Saturday, November 10, 2012
The Petraeus Resignation - What It Means (and Ken Starr)
Jim Treacher has a post on this: Petraeus resigns, and it definitely has nothing to do with Benghazi and of course it has everything to do with Benghazi. He was scheduled to testify before congress about Benghazi.
Guess Petraeus didn’t have any sealed divorce records for Obama to wave around. But this’ll do in a pinch. The important thing is to remove the obstacle.Not only doesn’t it matter that everybody can see what Obama is doing, it’s actually better for him that way. What good is abusing your power if you can’t laugh at your enemy’s futility
Glenn Reynolds I would say “heh,” but it’s not exactly funny.
I commented on the strange actions of Petraeus last month It's Time for Petraeus to Testify. The information the FBI gathered on him may have been used by Obama to blackmail Petraeus into backing the lie that Benghazi was a movie-inspired demonstration that got out of hand.
So was Petraeus told to resign, as
many most have suggested, or did he do so voluntarily? Does the Obama administration strike anyone as particularly prudish? With congressional testimony coming up, Petraeus' position became untenable and he could either resign or commit perjury. So he resigned. If his resignation was voluntary, it actually raises my opinion of him as a flawed but honorable man. If his resignation was forced, the timing was convenient for Obama. And why is the FBI leaking a torrent of information about Petraeus designed to make him out to be a love-struck teen, or a Bill Clinton clone? I mean, come on, who has the time to send an ex-lover "thousands of e-mails in the last several months." Who does he think he is, Glenn Reynolds?
But resignation does not get him off the hook. He can still be forced to testify. If he appears before the House Intelligence committee as a private citizen he will undoubtedly "lawyer up" and then it's doubtful if we will get any useful information from him.
Does this help or hinder the Obama/Media-Mob in the Benghazi cover-up? Some of it depends on the willingness of whistle-blowers in the military, CIA and the State Department to leak to the House Intelligence committee. A lot depends on the willingness of the Republicans in the House to pursue this issue now that the election is over and Obama is in power another four years. You can be sure that if they proceed with an investigation, they will be vilified and smeared. Who wants to be the next Ken Starr?