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

[Ray From Cleveland]

Intent to what?

Intent to mishandle classified materials. The only alternative explanation to Clinton deliberately ignoring the rules for some purpose is that she and her staff had no idea what the rules were, and that is not credible. If you need further proof of intent to commit a crime, five of her top aides, including her chief of staff, Cheryl Mills demanded immunity from prosecution before talking to the FBI.

Yes and that's my point. Somebody who knowingly mishandled classified info by storing it on a private device versus somebody who knowingly handed it over to somebody who was not cleared to view it are two very different things and the later is a more serious offense

Imagine if the chick that Petraeus handed all this stuff over to was actually an undercover operative? It very easily could have happened.

So what was more likely to happen, his girlfriend who was also in the military with government security clearance was an undercover operative, or that the Russians and Chinese (among others) intercepted Hillary's transmissions to and from that unsecured server or otherwise hacked into it?

She didn't have the proper clearance to view the documents he had. Do you think he would have shared those documents with someone he wasn't having an affair with?

No, I don't think he would of. But she certainly is a lot less of a threat to this country than hackers tapping into Hillary's server that didn't even have the basic encryption protection.

And before you tell me that her server likely didn't get tapped into, remember the things you said in the recount forums.

 

[Divine Wind]

....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.

It's the LAW that govt employees NOT SEND any personal emails to be govt archived...they must ONLY send govt documents or govt emails to be archived. Hillary deleted her personal emails....she followed the RULES & LAW.

Yes, we do have PROOF that she was NOT hacked...the FBI found NO HACKS....

IT'S YOU who has no proof that she was hacked....

not one, zip, zero emails from her server has showed up on wikileaks, or anywhere that was not obtained thru the FOIA requests that the state dept released....not a one!

Correct, I have no proof she wasn't hacked. Now tell me I should trust someone who is so paranoid and callous that they pass classified information over an unsecure email system because they don't trust the government system. Or, IMHO, wanted to cover their tracks since, as Hillary well knows since she helped pass the law, that all email used on a government system must be archived.

There is no government CLASSIFIED email system.... top SECRET and secret is stored on a server that has no internet /email access.... She and her staff were discussing information a source, OUTSIDE of the government, gave them.... it so happened that this info, from their source, ( Syd Blumenthal), was also gathered by our intelligence community simultaneously, and they classified it top secret....that's why None of the top SECRET emails had Classified markings and her staff did not know it was top secret.... they didn't believe it was top SECRET stuff because they got the info from a public source, a non Gvt source and if he could find these things out from his public sources, HOW could it be top secret?

If HILLARY had used the government email server and gotten a user id on the State.gov email her staffers used in the state dept, it too was an UNCLASSIFIED email system.

Derail as much as you like but the fact remains there are governmental secure systems and unsecure private systems. How do you think the Ambassador of Libya sends classified messages to the SoS? By carrier pigeon? Pony Express? Air mail?

 

[Slade3200]

She has admitted to the mistake many times. The FBI didn't recommend criminal prosecution. So what do you want Clinton to do? Beg the DOJ to punish her?

While your support and dedication to Hillary is commendable, there's a reason why many on the Left, much less the Right, don't trust her. Why do you think that is? Bad rap? She's just misunderstood?

Have you not read anything I've said? I didn't vote for Hillary and I don't find her trustworthy. Read it slow and comprehend

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

If Trump does put him up for the job, I can't wait to see who the partisans are that comes out against Trump for hiring Petreaus. Remember too that Hillary lied to the US Congress under oath several times, and even destroyed evidence after it was subpoenaed by them.

If people were truly objective then the Hillary supporters that excused her behavior should also excuse Petraeus, and the Trump supporters that wanted Hillary disqualified from running should not support Petraeus. If he is nominated there will be hypocrisy on both sides.

This is true, but what do you want to bet it will be the exact opposite?

I think many on the left will focus on the hypocrisy of the Right and use the rhetoric they used agaist Hillary against them. They will have a point

Wait a minute, they (who voted for Hillary) will be focusing on the hypocrisy of the right?

You don't call "lock her up" for mishandling classified info, to allow the General who was convicted and plead guilty of mishandling classified info serve as sec of state, hypocrisy? It fits the definition

So does the other way around. That's my point. Libs will be complaining like all hell about the Generals nomination, but forgetting who they voted for President at the same time.

 

[Lewdog]

Agreed.

Additionally, he was honest enough to own up to his mistake and take his punishment, unlike someone else who shared classified information and denied doing anything wrong. I think General Petraeus will be a good SoS.

"Petraeus resigned as CIA direct in November 2012, was convicted of a misdemeanor in 2015, and is currently on probation for sharing classified information with his biographer and mistress, former Army intelligence officer Paula Broadwell."

Y'all are kidding right?

