About the Petraeus Deal . . . .
Jonn’s written a couple of articles (here and here) recently concerning former GEN David Petraeus’ recent plea-bargain deal. And in truth, I generally (no pun intended) agree with Jonn’s assessment.
But I have to say that I agree with him for very different reasons.
Many have castigated Petraeus for his carrying on an affair with his biographer, former USAR MAJ Paula Broadwell. (Yes, former MAJ; her promotion to LTC was reportedly revoked, and she no longer seems to be a member of the USAR.) While I don’t condone such behavior, for a number of reasons that’s not my primary problem Petraeus’ actions.
Why? Well, for starters the affair was consensual, and reportedly began after Petraeus had left active duty. While IMO such conduct is morally wrong, no one is perfect.
Further, expecting perfection in senior leadership is IMO foolish. I don’t really think we want – or should expect – either senior military leaders or the head of the CIA to be saints. Intel can be a dirty business, and exceptionally few GOs/FOs are Chaplains. Saints aren’t normally the people you’d expect to excel in such roles.
My issue is with a different failing – and its potential effects, which we may not yet have seen or even know about.
Petraeus has pleaded to unauthorized retention of classified materials. That’s bad. But here’s a quote from one published article concerning the recent plea deal that describes just what he retained. I’ve added emphasis (italics) in the quote below.
All eight books “collectively contained classified information regarding the identifies of covert officers, war strategy, intelligence capabilities and mechanisms, diplomatic discussions, quotes and deliberative discussions from high-level National Security Council meetings… and discussions with the president of the United States.”
Those notebooks were apparently stored unsecurely at times. They were reportedly kept by Petraeus “in a rucksack”, and were loaned for a period of several days to his biographer and mistress – Broadwell – for her perusal.
That means we don’t really know who else might have seen them. We know Petraeus and Broadwell have. But do we truly know if anyone else looked them over – with or without their permission?
Maybe no one else has in fact seen them. As this point, that appears to be the case. But if access to them was achieved clandestinely . . . we might not know that for a while.
Some might ask if that’s really a “big deal”, or “what difference does it make?” For anyone asking those questions, let me refer you to Dmitri Polyakov, Adolf Tolkachev, Sergei Motorin and Leonid Poleshchuk. You can ask them if being exposed by-name is a “big deal” or “makes a difference”.
Or, more precisely: you can ask their surviving family and friends. Each of those individuals was reportedly executed by Soviet authorities not terribly long after being exposed by Aldrich Ames and/or Robert Hanssen as a US intelligence source.
Intel isn’t a game. And in real life, sometimes exposure as an intel source or operative ends more than that an individual’s usefulness.
No, General – that risk wasn’t worth it. And I can certainly see why you jumped at this deal.
You got off damn easy.
meanwhile any enlisted fellow who did the same would have gotten max plus sentencing. (unless you’re a whiny trans crybaby. then you can have the govment pick up the tab on your swap job)
And he lied to the FBI…
Agreed. The only reason we got Gary Powers back was that he was swapped for Soviet spy Francis Abel. I guess that was because people’s lives meant something back then.
I do not understand, nor will I ever, this blind carelessness that makes people act in this irresponsible manner.
I don’t think it was blind carelessness. I think he thought himself invincible and on top of the world. And then he had a fairly young reasonably attractive woman who enjoys sleeping with people in power. Enough blood to run a brain and a dick, just not simultaneously.
I think you meant “Robert Hanssen.”
Correct, and now fixed above.
That’s what I get for working from memory. It’s still fairly good, but not infallible. (smile)
Hondo,
Unless my browser is doing something strange, the first two links referencing posts by Jonn are at best incomplete.
As someone who also writes on a blog, that looks suspiciously like “I remember two posts and I’ll write they exist and then link to them later.”
Been there. Done that. 🙂
Just thought you’d want to know.
Not exactly – seems to be a font translation issue that sometimes occurs and which causes a broken link that defaults back to the current home page. Forgot to check for that when I posted the article, even though it’s an issue I know happens from time to time.
It’s fixed above now. Thanks for letting me know about the problem.
