Interesting tidbit came out about Petraeus "e-mails"

[CosmicCowboy]

They were never actually sent. FBI alleges they had private e-mail accounts and would write the e-mail and store it in the draft file...then the other one would log on and read the draft.

[EVAY]

They were never actually sent. FBI alleges they had private e-mail accounts and would write the e-mail and store it in the draft file...then the other one would log on and read the draft.

That is interesting. I assume they figured that was a clever way to avoid a paper trail of emails. Don't you get the impression that this was all more than anyone wanted to know? That nobody wanted to find this out, that when they found it out they wanted to keep it quiet, and then when Clapper told Petraeus that he ought to resign, he was the only person in the government who thought that was the right thing to do?

[CosmicCowboy]

Interesting read...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/12/exclusive-paula-broadwell-s-emails-revealed.html

long article...partial quote


Whatever transpired, the FBI agents found no indication that it constituted a crime or a threat to national security. They confirmed this when they interviewed Broadwell and then Petraeus. They are both said to have been forthcoming and consistent, even telling the agents more than they already knew.

Petraeus seems to have been the first guy in memory not to lie about sex. And a good thing too, because lying to a federal agent is a crime. Martha Stewart found that out the hard way.

By that point, FBI headquarters almost certainly had been notified. One former agent with extensive experience estimates that it would have taken no more than 24 hours for word to get to Director Robert Mueller. A case that might never have been if the agents in Tampa had heeded their initial misgivings now presented the head of the FBI with a predicament in which there were no happy options.

In all electronic surveillance, including emails, the FBI is legally compelled to adhere to the principle of “minimization,” limiting the invasion of privacy as much as possible to what is specifically warranted. This applies even when a case involves the worst kinds of criminals.

[boutons_deux]

They were never actually sent. FBI alleges they had private e-mail accounts and would write the e-mail and store it in the draft file...then the other one would log on and read the draft.

This was, is, a trick used by terrorists.

[boutons_deux]

Repugs are having 3 different Congressional hearings just this week for what appears to be a non-crime and not covered by any laws (not so far. Repugs LOVE legislation about sex and vaginas).

[Winehole23]

another weird wrinkle: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/13/top-us-commander-in-afghanistan-gen-john-allen-under-investigation-for-alleged/

[TeyshaBlue]

Repugs are having 3 different Congressional hearings just this week for what appears to be a non-crime and not covered by any laws (not so far. Repugs LOVE legislation about sex and vaginas).

"The reason the FBI had jurisdiction is because cyber-harassment is a federal crime, and once the FBI got to Broadwell they uncovered the affair."

gfy

[TeyshaBlue]

another weird wrinkle: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/13/top-us-commander-in-afghanistan-gen-john-allen-under-investigation-for-alleged/

Lots of moving parts to this....very weird.

[boutons_deux]

another weird wrinkle: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/13/top-us-commander-in-afghanistan-gen-john-allen-under-investigation-for-alleged/

cut the MIC budget by $200B/year

[CosmicCowboy]

Jill Kelly is a freaking MILF. Apparently others agree.

[boutons_deux]

the Repugs are trying to stick someone for a coverup crime, preferably Barry, not the FBI for investigating cybercrime.

Is the FBI going to prosecute this cybercrime? why not so far? they have evidence for months. GFY

[TeyshaBlue]

lol simpleton

[Spurminator]

I have a hard time believing all of this is happening over just an extramarital affair.

[TeyshaBlue]

I have a hard time believing all of this is happening over just an extramarital affair.

Its the potential for information exchange among persons with extraordinary access to sensitive data that's the kicker.

[EVAY]

Its the potential for information exchange among persons with extraordinary access to sensitive data that's the kicker.

Supportive of your position: The most recent reporting (I think it is on CNN's website) is indicating that in a speech she gave after the Benghazi incident she told an audience that 'they probably didn't know' that the CIA had detained a couple of Libyan terrorists in the Benghazi embassy annex, and there was some indication that the attack was an attempt to free them.

