Curious about your thoughts on Petraeus considered as Secretary of State?

[toomuchtime_]

Do you think he will be able to get his sex / sending classified information scandal behind him, or does he not have a chance..?

David Petraeus shared classified info. Can he be secretary of state? - CNNPolitics.com


View attachment 100796

Petraeus is a brilliant talented leader who would be the most qualified for the job and he is very impressive when testifying before Congress so I think he would be easily confirmed. He did have an affair while married, but America just elected a president who has had three wives and cheated on at least one of them, so I don't think this will stand in his way.

He didn't send classified information, he confided classified information to some one he had reason to trust and while this is a crime, the question is, does this single instance of poor judgement mean he can't be trusted in the future?

FYI-trump cheated on ALL of his wives, including Melania.

You are wrong, he did give his mistress and book writer CLASSIFIED TOP SECRET information in paperwork and files, including special Military classified codes, and when investigated by the FBI he lied about it and tried to hide it but the FBI had info that SHOWED he knew he was breaking the law by handing her that top secret information...

And mistresses are KNOWN to be the common spy used by foreign nations, he should NOT have trusted any mistress.... it was not simply poor judgement due to him thinking thru his one eyed trouser worm, or heart.

other than that, I agree...Petreaus is very knowledgeable and qualified if it weren't for his intentional and knowing breach...I'm sure he's learned a lesson...but............ I dunno?

You are letting your imagination run away with you. Paula Brodwell was an intelligence officer in the Army Reserves at the time, major I believe. If she had been on active duty at the time, there would have been no problem giving her the clearance to see this information, but since she was not on active duty and there was no military necessity to read her in, confiding in her was an infraction of the rules but not a security risk.

There is no comparison between Petraeus' infraction of the rules and Clinton's reckless and irresponsible disregard for security.

YOU are wrong wrong wrong on this, see my post right above!

lol Wrong about what? She was an intelligence officer in the Army Reserves.

 

[Divine Wind]

Ok, it's one big conspiracy, you keep running with that... I'm not going to argue with a nut job conspiracy theorist. I'm sticking to reality.

LOL

One of my favorite "Clintonisms". Fucking hilarious! I think a lot of the bullshit on both sides started during Bill Clinton's administration and the conspiracy to cover up his sexually predatory behavior.

 

[Divine Wind]

lol Wrong about what? She was an intelligence officer in the Army Reserves.

She wasn't cleared for the material. What Petraeus did was wrong and he paid a price for that mistake.

Obviously justice has been different for Republicans and military personnel than it is for Democrats over the past 8 years. I wonder why?

 

[Slade3200]

....Hillary had 107 emails out of 50,000 emails on her server, that were classified and only 7 those were top secret...she gave them or handed them over to no one, she did not remove them from their proper place, her staff had top secret clearance who participated in them...and ZERO were stolen or hacked.

you've been sold a bill of goods by your beloved FAUX media hacks

Not quite correct since she destroyed 30,000 emails. The numbers you quoted are the ones investigators know about.

You have no proof she wasn't hacked. It was an unsecure server and, as SoS, she would obviously be a target. Only the most inept intelligence agency wouldn't take a shot at hacking into her account.

So your whole argument is based on assumptions and what ifs... cool

No, sir. My argument is based on the facts. See the Comey quote above.

There's a big difference between saying OJ was found "not guilty" and that he is innocent of all charges.

Yes i agree with you on that and I'm not claiming that Hillary is innocent of all accusations. My simple point, I'll say again, is that those who thought Hillary was unfit to serve because of her mishandling of classified information should hold Patraeus tot the same standards or else they are being partisan hypocrites. Patraeus legally speaking performed more severe offenses than Hillary as laid out in this thread by both historical references and testimony by the investigating body

 

[Divine Wind]

FYI-trump cheated on ALL of his wives, including Melania....

Great straw man!!!!

 

[Lewdog]

lol Wrong about what? She was an intelligence officer in the Army Reserves.

She wasn't cleared for the material. What Petraeus did was wrong and he paid a price for that mistake.

