Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embedded

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
XTCamus
Posts: 176
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 11:59 pm UTC
Location: "...on that dizzying crest"

Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embedded

Postby XTCamus » Sun Nov 11, 2012 4:41 pm UTC

Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embedded With Him for 1 Year in Afghanistan

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/pau ... d=17689419

My only question, outside of the boring national security issues, is whether the ABC News editor wrote this headline intentionally, in which case it is merely clever, or unintentionally, in which case it is hilarious?

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Diadem » Sun Nov 11, 2012 9:04 pm UTC

Am I missing something here? This sounds like an obvious private matter. Why is this news?
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6562
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby sardia » Sun Nov 11, 2012 9:06 pm UTC

The general was an up and coming star, and if he had kept his dick in his pants, he could have made president. Affairs like this shut his career down, and was otherwise a good soldier.

User avatar
Garm
Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:29 pm UTC
Location: Usually at work. Otherwise, Longmont, CO.

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Garm » Sun Nov 11, 2012 9:09 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:Am I missing something here? This sounds like an obvious private matter. Why is this news?


He's head of the CIA. An affair is blackmail material.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
- JFK

User avatar
XTCamus
Posts: 176
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 11:59 pm UTC
Location: "...on that dizzying crest"

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby XTCamus » Sun Nov 11, 2012 9:20 pm UTC

His biographer, hmm...? Didn't we see this plot already in the film Adaptation?

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Lucrece » Mon Nov 12, 2012 9:46 am UTC

And a divorce isn't blackmail material? This is a fabricated scandal. At 50% divorce rates, you're just as gambling on state secrets by assuming he reveals information to those he sleeps with, and a spiteful ex-wife can be as damaging.

People are just angling about possible security threads in order to get pot shots at the guy for being an adulterer. Just like that ridiculous savaging of Tiger Woods that cost him so many endorsements.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

Tirian
Posts: 1891
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:03 pm UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Tirian » Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:45 pm UTC

You've got to work in that General Petraeus knows the rest of the story and we don't (yet). Think about the question that the press evidently hasn't yet: why was Paula Broadwell sending harassing emails to another woman? The punditry's chest-beatings that Petraeus should have tried to ride out the story because we hold generals to a laxer standard than every other man in public life are absurd.

User avatar
Ormurinn
Posts: 1033
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 3:42 pm UTC
Location: Suth Eoferwicscire

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Ormurinn » Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:46 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:And a divorce isn't blackmail material? This is a fabricated scandal. At 50% divorce rates, you're just as gambling on state secrets by assuming he reveals information to those he sleeps with, and a spiteful ex-wife can be as damaging.

People are just angling about possible security threads in order to get pot shots at the guy for being an adulterer. Just like that ridiculous savaging of Tiger Woods that cost him so many endorsements.
Diadem wrote:Am I missing something here? This sounds like an obvious private matter. Why is this news?


Having moral people in positions of power is an obvious positive. It follows that Immoral people in those positions should be critiscised and if necessary removed from power.

If his oath to his wife meant so little to him, why should we assume his oath to his country meant any more?
"Progress" - Technological advances masking societal decay.

kiklion
Posts: 511
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 5:02 am UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby kiklion » Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:49 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:And a divorce isn't blackmail material? This is a fabricated scandal. At 50% divorce rates, you're just as gambling on state secrets by assuming he reveals information to those he sleeps with, and a spiteful ex-wife can be as damaging.

People are just angling about possible security threads in order to get pot shots at the guy for being an adulterer. Just like that ridiculous savaging of Tiger Woods that cost him so many endorsements.


This is incorrect, people aren't gambling that he shares state secrets with those he sleeps with. They are saying that he may reveal state secrets in order to keep the affair secret.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Diadem » Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:09 pm UTC

But without any proof, that is just speculation. You might as well argue that Obama *could* be a secret Muslim extremist, so we shouldn't trust him.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:32 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:And a divorce isn't blackmail material? This is a fabricated scandal. At 50% divorce rates, you're just as gambling on state secrets by assuming he reveals information to those he sleeps with, and a spiteful ex-wife can be as damaging.


No. Divorces are public knowledge, and public knowledge makes for a really poor blackmail threat. Affairs generally have secrecy involved, and thus, make a rather more plausible blackmail threat.

It's not a matter of if he did...the point is, if you have a position of trust, you need to avoid situations where such a thing can come up.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Diadem » Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:36 pm UTC

so are you saying a general should not do anything that would be embarrassing it it became public knowledge? No affairs. But also, no kinky sex, no strong religious or other convictions, never visit Justin Bieber concerts. Is that really what you are saying?
Last edited by Diadem on Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:36 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

liveboy21
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:33 am UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby liveboy21 » Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:36 pm UTC

Is this story so hard to understand or is there more to this?