Two problems with what she said: 1) She shouldn't have known that - and the CIA is denying it now, and 2) If it was true (regardless of what the CIA says) then they were in violation of an executive order signed in January of 2009 specifically denying the ability of the CIA to detain foreign nationals in American embassies.

So, either she was talking out of school about something she shouldn't have had access to, and/or she was outing the CIA for doing something that they were explicitly told not to do. Either instance could have gotten Petraeus in hot water.

[RandomGuy]

Supportive of your position: The most recent reporting (I think it is on CNN's website) is indicating that in a speech she gave after the Benghazi incident she told an audience that 'they probably didn't know' that the CIA had detained a couple of Libyan terrorists in the Benghazi embassy annex, and there was some indication that the attack was an attempt to free them.

Two problems with what she said: 1) She shouldn't have known that - and the CIA is denying it now, and 2) If it was true (regardless of what the CIA says) then they were in violation of an executive order signed in January of 2009 specifically denying the ability of the CIA to detain foreign nationals in American embassies.

So, either she was talking out of school about something she shouldn't have had access to, and/or she was outing the CIA for doing something that they were explicitly told not to do. Either instance could have gotten Petraeus in hot water.

Eyup. Everything she has said in the last few years is now going to be put under a microscope for that reason.

[RandomGuy]

What will happen now, is the inevitable "why didn't Obama know sooner" charge from GOP congressmen.

As one analyst familiar with investigations noted (paraphrasing) "They keep this stuff from the administration on purpose to avoid compromising the investigations until most of the evidence is in with charges of 'it was politicized'".

If Obama's upper level people had known, the charge would then have been " how as it politicized" ala the Benghazi attack.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Lots of rather complicated legal issues involved that will be glossed over by oversimplifications I'm sure. Taking time to understand the whys and wherefores takes more effort than most will bother with, once they find a narrative they like in the simplifications.

[TeyshaBlue]

What will happen now, is the inevitable "why didn't Obama know sooner" charge from GOP congressmen.

As one analyst familiar with investigations noted (paraphrasing) "They keep this stuff from the administration on purpose to avoid compromising the investigations until most of the evidence is in with charges of 'it was politicized'".

If Obama's upper level people had known, the charge would then have been " how as it politicized" ala the Benghazi attack.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Lots of rather complicated legal issues involved that will be glossed over by oversimplifications I'm sure. Taking time to understand the whys and wherefores takes more effort than most will bother with, once they find a narrative they like in the simplifications.

The notification status thus far...(certainly susceptible to future changes).

"One of the law enforcement officials who spoke to the AP said long-standing Justice Department policy and practice is not to share information from an ongoing criminal investigation with anyone outside the department, including the White House and Congress. The official said national security must be involved to notify Capitol Hill, and that was not the case in the Petraeus matter."

http://www.wfaa.com/news/national/Petraeus-said-to-be-shocked-by-girlfriends-emails-179055881.html

[RandomGuy]

The notification status thus far...(certainly susceptible to future changes).

"One of the law enforcement officials who spoke to the AP said long-standing Justice Department policy and practice is not to share information from an ongoing criminal investigation with anyone outside the department, including the White House and Congress. The official said national security must be involved to notify Capitol Hill, and that was not the case in the Petraeus matter."

http://www.wfaa.com/news/national/Petraeus-said-to-be-shocked-by-girlfriends-emails-179055881.html

Yup. There is more to it, and a few laws that may or may not be applied from what I understand. Again, a fast moving story that will have the relevant legal issues vetted by lawyers with far more expertise than you or I. I will wait for that.

It is a complex decision with a lot of factors. I am hesitant to second guess people in those situations, as it is usually not clear. legal duty to tell, not to tell, what is the trigger, who to tell, etc.

At least we don't have the election pending to make it all more hyper-politicized than it should be. We have a (small) chance at a cogent, relevant discussion.

