security clearance in the land. (Is there one higher than POTUS? I bet there is. I just don't know the name for it. Probably something like "TS SSSSSSSSSSSCI+++++ x 10^99999" or something like that.) It was in itself a state secret. So there you have it. Now if someone tried to extort the CIA Director, what do you suppose would happen to him? My guess is he'd be sleeping with the fish at the bottom of the Potomac pretty fast. Try to extort a file clerk in Langley or some other such person? Yes, conceivable. It has happened. But try extorting the CIA Director and that is a great way to speed yourself on to the Great Beyond. So I doubt seriously this was the reason.

So really, where does that leave us? Either he wanted out of the Obama administration for whatever reason so badly that he could not wait 'til after Thanksgiving to bolt, or he was summarily shown the door for whatever reason and told to "Play along and play nice-- I am after all, the President". (There are many ways POTUS can make even a man of his stature lead a very uncomfortable life at least until POTUS leaves office, and 4 years is a long time. Perhaps he felt it was better to just leave, go along with the whole "affair" cover, keep his pension and whatever else he was getting, and retire to a life of comfort-- enjoy the grandkids, leave politics behind, take a few vacations -- all the stuff people really ought to be doing before it's too late, anyway.) Either way, I really doubt the whole affair story. Seems way too, how shall I say, well-timed to me-- especially given the proximity to the Congressional inquiry over Benghazi. Oh yes, I seem to have forgotten mentioning that in all my rantings above, haven't I? Yes, seems if either Obama or Petraeus did not want there to be a public airing (and attendant hiding, as the current House remains in the hands of the GOP) of "that whole embarrassing Benghazi matter", this would be a very good time for Petraeus to make an exit. Coincidentally, right between when Obama got re-elected and when the hearing was supposed to take place.

Now, I don't know really how Petraeus' resignation affects the hearing. Can the Congress still subpoena him to testify? Probably, yes. But will they? There are undoubtedly other behind-the-scenes things going on here that will affect outcomes. In fact, looks like he will not be testifying. The acting-Director (wow, found one FAST, didn't they?) will be doing so. Read it here.

I do know one thing: Nothing is quite as it appears to be when it comes to politics. In fact, it almost never is at all as it appears to be. No people live in a more bizarre and unstable, unpredictable world than politicians and high-level bureaucrats and staffers. And who makes it that way? They do. Maybe Buddhists are right: You really do make your own Hell.

-----

*The president is about to lose a lot of Cabinet members - most are staying on until new ones can be found but they are already packing their boxes. I don't envy any of them. It's tough working in an environment where for whatever reasons, you just don't like it much anymore. I mean, look at Rahm Emanuel. I know, he has a reputation for being nasty and a bully and I really don't know if that is true one way or another-- but I do know for whatever reason, he had to leave the WH in mid-term, then to do what, become mayor of Chicago, a city awash in violent crime and currently struggling in many ways. I mean, really, who'd wish that on anyone?

Stick with me here, guys. Things that were not adding up before now seem to add up. This is conjecture, mind you. All conjecture. I have no magical insider knowledge. I am just working with what I know. Here is my proposed timeline around the Benghazi disaster:

1. Some time last year, Obama gets a call from some Islamist Leader Guy ("ILG" from now on) in Benghazi or elsewhere. He tells POTUS that they need to do something on 9/11/12 but don't want the US to think it's a real threat. They saw what happened on 9/11/01 and what then has happened to them and they don't want to spark another large-scale shootin' war. Obama agrees but says he can't just let them get away with anything they want.

2. ILG says he understands, but what about this: the US's diplomatic mission in Benghazi is the last western mission there. The UK has amscrayed, leaving just the US. How about this: Jihadists lay siege to it for the day on 9/11/12 and even attack it with relatively harmless weapons, like RPGs using concussion grenades. Tell the consulate staff to stay over to one side and we'll target the other. After the crowd is satisfied honor is served, we pull out.

3. Obama thinks about it and says this: OK, but I can't let on to anyone we have this deal. I can't tell the embassy guards not to return fire.

4. ILG says, well, you're the boss, pull them out. If you can't pull all of them out, make sure they are unarmed. Promise, no one gets hurt.

See: OBAMA ADMIN SENT UNARMED BRITISH FIRM TO PROTECT U.S. MISSION IN BENGHAZI

5. Months pass and there is no problem at the US consulate in Benghazi. The ambassador is popular and gee, for some reason, the Islamists are laying low. Hmmm.

6. 9/11/12 arrives and of course, the demonstration begins. The anti-Islam film produced by a guy in the US has added fuel to the fire, but really, it was already there anyway. The demonstration was pre-planned. Our ambassador is in on the joke himself and when the fun starts, he tells everyone to remain calm and last it out. There are some loud noises and shots fired but no one hurt.

