This thing that's been going on is like a soap opera! First, CIA director cheats on his wife with girlfriend, girlfriend thinks she's got competition and sends nasty emails to girly, girly freaks out and contacts a FBI agent, FBI agent gets horny and sends a shirtless picture of himself to girly, girly also has a sister that's emotionally unstable, and everyone that I've just mentioned is MARRIED.
And he's stepping down right before he would have to testify on the bengazi scandal.
If this doesn't smell like a cover up, than what is?
If you actually pay attention to political history, big name public figures do not step down due to marital affairs, or sex scandals. They all have really wierd kinky sex, and its all an open secret. Marriages are political and for appearance.
The last one I remember was James McGreevy(NJ govenor) stepping down for being outed as gay. Everyone in state government and probably the media knew this, but kept their mouths shut out of good taste. His marriage was a political marriage to a powerful family.
He came out only after it was found his boyfriend was an Israeli spy, and the FBI let him go provided he find a way to step down. This I have from authoritative sources who I cannot name.
I try to find direct information rather than relying on news claims. For instance the senate and house websites will often have information on hearings, as well as actual text to bills. The CBO (congressional budget office) is good for getting facts and figures on spending and taxes.
Die Hard social conservative(or at least he was in the 1990s), Newt Gingrich had many affairs, and got divorced 4 times.(5 marriages), after harping on "family values".
He was alive enough in poliitcs to run in the primary this year, and few, if any social conservatives brought it up. Thats a partisan blowhard.
Now your talking about General Petraeus, who's claim to fame is writing the army field manual entitled "counterinsurgency", which is so famous, it made reading lists far outside military circles, and so good, I'd label it a companion work to Che Guevera's "Gureilla Warfare", and might be a defining military guide of our age.
Although a republican, his support in politics is bi-partisan and hard won from his results on the ground in Iraq, most thought were impossible before hand. Not from shrill rabble rousing and pandering. Of course he's also not in politics, and not looking to get into politics in the near future. There is no one with anything to gain by lynching him politically.....
So, if Newt can stay in politics after an affair, how can not a man in a secretive spy agency job not shrink from the lime light?
Of course we know there is Bill "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" Clinton, who despite the lynch mob was entirely unmoved politically.
Well, here's the thing to remember, here: Newt took his lumps for the extramarital affairs as they came to light, in the 90s. I was just a kid, but I remember at least a few of the political cartoons making fun of him. There's no guarantee that Petreus is going to suffer in the long term for this.
It's big news right now because it just happened, but big news does not equal permanent political pariahood.
"Newt took his lumps for the extramarital affairs as they came to light, in the 90s"
Of course, and Clinton took a real beating for a blow job.
Guess what, it finnished niether careers, and both were career politicians. Newt was alive and kicking through the 2012 primary season, over a decade later. Clinton never missed a beat in his presidency, and the impeachment for lying to congress never happened.
Both Gingrich and Clinton were in today's terms pretty polarizing figures, loved by their friends and hated by their enemies. They have long lines of people who'd love to seem them both respectively burn.
Petraeus's support is far more bi-partisan, and less politically relivant. His achievements real, and there is no one intrested in seeing him burn.
So if Clinton and Gingrich can both survive sex related lynch mobs, why can't someone like Petraeus.
Isn't the CIA pretty much the US's entire intelligence network? They're our eyes and ears outside of the US. In a world where nations are more likely to behave like middle school girls than village drunks (as they were in previous centuries), intelligence is more important than firepower.
The US politics have been at odds with its own intel agencies, CIA in particular. (The aftermath of Iran-Contra Affair is still around.) Other major powers have more straightforward attitude towards their own; they have smaller budget and personnel to work with, yet they can hold on their own. Technical intel is where the US has been the strongest.