Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Republican Sen. Rand Paul said there's a "potential problem" with retired Gen. David Petraeus as secretary of state because of his "similarities" with former Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton on classified information.
"You know, I think the problem they're going to have if they put him forward is there's a lot of similarities to Hillary Clinton as far as revealing classified information," Paul told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room." "I think that's a potential problem."
Petraeus, once a widely celebrated military leader who oversaw operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, was sentenced to serve two years on probation and to pay a $100,000 fine for sharing classified information with his biographer and lover, Paula Broadwell.
But during the campaign, Trump castigated Clinton for her handling of classified information, despite the fact that an FBI investigation resulted in no charges being brought against her.
If you liked Hillary, you'll love Dave....Petraeus is unqualified to be SOS. He is a convict. He leaked classified information, much less mis-storing it. No.
I'm literally praising a guy for going after Petraeus.Petraus hid documents in his attic under the insulation. I believe the FBI said he lied to them about it. Hence the prosecution.
How do you bash HRC but ignore all this? And he had a "whore?" While married? Come on, got to be better out there.........correct?
Petraus hid documents in his attic under the insulation. I believe the FBI said he lied to them about it. Hence the prosecution.
How do you bash HRC but ignore all this? And he had a "whore?" While married? Come on, got to be better out there.........correct?
He should have been busted to 2-Stars like Kimmel and Small.Petraus hid documents in his attic under the insulation. I believe the FBI said he lied to them about it. Hence the prosecution.
How do you bash HRC but ignore all this? And he had a "whore?" While married? Come on, got to be better out there.........correct?
I held Petraeus in high regard until this story came out. He is a disgraced general. I have no confidence in him.
He should have been busted to 2-Stars like Kimmel and Small.Petraus hid documents in his attic under the insulation. I believe the FBI said he lied to them about it. Hence the prosecution.
How do you bash HRC but ignore all this? And he had a "whore?" While married? Come on, got to be better out there.........correct?
I held Petraeus in high regard until this story came out. He is a disgraced general. I have no confidence in him.
Who gives a shit what Rand thinks? I mean really? He is DESPERATELY trying to stay relevant.Republican Sen. Rand Paul said there's a "potential problem" with retired Gen. David Petraeus as secretary of state because of his "similarities" with former Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton on classified information.
"You know, I think the problem they're going to have if they put him forward is there's a lot of similarities to Hillary Clinton as far as revealing classified information," Paul told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room." "I think that's a potential problem."
Petraeus, once a widely celebrated military leader who oversaw operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, was sentenced to serve two years on probation and to pay a $100,000 fine for sharing classified information with his biographer and lover, Paula Broadwell.
But during the campaign, Trump castigated Clinton for her handling of classified information, despite the fact that an FBI investigation resulted in no charges being brought against her.
Rand Paul casts doubt on support of a Petraeus pick - CNNPolitics.com
One of the best parts of the election being over has been Rand Paul smacking down nearly all of Trump's rumored Secretary of State nominees. Maybe his terrible campaign taught him that becoming a hack to be palatable to a mainstream who will always hate him regardless doesn't make any sense. I would enjoy watching him be a thorn in Trump's side for four years.
Anyone who realizes that Trump's rumored picks so far have done nothing but show that he's a fraud.Who gives a shit what Rand thinks? I mean really? He is DESPERATELY trying to stay relevant.Republican Sen. Rand Paul said there's a "potential problem" with retired Gen. David Petraeus as secretary of state because of his "similarities" with former Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton on classified information.
"You know, I think the problem they're going to have if they put him forward is there's a lot of similarities to Hillary Clinton as far as revealing classified information," Paul told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room." "I think that's a potential problem."
Petraeus, once a widely celebrated military leader who oversaw operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, was sentenced to serve two years on probation and to pay a $100,000 fine for sharing classified information with his biographer and lover, Paula Broadwell.
But during the campaign, Trump castigated Clinton for her handling of classified information, despite the fact that an FBI investigation resulted in no charges being brought against her.
