General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLeave Patraeus Alone? - “This man has suffered enough, in my view,” Feinstein, D-Calif.
Dianne Feinstein, the senior Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee, and the Republican senator John McCain told CNN Petraeus should not be indicted. Speaking to the same channel, Holder refused to comment on the case other than to say: Frequently these things are linked to the media by people not in a position to know.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/11/dianne-feinstein-david-petraeus_n_6451380.html
"This man has suffered enough in my view," Feinstein said on CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday, explaining why she doesn't think Attorney General Eric Holder should seek an indictment.
Petraeus "made a mistake," added the senator, who is vice chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. "But
it's done, it's over. He's retired. He's lost his job. How much does the government want?"
hmmmmm DiFi & McNuts???
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jan/11/attorney-general-eric-holder-david-petraeus-investigation
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Commit crimes, lose your job and you've 'suffered enough'.
How they think about the rest of us... Go to jail, go directly to jail, do not pass 'Go', do not collect $200.
NewDeal_Dem
(1,049 posts)back or anything comparable, unlike KKR Betrayus, who gets to continue destroying the country for cold hard cash.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)At Kohlberg Kravis Roberts. I doubt he's missing too many yacht payments.
http://www.kkr.com/our-firm/leadership/david-h-petraeus
Autumn
(44,762 posts)What an idiotic stupid way of thinking. She should just hurry and GTFO . Sickening.
misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)Suppose that's how they see Bush & Cheney also.
"Been through enough..leave it alone"
Ugh!
grasswire
(50,130 posts)Not fit to hold her position.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)it. Perhaps he was careless and let her have access or perhaps she took advantage of her 'position'.
Why can't our trillion dollar 'Homeland security" ask the woman how she got hold of the information? Or have our trillion dollar 'experts' examine the computer.
It's happened so many times before, "over sex" , some people get access to places where they shouldn't be.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)pscot
(21,023 posts)A kind of pain most of us will never know.
Autumn
(44,762 posts)How sickening is this comment and that it comes from a so called democrat is particularly galling. To hell with these people.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Di Fi's grown rich from the guy, a regular cash cow for War Inc.
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,308 posts)fredamae
(4,458 posts)shanti
(21,672 posts)KeepItReal
(7,769 posts)eom
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Last edited Sun Jan 11, 2015, 05:38 PM - Edit history (9)
particularly the Agency's role in the spread of terrorists and heavy weapons from Libya to Syria, and divisions within the Administration about arming the opposition. Petraeus' extramarital affair was raised as this issue came to a head in Oct. 2012, and his initial resistance to resignation forced the affair into the open. For the timeline and context, see, WSJ, 03/29/13, http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323639604578368930961739030
The cautious approach comes from the president himself, buttressed by advisers including Denis McDonough, now the White House chief of staff. Their view: Syria is awash in arms and adding more risks worsening violence without improving rebel chances of victory.
Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton came to believe late last year that Washington could no longer watch the Syria carnage from the sidelines. But Mrs. Clinton and other advocates of arming the rebels didn't in the end aggressively push for the initiative, put forward by then-Central Intelligence Agency Director David Petraeus, as it became clear where Mr. Obama stood, according to current and former administration officials.
Arming Syrian rebels divided the cabinet coalition that had championed the 2011 Libya campaign, pitting Mrs. Clinton against U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice who emerged as a leading voice of caution.
The most engaged U.S. effort thus far comes from the CIA, which is working with European and Arab spy services to provide intelligence, training and logistical support to select rebel groups, according to U.S., European and Arab officials. Nevertheless, CIA operatives are frustrated by what they see as the Obama administration's reluctance to provide the rebels with the items they say they need most, including arms and cash, according to current and former officials.
The CIA declined to comment.
< . . .>
The idea of arming secular rebels was popular among CIA field officers who wanted better relations with fighters. It also was more palatable to administration lawyers. The debate came to a head in an October meeting in the White House Situation Room.
Mr. Petraeus, leaning forward during his presentation, made a forceful case for arming rebels, arguing it would help the U.S. build pro-Western allies and shape future leaders of a post-Assad Syria. Mrs. Clinton spoke in favor of the initiative but her remarks were brief. U.N. Ambassador Rice argued strongly against arming the rebels, citing doubts about the opposition. Ms. Rice through a spokeswoman declined to comment.
Other White House advisers worried that providing arms, without toppling Mr. Assad, risked making the U.S. look ineffectual. Moreover, such a move would leave the president open to attack if the arms found their way into the hands of extremists. Shortly after the meeting, Mr. Petraeus resigned over an extramarital affair. A CIA analysis played down the impact of arming the rebels on accelerating Mr. Assad's fall, and the proposal to arm the rebels died.