Obviously justice has been different for Republicans and military personnel than it is for Democrats over the past 8 years. I wonder why?

Ok...so did you watch the video? Did you see where you were wrong about Petraeus lying? Or are you going to say Comey lied about that?

 

[Care4all]

FYI-trump cheated on ALL of his wives, including Melania....

Great straw man!!!!

Nahhhh, I didn't bring it up, I was just responding to someone else who brought up Trump being a cheater as well as Petreaus, so Petreaus's cheating should not matter to Trump or his supporters kind of thing....

 

[Divine Wind]

Yes a agree with you on that and I'm not claiming that Hillary is innocent of all accusations. My simple point, I'll say again, is that those who thought Hillary was unfit to serve because of her mishandling of classified information should hold Patraeus tot the same standards or else they are being partisan hypocrites. Patraeus legally speaking performed more severe offenses than Hillary as laid out in this thread by both historical references and testimony by the investigating body

Obviously there are political partisans who will bitch and whine about their opposition regardless of the facts. You seem honest enough to know this is true.

Nonetheless, Petraeus has paid the penalty for his violations. Hillary has not and continues to deny any wrongdoing.

Americans are very forgiving. If a person fucks up and makes a sincere mea culpa, most Americans will forgive. What is often not forgivable is a person who is obviously wrong, denies any wrong doing and then blames others for their mistakes. The Clintons have a loooong history of shady behavior, maybe not criminal, but certainly unethical and then reaping the benefits without ever admitting any wrongdoing. You know I'm a moderate even though I lean right on national defense and business issues. I'm not a Trump fan, but I'm clearly not a Clinton fan. Both sides have repeatedly accused me of being a "con" or a "lib". Something I expect from partisan assholes.

That said, on the issue of Petraeus and Clinton, I'd much sooner trust Petraeus to selflessly do what is best for our nation than I would Hillary or Bill Clinton. Same goes for General Mattis.

 

[Divine Wind]

Ok...so did you watch the video? Did you see where you were wrong about Petraeus lying? Or are you going to say Comey lied about that?

Feel free to quote the pertinent part.

 

[Slade3200]

Care to make a point?

He made the point that your post identifies you as either a liar or an idiot.

Baseless insults by somebody who can't make an intelligent arguement.

Not insults, observations. Your claim that Petraeus' single error in judgement in confiding classified information in an intelligence officer he had strong reasons to trust who had not been cleared for that particular information and Clinton's reckless and irresponsible disregard for security concerns clearly marks you as either a liar or an idiot.

Nice attempt at spin. What did I lie about?
Patraeus intentionally gave classified info to his mistress who did not have clearance. It was illegal. He was convicted. It was not disputed. These are facts.

Clinton carelessly mishandled classified information by using a private email server instead of the state departments servers. The FBI investigated for months. They concluded that it was careless but they did not see enough cause to prosecute. Facts

I provided a link That provides many quotes from the director of the FBI Commenting under oath and in detail about the Patraeus case vs the Clinton case.

Paula Brodwell was an intelligence officer in the Army Reserves, and if she had been on active duty at the time, there would have been no problem giving her that information, but since she wasn't on active duty and since there was no military necessity to read her in, it was an infraction of the rules to give her this classified information, but there was no security risk.

On the other hand, Clinton's reckless and irresponsible disregard of security rules did present a clear security risk to the US. We know that at least hundreds of those emails she sent contained classified information and we know that some of her correspondents had been hacked, so we have no idea how much damage she did to the US because so many of her emails were deleted before they could be examined. We do know that there was clear criminal intent because five of her top aides, including Cheryl Mills and Huma, demanded immunity from prosecution before talking to the FBI.

It is ridiculous to say there was no intent because she was merely careless. Does "careless" mean that neither she nor any of her top staff was able to understand what the rules are for handling classified information? Unless you believe Clinton and her whole staff were just hopelessly incompetent, you can't believe they didn't know what the rules were, so that means they knew what the rules were but chose to disregard them, which clearly shows intent and should have produced a recommendation to charge Clinton with mishandling classified information.

