Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 51

Thread: FBI Suppressed Petraeus Scandal to Protect President

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by AlwaysGreenAlwaysWhite View Post
    Point is just soaring over your head... He could have been blackmailed with the affair at any point in time until he was removed from his position... If you can't comprehend that, I don't know what to tell you...
    You are assuming that he wasnt already neutralized and stripped of all power. Just because this was only recentlymade public doesnt mean action wasnt already taken to prevent the blackmail you claim could have happen

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    You are assuming that he wasnt already neutralized and stripped of all power. Just because this was only recentlymade public doesnt mean action wasnt already taken to prevent the blackmail you claim could have happen
    Hmmmm... If that had happened, our President would have been very, very much aware that it had, yes?

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by AlwaysGreenAlwaysWhite View Post
    Hmmmm... If that had happened, our President would have been very, very much aware that it had, yes?
    Not necessarily.
    The CIA works in many mysterious ways.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    Not necessarily.
    The CIA works in many mysterious ways.
    Yeah... Sure buddy...

  5. #25
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Jersey shore
    Posts
    2,067
    Quote Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
    The issue here is that Obama's handlers apparantly thought first about the election rather than national security.
    This

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by AlwaysGreenAlwaysWhite View Post
    Yeah... Sure buddy...
    This response clearly shows you dont know very much about the CIA's history

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    What I am saying is that you and I have way too little information available to us to make any speculation.
    A recurring theme from the "most open administration is history".

    Here is what I know, this Administration reeks of secrets and scandals. Easily the equal of the Bush Era.

    The only difference is the same loud folks who denounced everything Bush, are now silent.

    Liek you Ken. I sure do miss all your Anti-War, Anti-Patriot Act, Anti-War on Terror, Anti-Govt. Secrets, Anti-everything posts since Obama got elected.

    Your "I love the Libya War!" posts were entertaining tho.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    A recurring theme from the "most open administration is history".

    Here is what I know, this Administration reeks of secrets and scandals. Easily the equal of the Bush Era.

    The only difference is the same loud folks who denounced everything Bush, are now silent.

    Liek you Ken. I sure do miss all your Anti-War, Anti-Patriot Act, Anti-War on Terror, Anti-Govt. Secrets, Anti-everything posts since Obama got elected.

    Your "I love the Libya War!" posts were entertaining tho.
    I never said "i love the Libya War"
    Ive always been against Obama's continuation of the bogus Patriot Act and his assasinations using the drone wars.

    How this relates to Obama is beyond me. Perhaps Fish would like to give us specific/verified evidence supporting that Obama ordered this info to be withheld until after the election. Ill wait.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    I never said "i love the Libya War"
    Ive always been against Obama's continuation of the bogus Patriot Act and his assasinations using the drone wars.

    How this relates to Obama is beyond me. Perhaps Fish would like to give us specific/verified evidence supporting that Obama ordered this info to be withheld until after the election. Ill wait.
    You'd have to wait a long while, I have no evidence of anything. I'm just a schmuck on the interweb Ken.

    What I have is an opinion, that this administration is as corrupt and dishonest and scandal-ridden as any in recent history. What we actually know is bad enough, what we don't know is very likely worse. Not just on this, but on so many things.

    You're free to believe whatever you like, for example, like your claim that the Libya Mass Bombings was to "stop a massacre", not for EU Oil Interests. Funny how the REAL massacre in Syria failed to elicit any such response tho.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    This response clearly shows you dont know very much about the CIA's history
    Your response clearly shows you're just making **** up... The DOJ, FBI and CIA had their top officials involved... Guys that meet the President weekly and discuss highly sensitive information that involves threats to national security...

    So there's two options for you to take here...

    A) Obama was briefed prior to the election, likely by multiple sources and chose to willingly withhold accepting Patreaus' resignation until the election was over...

    B) Obama has willingly let top security officials keep him in the dark amid potentially disastrous security scandals...

    Now if you believe the latter, it's naive... But your a citizen and naiveness is fine... But for a sitting President to 'allow' himself to be continuously left in the dark... By that I mean weeks after Benghazi... Well, that makes him one of the ****tiest of ****ty CIC's in history...

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by AlwaysGreenAlwaysWhite View Post
    Your response clearly shows you're just making **** up... The DOJ, FBI and CIA had their top officials involved... Guys that meet the President weekly and discuss highly sensitive information that involves threats to national security...

    So there's two options for you to take here...

    A) Obama was briefed prior to the election, likely by multiple sources and chose to willingly withhold accepting Patreaus' resignation until the election was over...

    B) Obama has willingly let top security officials keep him in the dark amid potentially disastrous security scandals...

    Now if you believe the latter, it's naive... But your a citizen and naiveness is fine... But for a sitting President to 'allow' himself to be continuously left in the dark... By that I mean weeks after Benghazi... Well, that makes him one of the ****tiest of ****ty CIC's in history...
    Everytime someone here says this scandal somehow affects National Security, they show they are full of Sh!t. It does not. This is something alarmist, right wing nut jobs say to make something out of nothing.