The media likes this story because it involves sex and the media is obsessed with sex. The media is obsessed with sex because sex sells, even if the sex is in the form of a scandal rather than just a picture of breasts.

Public figures are also afraid of the media getting a story involving sex because of the power and coordination it gives the people (directly or indirectly).

He could send people to die and few would care. He could murder civilians and few would care. But a story involving sexual activity? That could damage him.

A story about sex could damage Julian Assange. A story about sex could damage Bill Clinton, the former president of the United States.

That's why this story matters, because it shouldn't and because it does.

Enokh
Posts: 473
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 1:55 pm UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Enokh » Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:38 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:People are just angling about possible security threads in order to get pot shots at the guy for being an adulterer. Just like that ridiculous savaging of Tiger Woods that cost him so many endorsements.


. . .No. The three-letter agencies (really, all of the Federal agencies) take this kind of stuff VERY seriously. I had a friend who worked for a contractor for DHS as tier-1 tech support for a department that didn't really do anything special, and he had the lowest-level clearance. He missed a payment on a loan of a few thousand dollars, and was told (officially) that if he didn't pay that loan off within a few months he would lose his clearance and thus his job. They simply don't fuck around when it comes to clearance-holders have exploitable secrets. Though it might factor in, this isn't about moral superiority, it's about one of the most powerful men in the nation potentially having a marraige and career destroying secret.

And how in the hell is DIVORCE blackmail material? Getting a divorce isn't secretive. Hell, it's usually a matter of public record.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:45 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:so are you saying a general should not do anything that would be embarrassing it it became public knowledge? No affairs. But also, no kinky sex, no strong religious or other convictions, never visit Justin Bieber concerts. Is that really what you are saying?


He should avoid the type of life that would include dirty secrets a person could reasonably blackmail him for, yes. I don't care what he likes or does, provided it's in public. If he's religious, he can have fun with that, so long as it's not made a secret of.

This is pretty normal. You're told this if you ever have even the most basic of positions of trust.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10269
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Nov 12, 2012 2:23 pm UTC

If we want to take this to the logical extreme, senators and presidents have very high security clearance (if not, then they aren't in charge), so you should not be allowed to run for office if you have affairs or poor credit.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Nov 12, 2012 2:31 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:If we want to take this to the logical extreme, senators and presidents have very high security clearance (if not, then they aren't in charge), so you should not be allowed to run for office if you have affairs or poor credit.


There are some special exemptions in place for people that receive a security clearance by virtue of their position, rather than having a security clearance as a prerequisite for a position.

No, I'm not saying this is at all logical. Ideally, I would like our elected officials to be as responsible as we expect their underlings to be.

kiklion
Posts: 511
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 5:02 am UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby kiklion » Mon Nov 12, 2012 3:08 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:If we want to take this to the logical extreme, senators and presidents have very high security clearance (if not, then they aren't in charge), so you should not be allowed to run for office if you have affairs or poor credit.


There are some special exemptions in place for people that receive a security clearance by virtue of their position, rather than having a security clearance as a prerequisite for a position.

No, I'm not saying this is at all logical. Ideally, I would like our elected officials to be as responsible as we expect their underlings to be.


It is plausible that senators and presidents have security clearance to be given some information, but not to do the search itself. This would limit what they can reveal via blackmail to only items that were given to them.

More importantly, those are elected positions and are handled differently than appointed positions.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Lucrece » Tue Nov 13, 2012 8:45 am UTC

Enokh wrote:
Lucrece wrote:People are just angling about possible security threads in order to get pot shots at the guy for being an adulterer. Just like that ridiculous savaging of Tiger Woods that cost him so many endorsements.


. . .No. The three-letter agencies (really, all of the Federal agencies) take this kind of stuff VERY seriously. I had a friend who worked for a contractor for DHS as tier-1 tech support for a department that didn't really do anything special, and he had the lowest-level clearance. He missed a payment on a loan of a few thousand dollars, and was told (officially) that if he didn't pay that loan off within a few months he would lose his clearance and thus his job. They simply don't fuck around when it comes to clearance-holders have exploitable secrets. Though it might factor in, this isn't about moral superiority, it's about one of the most powerful men in the nation potentially having a marraige and career destroying secret.

And how in the hell is DIVORCE blackmail material? Getting a divorce isn't secretive. Hell, it's usually a matter of public record.



....Let's try again. What prevents a resentful ex-wife from mouthing off on state secrets her husband revealed to her for the sake of hurting his career? Or as leverage for visitation battles or alimony.

