Nothing titillates the nation’s capital like a sex scandal masquerading as a policy controversy. The American news media will use any excuse to get into public officials’ private lives so it can try to achieve the ratings of Entertainment Tonight-style celebrity gossip shows while maintaining a veneer of “responsible journalism.” In America’s unique celebrity-driven culture, this phenomenon happens in political campaigns as well as the current scandal involving David Petraeus, the recently cashiered CIA spy chief.
However, the thin national security implications of this scandal have put the American media out on a limb. In the Petraeus case, the compromise of secrets does not seem to have been an issue, and no laws seem to have been broken (in the case of Gen. John Allen, the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, adultery can be a crime in the tradition-oriented military, even in this day in age). So the sensationalist American media risks looking as if it’s just digging for, well … details of top U.S. officials’ sexual relationships — the ultimate in gotcha political journalism.
The U.S. media badly needs some political cover to continue getting to the bottom of this scintillating story. Here’s an angle that might actually help the country. The real scandal doesn’t involve sex, spy agencies, or the U.S. military; it involves the FBI’s role and its potential violation of the civil liberties of those officials and people targeted in the investigation.
The FBI seemingly opened an investigation into the cybercrime of threatening emails when Jill Kelley, a friend of David Petraeus, showed emails she received from Paula Broadwell, the alleged paramour of Petraeus, to a friend who was an FBI agent. Such access. The ultimate gumshoe investigation — at great government expense and opportunity cost in investigating real cyber threats in an age of cyberterrorism — apparently uncovered only harassing emails in perhaps a romantic rivalry, a tawdry private extramarital affair that was none of the government’s business, and no breach of security. The FBI should have dropped the matter long ago.
One can’t help but wonder if the FBI, which has a mutual historical hatred of the CIA, didn’t continue the investigation and leak it to take down the CIA’s leader and his theretofore golden-boy reputation.
Yet David Petraeus is now out of a job and has his career at least damaged; Gen. Allen is now being investigated by the Department of Defense’s inspector general for “inappropriate communication” with Kelley after the FBI turned over a treasure trove of tens of thousands of pages of emails through which it snooped. Allen’s promotion to supreme allied commander of NATO forces is on hold while the sifting of perhaps steamy emails continues.
Rather than spending taxpayer dollars on further investigation of such merely personal matters, maybe our federal snooping agencies should focus their efforts on real national security investigations.
The American media will probably not focus on this mundane federal abuse of privacy and civil liberties when there are potentially salacious details in the air. After all, some of the actual emails may eventually be aired, sending ratings soaring. Of course, in a free society with commercial media, the media is only catering to what the American people want — unfortunately many times, juicy sex scandals and episodes where celebrities and the mighty have fallen.
But despite trends toward democratization, we still have a republic with representative government, and the people’s representatives should be concerned with people’s civil liberties and the FBI’s possible violation of privacy in this case. The congressional intelligence committees should also be concerned that they weren’t notified early on about the FBI investigation of the CIA director. Maybe they could have monitored the investigation and closed it down earlier. That’s what checks and balances in constitutional government are supposed to do. Congress can still thoroughly investigate the FBI’s handling of this unseemly matter. And by the way, while at it, Congress should also abolish the crime of adultery in the military. As in the civilian sector, it may be a moral issue but should not be a crime or even a reason to fire someone, unless it directly affects a supervisor-employee relationship.
Read more by Ivan Eland
- Should the Law Governing the War on Terror Be Changed? – May 21st, 2013
- Benghazi: Who Cares? – May 14th, 2013
- Political Decentralization Might Help in Conflict-Ridden Countries – May 7th, 2013
- Avoid Drumbeat to Escalate in Syria – April 30th, 2013
- Government Response to Terrorism Needs to Be Dialed Down – April 23rd, 2013





nomangepas
November 13th, 2012 at 11:40 pm
The civil liberties issues are critical, yet I wouldn't be surprised if there were such blowback from the present investigations that it would be used to discourage investigations that should be conducted, e.g., of AIPAC and related lobbying groups, theft of nuclear material and technology, espionage by Israel, Turkey and other "friendly" governments, etc.
The Real Petraeus Scandal - Unofficial Network
November 14th, 2012 at 12:40 am
[...] View original article. This entry was posted in World News by admin. Bookmark the permalink. [...]
Of Plans, Policy, Public Perceptions and I « elcidharth
November 14th, 2012 at 2:31 am
[...] The Real Petraeus Scandal [...]
The Real Petraeus Scandal by Ivan Eland — Antiwar.com | Celebrity Scandal Online
November 14th, 2012 at 2:56 am
[...] of Entertainment Tonight-style celebrity gossip shows … … See the article here: The Real Petraeus Scandal by Ivan Eland — Antiwar.com ← Stars Impress for "DWTS" Veterans Day Episode | GossipCenter [...]
US Foreign Policy, Oops, Fallacy and I | My Sister Eileen
November 14th, 2012 at 3:13 am
[...] Palace RevolutionWho’s next? asks Justin RaimondoThe Real Petraeus ScandalIt’s not an affair, says Ivan ElandOf Backward Nations and Modern [...]
Joe
November 14th, 2012 at 5:59 am
When you decide to work for the federal government and ask for a top secret security clearance, you can expect that the most insignificant minutia of your private will be probed. An extramarital affair can, and had in the past, expose the person to blackmail and reveal damaging state secrets, which can put people's lives in danger. Definitely not a good thing.
