HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » anyone recall how much ja...

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:00 PM

 

anyone recall how much jail time Petraeus, Gonzales and Berger did for mishandling classified info?

just wondering...

46 replies, 1711 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 46 replies Author Time Post
Reply anyone recall how much jail time Petraeus, Gonzales and Berger did for mishandling classified info? (Original post)
hill2016 May 2016 OP
Thinkingabout May 2016 #1
nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #2
NWCorona May 2016 #11
leveymg May 2016 #13
Jitter65 May 2016 #42
nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #16
opiate69 May 2016 #3
Arneoker May 2016 #39
gordianot May 2016 #4
Avalux May 2016 #5
HubertHeaver May 2016 #6
QC May 2016 #8
Arneoker May 2016 #40
choie May 2016 #7
leveymg May 2016 #15
Mohammed_Lee May 2016 #9
stevenleser May 2016 #23
lmbradford May 2016 #36
apcalc May 2016 #10
leveymg May 2016 #18
Bob41213 May 2016 #24
leveymg May 2016 #25
Press Virginia May 2016 #33
leveymg May 2016 #34
Arneoker May 2016 #41
leveymg May 2016 #45
apcalc May 2016 #43
leveymg May 2016 #44
PoliticAverse May 2016 #12
lumberjack_jeff May 2016 #14
grasswire May 2016 #17
riderinthestorm May 2016 #19
anotherproletariat May 2016 #20
Press Virginia May 2016 #32
doc03 May 2016 #21
Press Virginia May 2016 #28
doc03 May 2016 #22
leveymg May 2016 #27
Press Virginia May 2016 #26
LenaBaby61 May 2016 #29
abakan May 2016 #30
Chasstev365 May 2016 #31
Peachhead22 May 2016 #35
lmbradford May 2016 #37
Fawke Em May 2016 #38
reddread May 2016 #46

Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:03 PM

1. Interesting question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:04 PM

2. New talking point!

 

and it is evolving

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #2)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:28 PM

11. At least they are imagining an indictment and apparently the possibility of a conviction

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #11)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:45 PM

13. Difference is, they weren't running for President. And never will.

Nor will she.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #13)

Tue May 31, 2016, 05:51 AM

42. Difference is they actually revealed classified and TS information to others on purpose.

 

And Pratreaus had a paramour who received this information during their sexual trysts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #11)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:50 PM

16. Well I could make a cruel joke but won't

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:06 PM

3. Anyone recall how many terms those three served as president??

 

Or, hell, let's lower the bar. Anyone recall how many years they were allowed to continue on in their jobs after?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to opiate69 (Reply #3)

Tue May 31, 2016, 04:39 AM

39. I guess I'll never run for President

That will ensure that I never get indicted!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:08 PM

4. What employment do they currently hold that involves classified information?

You don't always go to jail but let the punishment fit the crime?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:08 PM

5. I don't recall any of them running for president. Nope. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:09 PM

6. And the bar lowers...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HubertHeaver (Reply #6)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:10 PM

8. You think? "I've Never Been Imprisoned!" is a fine slogan

for a presidential candidate!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to QC (Reply #8)

Tue May 31, 2016, 04:41 AM

40. So you're saying that she is not likely to get indicted?

A lot of the other Bernie supporters have been saying something very different. Or do talking points change depending?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:10 PM

7. No jail time for Petraeus..

But he was charged with and plead guilty to a misdemeanor after the FBI and DOJ recommended felony charges..nice try at deflection..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to choie (Reply #7)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:48 PM

15. Berger was convicted, fined $100K. No jail. Different charge after

pleading down to destroying federal records. Interesting case. He tried to destroy all the after-action reports about the entry of the Flt. 77 hijackers entry in January 2000. These are the ones thst CIA and NSA was tracking as they attended the AQ planning summit in Kuala Lumpur and then after they entered the US the FBI liaison at CTC was ordered to withhold a warning cableb to FBI headquarters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:12 PM

9. suspended security clearance would make it difficult to function as president... n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mohammed_Lee (Reply #9)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:21 PM

23. No, it wouldn't since the President is the ultimate authority on security clearances.

 

The President can decide who is and who isn't cleared for something and can declassify or classify information.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110113190609/http://feinstein.senate.gov/crs-intel.htm

By virtue of his constitutional role as commander-and-in-chief and head of the executive branch, the President has access to all national intelligence collected, analyzed and produced by the Intelligence Community. The President's position also affords him the authority - which, at certain times, has been aggressively asserted (1) - to restrict the flow of intelligence information to Congress and its two intelligence committees, which are charged with providing legislative oversight of the Intelligence Community. (2) As a result, the President, and a small number of presidentially-designated Cabinet-level officials, including the Vice President (3) - in contrast to Members of Congress (4) - have access to a far greater overall volume of intelligence and to more sensitive intelligence information, including information regarding intelligence sources and methods. They, unlike Members of Congress, also have the authority to more extensively task the Intelligence Community, and its extensive cadre of analysts, for follow-up information. As a result, the President and his most senior advisors arguably are better positioned to assess the quality of the Community's intelligence more accurately than is Congress. (5)

In addition to their greater access to intelligence, the President and his senior advisors also are better equipped than is Congress to assess intelligence information by virtue of the primacy of their roles in formulating U.S. foreign policy. Their foreign policy responsibilities often require active, sustained, and often personal interaction, with senior officials of many of the same countries targeted for intelligence collection by the Intelligence Community. Thus the President and his senior advisors are uniquely positioned to glean additional information and impressions - information that, like certain sensitive intelligence information, is generally unavailable to Congress - that can provide them with an important additional perspective with which to judge the quality of intelligence.

