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

[Kosh]

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

Unfit to serve because she violated a protocol or because she was unrepentant and kept lying about it?

I don't know you tell me... I wasn't one of the lock her up puppets... I thought she was a bad candidate but absolutely fit to serve. Just as I have no problem with Petraeus serving if nominated. My simple point was that those who yelled lock her up are hypocrites if they dont hold petraeus to the same standard

And you just proven that you area far left drone!

She did worse than Petraeus, yet the far left still supported her!

Just like the supported the illegal wars of Obama/Clinton.

 

[Kosh]

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.

Yes the FBI director that was scared of repercussions if Hilary got elected!

The Clintons have a history that can be followed if you cross them!

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.

Says the far left drone that voted for Hilary!

I didn't vote for Hillary you dumbshit. You just can't help being wrong with just about all you idiotic presumptive statements. Do us a favor and take a hike until you figure out how to be rational honest and objective. Otherwise you are just wasting our time

Yes you did! You just do not want town up to it, because I doubt you voted for Trump!

Jill stein = Hilary Clinton! Writing in Bernie Sanders still proves yo are a far left drone!

 

[Kosh]

The general got a sweetheart deal .

The judge was so offended that he doubled the lame fine asked for by the prosecution from $25 to $50k . He gets $200k a year for his army pension alone . Which he still keeps along with his rank .

White lives matter justice system .

And another far left drone blazes in on their religious narratives not based on reality!

 

[Slade3200]

Ok, so Patraeus intentionally exposed classified information and Clinton was careless by keeping it in an unsecured server. So Patraeus had the more severe offense. You're right, not the same... but don't just take my word for it

Wait a minute. Petreaus exposed that information to only one person, and an American military person at that. Hillary exposed our classified information to anybody that could have hacked that toy sever of hers. I would say Hil-liar is far worse than anything Petreaus did.

http://nypost.com/2016/11/06/clinton-directed-her-maid-to-print-out-classified-materials/

That's fine, you can have that opinion. The FBI, who investigated and evaluated according to our laws, disagrees with you.

 

[Care4all]

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

There was plenty of intent, especially from someone that has been in politics for 30+ years!

The intent was that she was going to do whatever she wanted and the rules be damned.

But only a far left drone would believe their was no intent!

Who fucking cares!!! You have your biased partisan opinions and I have my opinions, neither matter, stick to the facts. I just laid them all out and provided a transcript to testimony by the director of the FBI. Come back to reality

Oh the irony impaired far left drones and their comments!

The far left runs from facts and you have yet to post any!

Careforall and I have posted quotes links and testimony. You name call and passively point to wild conspiracies. It pretty obvious who the impaired one is.

petraeus gave thousands of classified documents to a person not cleared to have them, 300 marked SECRET documents, he allowed her to copy, he stored these classified secret and compartmental TOP SECRET documents in his unlocked desk drawer and gave massive amounts of secret and top secret docs to her.

Hillary had 107 emails out of 50,000 emails on her server, that were classified and only 7 of 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.
OOPS I MEAN, KOCH has been sold a bill of goods by HIS beloved FAUX media hacks

 

[Divine Wind]

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

Unfit to serve because she violated a protocol or because she was unrepentant and kept lying about it?

Oh, and that is different from a guy that lied about it until he was in court facing life in prison with a ton of evidence against him including a tape of him saying he knew he was breaking the law? And only then under a plea agreement to a misdemeanor did he admit the truth?

Did he? Do you have evidence? A link, perhaps?

 

[Slade3200]

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

There was plenty of intent, especially from someone that has been in politics for 30+ years!

The intent was that she was going to do whatever she wanted and the rules be damned.

But only a far left drone would believe their was no intent!

Who fucking cares!!! You have your biased partisan opinions and I have my opinions, neither matter, stick to the facts. I just laid them all out and provided a transcript to testimony by the director of the FBI. Come back to reality

Oh the irony impaired far left drones and their comments!

The far left runs from facts and you have yet to post any!

Careforall and I have posted quotes links and testimony. You name call and passively point to wild conspiracies. It pretty obvious who the impaired one is.

Yes you have tried to equate what Hilary did to Petraeus and they are not the same not even close!

That is why you far left drones fail with your religious narratives!

You are embarrassing yourself now... time for you to take a walk

 

[Lewdog]

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

Unfit to serve because she violated a protocol or because she was unrepentant and kept lying about it?

Oh, and that is different from a guy that lied about it until he was in court facing life in prison with a ton of evidence against him including a tape of him saying he knew he was breaking the law? And only then under a plea agreement to a misdemeanor did he admit the truth?

Did he? Do you have evidence? A link, perhaps?

Oh, the video of Comey testifying to Congress. It's been posted several times.

 

[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.

 

[Lewdog]

....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.

I want her in jail, but you understand that isn't how it works? The onus is on you to prove it was hacked, not that someone has to prove it WASN'T hacked. That's like telling someone to prove God exist, and you saying prove God doesn't exist.

 

[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

 

[Kosh]

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

There was plenty of intent, especially from someone that has been in politics for 30+ years!

The intent was that she was going to do whatever she wanted and the rules be damned.

But only a far left drone would believe their was no intent!

Who fucking cares!!! You have your biased partisan opinions and I have my opinions, neither matter, stick to the facts. I just laid them all out and provided a transcript to testimony by the director of the FBI. Come back to reality

Oh the irony impaired far left drones and their comments!

The far left runs from facts and you have yet to post any!

Careforall and I have posted quotes links and testimony. You name call and passively point to wild conspiracies. It pretty obvious who the impaired one is.

petraeus gave thousands of classified documents to a person not cleared to have them, 300 marked SECRET documents, he allowed her to copy, he stored these classified secret and compartmental TOP SECRET documents in his unlocked desk drawer and gave massive amounts of secret and top secret to her.

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

Yes the far left will excuse Hilary of any wrong doing!

Hilary's server was unsecured and was exposed to many people and hackers!

The FBI has consistently said that it has no evidence to indicate that Hillary Clinton’s personal email account was hacked, but has repeatedly noted that if such a breach did occur its agents might not be able to tell.

That is far worse than Petraeus!

 

[Kosh]

....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.

I want her in jail, but you understand that isn't how it works? The onus is on you to prove it was hacked, not that someone has to prove it WASN'T hacked. That's like telling someone to prove God exist, and you saying prove God doesn't exist.

How could you want Hilary in jail when you voted for her?

Silly far left drone!

 

[Lewdog]

....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

Good thing we don't put people in jail on what ifs huh?

 

[Kosh]

....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

Just like yours! But then again anyone not far left will use facts!

 

[Divine Wind]

Oh, the video of Comey testifying to Congress. It's been posted several times.

The one below? I've read it....several times.

Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System
....From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification......

.....Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

 

[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.

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.

 

[Care4all]

....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!

 

[toomuchtime_]

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.

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.

 

[Lewdog]

Oh, the video of Comey testifying to Congress. It's been posted several times.

The one below? I've read it....several times.

Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System
....From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification......

.....Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

No, the video...