Rand Paul casts doubt on support of a Petraeus pick - CNNPolitics.com
One of the best parts of the election being over has been Rand Paul smacking down nearly all of Trump's rumored Secretary of State nominees. Maybe his terrible campaign taught him that becoming a hack to be palatable to a mainstream who will always hate him regardless doesn't make any sense. I would enjoy watching him be a thorn in Trump's side for four years.
Certainly much more than any of the rumored picks so far.At this point I would rather have Tulsi Gabbard as Secretary of State rather that Romney or Petraeusm,
He is an adulterer, compromised security protocols, and let his mistress suck him off for information. Oh, yeah, quite a guy.I think Patraeus would make a fine SOS. He's one very capable guy and he's paid for his mistake. I seriously doubt it will ever happen again.
Trump could do far worse.
He is an adulterer, compromised security protocols, and let his mistress suck him off for information. Oh, yeah, quite a guy.I think Patraeus would make a fine SOS. He's one very capable guy and he's paid for his mistake. I seriously doubt it will ever happen again.
Trump could do far worse.
Rand Paul is right, for Trump to tap Petraeus would be the height of hypocrisy not to mention reinforcing the message that there are one set of rules for the politically well connected and another set of rules for the plebs.Republican Sen. Rand Paul said there's a "potential problem" with retired Gen. David Petraeus as secretary of state because of his "similarities" with former Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton on classified information.
"You know, I think the problem they're going to have if they put him forward is there's a lot of similarities to Hillary Clinton as far as revealing classified information," Paul told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room." "I think that's a potential problem."
Petraeus, once a widely celebrated military leader who oversaw operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, was sentenced to serve two years on probation and to pay a $100,000 fine for sharing classified information with his biographer and lover, Paula Broadwell.
But during the campaign, Trump castigated Clinton for her handling of classified information, despite the fact that an FBI investigation resulted in no charges being brought against her.
Rand Paul casts doubt on support of a Petraeus pick - CNNPolitics.com
One of the best parts of the election being over has been Rand Paul smacking down nearly all of Trump's rumored Secretary of State nominees. Maybe his terrible campaign taught him that becoming a hack to be palatable to a mainstream who will always hate him regardless doesn't make any sense. I would enjoy watching him be a thorn in Trump's side for four years.
Rand Paul is right, for Trump to tap Petraeus would be the height of hypocrisy not to mention reinforcing the message that there are one set of rules for the politically well connected and another set of rules for the plebs.Republican Sen. Rand Paul said there's a "potential problem" with retired Gen. David Petraeus as secretary of state because of his "similarities" with former Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton on classified information.
"You know, I think the problem they're going to have if they put him forward is there's a lot of similarities to Hillary Clinton as far as revealing classified information," Paul told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room." "I think that's a potential problem."
Petraeus, once a widely celebrated military leader who oversaw operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, was sentenced to serve two years on probation and to pay a $100,000 fine for sharing classified information with his biographer and lover, Paula Broadwell.
But during the campaign, Trump castigated Clinton for her handling of classified information, despite the fact that an FBI investigation resulted in no charges being brought against her.
Rand Paul casts doubt on support of a Petraeus pick - CNNPolitics.com
One of the best parts of the election being over has been Rand Paul smacking down nearly all of Trump's rumored Secretary of State nominees. Maybe his terrible campaign taught him that becoming a hack to be palatable to a mainstream who will always hate him regardless doesn't make any sense. I would enjoy watching him be a thorn in Trump's side for four years.
Personally I respect General Petraeus's long and distinguished career as a soldier and the fact that he's a capable general, however he blew any opportunity to hold a sensitive position in government when he demonstrated an inability to protect sensitive information; He should never be allowed to hold a clearance again and he definitely shouldn't be tapped to hold a position as sensitive as the U.S. SoS, there are PLENTY of other Americans that are just as (or more) capable of doing the job who haven't disqualified themselves from holding a security clearance.
How about Trump start living up to his promise of "draining the swamp" and start getting some people that aren't long-time creatures of the political establishment, or does he think he can "drain the swamp" by filling it with the same odious muck that's already been there for decades? Of course, I never expected Trump to keep any of his campaign "promises" so I never expected anything other than Washington "business as usual" from his administration.