The affair is not important, because anyone he sleeps with or carries an intimate relationship with can blackmail him one way or another. States secrets are always at risk so long as someone isn't a hermit and has family and a wife/husband/kids. Any of these people are capable of leveraging their way to information just by mere social obligation.

Seriously, would this be in the news if it wasn't some racy affair? If it wasn't an affair that pisses off a party because it wasn't revealed for abuse in election time?
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

Chen
Posts: 5487
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Chen » Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:53 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:....Let's try again. What prevents a resentful ex-wife from mouthing off on state secrets her husband revealed to her for the sake of hurting his career? Or as leverage for visitation battles or alimony.

The affair is not important, because anyone he sleeps with or carries an intimate relationship with can blackmail him one way or another. States secrets are always at risk so long as someone isn't a hermit and has family and a wife/husband/kids. Any of these people are capable of leveraging their way to information just by mere social obligation.


I think the point was having a SECRET affair makes the affair itself blackmail material.

kiklion
Posts: 511
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 5:02 am UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby kiklion » Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:22 pm UTC

Chen wrote:
Lucrece wrote:....Let's try again. What prevents a resentful ex-wife from mouthing off on state secrets her husband revealed to her for the sake of hurting his career? Or as leverage for visitation battles or alimony.

The affair is not important, because anyone he sleeps with or carries an intimate relationship with can blackmail him one way or another. States secrets are always at risk so long as someone isn't a hermit and has family and a wife/husband/kids. Any of these people are capable of leveraging their way to information just by mere social obligation.


I think the point was having a SECRET affair makes the affair itself blackmail material.


This was the point. It is very easy to have a wife/kids and not tell them state secrets. It's not "Oh Honey what did you do today?" "...oh uhh ummm WE SENT AN ASSASSIN TO IRAN TO KILL THE PRESIDENT! ... >.> damnit lady stop interrogating me!"

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Diadem » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:18 pm UTC

But we all have secrets.

If you say someone who has a secret affair should be fired, what about other secrets? What about a secret habit of wearing women's clothing? A secret liking for Justin Bieber? A childhood vandalism conviction?

It seems to me that either you take the position that public figures should not be allowed to have any secrets at all, or you take the positions that each situation should be judged on its merits, in which case an affair alone should not be enough reason for being fired, without any indication that blackmail is likely.

Also, if you take the position that an affair should always lead to being fired, then you make it blackmail material, because for most people being fired is a lot worse than having an affair become public is.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:23 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:But we all have secrets.

If you say someone who has a secret affair should be fired, what about other secrets? What about a secret habit of wearing women's clothing? A secret liking for Justin Bieber? A childhood vandalism conviction?

It seems to me that either you take the position that public figures should not be allowed to have any secrets at all, or you take the positions that each situation should be judged on its merits, in which case an affair alone should not be enough reason for being fired, without any indication that blackmail is likely.

Also, if you take the position that an affair should always lead to being fired, then you make it blackmail material, because for most people being fired is a lot worse than having an affair become public is.


In terms of security, yes...any of those things *could* also be secrets. They're just much less likely to be the kind of secret that matters. And yes, if you don't think things such as an old criminal record can affect your security clearance...you're unfamiliar with the system. That would definitely be something the security people would take an interest in.

JudeMorrigan
Posts: 1254
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 1:26 pm UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby JudeMorrigan » Tue Nov 13, 2012 7:05 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:But we all have secrets.

If you say someone who has a secret affair should be fired, what about other secrets? What about a secret habit of wearing women's clothing? A secret liking for Justin Bieber? A childhood vandalism conviction?

If the concern is one's ability to hold a clearance, yes, no and not unless they tried to keep it a secret.

In the first case, the problem isn't the wearing of women's clothing, per se. The problem is that the average male American who has that sort of a secret would find it personally devastating if it came out. Yes, that says some not-great things about our society, but it's hard to reasonably argue. As such, knowledge of that secret would be a fairly significant sword to hold over the head of a cleared individual.

In the second case, the worst that would result from that sort of secret coming out is a bit of teasing. Realistically, it couldn't be used for blackmail unless the individual was unbalanced in other ways.

