General Petraeus Resignes as CIA head, Cites Affair

http://www.politico.com/news/stories...=t1_3#comments

Pretty cut and dry so far, it seems. Some people are speculating about the Benghazi incident and how that played in, but I don't see a strong connection.

Affairs for CIA folks are a big no-no (high chance of blackmail). Not unreasonable that he'd resign over this.

Per the WSJ, some have alleged that the "mistress" was trying to hack Petreus' e-mail, which is what exposed the whole thing.

Oh, that and the "mistress" used to spend hours on end jogging and talking about the biography she was writing about him. Of which there are now plenty of photos to second-guess. Like this one:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/...line-popup.jpg

But I think the BEST part of this is the suspicion that the mistress' husband wrote an anonymous question to the NYTimes "Ethicist" section this summer. :haha:

Quote:

---

MY WIFE’S LOVER

My wife is having an affair with a government executive. His role is to manage a project whose progress is seen worldwide as a demonstration of American leadership. (This might seem hyperbolic, but it is not an exaggeration.) I have met with him on several occasions, and he has been gracious. (I doubt if he is aware of my knowledge.) I have watched the affair intensify over the last year, and I have also benefited from his generosity. He is engaged in work that I am passionate about and is absolutely the right person for the job. I strongly feel that exposing the affair will create a major distraction that would adversely impact the success of an important effort. My issue: Should I acknowledge this affair and finally force closure? Should I suffer in silence for the next year or two for a project I feel must succeed? Should I be “true to my heart” and walk away from the entire miserable situation and put the episode behind me? NAME WITHHELD

Don’t expose the affair in any high-profile way. It would be different if this man’s project was promoting some (contextually hypocritical) family-values platform, but that doesn’t appear to be the case. The only motive for exposing the relationship would be to humiliate him and your wife, and that’s never a good reason for doing anything. This is between you and your spouse. You should tell her you want to separate, just as you would if she were sleeping with the mailman. The idea of “suffering in silence” for the good of the project is illogical. How would the quiet divorce of this man’s mistress hurt an international leadership initiative? He’d probably be relieved.

The fact that you’re willing to accept your wife’s infidelity for some greater political good is beyond honorable. In fact, it’s so over-the-top honorable that I’m not sure I believe your motives are real. Part of me wonders why you’re even posing this question, particularly in a column that is printed in The New York Times.

Your dilemma is intriguing, but I don’t see how it’s ambiguous. Your wife is having an affair with a person you happen to respect. Why would that last detail change the way you respond to her cheating? Do you admire this man so much that you haven’t asked your wife why she keeps having sex with him? I halfway suspect you’re writing this letter because you want specific people to read this column and deduce who is involved and what’s really going on behind closed doors (without actually addressing the conflict in person). That’s not ethical, either.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/ma...om-beyond.html

---

Quote:

---

CIA Chief Resigns Over Affair
Petraeus Relationship With Biographer Surfaced After FBI Probe of His Email

By DEVLIN BARRETT, SIOBHAN GORMAN and JULIAN E. BARNES

WASHINGTON—Central Intelligence Agency Director David Petraeus resigned after a probe into whether someone else was using his email led to the discovery that he was having an extramarital affair, according to several people briefed on the matter.

Spoiler:

A Federal Bureau of Investigation inquiry into use of Mr. Petraeus's Gmail account led agents to believe the woman or someone close to her had sought access to his email, the people said.

Multiple officials familiar with the investigation identified the woman as the author of a biography on Mr. Petraeus.

It was the second national-security revelation to come to light in the two days after President Barack Obama won re-election. On Wednesday, the Pentagon acknowledged that Iranian fighter planes had fired on an unmanned reconnaissance drone five days before the election. Some Republicans on Capitol Hill were irked that the administration waited so long to make the incident public, while administration officials said they didn't talk about the attack because the drone program was secret.

Mr. Petraeus's resignation also comes at a time when the CIA is embroiled in controversy surrounding the events of Sept. 11, 2012, when four Americans were killed in an attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. After weeks of conflicting accounts of what happened that night, the CIA acknowledged it had played a central role in gathering intelligence and providing security for the U.S. presence there.

