OK, maybe it's just me:

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

But why is it that sleeping with a woman he's not married to is all it takes to get a CIA director out of office? I mean it seems a rather underwhelming offense given how many people who retain their positions in office *coughDavidVittercough* happen to have done much worse things and retain their position and shamelessly keep doing the same kind of foolishness they got in trouble for beforehand. In today's America where the self-appointed defenders of traditional marriage cheat on their cancer-stricken wives to establish the bases for their third marriages and where sexual mores have changed for the better, how is this is at all a cause to dismiss anyone or for anyone to resign?

Sure, it might be bad 'if they talk' but then again, people like J. Edgar Hoover got away with much more than this. I really don't know what to make of Petraeus's resignation, so I'm basically asking you guys:

If someone in that position is boinking someone who's not his wife, should that alone be enough to lead to his resignation? (I admit to gendered bias in the question here but there aren't too many female politicians involved in sex scandals yet so that can be excused). I don't think it should be and I find the whole reaction to have more to do with puritanical pseudo-moralism than anything inherent in the offense. What do you think?

Comments

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

He's no longer vulnerable to blackmail, everyone knows.

Couldn't any misdeed could make you vulnerable to blackmail.

So, any infidelity nullifies security clearance?

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

There is that, but as politikitty pointed out above ...You're already giving her access that walks right up to that line of keeping your countries secrets. Sleeping with her just brings up all sorts of questions that you'd rather be on a classified dossier between agencies rather than the front page of the New York Times.

As for infidelity, I suppose it depends on the infidelity.

Anyone who is up for, or getting thier clearance renewed gets investigated by the FBI, it's up to the principal investigator to make the "Vulnerability to blackmail" call. Hell I know that when I first got mine, an agent went around interviewing half my former co-workers, high-school aquaintances and even my ex-girlfriend. Whatever he got from them couldn't have been all rainbows and unicorns (I was a bit of a delinquent in my younger years) yet my clearance was eventually approved.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

yet my clearance was eventually approved.

As was Bradley's.

I got access into Travis AFB to work on code after a security check. I wonder how high is the bar actually is? Depends on the clearance I expect.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

I've heard that the bar is higher for renewal than it is for getting your initial (youthful indiscretions and so on) but you're right, it does make one wonder.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

And then, if someone does have a questionable history, is the right approach to deny clearance, or to grant access and observe and bait?

Hmm.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Well, I guess we'll just have to continually weed out everyone who does it.

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

Wouldn't it then be giving a green light to everyone else at the agency, including him with a second affair?

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Sure. How often do you think it happens?

And who gives the green light or red light if not the penis placement police?

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

With a green light, probably more often, and blackmailers would find out more often as well.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Without the cultural stigmata, how would the blackmailer hold any sway?

We do this to ourselves. Penis placement is very important stuff.

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

Without the cultural stigmata, how would the blackmailer hold any sway?

He might not want his wife and kids finding out.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Yes. That is valid point.

Too late for him now I guess.