The third case I can actually personally attest to. It so happens that I have a childhood vandalism conviction. I also served a stint in the Navy. Back when I first joined, I listed my childhood conviction. The general reaction was one of amusement. The Navy really, really didn't care about it. But had I tried to hide it, and then had it come out, the fact that I had tried to hide it would have been evidence that I really cared about it not being divulged. In general, the security services are pretty good these days about not trying to pass moral or even legal judgement on people. (For example, the section to divulge prior drug use specifically notes that nothing that's said on the form can be used for criminal prosecution.) Adverse information is what they care about.
Last edited by JudeMorrigan on Tue Nov 13, 2012 7:15 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Nov 13, 2012 7:10 pm UTC

JudeMorrigan wrote:The third case I can actually personally attest to. It so happens that I have a childhood vandalism conviction. I also served a stint in the Navy. Back when I first joined, I listed my childhood conviction. The general reaction was one of amusement. The Navy really, really didn't care about it. But had I tried to hide it, and then had it come out, the fact that I had tried to hide it would have been evidence that I really cared about it not being divulged.


This. I also served a stint in the air force. It's not what you've done, generally(barring obviously overtly criminal/crazy behavior), it's how secretive you are about it. If you're very interested in keeping secrets from them, they feel like they can't trust you. This is...pretty reasonable and normal.

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Heisenberg » Tue Nov 13, 2012 8:29 pm UTC

Right, if Petraeus had gone through rehab for a cocaine addiction, and didn't care who knew about it, the people who managed his clearance may have decided that he could be trusted with state secrets regardless of his history. However, if Petraeus had tried to hide that addiction, and was fearful that it would damage his reputation and make him unable to say, run for office, then in that case he would almost certainly been denied clearance because he was blackmail-able by a third party.

The fact that he considered the affair shameful and kept it a secret opened him up to blackmail by a third party with knowledge of the affair, which is the issue here.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6562
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby sardia » Tue Nov 13, 2012 8:41 pm UTC

I thought it was the fact that Broadwell was talking about information that she shouldn't have known during a lecture and in her threatening emails. That's pretty damn important is shes giving out classified information as part of her lecture. It kinda implies that shes been getting classified shit out of Petraeus.

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Heisenberg » Tue Nov 13, 2012 10:41 pm UTC

And they've found classified documents on her computer. That implies Petraeus, but so far it hasn't been proven that they were his.

No, I think the more serious issue is that covering up a secret affair could get an enlisted man's clearance revoked, and this guy was the Director of the CIA.

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Malice » Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:50 am UTC

Image

quetzal1234
Posts: 107
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 10:04 pm UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby quetzal1234 » Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:28 am UTC

There's also the question of the fbi's involvement. That hint of inter-departmental rivalry might make the affair news all by itself!
WibblyWobbly wrote:If the ratio of the length of the shaft of a 4-iron to the diameter of a blackberry is 3*pi^3 + 2*pi/3 + (2*e-pi)/(2*e*pi), how does that tell me whether I should use a sand wedge or a lob wedge against an opponent holding an apricot?

User avatar
Jackpot777
Posts: 328
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:19 pm UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Jackpot777 » Wed Nov 14, 2012 8:57 pm UTC

The fascinating part of the story (for me) isn't Petraeus and Broadwell ...it's the story coming out about the Tampa socialite / MILF Jill Kelley.

Sorry to reduce a woman to such sexual terms. But to be fair: she is a Mama I'd Like to...

Image

(cough) Sorry. As I was saying...

She's the woman that notified the FBI of the emails that started it all. Since then, we've learned that the American commander in Afghanistan (Gen. John Allen) is facing an internal investigation for "inappropriate communications" with her, engaged in much more than "flirtatious" behavior, with one official even likening the email exchanges to "phone sex."

Now the Huffington Post has a story that Kelley and her husband (a doctor) started and bankrupt a charity "to grant wishes to terminally ill adult cancer patients" ...but this didn't happen. What DID happen is that the beginning balance of $157,284 was close to the amount that had been spent when it went bankrupt. Expenditures were listed as $43,317 for meals and entertainment, $38,610 for travel, $25,013 for legal fees, $8,882 for automotive expenses, and $12,800 for office supplies.

The doctor husband is on the left of this picture...

Image

...and that's why this part of the story is fascinating me more than the main event. When a '9' marries a '2', people assume it's for money. To use an example our British friends would know: when Mrs. Merton asked Debbie McGee of her relationship with her very short and balding husband, "so what first attracted you to the millionaire Paul Daniels?". It looks like Scott Kelley got to be the '2' to a '9', and now gets to jettison his wife without losing a cent (I'll put money on their being a lawyer's involvement there as I type).

I'm such a gossip! But that's the part that fascinates me. The whole soap opera of it all.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Paula Broadwell, David Petraeus' Alleged Mistress, Embed

Postby Lucrece » Thu Nov 15, 2012 6:10 am UTC

My favorite part was her "inviolability" quote.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: speising and 15 guests