General Petraeus resigns amid affair scandal

[M2]

I think that it is a hard to judge her from the outside looking in when we do not understand what type of documents she had in her office. Was it information that she was writing about that the FBI considers classified or are there actual documents that were snuck out that are classified. In my opinion, there is a difference. When an author/ex government employee writes a book that may have classified information in it at home but eventually gets in reviewed properly before getting it published, they do not get arrested when the government decides to redact 20 pages of it for being classified.

The government should not allow intelligence officers to be authors/news contributors because their knowledge on certain subjects can easily get into gray areas. News anchors talk about classified information all the time, the problem is when someone like Broadwell talks about the same thing, the military might as well be saying it. For example, for a long time the government didn’t claim they used “UAVs” in certain countries even though it was common knowledge and reported on CNN whenever it happened. If someone like Broadwell wrote an article on that subject would it be considered classified even if she used non-classified sources for her article?

The main thing that makes me wonder about the situation is, how in the hell did she get the classified documents on her computer in the first place? If she wasn’t the author, did she have a thumb drive or what? The government has not given any details about it so you have to wonder what the whole story is.

Doesn't matter, classified information is classified information. Just because it hasn't be reviewed or it shows up on Wikileaks doesn't mean the handling requirements change.

If she has a clearance and access then she knows how classified material must be protected, if she was ignorant of the classification guidance than it's her own damn fault.

Sorry, her tits and/or vag aren't going to get her a free pass every time...

[Spoo]

Not my fault, I thought she was 18.

[Guest one]

Doesn't matter, classified information is classified information. Just because it hasn't be reviewed or it shows up on Wikileaks doesn't mean the handling requirements change.

If she has a clearance and access then she knows how classified material must be protected, if she was ignorant of the classification guidance than it's her own damn fault.

Sorry, her tits and/or vag aren't going to get her a free pass every time...

It does matter. If you accidentally release classified information in a thesis you are writing that is borderline classified and you have a hundred unclassified sources for it, your situation will be treated a lot differently than someone who steals classified documents and uploads them to wikileaks. There is a very big difference. The handling requirements for things you create at home in an essay you are writing and classified documents created in a government facility are different.

I am not saying that she is innocent from wrong doing. I just think it is somewhat telling that she hasn't been arrested and no formal charges have been filed against her. This leads me to believe that her errors were not black and white.

She is a writer that almost exclusively writes about national security issues and international relations. There is going to be a lot of gray area. Like I said, retired intelligence officers who write books or articles usually have to get the book reviewed by whatever agency they worked for to see if there is any classified information. Some information almost always gets redacted because it is considered classified or "For Official Use Only". They do not get arrested or even have a security violation added to their record.

If she is guilty, they should arrest her. Unfortunately, they might not arrest her even if she is guilty just because of the situation with the General.

Edited February 23, 2013 by one

[Spoo]

Quibbling.

[RASH]

It does matter. If you accidentally release classified information in a thesis you are writing that is borderline classified and you have a hundred unclassified sources for it, your situation will be treated a lot differently than someone who steals classified documents and uploads them to wikileaks. There is a very big difference. The handling requirements for things you create at home in an essay you are writing and classified documents created in a government facility are different.

I am not saying that she is innocent from wrong doing. I just think it is somewhat telling that she hasn't been arrested and no formal charges have been filed against her. This leads me to believe that her errors were not black and white.

She is a writer that almost exclusively writes about national security issues and international relations. There is going to be a lot of gray area. Like I said, retired intelligence officers who write books or articles usually have to get the book reviewed by whatever agency they worked for to see if there is any classified information. Some information almost always gets redacted because it is considered classified or "For Official Use Only". They do not get arrested or even have a security violation added to their record.

If she is guilty, they should arrest her. Unfortunately, they might not arrest her even if she is guilty just because of the situation with the General.

Must be nice to be able to justify absolutely anything as right. I bet you sleep really well at night...

[Guest one]

Here is an example of a book that was filled with borderline classified information and information that at very least would be considered For Official Use Only. This was written by a retired Army Lt Col. It was published without being reviewed and the government had to pay thousands of dollars to keep it off the shelf and it still leaked. The author did not get arrested.

http://militarymusin...-run-destroyed/

Must be nice to be able to justify absolutely anything as right. I bet you sleep really well at night...

I am not saying that she is innocent. We do not know any details about the documents. I am not going to talk a lot of shit about someone that is an officer in the military without them getting their fair day in court. How many times have we seen the government get it wrong and ruin someone's life. So far, all she is guilty of is being clingy and being an adulterer.

