Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TorchTheWitch

(11,065 posts)
49. that isn't what I was talking about
Sat Nov 24, 2012, 07:20 PM
Nov 2012

She had clearance to review the docs she had. It was her security of them that's in question, and as of the last news info they still aren't sure if she had any docs that were classified that she had unsecured. It has not yet been said whether or not she's on the hook for having unsecured classified docs. Her clearance and Petreaus's instruction to his staff gave her access to the classified docs. Petreaus included her in the "need to know" since it was him that instructed his staff to give her access to the docs, which they did, and him telling her she could have them, which he also did. He wanted her to have them as she was his personal biographer that HE wanted glued to his side and writing and speaking glowingly of him despite Obama's admonishment to him that in accepting the appointment of CIA top cheese he had to keep a low profile... no entourage, no contact with the media, no strutting around showing off his uniform and chest wall of glory, etc. Once again he disregarded the president and kept his biographer around feeding her classified info for the sole purpose of exposure to the public about him and did speaking engagements wearing his chest fruit salad on his suit jacket, which of course is totally contrary to keeping a low profile. The dude is liar and has disregarded even the president several times so he could do what HE wanted to.

Who is it that is the decider on who has "need to know" anyway? Being the top cheese of the CIA wouldn't that decision fall to him? Who is it that is higher in the hierarchy that is the one that decides who has need to know within the CIA if not for the head of the CIA - Petreaus - himself? Of course, as his personal biographer she had no ACTUAL need to know, but was it HIM that decided for his own personal reasons that his personal biographer should be in on the "need to know" despite her not having any ACTUAL "need to know"?

You were saying that it was only her that lied to the FBI in saying that Petreaus didn't give her access to any classified docs as he told them as well. They BOTH lied about that, and it's Petreaus that is ultimately responsible since he was the top cheese and told both her and his staff she could have them... his telling the truth that he did not give her access and it being just her and his staff that suddenly couldn't remember to properly secure classified docs is ludicrous. They only would have done this upon HIS instruction. Whether or not he personally gave her any docs - who knows. I certainly wouldn't put it past him that he did. After all, he'd already told his staff and her that she could have them and didn't give a fig about their security or any actual need for her to know, so why would he care especially when he clearly didn't care about instruction (read: orders) from the president himself and has done end runs around Obama before.

I'm also curious about how she got this clearance level to begin with. Did HE give it to her so that she could have classified docs she had no actual need to know so that she could be his personal biographer for his personal self-promoting reasons? I find it hard to believe that she just so happened to have the appropriate clearance level when he found this attractive young Petreaus worshiper.

I never said she wasn't guilty of anything. I don't know if she is or not since at this point that's what the FBI has said... they are in the process of reviewing whether or not she broke any laws here in having the docs in the state she had them as far as whatever their security should have been. I also never said she wasn't doing any lying of her own. I think she has lied about Petreaus giving her access to the docs she had and doing it to cover both their asses. But that was never what I was talking about anyway. What I have been talking about is that it is Petreaus who lied and instructed his staff to give her whatever docs she wanted and told her she could have them. HE is the one with the ultimate responsibility here. I don't believe for one single second that his staff and her just blithely forgot all about proper security and did whatever they wanted without his say so and not only believed his say so was enough but also believed that his say so gave them no other option.


MRFF take on Petraeus................. kooljerk666 Nov 2012 #1
My take on him? He's a bullshitter and a liar. MADem Nov 2012 #2
Yup............... kooljerk666 Nov 2012 #4
This is the second biographer. Look at where the first one landed... Tutonic Nov 2012 #7
where did the first one land? Liberal_in_LA Nov 2012 #34
I agree... Little Star Nov 2012 #12
Irony has long since been dead, cremated and its ashes placed in a subduction zone Fumesucker Nov 2012 #3
One of the two ex-seals who died in Benghazi was a member of MRFF Schema Thing Nov 2012 #11
Any bets that details were being fed straight to malaise Nov 2012 #5
Hell of a job Petraeus! kitt6 Nov 2012 #6
Deep Doo Doo (R) and the Mysterious Emails (R) Berlum Nov 2012 #8
It was worth five edits to finally produce that image...HILARIOUS!! A+++! nt MADem Nov 2012 #14
Yeah - some days ya gotta work it Berlum Nov 2012 #16
If Margaretha Geertruida Zelle had been alive and wanted to be a Petraeus' biographer, AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #9
Margaretha was not without her talents, that's for certain. MADem Nov 2012 #18
And, excuse me for saying so, probably smarter than Petraeus as well. AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #23
Of that, I don't think there's any doubt! Petraeus has always been VERY overrated, IMO. nt MADem Nov 2012 #33
So Petraeus was part of that religious fundamentalism in the military? yardwork Nov 2012 #10
Xtian nutz in US Armed Forces is one of the most dangerous things on the planet............. kooljerk666 Nov 2012 #13
Got his Fundie Freak On. They usually do. While preaching to everyone else. Berlum Nov 2012 #17
Can someone answer this? RoccoR5955 Nov 2012 #15
He's a RepubliFundie Berlum Nov 2012 #19
Why are they special RoccoR5955 Nov 2012 #20
Ask a Republican Berlum Nov 2012 #22
Eric Holder. AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #24
Too many Americans falsely equate morality with religion Generic Brad Nov 2012 #44
He didn't give anything to Wikileaks. He just gave it to his girlfriend, who had a clearance. MADem Nov 2012 #21
He denied giving anything to his girlfriend. sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #25
I read that he directed his subordinates to give her access--that, IMO, is the same MADem Nov 2012 #27
So RobertEarl Nov 2012 #29
Not necessarily--see the link I added in the above post. MADem Nov 2012 #30
So RobertEarl Nov 2012 #32
That could be. Then again, his attitude (the General's, that is) could have contributed to MADem Nov 2012 #35
She stopped them RobertEarl Nov 2012 #36
It was not her intent to "stop them" at all--she wanted to be ONE OF THEM. MADem Nov 2012 #39
Where and how RobertEarl Nov 2012 #40
How asinine--so if I write "a high word count" about Jack the Ripper, I'm "favoring" him? MADem Nov 2012 #41
That's better RobertEarl Nov 2012 #42
You don't "know my words" though, unless you've read every post I have ever written about this guy. MADem Nov 2012 #45
So you're annoyed, then RobertEarl Nov 2012 #46
I'm not absolving the general of ANY responsibility. MADem Nov 2012 #47
Pertraeus is a 1,000 times worse RobertEarl Nov 2012 #48
Yes I do--but you'd have to have been a commissioned officer to understand. MADem Nov 2012 #50
her clearance gave her access TorchTheWitch Nov 2012 #37
No, that is NOT what clearance means. Just because you are cleared to "TS"--which she was--does not MADem Nov 2012 #38
that isn't what I was talking about TorchTheWitch Nov 2012 #49
No, you are still not understanding. You continue to confuse clearance and access. MADem Nov 2012 #51
And if they find some, shouldn't he be treated the same as Bradley Manning? n/t RoccoR5955 Nov 2012 #26
Not necessarily--if Petraeus shared information, he shared it with someone who has a clearance MADem Nov 2012 #31
"Rank hath its privileges" n/t Cerridwen Nov 2012 #28
Recommend for "MADem's" extra info re "Security Clearance" and links in the comments. n/t KoKo Nov 2012 #43
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»More trouble for Petraeus...»Reply #49