I think the one thing we can agree on about the Petraeus scandal is that it’s hilarious: anonymous Gmail address, FBI agent who sent shirtless photos of himself to Jill Kelley, whom Paula Broadwell apparently sent threatening e-mails to (which started the FBI investigation), and Gen. John Allen apparently sending tens of thousands of dodgy emails to Kelley.
Of course, there is all the double entendre now swept up in Broadwell and her book, but methinks a TV station should probably do a double check when grabbing the cover of All In off the interwebs. (Video here.)
the downfall of a general, but for entirely the wrong reasons?
That’s kind of what Michael Hastings is implying at BuzzFeed — kind of would be putting it kindly, as Hastings’ last major piece meant the end of Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s career — and in the wake of a couple days of profiles and writing where Petraeus is lionized once again and Paula Broadwell gets slammed in ways that are way beyond the pale by people looking to protect themselves or their associations with the general, it’s worth asking the questions, both about Petraeus and journalists who lose the plot and become embedded.
I swear, resigning one’s post as CIA director because you had an affair with your biographer just five days after she wrote this piece for Newsweek about your “rules for living” that is now riddled with unintentional comedy and double entendre that it probably puts the entire staff of The Onion in a headlock and makes them cry Uncle. I mean, how can “Stay fit to fight. Your body is your ultimate weapons system. Physical fitness for your body is essential for mental fitness” be anything other than a great joke now?