Petraeus tendancy toward political deception and grotesquely bad military judgement isn't surprising. Petraeus was previously a player in the Iraq WMD deception in 2003 (but that isn't why he's now being cashiered). See, http://journals.democraticunderground.com/leveymg/311
PETRAEUS' IRAQ WMD DECEPTION: How the General Earned His Stripes With Bush-Cheney
Posted by leveymg in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Tue Sep 11th 2007, 08:26 AM
In the last few days, it's come to light that Gen. Petraeus was the original source for incorrect information released to the U.S. media in May 2003 that mobile biological warfare trailers had been located in Iraq. False intelligence findings were indeed substituted for a 122-page DIA report suppressed by the Pentagon.
During the next year, the Bush-Cheney Administration continued to make false assertions that Saddam Hussein had a biotoxins program in place before the invasion, and that certain trailers found in Iraq proved that claim.
We now learn that a team of Defense Intelligence Agency investigators concluded on May 26 that the trailers found had no connection to a biowarfare program, but, nonetheless, Pentagon spokesmen and the Administration continued to make unfounded allegations that the mobile labs had been manufacturing anthrax, smallpox, and other deadly germs.
Gen. Petraeus appears to have taken no steps to correct the record after he falsely stated to reporters on May 13 that there is a "reasonable degree of certainty that this is in fact a mobile biological agent production trailer."
We should all ask why this part of Petraeus' history has been glossed over. Why has Congress and the media not pointed this out about the General before?
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)Him and Hillary are buds.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)When Mr. Petraeus resigned because of an extramarital affair and Mrs. Clinton suffered a concussion, missing weeks of work, the issue was shelved.
Thanks, Paula!
Still, it was Obamas decision to kill the idea
http://www.thenation.com/blog/172774/obama-opposed-syria-war-plan-clinton-petraeus-panetta-gen-dempsey#
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)msongs
(67,199 posts)gratuitous
(82,849 posts)We can argue all day long about who misrepresented the reasons for the war, who did and didn't have weapons of mass destruction, whose kids went off to kill and die based on those lies, and who made a buttload of money of the whole endeavor.
But the truth of the matter is that Dick Cheney, George W. Bush, and Gen. Petraeus are damned mad, too, and really don't want to answer a bunch of nosy questions from people not in a position to know (as Sen. McCain admonishes us). So let's just say that everyone made mistakes, put it in the past, and just move on. That's worked so well for us to this point, especially considering that each and every new atrocity generates the same pack of lies, and the American people don't seem to catch on any better the 10th time than they did the first time.
shraby
(21,946 posts)other's backs.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Puglover
(16,380 posts)Period.
MineralMan
(146,192 posts)Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Amirite?
kentuck
(110,950 posts)All he did was betray the nation.
underpants
(182,281 posts)Suck it up
Suck it up Petraeus.
Plus - Dianne you and your husband made a FORTUNE off this whole military reaction to 9/11.
on point
(2,506 posts)and should have been given a hero's medal instead of prosecuted and jailed. Has she suffered enough too?
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)As a republican. Sometimes we are own worst enemy.
Exultant Democracy
(6,594 posts)Then again I am totally biased by my previous interactions with his fabulous daughter. I would rather she not have to live though more of her fathers very public disgrace.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...
SamKnause
(13,043 posts)are so far up each other's asses.
they protect one another at ALL costs.
They do not believe in the rule of law.
Paying taxes and obeying the law are for the masses, not the wealthy and powerful.
friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)...(or words to that effect)- but the observation was spot-on.
Snarkoleptic
(5,995 posts)BeyondGeography
(39,284 posts)Shallow, tone deaf and laughable.
daredtowork
(3,732 posts)and Snowden's amount of suffering, mostly directly inflicted by the US Govt, with laser cannons, here.
Fair is fair.
roody
(10,849 posts)malaise
(267,827 posts)Stay out of matters legal lady.
WhiteTara
(29,676 posts)so I can see where she thinks nothing of this. When does she retire? Good riddance.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Jamastiene
(38,187 posts)who have done horrible things. It doesn't surprise me any more, but it always makes me feel nauseous and this is no exception.
spanone
(135,636 posts)Sienna86
(2,147 posts)Why would she suggest such a thing? Common men don't have that opportunity.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)if this had been, instead of a four-star general and CIA head who thought the rules didn't apply to him, some low-level schmuck of an intelligence analyst who gave his girlfriend access to his classified email...does anyone doubt he'd be facing five years in a federal prison? Regardless of whether he'd already been fired or forced to resign for some other infraction?
Octafish
(55,745 posts)The guy's got pictures of everybody.