No worries, friend. I enjoy reading your stuff. You are very detail-oriented. Makes me think you were AG in a past life.
I also think his status as a well respected general during the GWOT helped. I also believe that your point about actual harm versus potential harm is also a major component of the outcome. Had it become clear that foreign agencies took materials from the general’s lack of security regarding those documents I suspect we would have had a far different case.
In the absence of harm, and considering previous service along with the potential for future wrongdoing the sentence is appropriate.
Part of the system is used to punish and part to protect society. Petraeus will forever be damaged by all of this, but not only was no real harm done to society he represents no danger to our society moving forward.
I have seen many good people in bad marriages commit adultery, I wish more would be honest with their partner and end the marriage instead of engaging in the affairs first. That lack of honesty creates questions about the overall integrity of the individual committing the adulterous affair.
So the honorable General will forever be known as an adulterous buffoon who failed to secure sensitive documents, he will have no legacy of honor or integrity. He will bear the shame of his acts until he dies and history will record those acts for future generations.
In that line of thinking one might be able to argue that being damned as an adulterous lying fool for all of eternity is a serious cross to bear and a prison sentence would not add to the already heavy punishment.
Or not, YMMV…as it most certainly should.
It’s more than “failed to secure”, VOV. Those documents were retained knowingly when Petraeus left the military.
He either knew, or should have known, the nature of the materials contained therein and their sensitivity. Hell, they were his personal notebooks.
I’m guessing they were retained for post-service commercial purposes – e.g., as memory aids for the writing of a biography. That’s fine. But if he was going to do that, those documents should have been (1) transcribed, (2) reviewed for classification, and (3) sanitized of all classified information. Otherwise, he should not have retained them.
I do not believe the man was unaware of those requirements. I personally believe he chose to ignore them. And that behavior put others at risk.
Thankfully, it appears we “dodged a bullet” and nothing was disclosed to adversaries. Perhaps. We don’t really know at present.
And we won’t know for certain for years – if ever.
Hondo, I agree with your assessment of the General. I guess I missed the point this affair happened after active duty. Then, it is between him, the Major, his wife no one else. But keeping classified materials, especially personally notes of such, was a stray arrow waiting to hit a friend. As in Hillary’s personal email exchanges, if it was government business, it belongs to the government and thus the taxpayers, not him. Not his to retain, as you wrote to VOV, without being turned over for sanitation of classified intel. I still believe he’ll have a brighter civilian future than some think. If not, his pension will keep him in good shoes the rest of his life.
The only reason any of this came out is because the General wouldn’t kiss obamas rotten ass! His snakes will create a scene if they can’t find a real one! imho
Concur with all of the above that the carelessness when it comes to the mishandling of classified information is a HUGE deal, and no one should be above the law. I read a report that they have Petraeus on tape (made by his biographer during an interview for ALL IN) that those books were HIGHLY CLASSIFIED. As a 4-star General and former head of the CIA, he needs to set the example. Thus, I concur with all that he got off damn easy. However, we cannot overlook the selective nature of this prosecution. We have Lois Lerner and other officials at the IRS blatantly breaking the law when it comes to targeting specific groups because of their political beliefs and then covering up by claiming that her computer crashed and all back-up tapes have been destroyer. We have the Fast and Furious operation that has led to the deaths of Federal agents, and yet there has been no interest by the DoJ to even open an investigation. Who wants to lay money down that no one goes after the former SecState for “You’ve Got Mail, but the USG does not” – gate? Then there is Bergdahl who was investigated for possible desertion. That 15-6 was reported to have been completed back in December, but three months later the Army is still mulling it over. (Sure they are.) The point is that everyone knows that a respected and proven military leader that was and is David Patreaus makes an attractive presidential candidate. (Think of MacArthur both being sent to the southwest Pacific for the duration of the war and after he was fired by Truman, IKE, and Colin Powell.) Part of this calculation was to wing him so that he could never make a serious run at the White House. No, I am not putting his behavior on the same plane as my other examples. I am disappointed in Patreaus for breaking the law. One other thing, I believe the constant comparisons to what would happen to an enlisted person for comparable misconduct is wrong. Let’s face it, there is a… Read more »
fair enough. I did some fact checking and it seemed his affair started after he retired in aug, 2011.
