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

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 Patraeus legally speaking performed more severe offenses than Hillary as laid out in this thread by both historical references and testimony by the investigating body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.
I'm in the same boat, get called a Libtard Clinton supporter by the dumbshits all the time... even though I didn't vote for Clinton and I support smaller government. I'm fine with Petraeus getting a position, he paid his due and is an accomplished guy. I think the hypocrisy and critique that would come with a nomination will be enourmous as Trump and the GOP pretty much campaigned on Hillary's mishandling of classified information.
 
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.
I'm in the same boat, get called a Libtard Clinton supporter by the dumbshits all the time... even though I didn't vote for Clinton and I support smaller government. I'm fine with Petraeus getting a position, he paid his due and is an accomplished guy. I think the hypocrisy and critique that would come with a nomination will be enourmous as Trump and the GOP pretty much campaigned on Hillary's mishandling of classified information.

You are a far left done that did vote for Hilary!

Show all of your posts against Hilary!

No one in their right mind would claim Hilary as a viable candidate except a far left, that is where you outed yourself!
 
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.
Intent to what?
 
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.
Intent to what?

Already been posted far left drone!

Intent to hide her conversations and decisions!
 
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.
Well in one case the offender was prosecuted and convicted and in the other the FBI concluded there wasn't strong enough evidence to prosecute. So, No, I didn't make it up, and the fact that you can't recognize this very common knowledge points to you being the idiot
 
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.

ffkisrgcyhix.jpg




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!

Stop talking to me, I'm done wasting my time with your crazy idiotic ass
 
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.

ffkisrgcyhix.jpg




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!

Stop talking to me, I'm done wasting my time with your crazy idiotic ass


Stop posting like you are not a far left drone when you outed yourself by claiming Hilary was a viable candidate!

You got outed, if you do not like it that is your problem and no one else's.

Deal with the far you are a far left drone for supporting and voting for Hilary!
 
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!
You live in this fake, fantasy world, that I know nothing about....
 
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.
Intent to what?

Already been posted far left drone!

Intent to hide her conversations and decisions!
Haha. And you think intent to hide classified information is more serious than intentionally giving classified information to somebody who does not have clearance?? You really are low IQ
 
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!
You live in this fake, fantasy world, that I know nothing about....

See how the far left will deny that Hilary should have been exempt from being president!
 
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?
Life in prison but he got off with a misdemeanor and a fine? What's wrong with this picture?

 
Last edited:
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.
Intent to what?

Already been posted far left drone!

Intent to hide her conversations and decisions!
Haha. And you think intent to hide classified information is more serious than intentionally giving classified information to somebody who does not have clearance?? You really are low IQ

Oh my a 30+ year politician who should know better has a unsecured server that anyone could hack in their basement comparted to a man that gave one person in the intelligence community classified information.

Yes you are a far left drone if you think they compare!

And that means you have the IQ of an ameba!
 
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?
Life in prison but he got off with a misdemeanor and a fine? What's wrong with this picture?



Yes, and because some in the government didn't want a trial where all the dirty laundry of the government would be out in the open.

The government would never file those charges. Not everyone at Justice shared the prosecutors’ confidence, and lawyers for Petraeus and Broadwell separately pushed back hard, saying they would fight and beat the charges being considered. Moreover, with its mix of sex and government secrets, a trial promised to be an uncomfortably tawdry affair, one some in the government — as well as defense lawyers — preferred to avoid.

How David Petraeus avoided felony charges and possible prison time
 
....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.
 
Haha. And you think intent to hide classified information is more serious than intentionally giving classified information to somebody who does not have clearance?? You really are low IQ
I think both are equally deplorable. Do you honestly believe Hillary shouldn't be guilty of even a misdemeanor in her handling of classified material?
 
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?
Life in prison but he got off with a misdemeanor and a fine? What's wrong with this picture?



Yes, and because some in the government didn't want a trial where all the dirty laundry of the government would be out in the open.

The government would never file those charges. Not everyone at Justice shared the prosecutors’ confidence, and lawyers for Petraeus and Broadwell separately pushed back hard, saying they would fight and beat the charges being considered. Moreover, with its mix of sex and government secrets, a trial promised to be an uncomfortably tawdry affair, one some in the government — as well as defense lawyers — preferred to avoid.

How David Petraeus avoided felony charges and possible prison time
Awesome.

What's wrong with this picture?

573de0c3844d1f7e9d7a9fcc447888b7.jpg
 
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?
Life in prison but he got off with a misdemeanor and a fine? What's wrong with this picture?



Yes, and because some in the government didn't want a trial where all the dirty laundry of the government would be out in the open.

The government would never file those charges. Not everyone at Justice shared the prosecutors’ confidence, and lawyers for Petraeus and Broadwell separately pushed back hard, saying they would fight and beat the charges being considered. Moreover, with its mix of sex and government secrets, a trial promised to be an uncomfortably tawdry affair, one some in the government — as well as defense lawyers — preferred to avoid.

How David Petraeus avoided felony charges and possible prison time
Awesome.

What's wrong with this picture?

573de0c3844d1f7e9d7a9fcc447888b7.jpg

If I'm trying to look at anything other than the chick I'm gay. Or, because I'm not in it with her. Which answer you want?
 
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

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.
 
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

Not according to the New York Post:

Clinton directed her maid to print out classified materials | New York Post
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom