HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » If Cantor knew about the ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:18 AM

If Cantor knew about the Petraeus story before the White House did, and

didn't inform the White House, isn't that a betrayal of his responsibility to act in the best interest of the nation?

Like, maybe, an act of TREASON by omission?

53 replies, 3245 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 53 replies Author Time Post
Reply If Cantor knew about the Petraeus story before the White House did, and (Original post)
Jackpine Radical Nov 2012 OP
itsrobert Nov 2012 #1
djean111 Nov 2012 #2
malaise Nov 2012 #17
Lint Head Nov 2012 #3
jsr Nov 2012 #15
Panasonic Nov 2012 #4
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #5
Panasonic Nov 2012 #7
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #8
onenote Nov 2012 #23
hughee99 Nov 2012 #19
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #22
hughee99 Nov 2012 #25
alcibiades_mystery Nov 2012 #6
pinto Nov 2012 #33
ewagner Nov 2012 #9
HopeHoops Nov 2012 #10
former9thward Nov 2012 #11
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #12
RobertEarl Nov 2012 #13
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #14
RobertEarl Nov 2012 #18
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #20
RobertEarl Nov 2012 #26
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #28
RobertEarl Nov 2012 #32
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #36
former9thward Nov 2012 #21
RobertEarl Nov 2012 #24
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #27
RobertEarl Nov 2012 #29
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #31
former9thward Nov 2012 #30
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #34
RobertEarl Nov 2012 #35
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #37
former9thward Nov 2012 #38
RobertEarl Nov 2012 #40
former9thward Nov 2012 #41
Honeycombe8 Nov 2012 #16
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #45
Honeycombe8 Nov 2012 #52
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #53
Blue4Texas Nov 2012 #39
Tippy Nov 2012 #42
Sunlei Nov 2012 #43
Rex Nov 2012 #44
FarCenter Nov 2012 #46
Wellstone ruled Nov 2012 #47
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #48
Jackpine Radical Nov 2012 #49
amborin Nov 2012 #50
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #51

Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:22 AM

1. Did he work with the FBI?

The FBI seems like the appropriate agency to handle this. And if it is in the FBI hands, it's up to them to disclose or not to disclose as they see the best course of action of the investigation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:33 AM

2. Giving Cantor's treasonous character, I would think that,

if he had a choice, he would sit on the info hoping to use it for impeachment purposes if Romney lost.
But presumably Cantor cannot tell the FBI what to do. I hope.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #2)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:37 PM

17. So if Rmoney had won it would have been covered up?n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:34 AM

3. Petraeus and Cantor are right wingers. I think the whistle blower went to a right winger

because they thought it could be covered up. Petraeus has been cited by the GOP as a potential candidate for President. Cantor wants to be VP and this information would be a way to blackmail Petraeus into choosing him or else the world would know. I think Cantor was forced by circumstance to reveal the information.

This is just my speculation and opinion but stranger things have happened in our history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lint Head (Reply #3)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:34 PM

15. Very plausible

It is the simplest explanation right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:35 AM

4. Yup. Failure to notify the President is considered treason

 

ESPECIALLY if Cantor withheld knowledge about Petraeus story.

He needs to be expelled from Congress, and Wayne Powell wins the special election that is held the week before the new Congress gets seated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Panasonic (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:37 AM

5. Under what definition

is failure to notify the President "treason"?

That word gets tossed around here like crazy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #5)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:39 AM

7. Withholding cruicial information

 

about a head of a key cabinet position (oh, like the CIA) is definetely dangerous and could be used to topple the President.

That is treason, by definition, and Cantor is in serious trouble. I expect Ethics Committee to convene shortly to discuss two matters - one Issa and one Cantor to be expelled from the U.S. House of Representatives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Panasonic (Reply #7)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:41 AM

8. You would do well to look up the definition of treason in Constitution

Since the Constitutional definition is the only one that matters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #8)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:49 PM

23. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #5)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:43 PM

19. This one:

"Treason" - when someone does something I don't like that involves our government or a foreign country.

Similar to another word that gets tossed around like crazy.

"Nazi" - a person that I don't like.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hughee99 (Reply #19)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:49 PM

22. Interestingly, I was accused of treason downthread

Simply for calling out the misuse of the word.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #22)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:53 PM

25. I saw that and had to laugh. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:38 AM

6. Cantor actually did the right thing here, it appears to me

The FBI employee originally went to Representative Dave Reichert of Washington (also of Green River Killer task force fame). Reichert, rather oddly, passed him (or her) on to Eric Cantor.

