The Courier Journal, November 14,2012
No coincidences in weird, opaque Petraeus saga?
Written by Eugene Robinson
WASHINGTON — The one familiar aspect ofthe David Petraeus scandal is that
he had an affair. Everything else about this story is weird.
Petraeus, who resigned Friday as director ofthe CIA, is brilliant, brave, dedicated
and accomplished. But he is also vain. Even his most loyal and ardent supporters
have to acknowledge the care with which he has always burnished his own image.
He is used to being surrounded by acolytes — staffofficers,journalists, hangers-on
— whose fawning attentions can only foster a sense ofsuperiority and entitlement.
Not every man in that situation betrays his marriage vows. Some do, as evidenced
by the whole ofhuman history.
Sothe sexpartis deplorable butcomprehensible. The restof this sagais bizarrely
opaque, starting with the timing.
According to reports by The Washington Post and other news outlets, the FBI
investigation that uncovered the relationship between the retired four-star general and PaulaBroadwell, his two-decades-younger biographer, was launched earlyin the summer. Yet Petraeus' boss, Director ofNational Intelligence James Clapper,
wasn't told ofthe inquiry imtil Nov. 6. Whichjust happened to be Election Day.
Sorry, but there are no comcidences in spy novels.
It is inconceivable that FBI agents would skulk around investigating the private life
ofthe CIA director without informing top officials ofthe bureau and the Justice
Department. It was obvious that as soon as Clapper knew, he would have to inform
President Obama — and that Clapper would have to make some recommendation
about Petraeus' future. The whole mess surely would come to light.
Tell you what: Ifthe right-wing conspiracy theorists will acknowledge that the scandal wouldn't have materially affected the outcome ofTuesday's vote, I'll admitthat it sure looksas ifsomeone decided to keep the White House in the dark until the political season was over.
Conspiracy buffsshould alsoacknowledge that the scandal's timing could not possibly have beena wayto keepPetraeus from testifying on Capitol Hill about
Benghazi. Congress can still call him to the witnesstable anytime it chooses.
It's possible that the FBI kept the investigation such a closelyheld secret because it wanted to avoid the perception that the bureau was somehow going after the CIA.
Then again, I guess it's possible that the bureau was going after the CIA.
Another mystery is why the nation's chiefspy didn't practice better tradecraft in
seeking to protect his little secret.
According to widely published reports, Petraeus carried on a steamy email
correspondence with Broadwell through a private Gmail account that he opened
using a pseudonym.
It's as ifhe didn't know anything about IP addresses or location data. Presumably,
as CIA chief, Petraeus must have read intercepted emails sent by terrorists who
tried to disguise themselves by using false names. Why did no light bulb appear
above his head, no thought bubble saying, "Gee, even ifI don't use my real name,
somebody might figure out it's me?"
We know a bit about Broadwell, the West Point graduate whose book about
Petraeus was, to say the least, quite positive. When she appeared on "The Daily
Show" in January, Jon Stewart observed, "The real controversyhere is, 'Is he awesome or incredibly awesome?"'
But we still know very little about Jill Kelley, who has been called "the other other woman" but who might also be just an innocent bystander. It was Broadwell's string ofemails to Kelley, apparently accusing her ofhaving or seeking an affair
with Petraeus, that launched the investigation.
We know that Kelley lives in Tampa, is married, and that she and her husband
count David and Holly Petraeus among their friends. It is unclear whether she
knows Broadwell, and it appears that the menacing emails she received had been
sent anonymously.
In the end, this may be a simple story: A woman gets a series ofdisturbing
messages and asks an FBI agent she knows for help. A few months later, the
nation's chiefspy — and perhaps its greatest living military hero — comes
crashing down.
Ifyou believe in coincidences.
Ifyou don't, there has to be a foreign spymaster involved, an updated version of
John le Carre's diabolical Karla, an unseen figure manipulating these characters like puppets toward subtle and devious ends. Maybe I see the game that's being played. Maybe I know what this is all about.
But ifI told you, I'd have to kill you
The Courier-Journal, Wednesday, November 14, 2012, Forum