So why did Comey make the ridiculous statement that Clinton was careless but had no intent to break the law? Did he mean she and her staff were too incompetent to know what the rules for handling classified materials were? More probably, he understood that if he recommended charges be brought it would have effectively ended Clinton's campaign and made Trump president.

Let's make this really simple and take away the spin. Mishandling classified information by storing on a private unapproved device is a lesser offense than intentionally giving classified information to somebody who is not approved to see it. In one case the FBI recommended indictment and the other they did not

 

[Lewdog]

Ok...so did you watch the video? Did you see where you were wrong about Petraeus lying? Or are you going to say Comey lied about that?

Feel free to quote the pertinent part.

So you asked for evidence of him lying and when it was provided to you, you didn't watch it? So you can't admit you were flat out wrong? Got it.

 

[toomuchtime_]

lol Wrong about what? She was an intelligence officer in the Army Reserves.

She wasn't cleared for the material. What Petraeus did was wrong and he paid a price for that mistake.

Obviously justice has been different for Republicans and military personnel than it is for Democrats over the past 8 years. I wonder why?

Ok...so did you watch the video? Did you see where you were wrong about Petraeus lying? Or are you going to say Comey lied about that?

Of course Comey lied. Saying that Clinton was careless means either that she and her staff were not competent to understand the rules for handling classified material or that she chose to disregard them, which would show intent and be a chargeable offense.

 

[Care4all]

lol Wrong about what? She was an intelligence officer in the Army Reserves.

She wasn't cleared for the material. What Petraeus did was wrong and he paid a price for that mistake.

Obviously justice has been different for Republicans and military personnel than it is for Democrats over the past 8 years. I wonder why?

Cry me a River...

Petreaus committed 3 FELONIES and copped a plea to a single misdemeanor...

HOW was that not SPECIAL treatment?

I'm glad he got it, this special treatment, because he spent a lot of years giving his heart body and soul to this Country....but by no means was he given a harsh sentence for what he did...

 

[Slade3200]

Ok, it's one big conspiracy, you keep running with that... I'm not going to argue with a nut job conspiracy theorist. I'm sticking to reality.

LOL

One of my favorite "Clintonisms". Fucking hilarious! I think a lot of the bullshit on both sides started during Bill Clinton's administration and the conspiracy to cover up his sexually predatory behavior.

Both sides do it. I don't play for either team, but in this case it is many in the GOP claiming that the FBI covered for Clinton with the world spotlight on them. It makes me laugh that people really think this

 

[Lewdog]

lol Wrong about what? She was an intelligence officer in the Army Reserves.

She wasn't cleared for the material. What Petraeus did was wrong and he paid a price for that mistake.

Obviously justice has been different for Republicans and military personnel than it is for Democrats over the past 8 years. I wonder why?

Ok...so did you watch the video? Did you see where you were wrong about Petraeus lying? Or are you going to say Comey lied about that?

Of course Comey lied. Saying that Clinton was careless means either that she and her staff were not competent to understand the rules for handling classified material or that she chose to disregard them, which would show intent and be a chargeable offense.

No, did Comey lie about Petraeus lying.

 

[Lewdog]

lol Wrong about what? She was an intelligence officer in the Army Reserves.

She wasn't cleared for the material. What Petraeus did was wrong and he paid a price for that mistake.

Obviously justice has been different for Republicans and military personnel than it is for Democrats over the past 8 years. I wonder why?

Cry me a River...

Petreaus committed 3 FELONIES and copped a plea to a single misdemeanor...

HOW was that not SPECIAL treatment?

I'm glad he got it, this special treatment, because he spent a lot of years giving his heart body and soul to this Country....but by no means was he given a harsh sentence for what he did...

...and the DoJ wouldn't let Comey go after him for obstruction of justice for lying during the investigation. Another felony.

 

[kaz]

Do you think he will be able to get his sex / sending classified information scandal behind him, or does he not have a chance..?

David Petraeus shared classified info. Can he be secretary of state? - CNNPolitics.com


View attachment 100796

Good question. He should ask Hillary for tips

 

[Kosh]

lol Wrong about what? She was an intelligence officer in the Army Reserves.