Mr. Petraeus was scheduled to testify before the Senate intelligence committee next week. Michael Morell, who was named acting director of the CIA after Mr. Petraeus's resignation, will appear instead.

The resignation, which stunned the nation's capital, represented a fall for a man who had been one of the most celebrated military leaders of his time, a four-star general credited with turning the tide in Iraq and reversing the Taliban's momentum in Afghanistan.

Administration officials said the White House was briefed on the affair Wednesday by Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. Mr. Obama was informed Thursday by his staff and met with Mr. Petraeus that day. Mr. Petraeus then offered to resign. The announcement came Friday afternoon.

In a statement to CIA employees, Mr. Petraeus said, "After being married for over 37 years, I showed extremely poor judgment by engaging in an extramarital affair. Such behavior is unacceptable, both as a husband and as the leader of an organization such as ours."

His wife, Holly, the daughter of a West Point superintendent, heads the office for service-member affairs in the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an agency created by the 2010 financial-regulation law.

Multiple officials said Mr. Petraeus's affair was with Paula Broadwell, a West Point graduate who recently wrote a book on the retired general, "All In: The Education of General David Petraeus." Efforts to reach Ms. Broadwell were unsuccessful. A spokeswoman for her publisher, Penguin, did not immediately comment.

The computer-security investigation—which raised questions about a potential compromise to national security—points to one reason Mr. Petraeus and the White House decided he couldn't remain in the senior intelligence position. An extramarital affair has significant implications for an official in a highly sensitive post, because it can open an official to blackmail. Security officials are sensitive to misuse of personal email accounts—not only official accounts—because there have been multiple instances of foreign hackers targeting personal emails.

Leading contenders to succeed Mr. Petraeus include Mr. Morell and Pentagon intelligence chief Michael Vickers. Another possibility, if Mr. Obama seeks to reach across the aisle, is Rep. Michael Rogers (R., Mich.), chairman of the House intelligence committee.

One former CIA official called Mr. Morell an "odds-on favorite," adding that "he would bring over three decades of experience inside the agency. He's the consummate straight shooter. He's very well liked inside the agency. He has enormous street cred on Capitol Hill. He projects an image of calm."

The computer investigation began late this spring, according to a person familiar with the investigation. Mr. Petraeus wasn't interviewed by the FBI until recently.

While Mr. Petraeus was still a general, he had email exchanges with the woman, but there wasn't a physical relationship, the person said. The affair began after Mr. Petraeus retired from the Army in August 2011 and ended months ago, the person said.

A succession of official announcements began Friday shortly before 3 p.m. with a statement from Mr. Clapper. "Dave's decision to step down represents the loss of one of our nation's most respected public servants," Mr. Clapper said. Minutes later, the CIA distributed Mr. Petraeus's announcement to agency employees.

The White House issued a statement from Mr. Obama praising Mr. Petraeus for his "extraordinary service to the United States for decades," and adding: "By any measure, through his lifetime of service, David Petraeus has made our country safer and stronger."

Intelligence officials scrambled Friday afternoon to alert key members of Congress. Some received a call about an hour before the announcements from Deputy Director of National Intelligence Stephanie O'Sullivan. Other key congressional officials, including the chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.), weren't told in advance.

Sen. Feinstein called Mr. Petraeus's resignation "an enormous loss for our nation's intelligence community and for our country." She added, "I wish President Obama had not accepted this resignation, but I understand and respect the decision."

Rep. Rogers voiced appreciation for Mr. Petraeus's service. "His entire career has been spent defending and protecting the United States," he said. "I am confident the CIA will continue to successfully carry out its vital mission through this transition."

At the CIA, Mr. Petraeus kept a much lower profile than he did as a military officer, which was in accord with the administration's wishes. He rarely gave speeches and did not grant on-the-record interviews about his CIA duties.