Authorities Governing Executive Branch Control Over National Intelligence

The President is able to control dissemination of intelligence information to Congress because the Intelligence Community is part of the executive branch. It was created by law and executive order principally to serve that branch of government in the execution of its responsibilities. (6) Thus, as the head of the executive branch, the President generally is acknowledged to be "the owner" of national intelligence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #23)

Mon May 30, 2016, 10:58 PM

36. She isnt President yet

This would prevent her from ever getting clearance again or holding public office or govt job.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:22 PM

10. He KNEW it was classified and told.

Very different..,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apcalc (Reply #10)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:05 PM

18. She knew it was classified too but told him "keep 'em coming"

On another occasion, she told an aide to "strip the (classification) headers and "send unsecure." She knew exactly what she was doing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #18)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:22 PM

24. Does this sounds like someone who didn't know there was classified material?

HRC: "If not classified or otherwise inappropriate, can you send to the NYTimes reporters who interviewed me today?"

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/9821

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bob41213 (Reply #24)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:31 PM

25. She knew, but was incredibly cavalier about classified information.

Too big to touch, or so she assumed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #25)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:40 PM

33. It sounds like she knew she was receiving extremely sensitive and

 

likely classified information...and knew it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #33)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:47 PM

34. Yes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #18)

Tue May 31, 2016, 04:42 AM

41. And strip the information that was classified

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arneoker (Reply #41)

Tue May 31, 2016, 07:36 AM

45. No, she said the identifying classification headers. Here's the exact quote:

"If they can't, turn into nonpaper [with] no identifying heading and send nonsecure."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #18)

Tue May 31, 2016, 06:44 AM

43. Baloney

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apcalc (Reply #43)

Tue May 31, 2016, 07:32 AM

44. Hey, a good prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich.

Beats eating crow, like the HRC apologia squad has been in recent days.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:36 PM

12. Petraeus pled guilty to violating the law, are you saying Clinton violated the law and should also..

plead guilty to doing so?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 08:47 PM

14. So, as long as she's not actually *in jail*, she'll be a swell president?

 

How about house arrest? Do they make ankle monitors that match the green pantsuit?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:01 PM

17. that's good....now you are admitting reality.

Admitting that HRC is under investigation and did wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:07 PM

19. Phew! Some Hillary supporters finally admitting she's committed crimes

 

A 1st step...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #19)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:11 PM

20. I think what the OP was pointing out, is that even if the lies being spread were to happen,

 

that the seriousness of what you all are talking about would not disqualify anyone from running for, or serving as president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to anotherproletariat (Reply #20)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:39 PM

32. shed be stripped of her security clearance and have a conviction

 

I doubt it would play well to the masses. And it would be campaign ad after campaign ad attacking her as incompetent or worse

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:19 PM

21. The " Dick " Cheney didn't get any time for outing a CIA operative n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #21)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:36 PM

28. Neither did Richard Armitage, who was the person who actually leaked

 

her name to Novak

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:21 PM

22. Nobody in the GWB administration got any time for lying us into a war or

violating the Geneva Convention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #22)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:35 PM

27. HRC was a major part of making that lie real.

We can now do something about not rewarding her. The rest have the ten year Statute of Limitations to shield themselves, tragically.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:35 PM

26. I think they pleaded down to misdemeanors. If there is an indictment

 

There will be a plea deal or a commutation.
HRC won't do a second in jail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:37 PM

29. I hear you...

OP

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:37 PM

30. They sure as fuck

weren't nominated for president. Any kind of comparison between anyone and herself is like comparing snakes to elephants.
They are both air breathing creatures, and that's all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:38 PM

31. I Don't Know:

 

Did they launder money with a foundation?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 10:47 PM

35. Does anyone remember what political offices they were elected to after...?

_after_ their cases? Besides they were never elected to anything. They were appointed.

I doubt any one of them could be elected dogcatcher now. They're all pariahs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Peachhead22 (Reply #35)

Mon May 30, 2016, 11:02 PM

37. Part of the statute

States clearly that anyone in violation of mishandling classified info will be stripped of clearance, never have it again, and canno hold office or govt jobs even at low levels.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 11:03 PM

38. John Kiriakou did 30 months.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 07:36 AM

46. with friends like these

 

who needs traitors?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread