Petraeus scandal--who cares?

[FlyByNight512]

@Cheesesteak

Sure, he could more wisely choose his mistress, but what’s the fun in having a safe mistress?

I’m gonna go ahead and expect the head of the CIA to prioritize national security over his boner. Especially when he knows damn well that there are Reasons (good or bad) that he’s expected not to do these things.

[squeegee]

@Yllaria

I missed the fake cancer charity. But then I’m getting all my information here, so I’m not surprised.

Did you notice that you got that information here? :dubious:

[squeegee]

@RTFirefly

I don’t ‘care’ so much as I find the whole thing quite amusing.

The good part is that it doesn’t really matter; nobody’s going to lose their home or their health insurance because Petraeus was getting some extracurricular nookie, or because a besotted wingnut FBI agent decided that some faintly threatening emails to the woman he had the hots for needed to be brought to the attention of the House Majority Leader because Obama and Benghazi or something.

ETA: But some less-than-flattering things about Petraeus’ professional conduct have come to light as a result of this. Since he’s already resigned, once again, it doesn’t matter, but it seems that unauthorized sexytime was what he could lose his job over, instead of the stuff he perhaps *should *have lost his job over.

Yeah, that sums it up pretty well for me. It’s just a crazy story that you’d never, ever believe about the people involved. Huge WTF.

[lindsaybluth]

@Sailboat

To clarify, Petraeus wasn’t running a war, he was running the CIA (while letting a secret spiral out of control); it’s John Allen who was running the war in Afghanistan while writing 41 inappropriate e-mails per day; it’s Petraeus’ biographer who threatened the Miami socialite and the Miami socialite who…oh never mind.

In all seriousness, could you finish this paragraph? I genuinely have not been able to piece all of it together, and your above graph did an excellent job.

[brad_d]

@Hari_Seldon

But I’ll bet (maybe someone knows) that you still cannot get a clearance if you are openly gay.

Maybe it once was the case, but it certainly is not today. I know more than one openly gay individual (legally married, even) with an active Top Secret clearance.

[Johanna]

@brad_d

Maybe it once was the case, but it certainly is not today. I know more than one openly gay individual (legally married, even) with an active Top Secret clearance.

Out gay people have been getting clearances since President Clinton’s 1995 executive order. It is not an issue. Different story for trans people, who are not officially banned from having clearances, but there is no institutional check on transphobic actions.

[AK84]

@Johanna

Out gay people have been getting clearances since President Clinton’s 1995 executive order. It is not an issue. Different story for trans people, who are not officially banned from having clearances, but there is no institutional check on transphobic actions.

One would have thought closeted gays would be more of a potential security brisk than out gays?

[ladyfoxfyre]

There’s a difference between lying about something publicly and lying about something to your clearance investigator when you are asked about it. The former is okay. The latter is not.

[Clothahump]

@Inner_Stickler

I would love to sacrifice a kitten but no one has yet explained to me what the gate part of benghazigate is.

After Watergate, every major scandal seems to get tagged with a -gate suffix.

[Clothahump]

@Clothahump

Well, the Obama administration and the mainstream media care. They’re probably sacrificing kittens in thanks for it happening, because now they can divert away from BenghaziGate, Fast and Furious, etc.

@Marley23

Yes, you’ll never hear about that again except for the likely confirmation hearings for Secretary of State Rice or any time a Republican is on a talk show and gets asked about Obama’s foreign policy. Or every time any right winger gets bored or sad.

It has nothing to do with right wing, left wing, center wing or one wing low. It has everything to do with criminal malfeasance by the President which led to the deaths of four Americans.

But who cares about meaningless stuff like that, right? After all, Obama won and that’s all that matters; fuck the dead people, they probably wouldn’t have voted for him anyway.

[Johanna]

@AK84

One would have thought closeted gays would be more of a potential security brisk than out gays?

They didn’t distinguish the two in the old days. Almost everybody gay was closeted anyway and the spooks invested untold time and taxpayer expense to root out the queers. Bill Clinton finally put an end to that idiocy so that people can just be normally out.

[Lord_Feldon]

@Clothahump

It has nothing to do with right wing, left wing, center wing or one wing low. It has everything to do with criminal malfeasance by the President which led to the deaths of four Americans.

Maybe you’ll convince more people if you videotape yourself shooting a pumpkin in your back yard.