His reputation inside Langley was that of a competent director, but one who did not seek to win over the workforce in the way some of his predecessors had.

He presided over a moderation of the CIA's controversial drone program to take into greater account diplomatic sensitivities, a shift that sometimes put him at odds with the head of the agency's Counterterrorism Center.

During his time at CIA, the agency, along with foreign intelligence services, thwarted a plot by al Qaeda's Yemeni affiliate by infiltrating a component of the group.

Mr. Obama tapped Mr. Petraeus, a favorite of President George W. Bush, to serve as his top commander in Afghanistan after the abrupt resignation of Gen. Stanley McChrystal in 2010. Mr. Obama nominated him as CIA director in 2011. Messrs. Petraeus and Obama did not have the close chemistry that the president has with other top officials in his cabinet.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...422213868.html

---

That's a shame - folks on both sides generally agreed he was a good guy. (Except for those moveon guys).

Letting an outsider access your email while you're head of the CIA = not evidence of a good guy.

Heh.

Quote:

---

Chapter Titles Of David Petraeus’s Biography, Ranked By How Funny They Are Now That We Know The Author Was Humping The Subject

13. Ground Truth
12. Washington and Back
11. Transition
10. Mask of Command
9. High Stakes
8. True Believers
7. Drawdown
6. Lines of Operation
5. Results, Boy
4. Still All In
3. Clear, Hold and Build
2. Screaming Eagles
1. Anaconda

http://gawker.com/5959469/chapter-ti...ng-the-subject

---

I had a 5 day weekend over the holiday and didn't leave the house much. Attempted to head to work this morning and discovered that the other other woman involved in this, Jill Kelley, lives entirely to close to me :mad: I never truly understood the hatred towards the paparazzi until today.

All that work Tampa did to clean up its image with the RNC, and all it takes its a couple of jealous or paranoid sluts to remind everyone what Tampa is really made of.

To say that commanding officers at the Tampa base showed bad judgment in giving this much access to the village bicycle would be a massive understatement.

Wow, it seems that our Reality TV mentality has grown bigger claws than anyone imagined. What's next --- Housewives of The Pentagon? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Wow, it seems that our Reality TV mentality has grown bigger claws than anyone imagined. What's next --- Housewives of The Pentagon? :confused:

---

Well, career officer wives definitely counts as a very distinct subculture with some significant behavioral differences from what most of the country is used to. So I could easily see it. The problem is that it is kinda the antithesis of loud and strongly emphasizes solidarity. It would displease the production and ratings experts.

It’s just another effort done by FBI to control CIA. The similarcase happened 6 years ago.


406. Take over CIA (5/15/06)

Eight months ago, DOJ has activated a battle to take over the Supreme Court. They successfully sent two of their agents, John Roberts and Samuel Aliot, to the seats of Supreme Court Justice.

Now they are targeting CIA. FBI searched CIA No. 3 leader Foggo's home and office on 5/12. CIA Chief Porter Goss resigned in advance. The leader of CIA dropped in the trap set up by FBI.

Quote, "CIA boss Goss is cooked

Tied to contractor's poker parties -hints of bribes & women
BY RICHARD SISK and JAMES GORDON MEEK
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON - CIA Director Porter Goss abruptly resigned yesterday amid allegations that he and a top aide may have attended Watergate poker parties where bribes and prostitutes were provided to a corrupt congressman.

Intelligence and law enforcement sources said solid evidence had yet to emerge that Goss also went to the parties, but Goss and Foggo share a fondness for poker and expensive cigars, and the FBI investigation was continuing.

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/sto...p-350961c.html

Scandal is always a weapon FBI used to blackmail, to hit its target. They set up traps with its informants or undercover agents. (see "373. Extortion by scandal (1/12/06) 374. A covert totalitarian (1/12/06)")

Former President Nixon resigned from Watergate scandal. The "deep throat", concealed 30 years, now is revealed a FBI agent. Clinton and former Congressman Gary Condit were both hit hard by scandal of personal affair. The interns involved in the case, Lewinsky and Chandra Levy, were both from Jewish family. We know Israel tried to influence on US politicians through their aids. The recent Supreme Court nominations was fulfilled by the attack on GOP leader Frist (in Senate) and Tom Delay (in Congress) and on other GOP lawmakers by Abramoff scandal. Abramoff, I think, is an undercover agent who used to corrupt the law makers so these politicians could be extorted.