These rules are enforced to all, pretty much. If you don't want anybody to butt in your business, you may become self-employed. Even McDonald's will test you for drug use and check your credit report.
The fact that these generals, these leaders of men, were preaching one thing to their subordinates (and indeed, punishing them severely for their trespasses) and doing the very opposite, shows how hypocritical these officers are, and how drunk with power they have become, to the point that they see themselves as untouchable gods. It's time to take them down a notch or two.
» The Real Petraeus Scandal
November 14th, 2012 at 8:40 am
[...] In America’s unique celebrity-driven culture, [...] The Real Petraeus Scandal Click to Read More… Related Posts:Congress to investigate whether Petraeus scandal was a political cover-upPetraeus and [...]
Kratoklastes
November 14th, 2012 at 1:29 pm
Nobody seems to be AMAZED that the e-mail interaction between Kelley and Allen ran to **tens of thousands of pages**. Either there were some big-ass attachments (which in and of itself would be interesting), or Allen was spending way too much time NOT 'generalling'.
I've also read that Betrayus sent something of the order of 2000 e-mails to Mrs Broadwell (née Kranz).
I notice that regarding the Betrayus/Kranz exchanges, mainswamp journalists covering this have laid the groundwork for Betrayus, indicating that someone somewhere investigated the notion that Kranz/Broadwell had hacked Betrayus' gMail and sent saucy messages **to herself**.
In other words, America's Rommel is going to try to use the now-ubiquitous shreik of the Twitterati: "I never sent that! Someone musta hacked by account!". Sun Tzu would be mortified, but P.T. Barnum would 'get it': never underestimate the ability of the masses to believe what they're told (how do you think Popes got palaces, yo?).
Kratoklastes
November 14th, 2012 at 1:35 pm
Let's just say that if Jane Harman gets in at CIA, AIPAC investigations will sinmply not happen (it's bad enough with Mueller at FBI, ffs).
wars r u.s.
November 14th, 2012 at 2:28 pm
Funny how I don't give a s**t if king david's civil liberties were trampled. Maybe its Karma.
wthePoster
November 14th, 2012 at 4:09 pm
'tens of thousands of pages of emails"? Guys, at ten pages a day, that's a minimum of six years at hard labor, writin' away. Something wrong with this data.
Tim
November 14th, 2012 at 5:12 pm
Apparently at Langley you can foment civil wars, bomb civilians, hire assassins, kidnap and torture, stage coups, and raise hell around the globe but you can't screw your biographer. It's just not cricket.
MoT
November 14th, 2012 at 6:51 pm
I believe Ross Perot said he'd not hire a man who cheated on his wife because, in his mind, if he'd be unfaithful to his spouse he sure as hell couldn't be trusted with company secrets. So why should any sumbitch in government, especially in DC, be given a pass? They're compromised and thus unworthy of trust. I'd say the same of anyone up to and including da Prez. That they'd rake underlings over the coals for something they feel they're above does go to prove what hypocritical swine they are.
david
November 14th, 2012 at 7:28 pm
All I know is that DAVID PETRAEUS WENT AHEAD AND PUT HIS PENIS IN THERE. So if we're going to be gabbing endlessly about Broadwell's and Kelley's soiled virtue, we should be talking about Petraeus's too.
musings
November 14th, 2012 at 9:35 pm
I suppose you could say that Clinton also had his civil right to fool around in the Oval Office interfered with when Luciane Goldberg, a federal employee, pursued the Monica story by getting Linda Tripp to record their conversations. On her own, Monica seems to have kept a dress from going to the dry cleaners and then allowed it to be used as evidence.
Bottom line, when you have a dalliance like Clinton did, there is no telling who will turn it into something, perhaps with the connivance of the girlfriend. After all, love can turn to hate so easily when something isn't going in the direction of all your hopes and dreams.
With or without the FBI, Paula Broadwell seemed to have begun to distrust Petraeus' love and started striking out.
The standards we hold powerful men to are very high. And they always have rivals who want their jobs. No matter how much the FBI would have probed his life, if he didn't have an adulterous affair, he could not have been hurt. But he's lying too. It didn't start after he'd left the military. Anyone can see it happened while he was still serving. And interestingly enough, Broadwell's lashing out at a woman who entertained military officers makes it pretty clear they had some history from when Petraeus was in uniform. Didn't Broadwell and Petraeus go to Paris together then? Sounds like he didn't care if foreign nations could pin something on him. So much for being protected by American civil rights.
Sorry, I have to unpack my luggage. Wait what's this? TSA has been searching through my dirty underwear. I don't have an ounce of sympathy for Caesar and Cleopatra today. Sorry.
musings
November 14th, 2012 at 9:35 pm
Sorry – I mean that Linda Tripp was a federal employee, not Luciane Goldberg
BIN SAFI
November 14th, 2012 at 10:12 pm
The Infidelity of this retired General, Pales in Comparison to his Utter Failure in Iraq & Afghanistan!
This Much-Ballyhooed Hero, is a FAKE!!
Forcing him to RESIGN his Post at the CIA, Seems like a Victory for the FBI!!!
The ONLY Question is: Who's going to Investigate & Question the DOJ & FBI!!!!
Peace, Love & Respect,
» Antiwar.com Newsletter | November 16, 2012
November 17th, 2012 at 9:14 am
[...] Ivan Eland argued that the real Petraeus scandal isn’t infidelity. [...]
The Real Petraeus Scandal | News
February 11th, 2013 at 10:52 am
[...] Read More: Anti War [...]