Petraeus Shared Top Secret Info With Reporters

[Juan de Fuca]

Well to be exact, we don't know what the FBI is investigating. Also there are only two laws that apply to this investigation 18 USCA 1924(a) and 18 USCA 793(a) which is a more serious breach. The Supreme Court would view prosecution under the Espionage Act without sincere "Intent" to injure the United States and in "bad faith" very poorly.

As Professor Laurie Levinson intoned

This case doesn't rise to the level of Petraeus and will not have the ending either.

You can find some idiot who will give ANY opinion.

The fact is, that espionage does NOT require intent. Period.

Let me just be clear here.

I used to work for the government. I had a classified job (so no details will be posted) that often put me in places where my identity was unknown for the obvious reason that there were locals who would have liked to have gotten their hands on me if they knew my identity)

My life, and hundreds if not thousands of others like me, literally depended on people keeping that information secure. Clinton literally decided that her political career was more important than our lives when she refused to follow the rules and the law, and if a cabinet member isn't held to the law, why would a petty officer on a nuclear submarine be expected to follow said law, and then you have no one following the law.

Yes, I think Patraeus should have been punished more harshly, the fact that he wasn't has ZERO bearing on Clinton's case.

You're incorrect because the courts have traditionally viewed espionage (which Hillary Clinton is is no way being considered) as a very serious event. Here is the SC opinion of "Bad Faith"

"We find no uncertainty in this statute which deprives a person of the ability to predetermine whether a contemplated action is criminal under the provisions of this law. The obvious delimiting words in the statute are those requiring intent or reason to believe that the information to be obtained is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation. This requires those prosecuted to have acted in bad faith." Gorin v. United States 312 U.S. 19 (1941)

Further, the email that Hillary had that was classified only became classified at a later point. Even Colin Powell defends her on this point.

Everyone who has held a security clearance regards it highly, but that doesn't mean there aren't mistakes made. David Petraeus' violations were far more serious and he got off with a $100,000 fine and two years probation. Hillary Clinton will not get anything more serious than that.

I actually agree, she won't get anything more serious than that. THAT however should absolutely disqualify her from holding any elected office, let alone POTUS.

Also, what the courts have traditionally ruled on has little bearing on what the actual law is. I despise any court that doesn't frown heavily on ANY person who breaks the law in regards to treason, and I despise courts who don't act appropriately to punish those who break the law.

Then the argument boils down to "Should a misdemeanor disqualify anyone from running for office" especially since we have had felons in office. It kind of makes it difficult to disqualify anyone when we allow the more serious violators to hold office.

Ideally, yes of course breaking the law should disqualify you from holding an office that enacts or enforces said laws. But of course there should also be a higher standard correspondent to the higher position.

Let's just be real honest here. If a Republican had done EXACTLY the same thing Hillary did, EXACT same circumstances, 99% of the morons on this board who are currently defending her would be up in arms and calling for jail time for said Republican. You know that's true.

To be fair, no doubt most of the people who want her jailed for life don't even understand the law and would no doubt be defending her if she were a Republican.

Moral of the story. People are idiots. The LAW however is supposed to be blind. Hillary broke the law. PERIOD.

You made perfect sense until you got to the last sentence....she still has not been found guilty of anything.

 

[easyt65]

Absolutely I get it. Just don't whine when she gets slapped on the wrist.

Liberals seem to equate not being punished with being 'innocent'.

Eric Holder was caught perpetrating 3 Felony counts of Perjury yet was protected by Obama from criminal charges. A bipartisan Congress, in turn, Censured him, making him the 1st AG in US history to be Censured for crimes.

Lois Lerner admitted to the press that illegal targeting of the TEA Party and Conservatives DID happen and was conducted by HER department. She then pled the 5th and was protected from any punishment. (The IRS just released the Identities of the groups they admit they targeted.)

Despite the criminally incompetent Obama-appointed head of the VA being fired, Lynch just refused to enforce part of the law that enabled her to be fired, paving the way for the same loser responsible for a VA so dysfunctional and messed up that Vets died while waiting for care to get her job back.

Hillary, despite having been proven to have violated the law - the FOIA and Federal Records Act, is being and will continue to be protected by Obama / Lynch. Anyone really think Liberals will let an ex-1st lady, an Obama Sect of State Appointee, and 'new history-making DNC Candidate' go to jail? No way Obama and / or Liberals will let something like that go down in the history books as part of their legacy.