Why do I think so? Because Abramoff acted like a financial distributor. He not only offered financial aid to political campaign, he also offered financial aid to 911 hijackers. 3 or 4 hijackers (include Atta) visited casino ship SunCruze before the attack. Abramoff ran that casino company. And those 911 hijackers, at least some of them, were undercover former FBI agents and FBI informants. (see "403. Beware a global "terror" attack (4/30/06)")

In US, when a scandal happened, there used to be a purpose. So when Porter Goss resigns to a scandal, we know this time the purpose of DOJ is to take over CIA.

http://davidsimon.com/stray-penises-and-politicos/

Someone needs to suggest to Sen. McCain that he should either retire from public office, and/or seek professional counseling.

:confused:

<facepalm>

I think GGT's bigger point is that anyone who disagrees with her needs to be wiped from the face of the earth. :o

Its funny because I remember people complaining about McCain being too old to be president. Well guess what, Obama's first term is almost up and McCain is still alive and kicking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Its funny because I remember people complaining about McCain being too old to be president. Well guess what, Obama's first term is almost up and McCain is still alive and kicking.

---

Without having to deal with the stress that comes with being president :rolleyes:

Remind me how old Biden is.

Joe Biden can never die, only the actors who play him!

I think the main issue with the possibility of him dying in office was his veep pick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Remind me how old Biden is.

---

Yeah but if Biden died in office then we just wait for a new VP. If McCain had died in office then Palin would be President. And the GOP really should have learned that lesson after McKinley croaked and the party leaders' worst nightmare came true.

And you still vastly underestimate the level of medical treatment available to the president. Plus, it's not like McCain was a sickly man at the time. He was 70, not 90.

I was referring to McCain jumping on Rice before the investigations are complete, saying she's either part of a massive cover-up or incompetence, and ranting like a bitter old man....instead of the statesman and member of security or intelligence committees in his prior years. He knows better than most how these things unfold like an onion, with changing information every day. He comes off as a sore loser who'd rather drum up drama than actually get to the bottom of things.

A politician playing politics. How horrifying!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

A politician playing politics. How horrifying!

---

Ostensibly at least some percentage of the rapey Pubbies this go around (why yes, it did feel good writing that) were playing politics, or at least genuinely thought they were, does this excuse their statements? Exactly which amount of 'playing politics' is acceptable?

I guess the correct answer is: What the voters like, but :noob:

Also, and this has nothing to do with GeeGee's original statement, McCain was the maverick who blew off a confidential meeting about the events in Benghazi to hold a press conference crying about how he wasn't told enough about the events in Benghazi. Playing politics indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nessus

Ostensibly at least some percentage of the rapey Pubbies this go around (why yes, it did feel good writing that) were playing politics, or at least genuinely thought they were, does this excuse their statements? Exactly which amount of 'playing politics' is acceptable?

I guess the correct answer is: What the voters like, but :noob:

---

I really would like to know how saying something that costs you 10% at the polls is "playing politics".

The maverick thing was a gimmick. People really have to stop buying into the personas created by politicians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

I really would like to know how saying something that costs you 10% at the polls is "playing politics".

---

Wouldn't we all, really. But these guys, they're professionals!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

The maverick thing was a gimmick. People really have to stop buying into the personas created by politicians.

---

In case you missed it, I was being sarcastic :o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

A politician playing politics. How horrifying!

---

Maybe. If McCain was going to run for POTUS again, he'd probably try to appear more rational and diplomatic on national security issues. Sounds similar to Romney's early blunder on Day One, when it was still unfolding.

If the main goal is to create suspicion around Obama's administration....instead of addressing foreign policy and security....that's not leadership.