She wasn't cleared for the material. What Petraeus did was wrong and he paid a price for that mistake.

Obviously justice has been different for Republicans and military personnel than it is for Democrats over the past 8 years. I wonder why?

Cry me a River...

Petreaus committed 3 FELONIES and copped a plea to a single misdemeanor...

HOW was that not SPECIAL treatment?

I'm glad he got it, this special treatment, because he spent a lot of years giving his heart body and soul to this Country....but by no means was he given a harsh sentence for what he did...

And Clinton committed more felonies than that and yet scared the FBI not to recommend prosecution!

It is not what you think someone should be charged with it is what was decided!

 

[toomuchtime_]

He made the point that your post identifies you as either a liar or an idiot.

Baseless insults by somebody who can't make an intelligent arguement.

Not insults, observations. Your claim that Petraeus' single error in judgement in confiding classified information in an intelligence officer he had strong reasons to trust who had not been cleared for that particular information and Clinton's reckless and irresponsible disregard for security concerns clearly marks you as either a liar or an idiot.

Nice attempt at spin. What did I lie about?
Patraeus intentionally gave classified info to his mistress who did not have clearance. It was illegal. He was convicted. It was not disputed. These are facts.

Clinton carelessly mishandled classified information by using a private email server instead of the state departments servers. The FBI investigated for months. They concluded that it was careless but they did not see enough cause to prosecute. Facts

I provided a link That provides many quotes from the director of the FBI Commenting under oath and in detail about the Patraeus case vs the Clinton case.

Paula Brodwell was an intelligence officer in the Army Reserves, and if she had been on active duty at the time, there would have been no problem giving her that information, but since she wasn't on active duty and since there was no military necessity to read her in, it was an infraction of the rules to give her this classified information, but there was no security risk.

On the other hand, Clinton's reckless and irresponsible disregard of security rules did present a clear security risk to the US. We know that at least hundreds of those emails she sent contained classified information and we know that some of her correspondents had been hacked, so we have no idea how much damage she did to the US because so many of her emails were deleted before they could be examined. We do know that there was clear criminal intent because five of her top aides, including Cheryl Mills and Huma, demanded immunity from prosecution before talking to the FBI.

It is ridiculous to say there was no intent because she was merely careless. Does "careless" mean that neither she nor any of her top staff was able to understand what the rules are for handling classified information? Unless you believe Clinton and her whole staff were just hopelessly incompetent, you can't believe they didn't know what the rules were, so that means they knew what the rules were but chose to disregard them, which clearly shows intent and should have produced a recommendation to charge Clinton with mishandling classified information.

So why did Comey make the ridiculous statement that Clinton was careless but had no intent to break the law? Did he mean she and her staff were too incompetent to know what the rules for handling classified materials were? More probably, he understood that if he recommended charges be brought it would have effectively ended Clinton's campaign and made Trump president.

Let's make this really simple and take away the spin. Mishandling classified information by storing on a private unapproved device is a lesser offense than intentionally giving classified information to somebody who is not approved to see it. In one case the FBI recommended indictment and the other they did not

So we can clear up part of the question of whether you are a liar or an idiot. You just made up "Mishandling classified information by storing on a private unapproved device is a lesser offense than intentionally giving classified information to somebody who is not approved to see it", but that still leaves open the question of whether you are also an idiot.

 

[Kosh]

Ok, it's one big conspiracy, you keep running with that... I'm not going to argue with a nut job conspiracy theorist. I'm sticking to reality.

LOL

One of my favorite "Clintonisms". Fucking hilarious! I think a lot of the bullshit on both sides started during Bill Clinton's administration and the conspiracy to cover up his sexually predatory behavior.

Both sides do it. I don't play for either team, but in this case it is many in the GOP claiming that the FBI covered for Clinton with the world spotlight on them. It makes me laugh that people really think this

Yes you do! You have proven you are a far left drone!

Otherwise you would not have said Hilary was viable to be president!