Holder to go after Petraeus

[5.56NATO]

U.S. prosecutors recommend criminal charges against Petraeus: N.Y. Times
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The FBI and Justice Department prosecutors have recommended bringing criminal charges against former CIA chief David Petraeus for improperly providing classified information to a female Army Reserve officer with whom he was having an affair, the New York Times reported on Friday.

The newspaper cited officials who spoke on condition of anonymity. The Justice Department investigation focuses on whether Petraeus gave the woman, Paula Broadwell, access to his CIA email account and other highly classified information. The Times said officials have recommended felony charges.
http://news.yahoo.com/u-prosecutors-recommend-criminal-charges-against-petraeus-n-231834293.html

Wich reminds me....

Obama’s Military Coup Purges 197 Officers In Five Years
http://america-wake-up.com/2013/11/03/why-has-obama-fired-197-us-senior-military-commanders-in-5-years-nine-generals-in-2013/

[LAGC]

I don't know, sounds like pretty serious business. If it's true that Petraeus gave that bitch full access to his CIA e-mail account for her "biography" -- that's putting some serious national interests at critical risk right there.

I mean, what if she was a mole for Russian intelligence or something? I wouldn't put it past quite a few governments to dangle a pretty lady with a compelling story ("here to do your biography, sir") in front of a few high-ranking generals or intelligence agency directors to get some prime-level intel.

The good general should have kept his thinking with the big head instead of the little head, especially when it came to his job.

[5.56NATO]

If it exposes treason in the white house or elsehwere I'm all for laying it out in a biography or any other means.

[sevlex]

Petraeus would be smart to let this go to trial. Discovery would be very entertaining.

[1 Patriot-of-many]

I don't know, sounds like pretty serious business. If it's true that Petraeus gave that bitch full access to his CIA e-mail account for her "biography" -- that's putting some serious national interests at critical risk right there.

I mean, what if she was a mole for Russian intelligence or something? I wouldn't put it past quite a few governments to dangle a pretty lady with a compelling story ("here to do your biography, sir") in front of a few high-ranking generals or intelligence agency directors to get some prime-level intel.

The good general should have kept his thinking with the big head instead of the little head, especially when it came to his job. She has clearance ASS. Leave it you to miss the irony of Holder going after ANYONE but himself. But then you've been a good apologist for the most transparently corrupt and unconstitutional administration in American history haven't you and your stooge friend?

[308]

The good general....

The Fast & Furious "Good General"?

[LAGC]

She has clearance ASS.

I somehow doubt a lowly Army Reserve officer gets cleared for top-level military brass CIA briefings.

It isn't Holder who's pushing for prosecution here either, its the FBI. They're the ones who stumbled upon her affair with Petraeus in the first place due to her little cat-fight with another broad who she was jealous of moving in on Petraeus. They installed a trojan horse program on her laptop and went through all her personal e-mails and found out about her X-rated correspondence with the good general.

If Petraeus had just kept his pants zipped up and stayed faithful to his wife, he wouldn't be in this mess now, would he?

[alismith]

Looks like blacky is going after Whitey, again.

I have an idea IF Petreaus were black, this would never have happened.

[kuntryboy]

Looks like blacky is going after Whitey, again.

I have an idea IF Petreaus were black, this would never have happened.

or an illegal alien.

[jet3534]

If Petraeus had just kept his pants zipped up and stayed faithful to his wife, he wouldn't be in this mess now, would he?

On the other hand, if he had taken up "pole smoking" he would be a liberal hero.

[nfa1934]

Three-letter agencies digging up dirt on high-profile officials for the administration to use. Why the fuck is the FBI spying on the CIA anyway? Or anybody, for that matter? Meanwhile, Clapper still hasn't been indicted for lying to Congress.

[LAGC]

On the other hand, if he had taken up "pole smoking" he would be a liberal hero.

That's what I find so funny about this whole practice of homosexuals being denied top secret security clearance for so long because "they could be blackmailed."

It's becoming quite apparent that it's not "teh gay" we really need to be worrying about here when it comes to national security...

Not when there's plenty of straight, horny old generals lining up to be pussy-whipped at the slightest beck and call.

:coffee:

[LAGC]

Why the fuck is the FBI spying on the CIA anyway?

The only reason the FBI got involved was because Petraeus' bimbo sent anonymous threats to another woman, who then reported them to law enforcement.

The FBI then tricked the bimbo into downloading the trojan horse software to find out her identity, which then led them to the e-mails and the affair.

Petraeus has no one to blame but himself for this situation.

[ltorlo64]

It is low level officers who prepare the briefs that the generals and admirals give, so they have to have the same clearance.

[LAGC]

It is low level officers who prepare the briefs that the generals and admirals give, so they have to have the same clearance.

Does that include full access to all top department-level classified e-mails?

Keep in mind, he wasn't acting in his capacity as a general any more, but rather as DIRECTOR of the entire Central Intelligence Agency.

[ltorlo64]

Depends on the duty of the officer, but the general and the 2nd LT can have the same clearance and review the same material, it is a matter of if there was a "need to know". Even as the Director he would have low level staff that have the same clearance as he does and review the same material. We do that so the senior executives and officers can watch many different items while the low level staff get all the specifics on the items to brief the executives and senior officers. This happens in any large organization. The executive cannot know all there is about every decision they are responsible for so they have lower level staff people who are experts on specific items and when the executive has to make a decision on that item the expert is called in to brief the executive and to prepare any briefs the executive may need to give on the topic.