I don't recall you having the same problems with Democratic politicians when Bush was in power. You really are the ultimate example of cognitive dissonance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

I don't recall you having the same problems with Democratic politicians when Bush was in power. You really are the ultimate example of cognitive dissonance.

---

Are you referring to (D) who objected to military interventions or surges in Iraq, or the false "intelligence" of WMD by the Bush administration?

Since you claim to be all about debating topics and not personalities, perhaps you should focus your Cognitive Dissonance claims elsewhere. :donkey:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Are you referring to (D) who objected to military interventions or surges in Iraq, or the false "intelligence" of WMD by the Bush administration?

Since you claim to be all about debating topics and not personalities, perhaps you should focus your Cognitive Dissonance claims elsewhere. :donkey:

---

How about the Democrats who filibustered Bush's judicial picks simply because they interpreted the constitution closely to the way the founders meant it to be interpreted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

the way the founders meant it to be interpreted.

---

:rolleyes:

747. Petraeus case is an extortion (11/27/2012)

On Nov. 10, CIA ChiefPetraeus resigned from his post because the FBI had found his affairs inBroadwell’s email. On Nov. 20, we havesuch a news:

Quote:

---

Senate bill rewrite lets feds read youre-mail without warrants

---

Quote:

---

by Declan McCullagh
| November 20, 2012

A Senate proposal touted asprotecting Americans' e-mail privacy has been quietly rewritten, givinggovernment agencies more surveillance power than they possess under currentlaw.

CNET has learned thatPatrick Leahy, the influential Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciarycommittee, has dramatically reshaped his legislation in response to lawenforcement concerns. A vote on his bill, which now authorizes warrantlessaccess to Americans' e-mail, is scheduled for next week.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552225-38/senate-bill-rewrite-lets-feds-read-your-e-mail-without-warrants/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=title

---

Obviously, the FBI activatesits accessories in Senate to change the law to justify its action on the CIAChief. The cause they applied on Petraeus case is weak, fragile andunreasonable.

Quote:

---

In unusual CIA case, FBI detoured from usualpath

---

Quote:

---

By RICHARD LARDNER |Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The waythe FBI responded to Jill Kelley's complaint about receiving harassing emails,which ultimately unraveled or scarred the careers of ex-CIA Director DavidPetraeus and Marine Gen. John Allen, is the exception, not the rule.

The FBI commonly declines topursue cyberstalking cases without compelling evidence of serious or imminentharm to an individual, victims of online harassment, advocacy groups andcomputer crime experts told The Associated Press.
Instead, the FBI consideredthis from the earliest stages to be an exceptional case, and one so sensitivethat FBI Director Robert Mueller and Attorney General Eric Holder were keptnotified of its progress.
Civil liberties groups havecriticized the FBI for pursuing the investigation of the emails to Kelleybecause there is no indication the messages contained any threatening languageor classified information. The episode underscores the need to strengthen thelegal protections for electronic communications, according to the AmericanCivil Liberties Union.
http://us.mg5.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch

---

What made the FBI crossingthe path to create a scandal? There must be a reason. I think it was apotential extortion case. The FBI triedto blackmail CIA Chief Petraeus with the affair scandal but failed. Then we sawsuch a stage show.

748. Petraeus case is an extortion (2) (12/6/2012)

Quote:

---

New report describes Broadwell emails to Kelley as ‘death threats’

---

Quote:

---

By Rachel Rose Hartman,Yahoo! News | The Ticket – Tue, Nov 20, 2012

Paula Broadwell reportedlyvowed in an email to make Jill Kelley "go away" the New York DailyNews reported Tuesday in a story offering new details about how the mistress offormer CIA Director David Petraeus threatened Kelley.

---

It’s ridiculous to interpret“go away” as a life threat. Yet it was“so sensitive that FBI Director Robert Mueller and Attorney General Eric Holderwere kept notified of its progress.” Is it funny that the two big heads of theD.O.J. kept their interest on someone’s affair while A.G. Eric Holder said hewas not notified of “Operation Fast and Furious”?

As a matter of fact, EricHolder is under heavy pressure to resign on “Operation Fast and Furious”scandal. FBI director Robert Mueller is on his “extended two years” term. Bothare in their finale days in D.O.J.. (see #693 and #694) They have a mission toframe a case to terminate Kat Hak Sung, then to take the responsibility by“resignation” – a convenient way for the officials to quit from the crime theycommitted.

In 1990s, I left US twicebecause the intensified persecution of the Feds. Then they created OKC bombingand 911 attack to achieve the new law “Patriot Act” with which they establishthe TSA search in airport. On 10/7/2009, I was denied to enter Canada on the border. (see #611) The onlyexit now is Mexico. A few days later, in later October 2009, D.O.J. created“Operation Fast and Furious”. They successfully turned Mexico into a killingfield. It was obviously created for my case.

This year, the Feds have newplan to frame me through the new Obama’s Healthcare law. I revealed it in July.(see #726) Next month, a strange case happened.

Quote:

---

Mexico focus on police commanders in CIAshooting

---

Quote:

---

By E. EDUARDO CASTILLO |Associated Press – Mon, Nov 19, 2012.

MEXICO CITY (AP) — In astrange and aggressive attack by Mexican federal police on a U.S. Embassyvehicle that was pumped with 152 bullets, one major question remains: Why?

Mexican investigators arelooking for the answer from five police commanders who are accused of ordering14 officers to lie about what happened on Aug. 24 south of Mexico City, wheretwo CIA officers and a Mexican Navy captain came under heavy fire whiletravelling in an armored SUV clearly marked by diplomatic plates.
……
"Commanders controlledby whom? Whose instructions were they following?" said one Mexicanofficial with knowledge of the case.

http://news.yahoo.com/mexico-focus-police-commanders-cia-shooting-184012908.html

---

Media puzzled, asked why?People rarely know it was an attempt to create scandal for CIA. “Operation Fastand Furious” has made D.O.J. notorious already. They now intend to extort CIAto collaborate in their plot in Mexico if I would be forced to be there.


749. Petraeus case is an extortion (3) (12/11/2012)

Who has the power to orderthe Mexico Federal police to murder CIA agents? Mexico government has no intention to offend its super powerneighborhood. The answer is simple: It is someone who has the ability to extortthe Chief of CIA.

We know the Feds control thedrug gangs in Mexico. (see “698. FBI and DEA are behind the “Fast and Furious”(12/19/2011)”

Quote:

---

US Court Documents Claim Sinaloa “Cartel” IsProtected by US Government

---

Quote:

---

Posted by Bill Conroy - July31, 2011 at 5:07 pm

The son of a heavy hitter ina powerful Mexican drug trafficking organization has filed explosive legalpleadings in federal court in Chicago accusing the US government of cutting adeal with the the “Sinaloa Cartel” that gave its leadership “carte blanche tocontinue to smuggle tons of illicit drugs into Chicago and the rest of theUnited States.”

http://www.blackvisions.org/Boards/i...t2&topic=112.0

---

The Feds not only controldrug gangs in Mexico, they also control mexico police force, turn it into theirinformants.

Quote:

---

Reports Of Mexican Special Forces Serving As'Death Squads' In The Drug War

---

Quote:

---

Michael Kelley|Oct. 2, 2012
Ciudad Juárez, right acrossthe border from El Paso, Texas, was perhaps the most dangerous place in theworld between 2008 and 2011 as a “cartel turf war" led to more than 10,000murders.

But U.S. and Mexicanofficials told Stratfor that the surge of killings can be partly attributed toMexican special forces and hitmen who were acting as U.S. informants.

http://www.businessinsider.com/startfor-death-squads-in-the-drug-war-2012-10#ixzz2DZQF50Yv

---

The CIA agents survived inMexico police’ attack were lucky because they were in a bullet proof car. Theplot continues. CIA Chief Petraeus was extorted by affair scandal. It seemsPetraeus didn’t compromise to that blackmail. He knows once he obeys, he willbe a slave for that power for life. He chose to resign.