[boutons_deux]

General demoted for lavish travel, spendingDefense Secretary Leon Panetta (http://www.mysanantonio.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Leon+Panetta%22) has demoted the former head of U.S. Africa Command (http://www.mysanantonio.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22U.S.+Africa+Command%22) who was accused of spending thousands of dollars on lavish travel and other unauthorized expenses, a senior U.S. official said Tuesday.
Panetta stripped Gen. William "Kip" Ward of a star, which means that he will now retire as a three-star lieutenant general despite arguments from the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (http://www.mysanantonio.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Joint+Chiefs+of+Staff%22) against the demotion. Ward also has been ordered also repay the government $82,000.


http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/article/General-demoted-for-lavish-travel-spending-4033204.php

[RandomGuy]

The Petraeus Scandal Takes a Turn for the Shirtless

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/11/petraeus-scandal-takes-turn-shirtless/58935/


This keeps getting better and better. And by "better and better" I mean "ew"

[boutons_deux]

Jon Stewart on Paula Broadwell interview: 'I'm the worst journalist'In the hours after David Petraeus’ cheating scandal broke on Friday afternoon, a Jan. 25th appearance made by his biographer and alleged mistress Paula Broadwell on “The Daily Show” (http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-january-25-2012/paula-broadwell) quickly began making the rounds online. Viewed with the benefit of hindsight, Broadwell’s gushing interview is full of inneuendo: She praises the retired general’s energy, talks about his speedy recovery after a pelvis injury and even suggests that he can “turn water into bottled water.”

But no, in case you were wondering, Jon Stewart had no idea anything was up. In fact, he was mostly just distracted by Broadwell’s toned physique. “The whole time I was just thinking how defined her arms were and trying to think of another version one of my classic I’m-an-asthmatic-old-Jew joke,” he said. “I'm the worst journalist in the world. For God’s sake the title of her book was ‘All In.’”

After scrutinizing himself, Stewart turned his critical gaze to pundits who’ve rushed to find a link – any link – between the Petraeus scandal and the Obama administration. As for the suggestion that the administration held back the news about the affair in order to boost Obama's re-election chances, Stewart pointed to the fact that Rep. Eric Cantor, the Republican House Majority Leader, reportedly knew about the relationship in October -- weeks before the president.

Then there's the idea, spouted by the indefatigable conspiracy theorists at "Fox & Friends," that Petraeus was ousted so that he wouldn't be able to testify about the attack on Benghazi. Too bad this isn’t true, because, as Stewart pointed out, “quitting is different from dying.”

As for the comparison made by conservative columnist Peggy Noonan (among many, many others) between the scandal and the Showtime drama “Homeland,” Stewart wasn’t convinced. “It's not ‘Homeland, it's ‘Melrose Place,’” he said.

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/718/article/p2p-73291722/

[dbestpro]

They used Dropbox.

[Drachen]

Jill Kelly is a freaking MILF. Apparently others agree.

I think she is pretty, but I still prefer Kate bolduan.

[EVAY]

This scandal just keeps getting broader and broader and may be, in the end, one of the most classic examples of the Law Of Unintended Consequences known
to man.

Don't you just figure that the original Kelly woman regrets ever having asked someone to pursue this (especially since her emails with General Allen have come out)?

And don't you just know that the FBI guy who originally pursued it for her, later notifying Cantor's office of the investigation and is now under investigation himself
is going home at night saying "oh sh*t!

[RandomGuy]

This scandal just keeps getting broader and broader and may be, in the end, one of the most classic examples of the Law Of Unintended Consequences known
to man.

Don't you just figure that the original Kelly woman regrets ever having asked someone to pursue this (especially since her emails with General Allen have come out)?

And don't you just know that the FBI guy who originally pursued it for her, later notifying Cantor's office of the investigation and is now under investigation himself
is going home at night saying "oh sh*t!

Read my shirtless link. The "shirtless" guy was the FBI agent that Kelly knew and asked to investigate. He got ganked from the investigation early on.

This is quite possibly the best gossipy shitstorm since BC's BJ at the WH.