    If you think that every thing the CIA does goes through the president, then you my friend are the one who is naive.

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    You'd have to wait a long while, I have no evidence of anything. I'm just a schmuck on the interweb Ken.

    What I have is an opinion, that this administration is as corrupt and dishonest and scandal-ridden as any in recent history. What we actually know is bad enough, what we don't know is very likely worse. Not just on this, but on so many things.

    You're free to believe whatever you like, for example, like your claim that the Libya Mass Bombings was to "stop a massacre", not for EU Oil Interests. Funny how the REAL massacre in Syria failed to elicit any such response tho.

    Your opinion = ZERO.

    If you have nothing to back it up, then your opinion means as much as those who were shouting that Bush went to war with Iraq to help his oil company buddies.

    I never said that Libyan Bombings were simply to "stop massacre". Please find where I said that was the sole reason for our involvement.

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    Everytime someone here says this scandal somehow affects National Security, they show they are full of Sh!t. It does not. This is something alarmist, right wing nut jobs say to make something out of nothing.

    If you think that every thing the CIA does goes through the president, then you my friend are the one who is naive.
    You threw a theory out that said Patraeus had been neutralized in his position...

    If he were, how could he discuss the inner workings of the agency in his weekly meetings with the President?

    The answer: He couldn't...

    If he were allowed to remain in his position, who are you to say he wasn't open to blackmail if someone with knowledge of the affair wanted to strong arm him?

    The answer: You're a blowhard on a message board, with a smug sense of superiority, who somehow has intimate knowledge of how the CIA operates and refuses to acknowledge that the DOJ and FBI were clearly involved in this far earlier than Election Day...

    My opinion on the sensitive nature of the incident, fresh on the heels of Benghazi seems logical... It's speculative, as all things are when discussing national security agencies...

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    Everytime someone here says this scandal somehow affects National Security, they show they are full of Sh!t. It does not. This is something alarmist, right wing nut jobs say to make something out of nothing.

    If you think that every thing the CIA does goes through the president, then you my friend are the one who is naive.
    My issue is that information was withheld until after the election. What was the motivation for this? I await your response.

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    Your opinion = ZERO.
    Oh, good, then my opinion that you are the very worst kind of hypocrite, a party loayalist for whom policy always comes second to party, won't offend you then.

    Thats good.

    I never said that Libyan Bombings were simply to "stop massacre".

  16. #36
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Farmingdale, NY
    Posts
    2,523
    You voted Mitt Romney, Warfish.

    And now you say Obama = GWB in the amount and scope of scandals?

    I bet you were also saying the Petraeus scandal was to prevent his testimony on Libya too?

    He will be testifying, regardless of his resignation.


    Seems to me that you've now become what you hate - the party loyalist.

  17. #37
    Get over this already, Obama is the President like it or not! Lets move on to the Debt, Rising Unemployment, Tax Hikes, Powder Keg in the Middle East(what else is new).

  18. #38
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,710
    I would think it would actually be better for national security to keep it a secret until after the election. Election day is a pretty important event, probably better not to shake up the CIA until after it's over, imo.

    Also, you guys seem to live in a kind of fantasy world. Do you really think it would have been that easy to blackmail him? The director of the CIA of all people? First of all, he doesn't seem like the kind of man that would allow himself to be blackmailed. Secondly, with the FBI investigating him, I'm sure it would be real easy to just slip right in under their noses and blackmail him without getting caught /sarcasm. Really, it's too bad these unknown nefarious characters didn't try, because then we'd all know who they are.

  19. #39
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,176
    If you people don't think that Obama has known about this for months than I have a bridge to sell you. He meets with his AG and FBI director weekly. Surely he was made aware of this situation and the investigation.

    This administration said that it would be the most transparent ever. Yet we have Fast and Furious, Benghazi, Patraeus, etc.

    Not to mention they have negligent with the many intel leaks as well as fast and loose with classified information like the Bin Laden raid.

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Sharrow View Post
    I would think it would actually be better for national security to keep it a secret until after the election. Election day is a pretty important event, probably better not to shake up the CIA until after it's over, imo.

    Also, you guys seem to live in a kind of fantasy world. Do you really think it would have been that easy to blackmail him? The director of the CIA of all people? First of all, he doesn't seem like the kind of man that would allow himself to be blackmailed. Secondly, with the FBI investigating him, I'm sure it would be real easy to just slip right in under their noses and blackmail him without getting caught /sarcasm. Really, it's too bad these unknown nefarious characters didn't try, because then we'd all know who they are.
    I don't care that they kept it a secret... I care that the WH continues to lie to the American people and nobody gives a ****...

    Either 90% of the media outlets have better things to report on or they simply would rather not make this administration answer for blatantly lying to the public...

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us