What gets me about this is the President has divulged military and intelligence secrets to the press and through speeches, but he does not get investigated. But someone does not agree with him or challenges him and they are investigated. Don't get me wrong, if the General broke the law he should be held accountable, I just think that all who break the law should be held accountable. This administration seems to be more particular than most on who they do and do not try to hold accountable.

[LAGC]

Depends on the duty of the officer, but the general and the 2nd LT can have the same clearance and review the same material, it is a matter of if there was a "need to know". Even as the Director he would have low level staff that have the same clearance as he does and review the same material. We do that so the senior executives and officers can watch many different items while the low level staff get all the specifics on the items to brief the executives and senior officers. This happens in any large organization. The executive cannot know all there is about every decision they are responsible for so they have lower level staff people who are experts on specific items and when the executive has to make a decision on that item the expert is called in to brief the executive and to prepare any briefs the executive may need to give on the topic.

Well sure, that makes sense for an someone's secretary or subordinates or something, people working on on the same job/mission. But we're talking about a personal biographer here. What business does she have accessing intelligence-related information at such a high-level? After all, she's supposed to be covering HIS life, not all the details of this nation's highest-level intelligence secrets. That whole "need to know" thing.


What gets me about this is the President has divulged military and intelligence secrets to the press and through speeches, but he does not get investigated. But someone does not agree with him or challenges him and they are investigated. Don't get me wrong, if the General broke the law he should be held accountable, I just think that all who break the law should be held accountable. This administration seems to be more particular than most on who they do and do not try to hold accountable.

I guess what I don't understand, if you think this is a political-related conspiracy or something, is what motive does Obama have to falsely accuse the general at this point? I mean, he's already resigned in disgrace due to the affair. Why would he need to be made a further example of?

Obama only spoke of him glowingly after he stepped down:

David Petraeus has provided extraordinary service to the United States for decades. By any measure, he was one of the outstanding General officers of his generation, helping our military adapt to new challenges, and leading our men and women in uniform through a remarkable period of service in Iraq and Afghanistan, where he helped our nation put those wars on a path to a responsible end. As Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, he has continued to serve with characteristic intellectual rigor, dedication, and patriotism. By any measure, through his lifetime of service David Petraeus has made our country safer and stronger.

Today, I accepted his resignation as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. I am completely confident that the CIA will continue to thrive and carry out its essential mission, and I have the utmost confidence in Acting Director Michael Morell and the men and women of the CIA who work every day to keep our nation safe. Going forward, my thoughts and prayers are with Dave and Holly Petraeus, who has done so much to help military families through her own work. I wish them the very best at this difficult time.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/11/09/statement-president-obama-resignation-cia-director-david-petraeus

That doesn't come across as someone who has a personal vendetta against him, by any means.

[ltorlo64]

I don't have any idea what the job of the female officer in this was. Her official duties may have given her access as well. If not, this should be investigated and the General held accountable, I have already said this.

I have not said anything about a conspiracy, I have pointed out that this administration uses a very different measuring stick to decide who to investigate and who not to. If you attack conservatives that is not worthy of an investigation, if you disagree with the president, that is worthy of an investigation.

It is not what the President said in public, Presidents (plural) all say good things about their staff when they leave, or at least don't say anything negative. What the President said to the press does not provide me with any encouragement.

[stevelyn]

The only reason they are going after Petraeus is to derail any possibility of him challenging Hitlery in 2016.

[LAGC]

The only reason they are going after Petraeus is to derail any possibility of him challenging Hitlery in 2016.

Hitlery doesn't need any help. Have you seen her lately? She looks absolutely hideous. I'm not sure she has it in her for a full-blown presidential campaign these next two years, she's aging so fast.

She's going to need some "fluffing" up for the campaign trail, that's for sure.

:coffee:

[stevelyn]

Doesn't matter. The scumbag democraps will still vote for her even if they have to animate her like "Weekend at Bernie's".

[LAGC]

Doesn't matter. The scumbag democraps will still vote for her even if they have to animate her like "Weekend at Bernie's".

Don't be so sure about that. There are quite a few on the left who want Elizabeth Warren to run and take her to task about her corporate dealings with Walmart and Wall Street.

The 2016 primaries should be interesting, on both sides of the aisle.

[stevelyn]

Fauxcahontas is just as bad.

[LAGC]

Fauxcahontas is just as bad.

Well, she's definitely part of the 1% just like all politicians are these days, but she sure has the banks scared shitless, that's for sure.

Even after she created the Consumer Protection Financial Bureau they wouldn't let her run it for fears that she might actually use it to reign in the big banks. So they put some lackey in there instead to just pretend like he's cracking down on corruption and fraud. Same old, same old.

I have no illusions she'll be able to win the primary -- the powers-that-be won't let her come that close to the presidency. But she could bruise Hills up pretty bad if she challenges her, and depending on what sort of sleazy tactics Team Hillary throws at her, could cause quite a few liberals to sit the general out.