7. Then, the unplanned-for arises. The two SEALs come from seemingly out of nowhere and decide they will defend the mission-- with guns loaded with actual ammunition. (See Benghazi Consulate Could Have Used Marines With Bayonets). Just where did they come from and why were they there? No one is sure, at least not in the news, anyway. I sure am not sure. But they were there, and they returned fire, not themselves being in on "the joke".

8. The Islamists now think that Obama has welched, or that something has gone terribly wrong. Either way, the scene is now much different. And, they have no idea he gave orders to the CIA (here's the link to Petraeus!) to stand down. See CIA Operators Told to 'Stand Down' During Attack As 3 Urgent Requests for Military Back-Up Were Denied. Everyone also wonders where the hell the standard US military is. No one is dispatched to defend the position since no orders to do so are given. Why? The secret deal, that's why.

9. In retribution for the perceived welching on the bargain and loss of lives of the Islamist gunfighters, the US ambassador and members of his staff are killed after the Islamists start using more "effective means" of fighting.

10. The two SEALs are killed and now the word is out that POTUS explicitly told people in positions to make a difference not to.

Lesson: Strike bargains with the Devil, this is what happens.

Now, where does that lead to The Petraeus Connection? At some point, Obama told him what was set up and I have no doubt he nearly hurled onto the Presidential Seal carpet in front of the president's desk in the Oval Office (assuming he was there at the time). He probably told the president that this was big dice-rolling, that a lot of things could go wrong with this plan, and it was a bad idea. Obama told him yeah, he knew, but what else to do? Besides, this is how the game was played (pat on the head), now go be a good boy and go back to your office.

Fuming, Petraeus leaves the Oval Office. He decides he has had quite enough of this crap and it's time to go. Unless of course, two things happen: 1) The whole silly thing works out and 2) Obama loses his re-election bid. After all, it's just under two mos., between 9/11/12 and 11/6/12.

Neither occurs. And he realizes: He is done. Especially now that he faces a Congressional inquiry. He will be in a position where he has to tell the Congress the sitting president struck a deal with enemies of the US to allow an attack on a US diplomatic mission in exchange for the hope that no greater or actually-deadly attack will occur on 9/11/12. (Or, he can lie about it and run the risk that someone else will not and leave it to Congress to see who they believe.) This goes against the long-established US policy of "We never bargain with terrorists." (Yeah, right.) But not only would he be doing that, he'd be doing that to a GOP Congress which is not lame-duck, since they have kept control of the House. One way or another, the truth will out. And Petraeus will also have egg on his face since he knew about the deal and said nothing about it to anyone else (possibly, he couldn't have under the law-- I dunno. But it would have made him look VERY bad, not at all the hero of American Middle Eastern War Policy he has been now for years). Legacy: Gone. And, he knows it.

Now, add this: He could not keep it to himself. He tells two people about it: his wife, and his biographer, to whom he had become very close. His wife, no issue there. All these guys confide in their wives, and everyone knows it. And she's a military-tradition wife from a long line of military-service families. She's solid. But what about the biographer? Maybe they were having an affair, maybe not. It really doesn't matter. One way or another though, she also knew. And somehow the government found out she knew. (Maybe this is what got revealed or also revealed during the FBI wiretaps-- and remember, wasn't the FBI supposed to go to Benghazi and investigate the attacks? Of all people, the FBI? As I understand it though, they never did. But they did get around to investigating Petraeus...)

So now, Patraeus is feeling the heat. His good friend and/or girlfriend-on-the-side also knows, and Obama knows she knows.

There is only one way out now and everyone involved knows it: Petraeus must publicly self-destruct for his own sake and that of the president's, if not the country's, because really, if the public now knew that Obama had been striking these kinds of deals with the Islamists, what would a GOP-controlled House now insist upon? You got it: Impeachment. And this right as we head into Financial Armageddon Season. After two non-stop years of campaigning, the American people are fed up with everyone in DC, and everything. A long impeachment trial with skeletons dragged out of closets, classified information getting revealed perhaps, etc., would embolden our enemies, weaken us internally, and in the end, we may not even get a change of presidents. And if we did, who would we get? Crazy Uncle Joe, that's who! No one wants that, least of all the Democrats! Nope, only way out is to admit an affair and resign immediately before the Congressional hearing and let the temp take the heat.

Oh, BTW, seems our Sec'y of State, who was also probably in on the joke, is refusing to go testify next week as well. She's booked. She has to go to Australia for some yearly meeting. (See: House asks Clinton to testify on Benghazi, but she declines due to scheduling conflict). And she's also on her way out of POTUS's service as well. The Sec'y of Defense, Leon Panetta, an unsung hero of the past several years (and also a former CIA Dir.), is also reportedly going to call it quits. Again, he too may get dragged into the Congressional inquiry, or at least, they may try to do that to him.

No matter, this is what I think happened. It's my story and I'm stickin' to it. :)