Edited February 23, 2013 by one

[HeloDude]

I am not going to talk a lot of shit about someone that is an officer in the military without them getting their fair day in court.

You're not? Funny, you talk shit about officers damn near everyday on this forum. And this issue is no different--you comment on things you have little to no idea on what you're talking about.

Do yourself a favor, if you do happen to make it into the Air Force, please don't be as foolish of a 2Lt as your portray yourself here. It's challenging enough to mentor the young guys when they don't have the 'I know everything' attitude. As a school house IP, guys you like you always took much more of my valuable time compared to those who needed additional help but were willing to take instruction and critism.

How many times have we seen the government get it wrong and ruin someone's life.

Welcome to the military.

[TreeA10]

It's either classified or it's not. Borderline is not a classification that I'm aware of. Neither is "might be considered." Prosecution decision tree probably takes into account level of classification and probability (i.e. evidence) of scoring a kill but I'm not a lawyer nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

[M2]

It does matter. If you accidentally release classified information in a thesis you are writing that is borderline classified and you have a hundred unclassified sources for it, your situation will be treated a lot differently than someone who steals classified documents and uploads them to wikileaks. There is a very big difference. The handling requirements for things you create at home in an essay you are writing and classified documents created in a government facility are different.

I am not saying that she is innocent from wrong doing. I just think it is somewhat telling that she hasn't been arrested and no formal charges have been filed against her. This leads me to believe that her errors were not black and white.

She is a writer that almost exclusively writes about national security issues and international relations. There is going to be a lot of gray area. Like I said, retired intelligence officers who write books or articles usually have to get the book reviewed by whatever agency they worked for to see if there is any classified information. Some information almost always gets redacted because it is considered classified or "For Official Use Only". They do not get arrested or even have a security violation added to their record.

If she is guilty, they should arrest her. Unfortunately, they might not arrest her even if she is guilty just because of the situation with the General.

You don't have a fucking clue. Do you even have a clearance beyond a collateral? I do, and have probably longer than you've been alive. There was justification for pulling her promotion, despite your "opinion" on the matter.

Try talking less and listening more, it will serve you better in the future.

[Guest one]

You're not? Funny, you talk shit about officers damn near everyday on this forum. And this issue is no different--you comment on things you have little to no idea on what you're talking about.

Do yourself a favor, if you do happen to make it into the Air Force, please don't be as foolish of a 2Lt as your portray yourself here. It's challenging enough to mentor the young guys when they don't have the 'I know everything' attitude. As a school house IP, guys you like you always took much more of my valuable time compared to those who needed additional help but were willing to take instruction and critism.

I know it is not possible to know more about a topic than you because you are a pilot. That means you know more than anyone else about any topic. Not that it matters. but I have been in the military for about 6 years and I know a thing or two about this topic. I am not an expert like you though because I am only a 2Lt. You out rank me, so you are smarter than I am.

Joking aside, I disagree with people on this forum often but I try not to disrespect them or shit on them.

It's either classified or it's not. Borderline is not a classification that I'm aware of. Neither is "might be considered." Prosecution decision tree probably takes into account level of classification and probability (i.e. evidence) of scoring a kill but I'm not a lawyer nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

There are many ways to determine if something is classified or not. It depends on where the data was derived from. Each agency has classification guidance manuals that help determine whether something is classified and at what level it is classified. The DIA and the FBI may classify the same sentence differently because the sources they are using are derived from data collected by different means. If someone just writes something from the top of their head, it is difficult to determine where they derived the information because they could have gained the same knowledge from a number of different sources. It is something that has to be looked into carefully especially when it comes to releasing information to the public.

I am not trying to win a pissing match, I am just sharing some information. I was a Classification advisory Officer (just as an additional duty as an enlisted member) for four years. I am not an expert by any means but I know it is not always black and white. If as a CAO I didn’t know exactly how something was classified due to conflicting information from my training or the manuals, I would take it up with the boss. Very often, it was much more of a judgment call than an exact science.

ETA: If Broadwell had physical documents with the derivation and classification markings on it, it is a pretty cut and dry situation.

Edited February 23, 2013 by one

[Guest one]

You don't have a ing clue. Do you even have a clearance beyond a collateral? I do, and have probably longer than you've been alive. There was justification for pulling her promotion, despite your "opinion" on the matter.

Try talking less and listening more, it will serve you better in the future.

