The Real Petraeus Scandal: the CIA's Secret Killer Drones

We've turned local police forces - the ones we created "to serve and protect" into militarized brutes that view citizens as terrorists-until-proven-otherwise, so why not hand over to our supposed spy agency all the murderous dirty work we don't want citizens finding out about?  Our citizens, that is; foreign citizens get to see it up close and personally.

 

Kevin Drum:

Robert Wright, in an obvious effort to use Petraeusgate to draw attention to a boring subject that has nothing to do with sex, says the real scandal here isn't Petraeus leaving the CIA, it's the fact the he arrived there in the first place:

When, in the fall of 2011, David Petraeus moved from commanding the Afghanistan war effort to commanding the CIA, it was a disturbingly natural transition. I say "natural" because the CIA conducts drone strikes in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region and is involved in other military operations there, so Petraeus, in his new role, was continuing to fight the Afghanistan war. I say "disturbingly" because this overlap of Pentagon and CIA missions is the result of a creeping militarization of the CIA that may be undermining America's national security.

The militarization of the CIA raises various questions. For example, if the CIA is psychologically invested in a particular form of warfare—and derives part of its budget from that kind of warfare—can it be trusted to impartially assess the consequences, both positive and negative, direct and indirect?

And then there's the transparency question. [A piece in the Washington Post] noted concerns among some activists that "the CIA now functions as a military force beyond the accountability that the United States has historically demanded of its armed services. The CIA doesn't officially acknowledge the drone program, let alone provide public explanation about who shoots and who dies, and by what rules." Indeed, only a few months ago, in compliance with the War Powers Resolution, the Obama administration reported (vaguely) on targeted killings in Somalia and Yemen that had been conducted by the military, but not on those conducted by the CIA.

....The circumstances of Petraeus's departure from the CIA are a little alarming; you'd rather your chief spy not be reckless. But the circumstances of his arrival at the CIA a year ago were more troubling. Yet no alarm was sounded that was anywhere near as loud as the hubbub surrounding Petraeus now. That's scandalous.

As near as I can tell, drone warfare was largely handed over to the CIA precisely in order to avoid normal military accountability. That really is scandalous, but it attracted only fleeting notice. It's probably too much to hope that the Petraeus scandal will cause anyone to rethink this, but rethink it we should. Wright has more at the link.

I don't give a flying fuck what Petraeus fucks. I care a very great deal who he orders killed. Shame on our pathetic excuse for national media that I get far too much information about the former, and next to none about the latter.

It's Not the Hypocrisy, It's the Sex

If I've said it once, I've said it a hundred times: repugs don't respond to accusations of hypocrisy because the freakazoids don't consider hypocrisy a sin. In fact, there's nothing they love better than a contrite sinner. The more outrageous the sin, the more forgiveness and acceptance the sinner receives.

Paul Krugman nailed it, in a blog post perfectly titled "Sex and the Married Politician."

From their point of view the cause, the need to police what people do in bed, is, by definition, right, because it’s literally God-given. So the fact that some of those trying to police what other people do in bed are themselves doing nasty things does not reflect on the cause itself — on the contrary, it shows just how necessary more bed-snooping is.

It’s also notable that conservatives are, in practice, more forgiving of their politicians’ sins than liberals. John Edwards and Eliot Spitzer ended their political careers; Ensign and Vitter are still in the Senate, and Newt Gingrich is out there on the Sunday shows, speaking for the GOP. Why? Because where liberals see gross hypocrisy, conservatives see men doing the Lord’s work — which partially excuses their own failings. Liberals think that a man who has an affair is worse if he preaches moral values; conservatives think he’s better. You might say that as they see it, if he interferes with what enough other people do in bed, it doesn’t matter what he does himself.

Read the whole thing.

Sanford-freude

You know you want it. And you know you want me to give it to you.

First, the quote, given of his own free will, on the record, out loud, to the Associated freakin' Press:

Sanford said Chapur is his soul mate but he's trying to fall back in love with his wife.

Yeah, nothing charms a wronged wife like announcing you're going to make the supreme sacrifice of struggling mightily to give a shit about her again.

It's the line about "never crossing the ultimate line with anyone but Chapur" that really intrigues me.

I mean, different people draw the "ultimate line" in different places. Is Sanford like abstinence-pledging teens, who keep their promise by indulging in oral sex? Or is he more like the legendary Greek girls who stay virgins until marriage by leaving the back door open? Or maybe he agress with one friend I had in college who fucked every guy on campus but claimed to be still a virgin because she'd never had an orgasm.

"Ultimate line." What a maroon.

But wait - there's more! Apparently South Carolina Lt. Governor Andre Brauer gave an interview in which he denies rumors that he is gay - without anyone asking about said supposed rumors.

OK, South Carolina, which do you want for governor? A pathetic whiner who has the sexual sophistication of a 12-year-old, or a "confirmed bachelor" so insecure about his sexuality he starts rumors about it so he can deny them?