[boutons_deux]

this whole affair is better exposed, even serialized/dramatized on E! channel

[SA210]

Not that an affair has anything to really do with his resignation..but


http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/408167_335007266597295_785166828_n.jpg

[LnGrrrR]

General demoted for lavish travel, spending

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta (http://www.mysanantonio.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Leon+Panetta%22) has demoted the former head of U.S. Africa Command (http://www.mysanantonio.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22U.S.+Africa+Command%22) who was accused of spending thousands of dollars on lavish travel and other unauthorized expenses, a senior U.S. official said Tuesday.
Panetta stripped Gen. William "Kip" Ward of a star, which means that he will now retire as a three-star lieutenant general despite arguments from the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (http://www.mysanantonio.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Joint+Chiefs+of+Staff%22) against the demotion. Ward also has been ordered also repay the government $82,000.


http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/article/General-demoted-for-lavish-travel-spending-4033204.php

Wow, it's a big deal if he got stripped of a star... you rarely see that happen. I guess you can pimp younger soldiers, you can screw up any number of times, but fuck with money? Give me those stars and bars! :lol

[Wild Cobra]

Wow, it's a big deal if he got stripped of a star... you rarely see that happen. I guess you can pimp younger soldiers, you can screw up any number of times, but fuck with money? Give me those stars and bars! :lol
I've never heard of it happening. When was the last time?

[EVAY]

Not that an affair has anything to really do with his resignation..but


http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/408167_335007266597295_785166828_n.jpg

:lol

[boutons_deux]

FBI's abuse of the surveillance state is the real scandal needing investigation

the FBI investigation began when Jill Kelley - a Tampa socialite friendly with Petraeus (and apparently very friendly (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83747.html#ixzz2C6fkGKUo) with Gen. John Allen, the four-star U.S. commander of the war in Afghanistan) - received a half-dozen or so anonymous emails that she found vaguely threatening. She then informed a friend of hers who was an FBI agent, and a major FBI investigation was then launched that set out to determine the identity of the anonymous emailer.

The emails Kelley received were, as the Daily Beast reports (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/12/exclusive-paula-broadwell-s-emails-revealed.html), quite banal and clearly not an event that warranted an FBI investigation:

"The emails that Jill Kelley showed an FBI friend near the start of last summer were not jealous lover warnings like 'stay away from my man', a knowledgeable source tells The Daily Beast. . . .

"'More like, 'Who do you think you are? . . .You parade around the base . . . You need to take it down a notch,'" according to the source, who was until recently at the highest levels of the intelligence community and prefers not to be identified by name.

"The source reports that the emails did make one reference to Gen. David Petraeus (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/david-petraeus), but it was oblique and offered no manifest suggestion of a personal relationship or even that he was central to the sender's spite. . . .

"When the FBI friend showed the emails to the cyber squad in the Tampa field office, her fellow agents noted the absence of any overt threats.

"No, 'I'll kill you' or 'I'll burn your house down,'' the source says. 'It doesn't seem really that bad.'

"The squad was not even sure the case was worth pursuing, the source says.

"'What does this mean? There's no threat there. This is against the law?' the agents asked themselves by the source's account.

"At most the messages were harassing. The cyber squad had to consult the statute books in its effort to determine whether there was adequate legal cause to open a case.

"'It was a close call,' the source says.

"What tipped it may have been Kelley's friendship with the agent."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/13/petraeus-surveillance-state-fbi

[boutons_deux]

When Will It Stop! :lol

Gen. John Allen also helped Jill Kelley's sister during custody battle (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/battle_john_allen_also_helped_jill_YjkEYUNY2INC4sm BMEYqUI)Both Gen. David Petraeus and Gen. John Allen intervened in the same nasty child custody battle involving Natalie Khawam, the “psychologically unstable” twin sister of Jill Kelley, whose bombshell claims of being threatened by Petraeus' lover led to the top spy’s resignation last week, the Post has learned.
Allen, the four-star general top commander in Afghanistan, was revealed last night to have exchanged thousands of pages of of emails with Kelley, who went to the feds after receiving threatening e-mails from Paula Broadwell, the married mistress of Petraeus.

