But why was Kelley sucking up to Petraeus of she was not a romantic interest? And why are there also emails indicating that she was chasing General John R. Allen? (Kelley is a married name; she is Lebanese-American.)
The NY Post reports
Both Gen. David Petraeus and Gen. John Allen intervened in the same nasty child custody battle involving Natalie Khawam, the “psychologically unstable” twin sister of Jill Kelley, whose bombshell claims of being threatened by Petraeus' lover led to the top spy’s resignation last week, the Post has learned.Wow. This is more evidence that the family court is at the root of all evil.
Allen, the four-star general top commander in Afghanistan, was revealed last night to have exchanged thousands of pages of of emails with Kelley, who went to the feds after receiving threatening e-mails from Paula Broadwell, the married mistress of Petraeus.
A judge noted in the file that Khawam "has attached letters from Gen. David H. Petraeus averring to her ability to appropriately parent the child, and is prepared to present corroborating testimony at trial."
And in court documents filed by Kelley's sister Natalie Khawam, she name-drops both Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island -- who both have ties to a Providence, RI, lawyer/Democratic fundraiser who loaned a whopping $300,000 to Khawam. ...
The generals' letters to the court — written in the past two months — supported a motion to overturn a ruling made nearly a year earlier by a judge who resoundingly denied custody to Khawam, because of serious reservations about her honesty and mental stability, court records show.
The father, Grayson Wolfe, was unable to see the child for more than a year, according to court documents. The judge overseeing the case cited Khawam with “outrageous conduct,” “bad faith litigation tactics,” and “illogical thinking,” awarding full custody to the father and socking the mom with $350,000 in legal fees in 2011.
The judge gave Wolfe sole custody of the couple’s son after finding that Khawam, a lawyer, repeatedly lied under oath and filed bogus domestic-violence and child-abuse claims against her husband after their one-year marriage began crumbling in 2009.
That judge also found that Khawam routinely defied court orders to let the child see his dad and sent harassing e-mails to Wolfe’s friends and business partners that “excoriated Mr. Wolfe for being a horrible father and husband.”
The judge blasted Khawam for giving false evidence, and noted that a court-ordered shrink had found her domestic-violence allegations to be “part of an ever-expanding set of sensational accusations ... that are so numerous, so extraordinary and [so] distorted that they defy any common-sense view of reality.”
The judge also noted that she “is a psychologically unstable person.”
A crazy lawyer mom thinks that she can lie and make vindictive accusations to win child custody in family court. She refuses visitation. Her behavior is so outrageous that the judge calls her on it. She gets her twin sister to try to seduce some generals so that they will write character letters to the court. The FBI discovers all this months ago, but the Obama administration holds it up until after the election.
If I had my way, all parents would share 50-50 joint child custody and the family court would never even hear the sort of evidence mentioned above. But that's just my opinion. Everyone else thinks judges should micromanage peoples' lives, based on whatever dirt these crazy women dig up. It is going to be fun watching this scandal unfold.
14 comments:
How are you certain that the Obama administration held anything up ?
It has been widely reported that this FBI investigation began several months ago. I am pretty sure that no action would be taken on a scandal this big without the approval of Holder and Obama. Administration action was held up until after the election. You did not read this story a couple of months ago.
Clarification: The NY Times claims that the FBI and DoJ kept the White House in the dark. If you believe that, then the FBI and DoJ covered it up until after the election, without Obama's knowledge. Either way, the administration covered it up.
If the DOJ and then the FBI covered it up until after the election, how does that equal the administration covering it up ?
I couldn't find the N.Y. times article you cite. Do you have a link ? Thanks.
The "administration" means the govt agencies under the President. The DoJ and FBI are such agencies, and they take their orders from the President. Yes, they are part of the administration. I got the NY Times claim from this Buchanan column.
So, you mean to say that the president gave the FBI and DOJ orders to keep him in the dark about something that the president knew nothing about in the first place ? How can that be ?
"Clarification: The NY Times claims that the FBI and DoJ kept the White House in the dark."
Here's a clarification...The N.Y. Times never claimed that the FBI and DOJ kept the White House in the dark. You and Buchanan did that.
I personally believe that it is extremely likely that the FBI and DoJ briefed Obama on this scandal a couple of months ago, and that Obama ordered them to keep quiet until the post-election housecleaning. My guess is that Obama wanted to get rid of Petraeus anyway. However, I like to give my readers the facts, so I am telling you of the report that the White House was kept in the dark. You can believe whatever you want.
What you personally believe is "extremely likely" is not fact. What is your "guess" is not fact. I can believe what I want, and I don't believe that what you like to give your readers is the facts.
BTW..do you have a link to the N.Y. Times article that you cited ? The one that confirms the fact that the NY Times claims that the FBI and DoJ kept the White House in the dark.
If you have any contrary info, then go ahead and post it. I posted the only link I have to a claim that is contrary to what I believe.
You're not posting facts.
On Sunday's NBC TV Meet The Press, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee said that the DoJ did not formally notify the White House about Petraeus, but said that it is possible that the attorney general notified Obama before the election. Yes, I post the facts. Believe what you want.
Sure, anything is possible. Try posting facts.
"Clarification: The NY Times claims that the FBI and DoJ kept the White House in the dark."
Here's a clarification...The N.Y. Times never claimed that the FBI and DOJ kept the White House in the dark. You and Buchanan did that.
This Nov. 9 NY Times story says, "White House officials said they did not know about the affair until this week, when Mr. Petraeus informed them."
I think that it is more likely that Holder or someone else in the DoJ told Obama. But believe whatever you want. I report the facts.
Post a Comment