Anonymous wrote:They made a point to say she was a kick-boxer, she must have physically threatened the other woman. But, how did the other woman have access so easily to the FBi? Do they check out every harrssing email? And why did the crazy chick have access to Patraeus's email account. She hacked into his email, that is why they investigated Petraeus. But, they didn't say if she had help?

The other woman was CIA. Broadwell used an anonymous account to harass this CIA woman who she saw as a threat to her access to Petraeus. The OTHER WOMAN took these threatening emails to the FBI. FBI has jurisdiction over interstate criminal acts. Threats over the internet to a CIA employee would definitely pique their interest. The affair just came out in the course of investigating the emails. Seems like Broadwell went bats hit. Sad. She's obviously a brilliant, talented woman (Harvard/Tufts-Fletcher/King's College.) Credentials in her field don't really get any better than that. She and Petraeus have made a horrible, horrible mistake. Sounds like Petraeus has been a dog for a while though. Well, she's no spring chicken at 40. They're both old enough to know better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:817- you should be ashamed of yourself- how mean spirited.

Lets see what you look like at 60.

Yes-- that was both mean-spirited and disingenuous. This is a very normal representation of the way women look around 60. There's no way DP's behavior is his wife's fault, and there's no good reason DP, who certainly looks his age himself, should have believed he was entitled to cheat with a woman over 20 years his junior, and who is just 9 years older than his own daughter.

The Broadwell lady herself seems to be a bit of a loon, what with the husband and the hacking and the threats and all-- not to mention the "I already knew him from Academia", which no one actually says. But every woman who gets involved with a man older than her own generation is really an accessory to a misogynistic act against women in the man's own generation (which mean-spirited PP is apparently applauding).

pp, it's not him. the NYT has already said so.

The Letter suspected to be from HER husband was written to The Ethicist column in The New York Time Magizine. It
's a long shot but the date it was written in 7/12 is about right and the storyline is EERILY similar:


THE ETHICIST
A Message From Beyond
By CHUCK KLOSTERMAN
Published: July 13, 2012

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.

*This statement doesn't really line up since her husband is a radiologist--how would he have benefitted from his generosity? But who knows? Maybe Petraeus did help him in some way. Certainly his family unit has profited from the access to the DCI through the elevation of the wife's career...

Is anyone questioning the paternity of her children? The timing seems conceivable ( no pun intended) that Patreaus might have fathered one of them? How old is the younger child and when was she away from her husband?

Anonymous wrote:Ok, so I'm not the best at keeping up on current events and probably have no business in the political forum. However, I just started reading about this story. Am I missing something? Some other footage of this woman or some unsavory bio on her? People, please: are we looking at the same woman? I watched the Daily Show interview and I'm trying to decide what I want more--to BE Broadwell (minus this scandal) or to BANG her. And I'm a strait woman. She is a total badass, very intelligent, suscessfull, and smoking hot.

Obviously she has a nice body. Why would you want to be someone who lies, cheats, destroys lives and families, and is probably going to break the hearts of her own children?

I find it disgusting that she sits there and talks about Petraeus like she's some kind of scholar and the whole time, she was banging him. THAT's how she got such an unprecedented inside look at the subject of her work. She whored herself out. As a feminist, I find that apalling. It takes away all her credibility.

Anonymous wrote:Ok, so I'm not the best at keeping up on current events and probably have no business in the political forum. However, I just started reading about this story. Am I missing something? Some other footage of this woman or some unsavory bio on her? People, please: are we looking at the same woman? I watched the Daily Show interview and I'm trying to decide what I want more--to BE Broadwell (minus this scandal) or to BANG her. And I'm a strait woman. She is a total badass, very intelligent, suscessfull, and smoking hot.

So was Catherine Trammell.

The FBI has been investigating him since the spring. We're supposed to believe the President was just briefed on Wednesday?

Ok, so I'm not the best at keeping up on current events and probably have no business in the political forum. However, I just started reading about this story. Am I missing something? Some other footage of this woman or some unsavory bio on her? People, please: are we looking at the same woman? I watched the Daily Show interview and I'm trying to decide what I want more--to BE Broadwell (minus this scandal) or to BANG her. And I'm a strait woman. She is a total badass, very intelligent, suscessfull, and smoking hot.

They made a point to say she was a kick-boxer, she must have physically threatened the other woman. But, how did the other woman have access so easily to the FBi? Do they check out every harrssing email? And why did the crazy chick have access to Patraeus's email account. She hacked into his email, that is why they investigated Petraeus. But, they didn't say if she had help?

Anonymous wrote:817- you should be ashamed of yourself- how mean spirited.

Lets see what you look like at 60.

817- you should be ashamed of yourself- how mean spirited.

I'm not so sure there's much of a surprise to this story.

He was married to this woman who has to rush to assure people it wasn't a marriage of convenience since her daddy was a four-star general himself:


Holly always dismissed suggestions that Petraeus married her to advance his career.

“I’m not stupid. I wouldn’t have married someone on the make,” she told journalist Linda Robinson, whose 2008 book “Tell Me How This Ends” describes the Petraeuses’ courtship. “We got married because we fell in love.”

And then had an affair with her:

[/img]http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_404h/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/11/11/National-Security/Images/Petraeus_Resigns_0af2d-816.jpg[img]

I'm really not surprised.

She looks totally cold and calculating in every picture. The husband would be an idiot for staying with her.

Anonymous wrote:If every affair were an emergency over which someone would have to resign, the Hill would be a post-apocalyptic wasteland.

I assume Obama's staff had more important things to talk about, and handled this when it gelled into something.

world politics are descided by the power of the penis