Conspiracy or coincidence? In the event of any controversial happening, it is likely that you will find yourself on one of these two sides of the spectrum. As General David Petraeus steps down as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency following the attack on the embassy in Benghazi, many question the motives behind it that seem to be the elephant in the room that is weighing on many people’s minds.
In an article on ABC News, Sarah Parnass writes about the unraveling story behind the Petraeus affair and the FBI. Many questions are raised, including why the FBI was spying on the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and why the Director of an incredibly powerful federal agency is resigning over a non-criminal act?
The mainstream explanation for General Petraeus’s resignation is that he had an extramarital affair with his publicist and that this affair was grounds for resignation. Judge Andrew Napolitano, a former Superior Court judge in New Jersey, does not buy it though. He wrote in an op-ed for the Washington Times that a consensual adult extramarital affair is not grounds for resignation:
“In the modern era, office-holders with forgiving spouses simply do not resign from powerful jobs because of a temporary, non-criminal, consensual adult sexual liaison, as the history of the FDR, Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ and Clinton presidencies attest. So, why is Gen. Petraeus different? Someone wants to silence him.”
A more compelling explanation—one that Sarah Parnass suggests conservative circles have been theorizing—is that the Obama Administration is attempting to coerce Petraeus into silence after the Administration misled the American people regarding the attack on the Embassy in Benghazi.
What the truth is, we cannot know at this time. But with the live committee hearing on the attack in Benghazi, it is apparent that the press, the House, and the American people will soon get to the bottom of it.