 

[Juan de Fuca]

Absolutely I get it. Just don't whine when she gets slapped on the wrist.

Liberals seem to equate not being punished with being 'innocent'.

Eric Holder was caught perpetrating 3 Felony counts of Perjury yet was protected by Obama from criminal charges. A bipartisan Congress, in turn, Censured him, making him the 1st AG in US history to be Censured for crimes.

Lois Lerner admitted to the press that illegal targeting of the TEA Party and Conservatives DID happen and was conducted by HER department. She then pled the 5th and was protected from any punishment. (The IRS just released the Identities of the groups they admit they targeted.)

Despite the criminally incompetent Obama-appointed head of the VA being fired, Lynch just refused to enforce part of the law that enabled her to be fired, paving the way for the same loser responsible for a VA so dysfunctional and messed up that Vets died while waiting for care to get her job back.

Hillary, despite having been proven to have violated the law - the FOIA and Federal Records Act, is being and will continue to be protected by Obama / Lynch. Anyone really think Liberals will let an ex-1st lady, an Obama Sect of State Appointee, and 'new history-making DNC Candidate' go to jail? No way Obama and / or Liberals will let something like that go down in the history books as part of their legacy.

So? As everyone has seen every administration does the same. Maybe the problem is not accepting the fact that one party won the election and the other can't accept that fact (this applies to all sides) and has to obstruct and dig for events that can be construed as criminal. It's a game and its wrong.

 

[blastoff]

So why did he only get charged with a misdemeanor? and how do you charge Hillary Clinton for anything more serious than a misdemeanor if she is found to have broken security laws?

Protecting law breaking cows is wrong and the people who allowed it should be exposed.

The investigation that led CIA Director David Petraeus to resign and ultimately plead guilty to a criminal charge of mishandling classified information also uncovered evidence that he discussed highly classified information with journalists, according to a court document obtained Tuesday by POLITICO.
Requesting a search warrant for Petraeus' Arlington, Virginia home in 2013, an FBI agent told a federal magistrate the agency had two audio recordings in which the retired four-star Army general spoke with reporters about matters that authorities believed were "top secret."
Story Continued Below
"There is a recorded conversation between Petraeus and, inter alia, Washington Post reporters, which, based on the information and belief of your affiant, occurred in or about March 2011," Special Agent Diane Wehner wrote. "In the conversation, Petraeus stated, 'I would really love to be on background as a senior military officer.' Later in the recording, Petraeus discusses sensitive military campaigns and operations, some of which, on the basis of a preliminary review ... is believed to contain classified information, including information at the Top Secret level."


Read more: FBI claimed Petraeus shared ‘top secret’ info with reporters

It's called a plea deal. Patraeus WAS charged with a crime, and plead guilty to a lesser crime . Happens all the time.

That's my point. How does Hillary Clinton get charged at an appropriate level when David Petraeus got away with murder?

He didn't get away with murder. Hyperbole much?

I believe he got off too easy. BUT that doesn't have jack shit to do with HIllary and her own case.

You can't set a standard that low for an actual security crime for a high level person and actually think that someone isn't going to raise holy hell if you try to charge another high level person with a higher level crime. It just won't happen.

You're kind of dense.

 

[Juan de Fuca]

So why did he only get charged with a misdemeanor? and how do you charge Hillary Clinton for anything more serious than a misdemeanor if she is found to have broken security laws?

Protecting law breaking cows is wrong and the people who allowed it should be exposed.

It's called a plea deal. Patraeus WAS charged with a crime, and plead guilty to a lesser crime . Happens all the time.

That's my point. How does Hillary Clinton get charged at an appropriate level when David Petraeus got away with murder?

He didn't get away with murder. Hyperbole much?

I believe he got off too easy. BUT that doesn't have jack shit to do with HIllary and her own case.

You can't set a standard that low for an actual security crime for a high level person and actually think that someone isn't going to raise holy hell if you try to charge another high level person with a higher level crime. It just won't happen.

You're kind of dense.

No, actually I'm not and understand the applicable law in this case pretty well.

 

[Hossfly]

I don't believe she will be charged with anything. I'm leaning towards an aide or an underling being charged, but that's where it ends.

That's the part that people don't get. The FBI isn't investigating whether there were crimes committed. There WERE crimes committed. They are investigating who should be charged with those crimes.

I don't see how she isn't charged with something. But yeah, Huma will probably take most of the fall.

Well to be exact, we don't know what the FBI is investigating. Also there are only two laws that apply to this investigation 18 USCA 1924(a) and 18 USCA 793(a) which is a more serious breach. The Supreme Court would view prosecution under the Espionage Act without sincere "Intent" to injure the United States and in "bad faith" very poorly.

As Professor Laurie Levinson intoned

"Politics aside, it is difficult to find prior cases where the unwise handling of classified information led to a federal indictment. For the last 20 years, the federal statutes have been used when there were intentional unauthorized disclosures. The Department of Justice appears to have gone after ‘leakers,’ but not bunglers."
Clinton's Email: Unwise, But Likely Not Criminal

This case doesn't rise to the level of Petraeus and will not have the ending either.

You can find some idiot who will give ANY opinion.

The fact is, that espionage does NOT require intent. Period.

Let me just be clear here.

I used to work for the government. I had a classified job (so no details will be posted) that often put me in places where my identity was unknown for the obvious reason that there were locals who would have liked to have gotten their hands on me if they knew my identity)

My life, and hundreds if not thousands of others like me, literally depended on people keeping that information secure. Clinton literally decided that her political career was more important than our lives when she refused to follow the rules and the law, and if a cabinet member isn't held to the law, why would a petty officer on a nuclear submarine be expected to follow said law, and then you have no one following the law.

Yes, I think Patraeus should have been punished more harshly, the fact that he wasn't has ZERO bearing on Clinton's case.

You're incorrect because the courts have traditionally viewed espionage (which Hillary Clinton is is no way being considered) as a very serious event. Here is the SC opinion of "Bad Faith"

"We find no uncertainty in this statute which deprives a person of the ability to predetermine whether a contemplated action is criminal under the provisions of this law. The obvious delimiting words in the statute are those requiring intent or reason to believe that the information to be obtained is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation. This requires those prosecuted to have acted in bad faith." Gorin v. United States 312 U.S. 19 (1941)

Further, the email that Hillary had that was classified only became classified at a later point. Even Colin Powell defends her on this point.

Everyone who has held a security clearance regards it highly, but that doesn't mean there aren't mistakes made. David Petraeus' violations were far more serious and he got off with a $100,000 fine and two years probation. Hillary Clinton will not get anything more serious than that.

I will bet the farm that no information is or ever has been "classified later." That is a crock of bullshit. When classified material is sent it has a security designation. Hillary told her staff to remove the classification and send it E-mail. Classified mail is supposed to be faxed, not E-mailed. I will stake my life on it.The bitch ignored and broke the law. Anyone else in would have already been in prison.

 

[Juan de Fuca]

I don't believe she will be charged with anything. I'm leaning towards an aide or an underling being charged, but that's where it ends.

That's the part that people don't get. The FBI isn't investigating whether there were crimes committed. There WERE crimes committed. They are investigating who should be charged with those crimes.

I don't see how she isn't charged with something. But yeah, Huma will probably take most of the fall.

Well to be exact, we don't know what the FBI is investigating. Also there are only two laws that apply to this investigation 18 USCA 1924(a) and 18 USCA 793(a) which is a more serious breach. The Supreme Court would view prosecution under the Espionage Act without sincere "Intent" to injure the United States and in "bad faith" very poorly.

As Professor Laurie Levinson intoned

"Politics aside, it is difficult to find prior cases where the unwise handling of classified information led to a federal indictment. For the last 20 years, the federal statutes have been used when there were intentional unauthorized disclosures. The Department of Justice appears to have gone after ‘leakers,’ but not bunglers."
Clinton's Email: Unwise, But Likely Not Criminal

This case doesn't rise to the level of Petraeus and will not have the ending either.

You can find some idiot who will give ANY opinion.

The fact is, that espionage does NOT require intent. Period.

Let me just be clear here.

I used to work for the government. I had a classified job (so no details will be posted) that often put me in places where my identity was unknown for the obvious reason that there were locals who would have liked to have gotten their hands on me if they knew my identity)

My life, and hundreds if not thousands of others like me, literally depended on people keeping that information secure. Clinton literally decided that her political career was more important than our lives when she refused to follow the rules and the law, and if a cabinet member isn't held to the law, why would a petty officer on a nuclear submarine be expected to follow said law, and then you have no one following the law.

Yes, I think Patraeus should have been punished more harshly, the fact that he wasn't has ZERO bearing on Clinton's case.

You're incorrect because the courts have traditionally viewed espionage (which Hillary Clinton is is no way being considered) as a very serious event. Here is the SC opinion of "Bad Faith"

"We find no uncertainty in this statute which deprives a person of the ability to predetermine whether a contemplated action is criminal under the provisions of this law. The obvious delimiting words in the statute are those requiring intent or reason to believe that the information to be obtained is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation. This requires those prosecuted to have acted in bad faith." Gorin v. United States 312 U.S. 19 (1941)

Further, the email that Hillary had that was classified only became classified at a later point. Even Colin Powell defends her on this point.

Everyone who has held a security clearance regards it highly, but that doesn't mean there aren't mistakes made. David Petraeus' violations were far more serious and he got off with a $100,000 fine and two years probation. Hillary Clinton will not get anything more serious than that.

I will bet the farm that no information is or ever has been "classified later." That is a crock of bullshit. When classified material is sent it has a security designation. Hillary told her staff to remove the classification and send it E-mail. Classified mail is supposed to be faxed, not E-mailed. I will stake my life on it.The bitch ignored and broke the law. Anyone else in would have already been in prison.

Yet Colin Powell said the same thing happened to him.

 

[Hossfly]

That's the part that people don't get. The FBI isn't investigating whether there were crimes committed. There WERE crimes committed. They are investigating who should be charged with those crimes.

I don't see how she isn't charged with something. But yeah, Huma will probably take most of the fall.

Well to be exact, we don't know what the FBI is investigating. Also there are only two laws that apply to this investigation 18 USCA 1924(a) and 18 USCA 793(a) which is a more serious breach. The Supreme Court would view prosecution under the Espionage Act without sincere "Intent" to injure the United States and in "bad faith" very poorly.

As Professor Laurie Levinson intoned

"Politics aside, it is difficult to find prior cases where the unwise handling of classified information led to a federal indictment. For the last 20 years, the federal statutes have been used when there were intentional unauthorized disclosures. The Department of Justice appears to have gone after ‘leakers,’ but not bunglers."
Clinton's Email: Unwise, But Likely Not Criminal

This case doesn't rise to the level of Petraeus and will not have the ending either.

You can find some idiot who will give ANY opinion.

The fact is, that espionage does NOT require intent. Period.

Let me just be clear here.

I used to work for the government. I had a classified job (so no details will be posted) that often put me in places where my identity was unknown for the obvious reason that there were locals who would have liked to have gotten their hands on me if they knew my identity)

My life, and hundreds if not thousands of others like me, literally depended on people keeping that information secure. Clinton literally decided that her political career was more important than our lives when she refused to follow the rules and the law, and if a cabinet member isn't held to the law, why would a petty officer on a nuclear submarine be expected to follow said law, and then you have no one following the law.

Yes, I think Patraeus should have been punished more harshly, the fact that he wasn't has ZERO bearing on Clinton's case.

You're incorrect because the courts have traditionally viewed espionage (which Hillary Clinton is is no way being considered) as a very serious event. Here is the SC opinion of "Bad Faith"

"We find no uncertainty in this statute which deprives a person of the ability to predetermine whether a contemplated action is criminal under the provisions of this law. The obvious delimiting words in the statute are those requiring intent or reason to believe that the information to be obtained is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation. This requires those prosecuted to have acted in bad faith." Gorin v. United States 312 U.S. 19 (1941)

Further, the email that Hillary had that was classified only became classified at a later point. Even Colin Powell defends her on this point.

Everyone who has held a security clearance regards it highly, but that doesn't mean there aren't mistakes made. David Petraeus' violations were far more serious and he got off with a $100,000 fine and two years probation. Hillary Clinton will not get anything more serious than that.

