Mice In A Maze: WH Knew of Petraeus CIA Scandal Tuesday But Obama Told Thursday?

By
November 11, 2012

There are endless discussions and columns and posts on the unfortunate revelations regarding CIA director David Petraeus’ affair and resignation. Many of them speculate about the political convenience of it all – skirting Benghazi hearings and/or saving it until after the election, for instance.

Well, the White House does itself and the country no favors when it acts in such a manner as to either lend credence to suspicions of political hackery or suggest wholesale dysfunction on the part of both the White House staff and the newly-reelected president they continue to serve.

Pay close attention to this and you cannot come away from it with any good feelings.

“Director [of National Intelligence] Clapper learned of the situation from the FBI on Tuesday evening around 5 p.m.,” a senior U.S. intelligence official said. “In subsequent conversations with Director Petraeus, Director Clapper advised Director Petraeus to resign.”

[Snip…]

The emerging details suggest that Petraeus was not involved in the decision to notify the White House that he had been ensnared in an FBI probe.

Instead, it was Clapper who told the White House late Wednesday, with Obama learning about it a day later. A senior h official defended the decision not to notify the president earlier, saying that staff “needed to get their arms around” the matter before briefing Obama, who had returned from his election trip to Chicago on Wednesday night.

Obama summoned Petraeus to the White House on Thursday and “made the decision alone overnight” to accept his CIA director’s resignation, the official said.

So, if this related tale to the Washington Post is to be believed, DNI Clapper was informed at 5pm Tuesday during the elections. He spoke immediately with CIA Director Petraeus, more than once. And so critical was the situation that DNI Clapper quickly “advised” resignation.

Sit on that for a second. A Cabinet level director just “advised” the sitting director of the CIA to resign. It’s still Tuesday. (Don’t think for a second that resignation didn’t come up until someone slept on it. One doesn’t come to resignation conclusion after a good night’s sleep. It’s obvious immediately and it is “advised.”)

And the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper sits on this until the next day before informing the White House?  He just does what, goes home an ponders the situation privately over a lonely fireside bourbon? He just advised the Director of Central Intelligence to resign his office immediately.

So DNI Clapper finally gets around to telling the White House staff the next day. It’s Wednesday, and still, we are to believe, the President of the United States has not been informed that a.) his CIA director is part of an investigation, b.) has compromised and exposed himself to blackmail or worse with an affair, and c.) has been “advised” by the DNI to resign immediately.

The White House staff just couldn’t figure out how to break the news to the boss. Just couldn’t “get their arms around” the tumult. So they apparently crawled around like panicked mice loose in a maze, bouncing head-first off of walls until finally one of them figured out a safe exit. Cheese reward for all. This took all of Wednesday. The president is busy, you know.

We are now to believe that Thursday, two days later, was the first day the President of the United States was made aware that his CIA Director is compromised and will be tendering his resignation. President Obama “summons Petraeus to the White House” where the CIA director tenders his resignation.

Here’s the morbidly entertaining part: Now President Obama needs a day to run around the mouse maze, bump off of walls and find the exit with the cheese. He doesn’t accept the resignation until the next day, Friday. Good thing the White House staff took prudent time to “get their arms around” the matter. It might have taken POTUS two days to figure out what to do.

CONCLUSION:

One of two things is going on here.

1. The White House – from its staff to the President of the United States – is cooking up a timeline tale for the Washington Post’s willing scribes to profess to the world in order to cover a very different actual timeline of events executed for another reason entirely. Of course, there’s already speculation into potential motives, including avoiding potentially damaging Petraeus testimony on Benghazi as well as the possibility of simply avoiding embarrassment until after the election.

Or…

2. The White House – from its staff to the President of the United States – is so inconceivably dysfunctional and incompetent on matters of intelligence and national security that its own Director of National Intelligence sits on personally advising the scandal-driven resignation of the Director of the CIA(!) for a day, then wakes up the next morning and finally tells the rest of the White House staff which sits on the development of the scandal-driven resignation of the Director of the CIA(!) for a day, until finally it reaches the President of the United States on Day 3, who then sits on accepting the scandal-driven resignation of the Director of the CIA(!) for a day.

Either the White House needs to be investigated or President Obama needs to fire his entire inept White House staff.

Read the recipe published in the Washington Post cookbook yourself. Those are the only two conclusions an intelligent and even marginally analytical person is left to choose from.

Then, of course, there is the 52% Conclusion that President Obama was diligent and very presidential while his staff and cabinet were thorough in the execution of their very complicated duties. The president “made the decision alone overnight” to accept Petraeus’ resignation. All by himself. That’s big boy material right there. Nothing else to see here. Move along.

Elections have consequences.

Tagged with: , , , , ,



AdSense 300×250
NewsMax Trending Now
Comments:
  1. […] more: Mice In A Maze: WH Knew of Petraeus CIA … – Riehl World View posted under […]

    • X Spook says:

      This has Axelrod written all over it. The basic question is about the biographer and who hired her? Was it a publicist, was it Petraeus himself? Quite frankly, I think that the administration had to damage Petraeus’ reputation and try to keep him from testifying on Bengazi. Now that Petraeus is a private citizen, I would expect that he can speak to anyone, however, with the Secrecy Act, Petraeus could become another Scooter Libby tied up in legalities with the threat of jail. But, there are ways around that. Like get congressional immunity. There is a lot to discover here, and Petraeus just might have gone off script, by resigning and acknowledging the affair, so now, what leverage does Obama have over Petraeus?

  2. […] usual… The White House probably knew more than what they let on. Petraeus’s departure now has also thrown a whole new pile of grist into the Benghazi […]

  3. Captain Joe says:

    A little birdie tells me that Angelina Joli is the third woman, the one who complained to the FBI about threatening emails from Paula Broadwell. Joli’s picture taken in Petreaus’ office raised alarms that resulted in the nasty emails.

  4. Captain Joe says:

    I think there is a possibility that Paula Kranz Broadwell may have been working for the Israelies. “Paula” and “Kranz” are common Jewish names, and she did do some training in Israel during her military career. Of course, Petraeus is also a Dutch jewish name. Somehow I think the yids are behind this Benghazi mess. Wasn’t the ambassador Stevens a Jew?

    • Ragspierre says:

      uh…no.

      What an idiot.

      The only ethnicity to which I know of Stevens being attached was American Indian.

      • Captain Joe says:

        Technically, you’re right. His mother was an American Indian, but his father wasn’t, and you ain’t a Jew unless your mother is also a Jew.

  5. ltw says:

    “No kidding”

    “Pay close attention to this and you cannot come away from it with any good feelings.”

    This NY Times article says Paula Broadwell was questioned for the first time the week of October 21 and given her speech at Denver University was on October 26, she must have been questioned later that day…Friday or Saturday, otherwise why would she have given the answers she did.

    Officials Say F.B.I. Knew of Petraeus Affair in the Summer

    By SCOTT SHANE and CHARLIE SAVAGE
    Published: November 11, 2012

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/12/us/us-officials-say-petraeuss-affair-known-in-summer.html?pagewanted=2

    “F.B.I. agents interviewed Ms. Broadwell for the first time the week of Oct. 21, and she acknowledged the affair, a government official briefed on the matter said. ”

    Here’s Paula Broadwell’s bio:

    http://alumni.du.edu/s/1150/images/editor_documents/alumni_relations/alumni_symposium/paula_broadwell_bio.pdf

  6. jTqub7QN says:

    318097 715050Outstanding post, I conceive folks need to larn a whole lot from this weblog its really user friendly . 776142

  7. 4873 796070I like this weblog so much, saved to my bookmarks . 899489