I never said anything about there not being justification to pull her clearance. The adultery alone would have been sufficient but an investigation by the FBI would also do the trick. If she is innocent, I am sure there is some process to get her promotion back, that is, if she even wants it at that point.

Edited February 23, 2013 by one

[GrndPndr]

<SNIP>

"...borderline classified..."

At best, to be determined by others. Pure speculation, despite your previous MOS.

<SNIP>

"...exclusively writes about national security issues and international relations."

And, should have known better.

FM

Edited February 23, 2013 by GrndPndr

[Guest one]

At best, to be determined by others. Pure speculation, despite your previous MOS.

And, should have known better.

FM

Definitely pure speculation. I have no idea about the documents.

She should have known better, but as we see all too often, people that hold these positions often become writers and news contributors.

[17D_guy]

There are many ways to determine if something is classified or not. It depends on where the data was derived from. Each agency has classification guidance manuals that help determine whether something is classified and at what level it is classified. The DIA and the FBI may classify the same sentence differently because the sources they are using are derived from data collected by different means. If someone just writes something from the top of their head, it is difficult to determine where they derived the information because they could have gained the same knowledge from a number of different sources. It is something that has to be looked into carefully especially when it comes to releasing information to the public.

I have been blessed to have a decent clearance with some cool caveats for awhile now. That bolded part makes me want to drown puppies. Seriously? Just write something out.. "I think it's classified, eh.. screw it." The story, while light on details, doesn't even read that way.

Possible options:

She has a journal at home that she filled with classified info.

She took classified docs home.

Are either of those even remotely ok?

Also.. with the rigid requirements for working with this stuff (inline statements, overall statements, etc) how can someone not currently involved with it not know? Additionally, with the pre-publish review requirement... wtf?

ETA: If Broadwell had physical documents with the derivation and classification markings on it, it is a pretty cut and dry situation.

Good to know you have a line somewhere.

[brickhistory]

Additionally, with the pre-publish review requirement... wtf?

Bingo!

So despite the one's theory that no one with a clearance should ever write anything, how about A) know whether you are writing about something is classified, was classified, and where you obtained the source material and B) follow the rules as you swore to do when you took Uncle Sam's money and obtain clearance if required?

I can assure you that both A and B are easy to accomplish.

Broadwell banged a general as a civilian unless she did it while on orders too. She took classified stuff home as a Reserve Lt Col and got caught. She's not Amn or 2Lt Snuffy who is inexperienced. She had a career working with classified. She looks like she got complacent and figured the rules didn't apply.

I'm sure she's crying all the way to the publisher for her next book and the movie rights for her Petreaus tome.

[Guest one]

I have been blessed to have a decent clearance with some cool caveats for awhile now. That bolded part makes me want to drown puppies. Seriously? Just write something out.. "I think it's classified, eh.. screw it." The story, while light on details, doesn't even read that way.

Possible options:

She has a journal at home that she filled with classified info.

She took classified docs home.

Are either of those even remotely ok?

Both of those are definitely not okay. The government has not released any specifics about the documents, so I was just playing devil’s advocate. You can’t determine if she is guilty or innocent with the facts released but I am sure it will eventually become public.

I can see your point about the bolded text. That is why I feel the government should not allow intelligence officers to publish books or go on tv talking about their field of expertise. For example, if you are a counterterrorism expert working for the government, I’d imagine that it would be difficult not to cross any lines while writing a book about counterterrorism. Someone with no government affiliation might write a very similar book with very similar facts but they didn’t have the government's intelligence to back it up with. The writer’s opinions maybe fueled by sensitive information they had access to whether they realize it or not. Being able to say you got that information from some news report overseas or from a book you read is not good enough when you had access to classified information. Even former Presidents have to get their books reviewed and often have big chunks redacted.

The prepublication review process gives the writer enough rope to hang themselves with. You are usually allowed to write about topics that you don’t think is classified or sensitive on your home computer but afterwards you have to submit it for review. If they say something is not okay, you have to destroy your copies of it and make sure it doesn’t get released to the public.

Here is an example of the DIA’s policy.

http://www.dia.mil/p...UBLIC%20REL.pdf

If she said it was a mistake (doesn’t make it right) but she had every intention to have anything she wrote reviewed before it being published, It would be hard to believe that she would get anything more than a slap on the wrist because that is still following the policies on prepublication. All that is assuming they found her own writings to be classified which may be completely inaccurate. Like I said, if Broadwell had physical documents with the derivation and classification markings on it, it is a pretty cut and dry situation. She should face jail time.