I will bet the farm that no information is or ever has been "classified later." That is a crock of bullshit. When classified material is sent it has a security designation. Hillary told her staff to remove the classification and send it E-mail. Classified mail is supposed to be faxed, not E-mailed. I will stake my life on it.The bitch ignored and broke the law. Anyone else in would have already been in prison.

Yet Colin Powell said the same thing happened to him.

But Colin is not being investigated. Clinton is.

 

[Juan de Fuca]

Well to be exact, we don't know what the FBI is investigating. Also there are only two laws that apply to this investigation 18 USCA 1924(a) and 18 USCA 793(a) which is a more serious breach. The Supreme Court would view prosecution under the Espionage Act without sincere "Intent" to injure the United States and in "bad faith" very poorly.

As Professor Laurie Levinson intoned

This case doesn't rise to the level of Petraeus and will not have the ending either.

You can find some idiot who will give ANY opinion.

The fact is, that espionage does NOT require intent. Period.

Let me just be clear here.

I used to work for the government. I had a classified job (so no details will be posted) that often put me in places where my identity was unknown for the obvious reason that there were locals who would have liked to have gotten their hands on me if they knew my identity)

My life, and hundreds if not thousands of others like me, literally depended on people keeping that information secure. Clinton literally decided that her political career was more important than our lives when she refused to follow the rules and the law, and if a cabinet member isn't held to the law, why would a petty officer on a nuclear submarine be expected to follow said law, and then you have no one following the law.

Yes, I think Patraeus should have been punished more harshly, the fact that he wasn't has ZERO bearing on Clinton's case.

You're incorrect because the courts have traditionally viewed espionage (which Hillary Clinton is is no way being considered) as a very serious event. Here is the SC opinion of "Bad Faith"

"We find no uncertainty in this statute which deprives a person of the ability to predetermine whether a contemplated action is criminal under the provisions of this law. The obvious delimiting words in the statute are those requiring intent or reason to believe that the information to be obtained is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation. This requires those prosecuted to have acted in bad faith." Gorin v. United States 312 U.S. 19 (1941)

Further, the email that Hillary had that was classified only became classified at a later point. Even Colin Powell defends her on this point.

Everyone who has held a security clearance regards it highly, but that doesn't mean there aren't mistakes made. David Petraeus' violations were far more serious and he got off with a $100,000 fine and two years probation. Hillary Clinton will not get anything more serious than that.

I will bet the farm that no information is or ever has been "classified later." That is a crock of bullshit. When classified material is sent it has a security designation. Hillary told her staff to remove the classification and send it E-mail. Classified mail is supposed to be faxed, not E-mailed. I will stake my life on it.The bitch ignored and broke the law. Anyone else in would have already been in prison.

Yet Colin Powell said the same thing happened to him.

But Colin is not being investigated. Clinton is.

But Colin said you were wrong. What else are you wrong about?

 

[Hossfly]

You can find some idiot who will give ANY opinion.

The fact is, that espionage does NOT require intent. Period.

Let me just be clear here.

I used to work for the government. I had a classified job (so no details will be posted) that often put me in places where my identity was unknown for the obvious reason that there were locals who would have liked to have gotten their hands on me if they knew my identity)

My life, and hundreds if not thousands of others like me, literally depended on people keeping that information secure. Clinton literally decided that her political career was more important than our lives when she refused to follow the rules and the law, and if a cabinet member isn't held to the law, why would a petty officer on a nuclear submarine be expected to follow said law, and then you have no one following the law.

Yes, I think Patraeus should have been punished more harshly, the fact that he wasn't has ZERO bearing on Clinton's case.

You're incorrect because the courts have traditionally viewed espionage (which Hillary Clinton is is no way being considered) as a very serious event. Here is the SC opinion of "Bad Faith"

"We find no uncertainty in this statute which deprives a person of the ability to predetermine whether a contemplated action is criminal under the provisions of this law. The obvious delimiting words in the statute are those requiring intent or reason to believe that the information to be obtained is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation. This requires those prosecuted to have acted in bad faith." Gorin v. United States 312 U.S. 19 (1941)

Further, the email that Hillary had that was classified only became classified at a later point. Even Colin Powell defends her on this point.

Everyone who has held a security clearance regards it highly, but that doesn't mean there aren't mistakes made. David Petraeus' violations were far more serious and he got off with a $100,000 fine and two years probation. Hillary Clinton will not get anything more serious than that.