A judge noted in the file that Khawam "has attached letters from Gen. David H. Petraeus averring to her ability to appropriately parent the child, and is prepared to present corroborating testimony at trial."
And in court documents filed by Kelley's sister Natalie Khawam, she name-drops both Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island -- who both have ties to a Providence, RI, lawyer/Democratic fundraiser who loaned a whopping $300,000 to Khawam.


http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/battle_john_allen_also_helped_jill_YjkEYUNY2INC4sm BMEYqUI

[Spurminator]

Widening Petraeus Scandal Reveals Human Race Has Been Having Sex For 200,000 Years

NOVEMBER 13, 2012
http://o.onionstatic.com/images/18/18748/16x9/635.jpg?8647
FBI officials say the Petraeus scandal has broadened, and that sexual activity may have occurred throughout all of human history.

WASHINGTON—Following the recent revelation that former CIA director David Petraeus conducted a protracted extramarital affair with his biographer Paula Broadwell, sources confirmed today that the far-reaching scandal has widened to reveal that mankind, otherwise known as the species Homo sapiens, has been engaging in sexual intercourse (http://www.theonion.com/topics/sexual%20reproduction) for the past 200,000 years.

“While the situation appeared at first to be limited to this one sexual relationship between Gen. Petraeus and Ms. Broadwell, we see now that it is far more extensive than we had initially believed,” said an FBI official who spoke on a condition of anonymity due to the ongoing investigation. “Indeed, evidence shows Gen. Petraeus is, in fact, just one of literally billions of human beings who we now believe have on numerous occasions engaged in sexual intercourse over the last several hundred millennia.”

“No matter how far back we go, we just continue to find more and more corroborating proof of people having sex,” the official added. “There’s simply no end in sight.”

Officials were reportedly first alerted to the allegations after the discovery of thousands of documents this week, including e-mails, letters, and photographs, which led them to believe that millions of other people beyond Gen. Petraeus have been having sex perhaps since the middle Paleolithic period, and continue to have sex today in various partnerships and in all 196 countries worldwide.

A further investigation into the matter then revealed that not only have people been frequently having sex throughout modern history, they have been doing so at least since the first precursors to modern humans gained the ability to walk upright, and that sexual intercourse is a natural biological function that may indeed by widespread and prevalent throughout all eras of the human race.

“The scope of this scandal is simply astonishing—there is currently enough evidence to implicate citizens from every part of the world, even dating back before the creation of modern international states,” said one source close to the investigation, adding that the FBI has collected millions of first-person accounts of people who have either had sex themselves or witnessed others performing sexual acts. “There is even thousands of hours of video evidence that cyber-security experts in D.C. and Langley have managed to find on the Internet.”

“The real question is, ‘Who knew about this? And for how long?’” the anonymous source added.

According to reports, a comprehensive global probe jointly conducted by the FBI and CIA also revealed that, in addition to Gen. Petraeus, others alleged to have had sex in the past include Leon Panetta, Condoleezza Rice, Ben Bernanke, George Stephanopolous, John Lennon, Charlotte Brontë, Jack Nicholson, William Shakespeare, Andre Agassi, Plato, Ulysses S. Grant, Queen Elizabeth II, Ted Avery of Dayton, OH, George Washington, Karen Avery of Dayton, OH, every past and present member of the band Chicago, Sir Isaac Newton, Bill Gates, Andie MacDowell, Benjamin Franklin, Leonardo da Vinci, Vince Lombardi, and Adolf Hitler.

“A closer look at the evidence indicates that even the earliest primates from the Paleolithic era had engaged in acts of sexual intercourse,” said Dr. Jacob Reynolds, a historian at the University of North Carolina. “We have even discovered lewd depictions engraved on stone tablets dating all the way back to 10,000 BC in what is now modern-day Turkey. But it is very possible that this controversy stretches back farther than any of our historical records.”

Reynolds confirmed that in addition to human beings, many well-known animals are also thought to have engaged in sexual activity, including millions of bears, sheep, goats, and even numerous fish and insect species.

Furthermore, sources indicated that sexual activity may extend all the way to the White House.

While the exact scope of the controversy is still unknown, sources said the FBI will continue looking into the matter until “everyone and everything involved in this matter is brought to light.”

At press time, officials estimated that roughly 15,000 human beings are having sex at this exact moment.http://www.theonion.com/static/onion/img/icons/terminator.gif

[Winehole23]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/11/13/abc-station-botches-petraeus-book-cover-all-up-in-my-snatch/

[Winehole23]

As the New York Times reports (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/14/us/top-us-commander-in-afghanistan-is-linked-to-petraeus-scandal.html?hp) Tuesday morning that the Petraeus sex scandal has now spread and the Pentagon has initiated an investigation into top NATO commander in Afghanistan, US General John Allen, what is becoming increasingly clear—beyond all the seemingly bizarre twists of this unfolding drama and leaving aside the question about whether or not the private sexual lives of top officials are, in fact, worthy of the endless media blitz they receive—is that the FBI's ability to examine private email accounts during an investigation are having far-reaching, if not ironic, consequences.


David Petraeus ... submitted his resignation as director of the CIA citing an extramarital affair. Marine General John Allen, right, is now under investigation for alleged "inappropriate communications" with a woman involved in the Petraeus scandal. (Alex Wong / Getty Images) In this case, it seems that some of the military's most senior officers have been undone by some of the aggressive electronic policing measures that law enforcements officers in the US have argued were necessary to capture dangerous terrorist networks operating in the US and abroad in the post-9/11 world.

As the Associated Press reports (http://news.yahoo.com/petraeus-case-shows-fbis-authority-read-email-222008153.html):


The downfall of CIA Director David Petraeus demonstrates how easy it is for federal law enforcement agents to examine emails and computer records if they believe a crime was committed. With subpoenas and warrants, the FBI and other investigating agencies routinely gain access to electronic inboxes and information about email accounts offered by Google, Yahoo and other Internet providers.


"The government can't just wander through your emails just because they'd like to know what you're thinking or doing," said Stewart Baker, a former assistant secretary at the Department of Homeland Security and now in private law practice.

"But if the government is investigating a crime, it has a lot of authority to review people's emails."


And as independent journalist Dave Lindorff points out (http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/1424):


[...] What makes the epic collapse of this consummate political general’s career so exquisite is that it was the post-9-11 spying capabilities of the FBI that allowed its agents to slip unannounced into the email of the General’s paramour, Paula Broadwell (a name that could have been selected by Ian Fleming!), and possibly into the general’s own email too, there to find the evidence, allegedly in the form of X-rated letters, of a covert adulterous relationship underway.


We now know that the FBI was alerted to this breach of decorum [...] and lack of judgement on the part of the head of the nation’s spooks, by a second woman, Jill Kelley, who was a volunteer military liaison and family friend of the Petraeus clan.

"Technology has evolved in a way that makes the content of more communications available to law enforcement without judicial authorization, and at a very low level of suspicion," Greg Nojeim, a senior counsel at the Center for Democracy & Technology, explained to AP.


The Guardian's Glenn Greenwald notes (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/13/petraeus-surveillance-state-fbi) that"What is most striking is how sweeping, probing and invasive (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/12/us/us-officials-say-petraeuss-affair-known-in-summer.html?pagewanted=2) the FBI's investigation then became, all without any evidence of any actual crime - or the need for any search warrant." And continues:


This is a surveillance state run amok. It also highlights how any remnants of internet anonymity have been all but obliterated by the union between the state and technology companies.