One more thing:

Under South Carolina law, adultery is a crime, punishable by a $500 fine and a year in jail. SC law enforcement says they don't have time to fool with that shit, but fercryinoutloud, the perp confessed live on national TV! Why hasn't Mark Sanford been arrested?

And no, that fucker is NOT going to resign. The arrogance, the self-centeredness, the utter disregard for his children, the inability to grasp the irresponsibility of abandoning his duties as governor - no, they're going to have to drag him out of the governor's mansion screaming and kicking.

For comprehensive Sanford coverage, especially on the actual issue here, which is malfeasance in office, bookmark The State newspaper in South Carolina.

For the low-down on the dirty-dirty, of course it's Wonkette.

Quote of the Day

Wonkette commenter saralovesyou:

Sanford is destroying the sanctity of my gay marriage.

Sex/Money/Ethics Scandal Dooms One-Week-Old Beshear Administration

New Democratic Governor of Kentucky Steve Beshear is about to break criminal former governor Ernie Fletcher's record for Shortest Time Between Inauguration and Stupid Scandal That Dooms Administration.

Took Ernie 17 months to start the lying and stonewalling about illegal behavior by underlings; Steve Beshear took the first step down that road today - Day 7 of his administration.

Gov. Steve Beshear will let the state Personnel Board handle questions surrounding two hiring-related moves of former State Treasurer Jonathan Miller, Beshear's spokeswoman said today.

"There is no action necessary on behalf of the Governor,” spokeswoman Vicki Glass said in a statement.

Meanwhile, Beshear has appointed one of the employees involved in the potential inquiry to a position in the Justice and Public Safety Cabinet.

Rebecca Brooke Parker, who most recently served as Miller's deputy treasurer, is being appointed executive director of inter-governmental affairs at the request of Justice Secretary J. Michael Brown, Glass said.

On Saturday, the Lexington Herald-Leader reported that Miller -- Beshear's recently named Finance and Administration Cabinet secretary -- must clean up several mistakes his treasury office made in the hiring of a state merit worker and the awarding of raises to at least one of his aides.

Beshear, who campaigned on a platform of ethics reform, pledged in his inaugural address last week that all of his top appointees would receive training in state hiring laws and ethics laws.

"We need to get our own house in order before we can be trusted to do the people's business," Beshear said in his speech.

At issue with Miller are the October 2006 hiring of merit employee Michael Bates, who works in the treasury's printing department, and two salary increases in 2004 to Parker.

In Parker's case, (outgoing Personnel Cabinet Secretary Brian Crall) questioned two salary increases, amounting to a total of $566.92 a month, awarded in June 2004.

Overall, Parker saw her salary rise from $21,000 a year when Miller hired her out of college as a secretary in 2000 to $78,981 a year this year as deputy state treasurer.

Miller denied any suggestion that he gave Parker undue favorable treatment but said he has relied on her input regarding "personal business" matters such as future job opportunities.

For instance, Parker accompanied Miller on a trip to Las Vegas between May 14 and 17, just after Miller dropped out of the Democratic primary for governor.
"We had business meetings," he said. "On trips where I'm trying to look to my future and to develop my future business contacts, yeah, she would have been involved in that kind of activity."

Page One was the first to note that the HL's initial piece on this Saturday stopped just short of saying outright that Parker and Miller were having an affair.

The rumor of Jonathan Miller’s alleged affair has been swirling around Kentucky for months. It’s been such common knowledge that it’s no longer exciting gossip in political circles. So why are we beating around the bush by merely discussing his strange-as-hell trip to Las Vegas with Brooke Parker? Someone should just ask the questions.

Has Jonathan– Mr. Ten Commandments– been cheating on his wife (with whom he has two young children) with his Deputy? Did he abuse his power when providing a 380% raise for his alleged mistress? Did he do all of this while parading around as a man of such high morality that he could publish a book about it?

We don’t personally care if he’s a cheat. It’s up to him if he wants to do something disgusting and morally bankrupt. But Miller needs to come clean with the public if he expects to ever be taken seriously. Especially if he misused his office or position while galavanting around the country.

If he did abuse his power, should he be serving as a cabinet secretary? Of course not. So if he’s done something wrong it’s time to tell the Commonwealth. Because it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to determine that the Herald-Leader is moments away from tightening its vice grip. Moments away from embarrassing our new administration.

Miller needs to understand that no one cares if he’s having an affair. We only care if he’s abused his office to benefit his alleged mistress. It’s nothing personal.

Amen. But this isn't about Miller's utter lack of personal, professional, political and governomental ethics.

This is about Governor Steve Beshear's inability to deal swiftly and decisively with a subordinate who has probably broken the law.

Particularly six weeks after Beshear upset an incumbent repug who specialized in thumbing his nose at state hiring laws, this is beyond disappointing.

Fire Miller, Governor. Fire Parker. Do it now.

Cross-posted at BlueGrassRoots.