I will bet the farm that no information is or ever has been "classified later." That is a crock of bullshit. When classified material is sent it has a security designation. Hillary told her staff to remove the classification and send it E-mail. Classified mail is supposed to be faxed, not E-mailed. I will stake my life on it.The bitch ignored and broke the law. Anyone else in would have already been in prison.

Yet Colin Powell said the same thing happened to him.

But Colin is not being investigated. Clinton is.

But Colin said you were wrong. What else are you wrong about?

Colin got investigated? Fancy that!

 

[Juan de Fuca]

You're incorrect because the courts have traditionally viewed espionage (which Hillary Clinton is is no way being considered) as a very serious event. Here is the SC opinion of "Bad Faith"
Further, the email that Hillary had that was classified only became classified at a later point. Even Colin Powell defends her on this point.

Everyone who has held a security clearance regards it highly, but that doesn't mean there aren't mistakes made. David Petraeus' violations were far more serious and he got off with a $100,000 fine and two years probation. Hillary Clinton will not get anything more serious than that.

I will bet the farm that no information is or ever has been "classified later." That is a crock of bullshit. When classified material is sent it has a security designation. Hillary told her staff to remove the classification and send it E-mail. Classified mail is supposed to be faxed, not E-mailed. I will stake my life on it.The bitch ignored and broke the law. Anyone else in would have already been in prison.

Yet Colin Powell said the same thing happened to him.

But Colin is not being investigated. Clinton is.

But Colin said you were wrong. What else are you wrong about?

Colin got investigated? Fancy that!

No one said that. He stood up for Hillary Clinton is all.

 

[Hossfly]

I will bet the farm that no information is or ever has been "classified later." That is a crock of bullshit. When classified material is sent it has a security designation. Hillary told her staff to remove the classification and send it E-mail. Classified mail is supposed to be faxed, not E-mailed. I will stake my life on it.The bitch ignored and broke the law. Anyone else in would have already been in prison.

Yet Colin Powell said the same thing happened to him.

But Colin is not being investigated. Clinton is.

But Colin said you were wrong. What else are you wrong about?

Colin got investigated? Fancy that!

No one said that. He stood up for Hillary Clinton is all.

Lip service, that's all.

 

[Juan de Fuca]

Yet Colin Powell said the same thing happened to him.

But Colin is not being investigated. Clinton is.

But Colin said you were wrong. What else are you wrong about?

Colin got investigated? Fancy that!

No one said that. He stood up for Hillary Clinton is all.

Lip service, that's all.

He said he received information that was classified later, that will come in handy at a trial and he'll make a very good witness.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

But Colin is not being investigated. Clinton is.

But Colin said you were wrong. What else are you wrong about?

Colin got investigated? Fancy that!

No one said that. He stood up for Hillary Clinton is all.

Lip service, that's all.

He said he received information that was classified later, that will come in handy at a trial and he'll make a very good witness.

You're both right and wrong on that point.

Powell did say he had some emails that were later on classified meaning they weren't actually designated as classified when he saw them.

The problem is when you have a security clearance you are supposed to recognize material that should be classified and treat it accordingly even if it's not officially marked "classified" also Juan there is zero evidence that Powell sent any such emails via personal email. There were I believe 3 instances where he received classified emails. That's not illegal.

Do you notice that Clinton has always parsed her comments to say "I never sent emails that were marked as classified?" That in fact may be true , but she was tasked with knowing which material should be classified whether marked as such or not. So "it wasn't marked classified" is no excuse at all an dB the FBI makes that very clear when they brief you when you receive your clearance

 

[Juan de Fuca]

But Colin said you were wrong. What else are you wrong about?

Colin got investigated? Fancy that!

No one said that. He stood up for Hillary Clinton is all.

Lip service, that's all.

He said he received information that was classified later, that will come in handy at a trial and he'll make a very good witness.

You're both right and wrong on that point.

Powell did say he had some emails that were later on classified meaning they weren't actually designated as classified when he saw them.

The problem is when you have a security clearance you are supposed to recognize material that should be classified and treat it accordingly even if it's not officially marked "classified" also Juan there is zero evidence that Powell sent any such emails via personal email. There were I believe 3 instances where he received classified emails. That's not illegal.