“in late 2011…”
Sorry Hondo, he should have had the balls and courtesy to divorce his wife. After being touted as a new MacArthur, I don’t feel one bit sorry for for him. Hell, get rid of that Army Values thing, it ain’t important.
I didn’t say he was blameless, PFM. In my book, infidelity is wrong. Period.
However: IMO marital fidelity is also something that’s between him, his spouse, and the Deity. It’s neither a matter of public concern nor is it an absolute requirement for most professions – to include the military.
Petraeus was appointed General and CIA Director; he wasn’t ordained as clergy. The qualities required for the former two jobs are IMO quite different from those of the latter.
Try telling that to my old CSM when an NCO screwed up, especially a SNCO…
Yeah, I also served with a few intolerant, self-appointed “guardians of morality”. Can’t say I thought too highly of most of them.
I think it has less to do with marital infidelity and accountability by faith than it does with a complete lack of common sense.
If you remember the 1960s at all, Harold MacMillan’s Secretary of War, John Profumo, had to resign (got fired) from his position because of his affair with Christine Keeler, who was known to have a relationship with Yevgeny Ivanov. Mandy Rice-Davies was also involved in this mess.
When someone gets to a certain point in his career,it seems to replace any common sense he may have had with his pecker. Women do the same thing now, so don’t tell me it isn’t so.
It takes place in the civilian corporate world, too, so it’s not exclusive to the miliary or to politics.
Petraeus knew better, but he just didn’t care, because he was getting laid. I sure do hope he enjoyed it.
Believe it was Ross Perot who viewed infidelity as grounds for instant firing – if someone can’t be trusted to keep one of the most meaningful promises he/she makes to the person they are supposedly dedicating the rest of their life to – how can you trust them to keep any lesser promise?
Has anyone here considered a possible correlation between the timing of the “official” announcement of the charges against Petraeus and the “leak” of the information about Hillary’s emails?
Doesn’t the first, by including the possibility of a prison sentence and the consequence that the perpetrator is forever barred from holding future federal office, set the stage for the seriousness of Clinton’s mishandling of state department correspondence? The first makes it more difficult to just brush away the seriousness of Clinton’s violations with a dismissive, “Oh everyone does it,” type response.
There has never been any love lost between the Obama and Clinton camps. The left wing of the Democrat party has long made it known they would rather have a full-blown socialist like Elizabeth Warren than an old has-been, college-days commie like Clinton. And Obama, definitely being in the party’s far-left cohort might be willing to do their dirty work. And don’t tell me the White House didn’t know of Hillary’s foolery and purposely file that knowledge away as the possible future political weapon it has now become.
Summing up, would this not be a very effective way for that side of the party to undermine Clinton’s status within the liberal establishment, particularly the mainstream media, which it has demonstrably done already, paving the way for a Warren or some other dark horse run?
And no, Ol’ Poe isn’t a tinfoil-hatted conspiracy theorist, he just thought the timing a bit too convenient for those who could most benefit.
Funny you should say that….
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clintons-use-of-personal-e-mail-at-state-dept-violated-obama-directive/2015/03/03/454d7938-c1b9-11e4-9271-610273846239_story.html?postshare=251425487755400
The Obama white house is looking to park a bus on her head even as I type this by stating clearly she in violation of white house guidelines..
Veritas Omnia Vincit Thank you for the article. I’m giving ten to one odds, she gleaned those emails of any official exchanges before they were turned over.
I thought it would be interesting, methinks it’s a great time for the WH to finally bury Clinton and open the door for some other non-legacy candidate…they’ve got some oddballs in the wings that will no doubt be happy to step up and take on the mantle.
Petreaus thought he was going to get laid and paid at the same time. The old saying goes, “We’ve established what you are — now we have to figure out your price.”
Honor and money mix like mud and ice cream (it’s doesn’t hurt the mud any, but it damn sure doesn’t do anything for the ice cream.)
But if he was a retired Enlisted Soldier, they would try to take his retirement pay…
“You got off damn easy.”
Rank Hath Its Privileges.
Different spanks for different ranks…