Are you saying he did not own up to it?

Silly far left drone!

No im not saying that. I'm saying Patraeus showed intent by choosing to disclose classified info to somebody who did not have the clearance. Clinton showed carelessness but no intent

Wrong. Broadwell's clearance was exactly the same as Petraeus.

He was the Director of Central Intelligence.
I think not.

She did have Top Secret clearance, however she was a reservist and it only applied while she was on duty, which she wasn't while at his house.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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

If Hilary can run for president for having a unsecured server with state secrets that has been hacked, why not?

I'd think that those who said that Hillary was unfit to serve because of her email issues would have to hold Patraeus to the same standards... otherwise it's straight partisan hypocrisy

No it is not, it is not even in the same realm..

Only a far left drone would seem them as the same!

You're right. They're not the same at all.

 

[Slade3200]

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.

Intent to what?

Intent to mishandle classified materials. The only alternative explanation to Clinton deliberately ignoring the rules for some purpose is that she and her staff had no idea what the rules were, and that is not credible. If you need further proof of intent to commit a crime, five of her top aides, including her chief of staff, Cheryl Mills demanded immunity from prosecution before talking to the FBI.

Yes and that's my point. Somebody who knowingly mishandled classified info by storing it on a private device versus somebody who knowingly handed it over to somebody who was not cleared to view it are two very different things and the later is a more serious offense

Imagine if the chick that Petraeus handed all this stuff over to was actually an undercover operative? It very easily could have happened.

Yes he was rightfully convicted and I was pretty shocked to hear his name in the SOS consideration. Humorous to hear the Trump hypocrites try and justify it

 

[Lewdog]

Intent to mishandle classified materials. The only alternative explanation to Clinton deliberately ignoring the rules for some purpose is that she and her staff had no idea what the rules were, and that is not credible. If you need further proof of intent to commit a crime, five of her top aides, including her chief of staff, Cheryl Mills demanded immunity from prosecution before talking to the FBI.

Yes and that's my point. Somebody who knowingly mishandled classified info by storing it on a private device versus somebody who knowingly handed it over to somebody who was not cleared to view it are two very different things and the later is a more serious offense

Imagine if the chick that Petraeus handed all this stuff over to was actually an undercover operative? It very easily could have happened.

So what was more likely to happen, his girlfriend who was also in the military with government security clearance was an undercover operative, or that the Russians and Chinese (among others) intercepted Hillary's transmissions to and from that unsecured server or otherwise hacked into it?

She didn't have the proper clearance to view the documents he had. Do you think he would have shared those documents with someone he wasn't having an affair with?

No, I don't think he would of. But she certainly is a lot less of a threat to this country than hackers tapping into Hillary's server that didn't even have the basic encryption protection.

And before you tell me that her server likely didn't get tapped into, remember the things you said in the recount forums.

I think they probably were hacked... personally, but there is no proof. However who died as a result of those potential hacks? Petraeus gave out information that had the identities and locations of undercover operatives... directly putting their lives in danger.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

A Petreaus senate confirmation would be a circus, Dem's have zero problem with double standards and hypocrisy. Unless Petreaus is by far 'the' best candidate I say Trump should avoid this side show, bring him in as an advisor who does not require senate confirmation. Basically don't give Dem's any gifts.

This is likely the same reason Chris Christie was jettisoned. And as much as it pains me to say it, why boring back stabber Romney is being considered, he's low drama and has been vetted.

I really don't think there would be any problem getting Petraeus confirmed. There would be a lot nonsense from some of the Democrats, but in the end, he'd get the job.

I really don't think

That's apparent.
Tell us some more about crooked Hillary.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Y'all are kidding right?

Are you saying he did not own up to it?

Silly far left drone!

No im not saying that. I'm saying Patraeus showed intent by choosing to disclose classified info to somebody who did not have the clearance. Clinton showed carelessness but no intent

Wrong. Broadwell's clearance was exactly the same as Petraeus.

He was the Director of Central Intelligence.
I think not.

She did have Top Secret clearance, however she was a reservist and it only applied while she was on duty, which she wasn't while at his house.

How does it apply to only when one is on duty? You either have that clearance or you don't.

 

[Divine Wind]

OJ was prosecuted and the decision was decided by a jury. Stop using that example....

I can see why you don't like me using the "not enough evidence to convict" when applied to your defense of Hillary, but I disagree. As the Comey quote posted previously states, there wasn't enough evidence to file charges. It's not an exoneration. In fact, Comey goes on to say she should have known better.

 

[Lewdog]

Are you saying he did not own up to it?

Silly far left drone!

No im not saying that. I'm saying Patraeus showed intent by choosing to disclose classified info to somebody who did not have the clearance. Clinton showed carelessness but no intent

Wrong. Broadwell's clearance was exactly the same as Petraeus.