Cantor referred the matter back to the FBI.

It seems clear that both the FBI employee and Reichert were looking to make election hay out of this issue. Cantor refused to do so, and went through the proper channels. Now, Cantor's motivation for doing so are unclear. I suspect that he was just as shocked as anybody, and because he's a Virginia guy, he's probably been around Petraeus a lot. Indeed, he's probably personal friends with Petraeus.

So, the FBI employee meets with him with this information, and Cantor doesn't like it at all. He essentially turned the FBI employee into the FBI Director. But this was the right thing to do, since the FBI employee was in essence interfering with an ongoing investigation in order to make an impact on the election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #6)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:04 PM

33. Tend to agree on the whole. I think the FBI employee, as well as Reichert, were possibly looking for

pre-election investigation hay. Reichart may have felt his responsibility was to pass the info on to his leader in the House. The employee, though, should have gone up the ladder within his own department and let the FBI Director make the follow up call.

Worth noting as an aside that internecine politics exist in the FBI and the CIA for that matter. Maybe less so than in other departments, but neither are devoid of partisan political advocates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:45 AM

9. My take on it...

Cantor was caught between a rock and a hard place...

Should he?

1. Jump in an destroy the Republican Party's "Great White Hope" for 2016?

or

2. Destroy the iconic general and try to pin the Obama Administration with a scandal?

Decisions, decisions, decisions....

He punted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:03 PM

10. His "service" in the House has been a string of acts of treason.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:14 PM

11. Yet another poster who loves to throw around the work "treason".

Without knowing the legal definition. By that tortured logic then Petraeus committed treason since he knew the story immediately before anyone else and did not inform anyone. And Obama committed treason since after he knew the story he praised Petraeus to the sky.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #11)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:15 PM

12. Thank you

Treason has a very specific definition, and this isn't even close.

And yes, I'm constantly amazed at how often "treason" gets thrown around here at DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:32 PM

13. You have to admit

That given the state of affairs pretty much all of them are Treasonous Bastards being that they are destroying our country and giving aid and comfort to our enemies.

And you do tend to amaze me, SO1P, you are seemingly everywhere preaching aid and comfort for our enemies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #13)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:33 PM

14. Where have I EVER preached aid and comfort to our enemies? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #14)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:38 PM

18. Well, here, for one

And I remember you being against me when I was preaching about them stealing votes.

But the real question is: why are you protecting Cantor on this thread? He is our enemy, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #18)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:46 PM

20. Knowing the definition of treason

And calling out people that obviously have no idea what it is as they accuse people of it is not "protecting Cantor". "Treason by omisson"? That's not even a real concept.

Here is the definition of treason (bolding added by me):

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.


While Cantor may well be an enemy of Democrats, I don't believe him to be an enemy of the United States, which is what he would need to be in order to be "treasonous".

Show me what you have that shows that Cantor levied war against the United States or where he adhered to enemies of the United States, giving them aid and comfort, and we'll talk.

For that matter, show me where I've done either of those things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #20)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:56 PM

26. Heh

Cantor, just this summer, tried his best to destroy the Good Faith and Credit of the US.

If you are so blind as to not see what Cantor has been doing, you need to go back and study the archives of faux news. It's all there, I am sure.

As far as I am concerned, Cantor is my enemy, because he made himself as such. I take it he is your friend?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #26)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:00 PM

28. Upon what do you base your assumption that he's my friend?

The fact that I won't accuse him (or anyone else) of treason just because they don't act the way I want them to?

I'm of the opinion that people who want to throw political enemies into prison without charge, trial or conviction to be much more of a danger to democracy than the political enemies themselves.

YMMV.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #28)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:03 PM

32. Who said no trial?

Why do you feel you have to make stuff up?

He should be charged, have a fair trial and then be thrown in prison.

He is not my friend. He is my enemy, Is he your friend or an enemy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #32)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:06 PM

36. On a personal level, neither

He's a political opponent, a man with a leadership role in an opposing political party. Politically, he's an enemy. On a personal level, he's nothing to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #18)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:47 PM

21. Since Cantor is our "enemy" do you want all of our enemies thrown in Prison?

Or better yet, shot without trial? Tell us what you really want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #21)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:52 PM

24. Prison is an apt place, yes.

What? You think he is not a criminal?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #24)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:57 PM

27. Thinking someone is a criminal

doesn't meet the standard. When charges are brought and he's found guilty, then throw him under the jail.