Really curious to see how Mexican drug cartels file court cases in the US claiming the US is playing favorites with Mexican drug cartels.

750. Petraeus case is an extortion (4) (12/20/2012)

Petraeus’ resignation wassudden and unexpected, it’s obvious. There was a flurry in news field. At firstit said the affair was found in emails between Petraeus and Paula Broadwell. Itwas illegal to search private communication.

So then we knew Jill Kelley.The justification was that she received anonymous threatening emails. But how could Kelleycomplained her private affair to the FBI? Then we got an unnamed FBI agent:

Quote:

---

Jill Kelley turned to friend — and Tampa FBIagent — for help

Nov 14, 2012

He was identified lateWednesday by the New York Times, quoting anonymous sources, as the Tampa FBIagent who took the complaints from socialite Jill Kelley that started acyberstalking investigation and uncovered Petraeus' affair with biographerPaula Broadwell.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/militar...gation/1261562

---

And some other story toconvince people:

Quote:

---

Jill Kelley Claims 'Threats' in Email toMayor
By ABC News | ABC News 11/16/2012
By DREW MILLHON, MIKEGUDGELL and LEE FERRAN

http://news.yahoo.com/jill-kelley-cl...opstories.html

---

Then the news that the FBIagent allegedly sent Jill Kelley shirtless photos, Kelley’s affair with Gen.John Allen, Kelley’s social life with high ranking government officials…. . Allthose 007 style stories are used to distract people from the main focus – Petraueswas under illegal surveillance.

Is sex scandal really thatimportant? Gen. John Allen is a high ranking official. He now goes back toAfghanistan to continue his commander career there. His mistress came fromLebanon and is a social butterfly. Paula Broadwell graduated from West Pointand was allowed to do her writing with Petraeus. She is much cleaner than JillKelley. Yet Petreus lost his job.

The word to justify thesearch was “go away”. Do you believe it?

Quote:

---

New report describes Broadwell emails toKelley as ‘death threats’

By Rachel Rose Hartman,Yahoo! News | The Ticket – Tue, Nov 20, 2012

Paula Broadwell reportedlyvowed in an email to make Jill Kelley "go away" the New York DailyNews reported Tuesday in a story offering new details about how the mistress offormer CIA Director David Petraeus threatened Kelley.

---

751. Petraeus case is an extortion (5) (12/25/2012)

FBI used to kill with aborrowed knife. In Waco event when they decided to eliminate the BranchDavidians, they let the BATF to provoke the case which at last led to themassacre of seventy four people.

In October 2009, they letthe Canada authority to deny my entering at border check point. A few dayslater they activated “Operation Fast and Furious” to turn Mexico into a killingfield. When that operation became a scandal in 2011, BATF again became ascapegoat.

Then who would be a borrowedknife in Mexico if Kat Sung have gone there? They thought of CIA. We saw thestrange case that Mexico Federal police shooting the SUV of CIA agents and thescandal of CIA Chief Petraeus. However, Petraeus chose to resign instead ofkeeling down. Now FBI has to show its true face.

I have an email account withYahoo so I read its news everyday. On November 24, two weeks after Petraeus'resignation, a news jumped into my view.It proves my allegation that the blackmail on CIA was about Mexico:

Quote:

---

1 of FBI's 10 most wanted arrested in Mexico
Associated Press –11/24/2012

LOS ANGELES (AP) — One ofthe FBI's Ten Most Wanted Fugitives was arrested in Mexico and returned to LosAngeles Friday night to face charges of murder, kidnapping and rape, U.S.officials said.

Reputed Los Angeles gangmember Joe Luis Saenz was taken into custody in Guadalajara late Thursdayfollowing a joint operation with the Mexican government, said Bill Lewis,assistant director in charge of the FBI's Los Angeles office.

http://news.yahoo.com/1-fbis-10-most...031249271.html

---

They won’t hide behind thecurtain anymore.