Do you notice that Clinton has always parsed her comments to say "I never sent emails that were marked as classified?" That in fact may be true , but she was tasked with knowing which material should be classified whether marked as such or not. So "it wasn't marked classified" is no excuse at all an dB the FBI makes that very clear when they brief you when you receive your clearance

Clinton is a Yale trained lawyer so I expect her answer to be precise and confounding to investigators. If you are really intent on finding something you had better have your best investigators on it it you're just wasting taxpayer money as we have seen. The problem that the FBI is going to have and I saw it early on, is that someone like Clinton doesn't do the menial work, we don't pay her the big bucks to send faxes and is why the FBI is not likely to find anything but exasperation in this case.

 

[williepete]

He said he received information that was classified later, that will come in handy at a trial and he'll make a very good witness.

I take it from your posts you aren't familiar with handling classified information.

I see from your profile page you originally claimed to be a Vietnam veteran who served two tours but you stated your birth year as 1975. You quickly pulled that down after V called you on it.

I can understand not being familiar with handling classified information but stolen valor is beneath contempt.

If you're going to continue to post here, you should either come clean or leave. I can accept an apology but a cover up or a barrage of excuses is just asking us to accept more of your stolen valor lies.

Quick and easy questions for you: Did you serve? What branch? What MOS/AFSC/Specialty? What was your security clearance level?

If you didn't serve, just fess up. I'll be the first to call no harm, no foul. Far better than to steal what others earned. 6 of my squadron mates paid the full price.

 

[williepete]

Vigilante I see you REMOVED your 1975 birth date, AFTER I caught you saying you served 2 tours in Vietnam.... You lying, fucking stolen valor bastard!
May 27, 2016 Report
Thank Comment

1. 
   Juan de Fuca Do you know that people can figure out where you live by your birthday? All they need is a zip code and there are programs that can narrow it down to your doorstep. That's why I don't put the correct date up. None of you should.
   May 27, 2016 Report
   Thank
   
   
2. 
   Vigilante You're so full of bullshit, this page is beginning to small from your stench! Claiming to be a Vietnam Vet born in 1975....ROTFLMFAO...only a fucking weenie liberal scumbag would even think about trying to CON his way out of this!

 

[Juan de Fuca]

He said he received information that was classified later, that will come in handy at a trial and he'll make a very good witness.

I take it from your posts you aren't familiar with handling classified information.

I see from your profile page you originally claimed to be a Vietnam veteran who served two tours but you stated your birth year as 1975. You quickly pulled that down after V called you on it.

I can understand not being familiar with handling classified information but stolen valor is beneath contempt.

If you're going to continue to post here, you should either come clean or leave. I can accept an apology but a cover up or a barrage of excuses is just asking us to accept more of your stolen valor lies.

Quick and easy questions for you: Did you serve? What branch? What MOS/AFSC/Specialty? What was your security clearance level?

If you didn't serve, just fess up. I'll be the first to call no harm, no foul. Far better than to steal what others earned. 6 of my squadron mates paid the full price.

I am familiar with handling classified information. I spent a year at the Field Artillery Combat Developments Agency at Ft Sill and worked as an aide to Col Frank Sandholm Director,before the agency was closed. mission was to develop, monitor and offer criticism to weapons of the future. We also had to contribute to a plan that readied the military for conflict in the year 2000. I had a Top Secret Temp rating because of my relationship with the Agency Director and a permanent Secret clearance.

I am who I said I was and I explained to Vigilante that I do not put personal information on message boards. Professionals just need your birthdate and a zip code to establish your address and a plethora of personal information. I served in the Army and graduated from OCS at Ft Sill, I served with the 9th Infantry Division in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam.

That's all I have to say about it.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Petraeus was caught in something much larger involving more people than known....he took the fall for all of them so their names could be kept secret.......the Fl socialites are muslim agents

 

[williepete]

I am who I said I was and I explained to Vigilante that I do not put personal information on message boards. Professionals just need your birthdate and a zip code to establish your address and a plethora of personal information. I served in the Army and graduated from OCS at Ft Sill, I served with the 9th Infantry Division in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam.

So why did you need to lie about being a combat vet who was born two years after the U.S. left Vietnam? All of your personal information is now wiped clean. It's kind of hard to give you any credibility after joining a message board with this level of falsehood.