But, as unwarranted and invasive as this all is, there is some sweet justice in having the stars of America's national security state destroyed by the very surveillance system which they implemented and over which they preside. As Trevor Timm of the Electronic Frontier Foundation put it this morning (https://twitter.com/trevortimm/status/268318480976183297): "Who knew the key to stopping the Surveillance State was to just wait until it got so big that it ate itself?"


It is usually the case that abuses of state power become a source for concern and opposition only when they begin to subsume the elites who are responsible for those abuses. Recall how former Democratic Rep. Jane Harman - one of the most outspoken defenders of the illegal Bush National Security Agency (NSA) warrantless eavesdropping program - suddenly began sounding like an irate, life-long ACLU privacy activist (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article22477.htm) when it was revealed that the NSA had eavesdropped on her private communications (http://www.salon.com/2009/04/20/harman/) with a suspected Israeli agent over alleged attempts to intervene on behalf of AIPAC officials accused of espionage. Overnight, one of the Surveillance State's chief assets, the former ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, transformed into a vocal privacy proponent because now it was her activities, rather than those of powerless citizens, which were invaded.


With the private, intimate activities of America's most revered military and intelligence officials being smeared all over newspapers and televisions for no good reason, perhaps similar conversions are possible. Put another way, having the career of the beloved (https://twitter.com/jeremyscahill/status/268151340717465601) CIA Director and the commanding general in Afghanistan instantly destroyed due to highly invasive and unwarranted electronic surveillance is almost enough to make one believe not only that there is a god, but that he is an ardent civil libertarian.


http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/11/13

[LnGrrrR]

Jane (Harman) is an ignorant slut.

[Agloco]

Lots of moving parts to this....very weird.

Ugh....I'm trying to keep this clean in my head. Failing.

[TeyshaBlue]

Ugh....I'm trying to keep this clean in my head. Failing.

You need a hobby....and a beer.:p:

[Agloco]

You need a hobby....and a beer.:p:

You're noted. Again. :lol

[Winehole23]

so much for conspiracies:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/14/petraeus-agrees-to-testify-on-libya-before-congressional-committees/

[Winehole23]

Referral by FBI and DOJ under the 1917 Espionage Act:



In a surprising development, the New York Times reported late Friday (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/10/us/politics/prosecutors-said-to-recommend-charges-against-former-gen-david-petraeus.html?referrer=&_r=1) that the FBI and Justice Department have recommended felony charges against ex-CIA director David Petraeus for leaking classified information to his former biographer and mistress Paula Broadwell. While the Times does not specify, the most likely law prosecutors would charge Petraeus under is the same as Edward Snowden and many other leakers: the 1917 Espionage Act.


It remains to be seen whether Petraeus will actually be indicted (given how high-ranking government officials so often escape punishment), and the decision now sits on Attorney General Eric Holder’s desk. But this is a fascinating and important case for several reasons.



First, all of Petraeus' powerful D.C. friends and allies are about to be shocked to find out how seriously unjust the Espionage Act is—a fact that has been all too real for many low-level whistleblowers for years.



By all accounts (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/10/us/politics/prosecutors-said-to-recommend-charges-against-former-gen-david-petraeus.html?referrer=&_r=1), Petraeus’s leak caused no damage to US national security. “So why is he being charged,” his powerful friends will surely ask. Well, that does not matter under the Espionage Act. Even if your leak caused no national security damage at all, you can still be charged, and you can’t argue otherwise as a defense at trial. If that sounds like it can’t be true, ask former State Department official Stephen Kim, who is now serving a prison sentence for leaking to Fox News reporter James Rosen. The judge in his case ruled (http://fas.org/blogs/secrecy/2013/07/prosecutors-burden/) that prosecutors did not have to prove his leak harmed national security in order to be found guilty.