With all of these SEALs spouting off about killing Osama, all of the un-reviewed books being released by people in the know, her situation seems the least damaging of the three. No information (according to reports) have been released to the public.

I still can’t believe the SEALs that have been doing interviews have not been punished in any way.

Edited February 24, 2013 by one

[Guest one]

Bingo!

So despite the one's theory that no one with a clearance should ever write anything, how about A) know whether you are writing about something is classified, was classified, and where you obtained the source material and B) follow the rules as you swore to do when you took Uncle Sam's money and obtain clearance if required?

I can assure you that both A and B are easy to accomplish.

I think A and B is very difficult if you are a news contributor. For example, John Bolton, the former UN Ambassador goes on Fox News all the time talking about the Iraq war, terrorism, and all sorts of other related topics. When he is talking of the top of his head, none of it is being reviewed. With his level of access, it would be easy for him to let something slip that may be deemed sensitive.

When information is reviewed, sometimes very mundane things have to be redacted because of something you wouldn’t normally think about. The material doesn’t even have to be classified…it is redacted even if it is just found to be “For Official Use Only”. Almost anything can be argued to be FOUO.

If people follow the review policy there should be no real problems. Some of the SEALs from the raid and many others have been disregarding those rules but have faced no consequences.

ETA: John Bolton is smart enough to know not to cross the line but politicans have been known to let very serious intelligence slip without ever realizing they made a mistake until it was too late.

Edited February 24, 2013 by one

[17D_guy]

I still can’t believe the SEALs that have been doing interviews have not been punished in any way.

Concur.

[matmacwc]

One-You never had or have a clue what you are talking about in regards to the classification of materials, either what makes them classified or how they are classified. On top of that, the markings and/or the rules of what governs what you can do with them. Go back to your TPS reports. If you want to talk about them, I'm all ears.

[Guest one]

I am on it.

[TreeA10]

I'm wondering if the SEALS jumped on the bandwagon since someone else was taking all the credit for their work. From accounts, they thought they had high odds of failure and prison and/or death in Pakistan. But taking all the risks and getting none of the credit was fine with them in the past. Yet someone....who was that guy?....kept claiming he was a credible candidate because Osama was dead because of Him, The One. That would surely piss me off and I would want to set the record straight.

Regarding classified, "The rules do no apply to me because I'm important" may have happened here. Unfortunately, she isn't important enough, like Senator Patrick Leahy when on the Senate Intelligence committee, or politically connected enough, like Sandy Berger, National Security Advisor, to dodge whatever prosecutor arrows are thrown her way.

[Beaver]

I'm wondering if the SEALS jumped on the bandwagon since someone else was taking all the credit for their work. From accounts, they thought they had high odds of failure and prison and/or death in Pakistan. But taking all the risks and getting none of the credit was fine with them in the past.

In what universe did SEALs not take credit for something?

I think that it is a hard to judge her from the outside looking in when we do not understand what type of documents she had in her office. Was it information that she was writing about that the FBI considers classified or are there actual documents that were snuck out that are classified. In my opinion, there is a difference. When an author/ex government employee writes a book that may have classified information in it at home but eventually gets in reviewed properly before getting it published, they do not get arrested when the government decides to redact 20 pages of it for being classified.

The government should not allow intelligence officers to be authors/news contributors because their knowledge on certain subjects can easily get into gray areas. News anchors talk about classified information all the time, the problem is when someone like Broadwell talks about the same thing, the military might as well be saying it. For example, for a long time the government didn’t claim they used “UAVs” in certain countries even though it was common knowledge and reported on CNN whenever it happened. If someone like Broadwell wrote an article on that subject would it be considered classified even if she used non-classified sources for her article?

The main thing that makes me wonder about the situation is, how in the hell did she get the classified documents on her computer in the first place? If she wasn’t the author, did she have a thumb drive or what? The government has not given any details about it so you have to wonder what the whole story is.

The government should not allow intelligence officers to be authors/news contributors because their knowledge on certain subjects can easily get into gray areas. News anchors talk about classified information all the time,

Are you some kind of communist?

[17D_guy]

In what universe did SEALs not take credit for something?

Credit as a community sure, credit as an individual for actions completed in the course of a mission?

[10percenttruth]

Credit as a community sure, credit as an individual for actions completed in the course of a mission?

Sounds like standard OPR building to me.

[HU&W]

Prosecutors are recommending felony charges against Petraeus.

WASHINGTON — The F.B.I. and Justice Department prosecutors have recommended bringing felony charges against retired Gen. David H. Petraeus for providing classified information to his former mistress while he was director of the C.I.A., officials said, leaving Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to decide whether to seek an indictment that could send the pre-eminent military officer of his generation to prison.The Justice Department investigation stems from an affair Mr. Petraeus had with Paula Broadwell, an Army Reserve officer who was writing his biography, and focuses on whether he gave her access to his C.I.A. email account and other highly classified information. F.B.I. agents discovered classified documents on her computer after Mr. Petraeus resigned from the C.I.A. in 2012 when the affair became public.Mr. Petraeus, a retired four star-general who served as commander of American forces in both Iraq and Afghanistan, has said he never provided classified information to Ms. Broadwell, and has indicated to the Justice Department that he has no interest in a plea deal that would spare him an embarrassing trial. A lawyer for Mr. Petraeus, Robert B. Barnett, said Friday he had no comment.Mr. Holder was expected to decide by the end of last year whether to bring charges against Mr. Petraeus, but he has not indicated how he plans to proceed. The delay has frustrated some Justice Department and F.B.I officials and investigators who have questioned whether Mr. Petraeus has received special treatment at a time Mr. Holder has led an unprecedented crackdown on government officials who reveal secrets to journalists.The protracted process has also frustrated Mr. Petraeus’s friends and political allies, who say it is unfair to keep the matter hanging over his head. Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, wrote to Mr. Holder last month that the investigation had deprived the nation of wisdom from one of its most experienced experts.“At this critical moment in our nation’s security,” he wrote, “Congress and the American people cannot afford to have his voice silenced or curtailed by the shadow of a long-running, unresolved investigation marked by leaks from anonymous sources.”Since his resignation from the C.I.A. on Nov. 10, 2012, Mr. Petraeus has divided his time between teaching, making lucrative speeches and working as a partner in one of the world’s largest private-equity firms, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts.Mr. Holder has said little publicly about the investigation. the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, asked by reporters in December why it was taking so long, said: “I can’t say. I mean, I guess I could say, but I won’t say.”Marc Raimondi, a Justice Department spokesman, declined to comment on the investigation. Several officials who discussed it did so on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. At a news conference shortly after Mr. Petraeus resigned, President Obama said he had no evidence that Mr. Petraeus had disclosed classified information “that in any way would have had a negative impact on our national security.” “We are safer because of the work that Dave Petraeus has done,” Mr. Obama said, referring to his career in government. “And my main hope right now is — is that he and his family are able to move on and that this ends up being a single side note on what has otherwise been an extraordinary career.” But investigators concluded that, whether or not the disclosure harmed national security, it amounted to a significant security breach in the office of one of the nation’s most trusted intelligence leaders. They recommended that Mr. Petraeus face charges, saying lower-ranking officials had been prosecuted for far less. Federal agents stumbled onto the affair after Jill Kelley, a friend of Mr. Petraeus, complained to the F.B.I. that she had received anonymous threatening emails about her relationship with Mr. Petraeus. F.B.I. agents opened a cyberstalking investigation, traced the message to Ms. Broadwell and began searching her emails. That is when they discovered evidence that she and Mr. Petraeus were having an affair. Mr. Petraeus is said to have begun the affair with Ms. Broadwell in 2011, soon after taking the job at the C.I.A. and she was interviewing him for her book, “All In: The Education of General David Petraeus.”Mr. Petraeus resigned from the the C.I.A. three days after Mr. Obama was re-elected. In a brief statement, Mr. Petraeus admitted to the affair, saying that “after being married for over 37 years, I showed extremely poor judgment.”“Such behavior is unacceptable, both as a husband and as the leader of an organization such as ours,” Mr. Petraeus said, referring to the C.I.A. “This afternoon, the president graciously accepted my resignation.” Mr. Petraeus, a graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point, took command of American forces in Iraq in 2007, one of the lowest points in the war. Al Qaeda controlled large parts of the country, and dozens of American soldiers were dying each month. Mr. Petraeus directed the so-called “surge” of American forces that helped stablize Iraq enough so that the United States could withdraw its troops under Mr. Obama. In 2010, Mr. Obama chose him to lead American forces in Afghanistan, where the Taliban was gaining territory. Mr. Petraeus had some success — although not nearly as much as he had in Iraq. Along with his acumen on the battlefield, Mr. Petraeus was considered a natural political operator in Washington, where he easily navigated the politics of Congress, the White House and the Pentagon. He fielded calls to run for president and cultivating a larger-than-life media image. All the while, he remained a trusted adviser to Mr. Obama, who appointed him to lead the C.I.A. in 2011.