In
March 2012, as part of my monthly report on new books, Bookviews.com, I
recommended “All In: The Education of General David Petraeus”, noting that Paula
Broadwell “had
considerable access to the man who now is director of the CIA and who had an
illustrious military career.” Neither I, nor anyone else realized how much
“access” she had. It turns out, as well, that much of the book was ghost-written
by Vernon Loeb, who received credit on the cover. Even he was caught unaware.
As
the story continues to unfold in the wake of Petraeus’ resignation as Director
of the Central Intelligence Agency, just a day after the reelection of President
Obama, the stench of moral and political corruption continues to rise from
everything that led to his resignation.
First
there was the general’s affair with the married biographer, Ms. Broadwell. It is
not uncommon for men to betray their marriage vows, but we expect men granted
power and prestigious positions to maintain a higher degree of morality. As
often as not ambitious men do not and one need only consult the Bible for the
story of David as evidence of that. Even those around Petraeus may have had
their suspicions, but they understandably said nothing. He was, after all, a
four-star general and a hero of the Iraq war, the creator of a
counter-insurgency program that rescued the U.S. from defeat after the “surge”
approved by former President Bush.
What
is, to my mind, most disturbing of the facts we have since learned, was that the
Federal Bureau of Investigation had stumbled on the affair months prior to the
election and the resignation. The key question becomes whether Petraeus’
testimony to a Congressional intelligence committee was influenced by the fact
that his indiscretion was known to persons high in the Obama
administration?
Was
Petraeus under pressure to validate the false cover story that the Benghazi
attack was the result of a “flash mob” and triggered by a video no one had seen?
That was, in essence, what the general told the committee. It was the same story
put forth by the administration’s UN ambassador, Susan Rice, as well as the
President.
Scheduled
to testify under oath, Petraeus rendered his resignation and one can only think
that he did so in order not to perjure himself. The question remains whether he
will be subpoenaed to testify.
The
Nov 13th Washington
Post reported that “some of his closest advisers who served with him during
his last command in Iraq said Monday that Petraeus planned to stay in the job
even after he acknowledged the affair to the FBI, hoping the episode would never
become public. He resigned last week after being told to do so by Director of
National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. on the day President Obama was
reelected.”
Another
key question is why the FBI was authorized to pursue the investigation that
arose out of a complaint of email harassment by Broadwell of someone unrelated
to the Benghazi event, but known to Petraeus. Why would the FBI investigate such
a seemingly minor offence? And, knowing well in advance that Petraeus had
engaged in an affair with Ms. Broadwell following his CIA appointment, how high
up the chain of command did that knowledge go? Did, for example, the Attorney
General give his blessing to the investigation? Did he inform White House
intelligence officials? Did they, in turn, inform the
President?
None
of this is trivial. I can well remember the long months it took before the
Watergate scandal of the 1970s eventually forced the resignation of Richard
Nixon in the face of an impending impeachment.
President
Clinton survived an impeachment effort in the wake of his sexual dalliance with
a White House intern. He has long since been forgiven for it by many, if not
most, Americans, despite the fact that he deliberately and knowingly lied to
them at the time.
What
did President Obama know? In hindsight, why did he offer the CIA position to
Petraeus whose entire background was in military affairs, a consumer of
intelligence, but not a producer of it? No doubt his leadership record qualified
him to run a huge bureaucracy, but this one is as much a keeper of secrets as
one that uncovers them. The agency has received a serious blow to its
integrity.
On
CanadaFreePress.com, Doug
Hagmann recently wrote, “The alleged trysts of powerbrokers
are a component to the story of Benghazi, but they are not the story. They
provide convenient cover for emerging revelations. Like arrows in a quiver of
those in positions of power, they exist as leverage to be used to neutralize
existing or potential threats at the precise moment they are needed, without the
untidiness and inconvenient inquiries that tend to accompany dead bodies. They
are also powerful weapons that control the perception of a voyeuristic public,
which is dutifully fed the salacious details by a complicit
media.”
So, as the public’s attention is
diverted to the Petraeus scandal, one is left to wonder if the full story of
Benghazi and what now appears to be a major Obama administration failure to
respond to the growing threat to our ambassador and his staff in Libya will
fully emerge; misjudgments that cost him and three others their lives and was
followed by weeks of outright deception by the President and those who answer to
him.
In the wake of an election where it
is increasingly clear that massive voter fraud contributed to the reelection of
President Obama and possibly congressional candidates, one wonders whether there
is sufficient voter outrage to have the fraud investigated. It has been reported
that 59 districts in Philadelphia did not record one vote for Mitt Romney!
The stench of political corruption
hung over the first term of the President in scandals such as the government
gun-running scheme to Mexican cartels, “Fast and Furious” that cost a border
patrol office his life. There was the long succession of the failures of green
energy companies that cost taxpayers billions. There was the slush fund called a
“stimulus” that achieved few jobs and no recovery from the recession Obama
“inherited.”
Those who voted for a change are now
thoroughly dispirited and depressed. Those who voted for Obama expect an
extension of unemployment benefits, the food stamp program, and other government
handouts. There is, however, a limit on how long such programs can be sustained.
As the former British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, once said, “Sooner or
later you run out of other people’s money.” As the nation continues to
hemorrhage lost jobs, that won’t take long.
Is it too much to hope that General
Petraeus will testify and tell the truth about what the CIA knew about the
Benghazi attack on September 11, 2011, the anniversary of
9/11?
If he does not, a distinguished
career of service to America will be ruined by the worst mistake of his life.
© Alan Caruba, 2012