It doesn’t matter what Petraeus’s motive for leaking was either. While most felonies require mens rea (an intentional state of mind) for a crime to have occurred, under the Espionage Act this is not required. It doesn’t matter that Petraeus is not an actual spy. It also doesn’t matter if Petraeus leaked the information by accident, or whether he leaked it to better inform the public, or even whether he leaked it to stop a terrorist attack. It’s still technically a crime, and his motive for leaking cannot be brought up at trial as a defense.

http://boingboing.net/2015/01/10/if-petraeus-is-charged-over-le.html

[CosmicCowboy]

One rumor is it's the "carrot and the stick". Don't ever tell what you REALLY know about Benghazi (he toed the Obama "it was about the movie" line in his first testimony to congress) and we won't ever charge you with espionage.

The pissed off Republicans may control the new Benghazi hearings but Obama still controls the FBI.

[Winehole23]

where'd you hear the rumor?

[Winehole23]

why would Obama need to silence Petraeus after Issa's years long inquiry came up empty and shut down, and well after Petraeus himself had already resigned in disgrace?

[boutons_deux]

CC :lol totally conned by the Repug/Fox Benghazi!!! bullshit :lol

My guess is they'll let Petraeus skate free, just like the banks. No Law Is Above The Man.

[CosmicCowboy]

where'd you hear the rumor?

I honestly don't remember. I think it was a guest on CNN. It's no secret that the Republicans think Petraeus lied to Congress and that Tey Gowdy is reopening Benghazi hearings this month now that Republicans control the sub-committees. Obviously it's political to hurt Hillary Clinton but nobody in the White House wants Petraeus spilling his guts to Gowdy.

[CosmicCowboy]

CC :lol totally conned by the Repug/Fox Benghazi!!! bullshit :lol

My guess is they'll let Petraeus skate free, just like the banks. No Law Is Above The Man.

In Buotons fantasy world, why would Fox News say anything bad about Republicans, especially the anti-Hillary motive for new Benghazi hearings?

[ChumpDumper]

lol Benghazi

[CosmicCowboy]

lol Benghazi

I actually agree but it is what it is.

[Winehole23]

Obviously it's political to hurt Hillary Clinton but nobody in the White House wants Petraeus spilling his guts to Gowdy.if Petraeus has already lied to Congress about Benghazi, why would you bleive his retraction?

You seem to assume Petraeus has something to say about Benghazi he hasn't already said. Why?

[CosmicCowboy]

if Petraeus has already lied to Congress about Benghazi, why would you bleive his retraction?

You seem to assume Petraeus has something to say about Benghazi he hasn't already said. Why?

Because anyone with a brain knows it wasn't just a "demonstration against the movie" that got out of control.

You are a pretty smart guy. You don't still believe that story, do you?

[Winehole23]

I don't believe reducing what happened to a single talking point gives an accurate picture of what happened, but neither do I think the Obama administration limited itself to it's own initial assessment and talking points. Pretending it did, as you seem to be doing, is very misleading too.

[CosmicCowboy]

I don't believe reducing what happened to a single talking point gives an accurate picture of what happened, but neither do I think the Obama administration limited itself to it's own initial assessment and talking points. Pretending it did, as you seem to be doing, is very misleading too.

I don't ever remember a concession that it was a successful terrorist attack against our US embassy that was apparently intentionally planned and executed on the anniversary of 9/11.

If you don't think that was what it was, please feel free to elaborate. I know you like to argue with me but insisting otherwise is positively Boutonish.

[ChumpDumper]

I don't ever remember a concession that it was a successful terrorist attack against our US embassy that was apparently intentionally planned and executed on the anniversary of 9/11.

If you don't think that was what it was, please feel free to elaborate. I know you like to argue with me but insisting otherwise is positively Boutonish.It wasn't an embassy for one.

[ChumpDumper]

And the State Department report says it was a terrorist attack and there were no demonstrations prior to it.

[CosmicCowboy]

It wasn't an embassy for one.

Diplomatic compound. I stand corrected although the ambassador is still dead.

[Winehole23]

CC still throwing shit on the wall, hoping it will stick. You need a new hobby horse, CC.

[boutons_deux]

Diplomatic compound. I stand corrected although the ambassador is still dead.

so are about 20 diplomatic staff dead under your loverly Repug administration. where was your fabricated outrage then?