Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Petraeus v Obama [View all]hootinholler
(26,449 posts)31. Was appointing the general to head the CIA a matter of keeping you enemies close?
I can't imagine that he would be providing complete intelligence or perhaps, unskewed is a better term than complete.
There is so much of the iceberg that is undefinable to us mortals, only dark waters to gaze upon and the occasional shadow barely perceptible.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
41 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
sounds like obama did a lousy job of vetting Petraeus. everybody knew he was a whore but obama lol n
msongs
Nov 2012
#3
Was appointing the general to head the CIA a matter of keeping you enemies close?
hootinholler
Nov 2012
#31
I've been curious about how the Benghazi story has been developing due to the Republicans' bizarre
pacalo
Nov 2012
#10
I think the resignation over the emails is a ruse. I dont believe that the Gen
rhett o rick
Nov 2012
#11
Woodward's role in the Administration may have been very important according to some reports...
AntiFascist
Nov 2012
#22
If Pres Obama won't even prosecuted openly admitted war criminals, why should Petraeus
AnotherMcIntosh
Nov 2012
#17
Petraeus = 1st U.S. General to be called an 'ass-kissing little chickenshit' by
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#41