He was the Director of Central Intelligence.
I think not.

She did have Top Secret clearance, however she was a reservist and it only applied while she was on duty, which she wasn't while at his house.

How does it apply to only when one is on duty? You either have that clearance or you don't.

That's the rules. She was a Intelligence reservist. Read up on it. She even ended up losing that clearance in the end.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes and that's my point. Somebody who knowingly mishandled classified info by storing it on a private device versus somebody who knowingly handed it over to somebody who was not cleared to view it are two very different things and the later is a more serious offense

Imagine if the chick that Petraeus handed all this stuff over to was actually an undercover operative? It very easily could have happened.

So what was more likely to happen, his girlfriend who was also in the military with government security clearance was an undercover operative, or that the Russians and Chinese (among others) intercepted Hillary's transmissions to and from that unsecured server or otherwise hacked into it?

She didn't have the proper clearance to view the documents he had. Do you think he would have shared those documents with someone he wasn't having an affair with?

No, I don't think he would of. But she certainly is a lot less of a threat to this country than hackers tapping into Hillary's server that didn't even have the basic encryption protection.

And before you tell me that her server likely didn't get tapped into, remember the things you said in the recount forums.

I think they probably were hacked... personally, but there is no proof. However who died as a result of those potential hacks? Petraeus gave out information that had the identities and locations of undercover operatives... directly putting their lives in danger.

And what was Hillary's classified emails about, wedding cakes?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Y'all are kidding right?

Are you saying he did not own up to it?

Silly far left drone!

No im not saying that. I'm saying Patraeus showed intent by choosing to disclose classified info to somebody who did not have the clearance. Clinton showed carelessness but no intent

Wrong. Broadwell's clearance was exactly the same as Petraeus.

He was the Director of Central Intelligence.
I think not.

She did have Top Secret clearance, however she was a reservist and it only applied while she was on duty, which she wasn't while at his house.

I had a TS clearance as a 19 yr old private.
That is no where near the CIA director.

 

[Muhammed]

Never saw any Democrats bitching about it when
Plame leaked classified info to Wilson.

 

[Divine Wind]

How does it apply to only when one is on duty? You either have that clearance or you don't.

Sorry, man, but there is a thing known as "need to know". I had a TS clearance, but if I didn't have a "need to know", I wasn't given access to TS material.

 

[Slade3200]

The opposite of what? We've already seen Trump supporters supporting Petraeus JUST because they feel Hillary got off the hook.

So one minute they had ethics and morals saying Hillary should be locked up, and the next they want a guy that actually plead guilty to a crime as the third highest position in government.

The opposite of what? The opposite of leftists not making a big deal about Petreaus because of his past. I want to see these hypocrites make a big deal out of it.

So this is one of those... we''ll give up on Hillary being a criminal as soon as you guys forgive Petraeus? yeah... that's not going to work. How about, both are guilty, so pick a different person for Sec. of State?

Okay, but the people that will complain about him will be the same people that voted for Hillary. That's what I want to rub in.

There is nothing to rub in. Those who complain will be pointing out an obvious hypocrisy and double standard. I really don't see how you can deny this

I don't see how you would be able to deny it is they who are hypocrites by voting for Hillary and then protesting Petreaus.

I can't speak for everybody but I'd assume the protest would be about the hypocrisy not the pick.

 

[Lewdog]

Imagine if the chick that Petraeus handed all this stuff over to was actually an undercover operative? It very easily could have happened.

So what was more likely to happen, his girlfriend who was also in the military with government security clearance was an undercover operative, or that the Russians and Chinese (among others) intercepted Hillary's transmissions to and from that unsecured server or otherwise hacked into it?

She didn't have the proper clearance to view the documents he had. Do you think he would have shared those documents with someone he wasn't having an affair with?

No, I don't think he would of. But she certainly is a lot less of a threat to this country than hackers tapping into Hillary's server that didn't even have the basic encryption protection.

And before you tell me that her server likely didn't get tapped into, remember the things you said in the recount forums.

I think they probably were hacked... personally, but there is no proof. However who died as a result of those potential hacks? Petraeus gave out information that had the identities and locations of undercover operatives... directly putting their lives in danger.

And what was Hillary's classified emails about, wedding cakes?

I don't know... but who died due to the server possibly being hacked?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I'd think that those who said that Hillary was unfit to serve because of her email issues would have to hold Patraeus to the same standards... otherwise it's straight partisan hypocrisy

No it is not, it is not even in the same realm..

Only a far left drone would seem them as the same!

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.

Not an error of judgement. A wanton felony.

 

[Divine Wind]

I can't speak for everybody but I'd assume the protest would be about the hypocrisy not the pick.

Dude, it's been about "the pick" ever since Trump won the election.