If you have proof of his criminal activity, I would recommend contacting the FBI in DC ASAP. You should be able to Google their number.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #27)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:01 PM

29. FBI is on him now

What you forget is that Bush, et al, including Cantor, are criminals. They just have not been convicted yet.

What drives you to be so coddling of these criminals?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #29)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:03 PM

31. Examples of where I'm coddling them? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #24)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:02 PM

30. So you re saying all non-Democrats are criminals?

In addition to your disgust for the Constitution are you in the prison business? We will need a lot of them to house about 100 million people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #30)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:04 PM

34. Apparenty so

I also learned today that it's treasonous to actually know the definition of treason.

I'm very upset with my fifth grade history teacher for not making it clear to me that by educating me, he was making me a criminal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #30)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:05 PM

35. No. But Cantor is

You do know what website you are on, right?

And somehow this wisdom disturbs you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #35)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:10 PM

37. If you have proof he's a criminal, turn him in

Why are so overwrought about this? Submit the evidence, and let the investigation begin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #35)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:14 PM

38. Yes Mr. 1650 posts I know what website I am on.

I think you should read the Constitution, if you can stomach it, and then we can talk about "wisdom", something which you have not shown in any of your posts on this thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #38)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:20 PM

40. Cantor is my enemy

He has done what he could do keep Obama from making progress. He has supported the possible theft of my vote. He supports the Bush criminal activities.

What is he to you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #40)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:27 PM

41. A political opponent.

But please continue with your obsession.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:37 PM

16. Depends on whose duty it was to inform the W.H. Cantor was informed because of his committee

position or something.

No one probably wanted to interfere with the election, either. The W.H. was told on Wednesday. Cantor was told on Tuesday, I think.

Could be the FBI's duty to tell the W.H. Dunno.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #16)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:37 PM

45. I would have thought the FBI would have informed the White House

If there was an investigation going on at the time Cantor found it, which it appears there was, the FBI may have told him to keep his mouth shut.

Who knows at this point, but it will have to come out in the end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #45)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 08:59 PM

52. I have since learned that Cantor learned about it in OCTOBER. From an FBI friend? Hmmmm. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #52)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 09:15 PM

53. He learned about it from another Congressman

and then called the guy from the FBI that had gone to the other Congressman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:19 PM

39. Whether he followed protocol or not is the issue

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:29 PM

42. Display article list Petraeus news hit Feinstein like 'lightning bolt'

She is mad as hell she was not contacted...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:31 PM

43. investigate right away. Bring charges against them if merited

Someone else should be assigned Leader and any other involved positions so they don't delay our Govs time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:34 PM

44. He was waiting for his leader, Mittens to win.

If he doesn't lose his job over this...hahaha WHO am I kidding!? Repukes are criminal scum, they never pay for their crimes against the State.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:45 PM

46. The FBI is the part of the executive branch that is responsible for counterintelligence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:52 PM

47. Was this the Gobbers October Surprise?

Part and Parcel of Issa's bullshit Libya diatribe. Cantor is done politically,remember Jane the Harmon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 02:49 PM

48. Based on this logic and per Dianne Feinstein's comments I guess the FBI is guilty of treason

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57548156/petraeus-news-hit-feinstein-like-lightning-bolt/

"It was like a lightning bolt," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who leads the Senate intelligence Committee and planned to have Petraeus testify this week on the Sept. 11 attack that killed the U.S. ambassador in Libya and three other Americans.


Feinstein, D-Calif., said she first learned of Petraeus' affair from the media late last week and was dumbstruck when Petraeus confirmed the affair to her in a telephone call Friday. She said she has since been briefed by the FBI but wants to know why the bureau didn't notify her sooner that the CIA chief was at the center of a serious inquiry.

"We are very much able to keep things in a classified setting," she told "Fox News Sunday." "At least if you know, you can begin to think and then to plan. And, of course, we have not had that opportunity."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 07:52 PM

49. Covering up the potential vulnerability of a person in Petraeus' position is arguably

"giving aid and comfort to the enemy." For example, he could have been blackmailed by hostile foreign entities into giving false information or not taking proper action in a case involving--well--who knows?

Sorta like someone tells you there's a bomb on a battleship & you over it up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 07:53 PM

50. yes; it also suggests the FBI has too much autonomy and is aligned with Cantor, and not under Prez c

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to amborin (Reply #50)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 07:56 PM

51. Yes as in it's treason? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread