Slashdot Mirror


Gen. Petraeus To Be Sentenced To Two Years Probation and Fine

An anonymous reader writes: Petraeus, a now-retired U.S. Army General, has already agreed to plead guilty to a criminal misdemeanor charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material. As part of the agreement with prosecutors filed in March, the government will not seek any prison time. Instead, Petraeus will agree to pay a $40,000 fine and receive two years of probation, according to court documents. The recommendations are not binding on the federal judge who will preside at the hearing Thursday afternoon in Charlotte.

94 comments

  1. Haha FTA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Snowden done a truly patriotic service, never mind his intent (who knows) but this General was only after pussy before he BETRAYED US!

    1. Re: Haha FTA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you recheck the snowden stuff, everything was cross refered to in the news prior to snowden rereleasing as a total script. UST no one put 2+2 together in one compressive document. Like a masters thesis is supposed to cr the object, that is what he did on spying.

    2. Re: Haha FTA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Imagine that. A smug self righteous zealot bows at the feet of their god Snowden. Let me get you some more gold stars millennial.

  2. Thank God!!!! by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For a second I thought a member of the elite was actually going to be significantly punished, but these wise prosecutors have preserved the Aristocracy from shame!

    Now, let's get about castrating Edward Snowden!

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    1. Re: Thank God!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That judge wanted to send a serious message. He more than doubled the fine to prove it!

    2. Re: Thank God!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The judge got his serious message across, by doubling the fine.

    3. Re: Thank God!!!! by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So the general protection fault has to pay almost what, 5% of what he made by selling out his country?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re: Thank God!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is he All In?

      SNL had a great thing to say about that book. The early working title, they said, was "Just an Inch."

    5. Re: Thank God!!!! by siddesu · · Score: 1

      Yeah. I wonder what is the 'serious' message that's worth less than half of his yearly pension, "don't get caught"? Also, the "he didn't disclose it" crap is hilarious, because it is full of unknown unknowns.

    6. Re: Thank God!!!! by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      He did send a serious message.... misappropriation and corruption at the highest levels will most certainly be tolerated.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  3. so....why? by Sowelu · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    We get a lot of articles here that people say don't belong on Slashdot, but I usually side with them being good articles. "Stuff that matters" and all that, personal freedoms, general interest to nerds, etc. But this one...no, I'm just not seeing it. Nothing to do with personal freedoms, nothing to do with computers, nothing to do with public policy, absolutely zero effect on any of us, even those of us in the USA. It's just political celebrity news.

    1. Re:so....why? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Well, thanks for showing up to tell us. It's so good of you to come on to a topic that you believe completely does not belong on /. to tell us how it does not not belong on /. You are a true champion through and through! Now use your powers to find out if that pack of 100 jelly beans in fact has 100 jelly beans, or 99 or 103.

      America needs people like you!

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:so....why? by Sowelu · · Score: 1

      I could say the same thing about your post, but that's really going nowhere.

    3. Re:so....why? by lgw · · Score: 1

      I agree with OP. /. is it's own thing, not a general purpose news aggregation site. The world is saturated with those, and surely doesn't need another.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    4. Re:so....why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This just in: Slashdot editors can post whatever they want.

    5. Re:so....why? by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      Slashdot is been posting general new stories since basically forever.

    6. Re: so....why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Petraeus' case is generally contrasted with those of Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden. Manning spent a long time in questionable conditions that some suggest were intended as duress, all for leaking computer data that exposed a US war crime. Snowden is in de facto exile for exfiltrating data that revealed the means by which the US government illegally spies on its citizens and the extent of their previous lies denying it. Petraeus got a slap on the wrist for leaking classifed information to a woman with whom he was having an affair. The two former leakers were punished for revealing the government's crimes, while the latter stayed out of jail despite giving classified info in exchange for sex.

    7. Re: so....why? by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Petraeus is a part of the elite. The elite don't get real punishments. Now remember who your masters are, and beg them not to punish you for your impertinence! Oh, and Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    8. Re:so....why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's meant to warn nerds of the dangers associated with female companionship

    9. Re: so....why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mod parent up.

      GP is either an idiot, a troll, or a govt shill.

    10. Re:so....why? by grcumb · · Score: 4, Informative

      We get a lot of articles here that people say don't belong on Slashdot, but I usually side with them being good articles. "Stuff that matters" and all that, personal freedoms, general interest to nerds, etc. But this one...no, I'm just not seeing it. Nothing to do with personal freedoms, nothing to do with computers, nothing to do with public policy, absolutely zero effect on any of us, even those of us in the USA. It's just political celebrity news.

      Except that his indiscretions were discovered because his electronic cloak-and-dagger skills weren't what he thought they were, and that the FBI discovered this in an electronic dragnet, and that he, the director of the CIA, disclosed state secrets to his soon-to-be-jealous lover, which constitutes a greater potential breach of security than Snowden and Assange combined....

      But aside from that, yeah, no relevance to the life of the average geek. None whatsoever.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
    11. Re:so....why? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      It's meant to warn nerds of the dangers associated with female companionship

      I suppose it is useful to have purely theoretical discussions around here from time to time.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    12. Re: so....why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You state "Manning spent a long time in questionable conditions that some suggest were intended as duress

      "

      but numerous entities designate solitary confinement as torture, which seems accruate.

      Truly astonishing that Petraeus sees no jail time /sarc.

      Are they any more American patriots any more? If so, how do you defend yourselves?

      For you sycophants, if Petrasous sees no jail time, does that apply to Manning, Snowden, and others:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_whistleblowers

    13. Re: so....why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Petraeus is pretty far from 'elite', he's a dog on a leash. That's why he's getting a sentence instead of a free pass. I may change my opinion if he gets a pardon, though.

    14. Re: so....why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, as long as the elite increases my chocolate rations from 20g to 15g, they're cool with me.

    15. Re: so....why? by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      Probably somewhere in the middle... he knew the location of enough closeted skeletons to avoid a stay at Hotel Leavenworth, but he was not quite powerful enough to just have the system shrug it off.

      Then again, consider that he is still, even now, a paid consultant for the Obama Administration (ostensibly concerning ISIS), so take from that what you will...

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    16. Re: so....why? by ZeroWaiteState · · Score: 1

      Petraeus was the head of an US intelligence agency at the time. If you don't understand why US intelligence is relevant to information technology you haven't been paying attention for 15 years.

    17. Re: so....why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Torture is a broad and fuzzy term. Duress is more specific: force or the threat of force that aims to gain compliance. The government wanted to break Manning, to get him to repent on the record so that he wouldn't be idolized as a whistleblower but vilified as a traitor. Duress is negative reinforcement (not punishment).

  4. The more this happens ... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The more this happens, the more it looks like Snowdon is a vendetta for embarrassing the powerful by doing what is, more and more, looking like the right thing.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    1. Re: The more this happens ... by ZeroWaiteState · · Score: 1

      That's precisely the case. A vast majority of leaks you read about in the paper are sourced from government officials acting with full knowledge of their agency. The ones who are prosecuted arent targeted because of the nature of the info, they are prosecuted based on who it embarrassed. That's why the only person to serve time in jail regarding torture was the guy who exposed it. When it comes to topics the government is sensitive about, we have more of a kangaroo system than a real court.

  5. not binding by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    100K

    1. Re:not binding by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      If we're talking about the number of kicks to the nuts he should receive, we can start talking.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:not binding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm the one that submitted the article. I specifically made note to the editor that the amount actually fined was $100,000 and it was announced on Reuters but they had not written an official article on the ruling yet. For some reason that part was stripped out.

  6. Good to see process play out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why can't we get the same sort of equitable result for those in Senior Staff Positions with the DOS who chose to ignore rules and standards in the name of 'convenience'. Gee why didn't Mrs. Slick Willy think of that - oh wait....

  7. Should be used as precedent for sentencing Snowden by timrod · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think this case should absolutely be used as precedent when and if they sentence Edward Snowden. I think a two year suspended sentence, followed by a Congressional Medal of Freedom would be an appropriate sentence.

  8. Good thing he didn't download a bunch of pdf's by musmax · · Score: 2, Funny

    but only provided national security info to his floozy for sex.

  9. Re: Should be used as precedent for sentencing Sno by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A Congressional medal?

    I would sooner pick the two years on jail instead.

  10. Summary overlooks a couple of points by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1. He was leaking classified information to his mistress who was also his biographer. Like top-secret stuff.
    2. When an investigation ensued, he lied to the FBI about leaking the material to his mistress.

    Martha Stewart lied to the FBI about insider trading tips and got at least 5 month in a prison camp.

    1. Re:Summary overlooks a couple of points by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So remember, leaking classified material to the public the govt supposedly 'works for' (I know, hahahahaha), and you get a crazy prison sentence, calls for the death penalty, etc.

      Leak it to the hot piece of pussy you're trying to impress? Well, that's ok, we'll just slap a little fine on you and give you probation...

    2. Re:Summary overlooks a couple of points by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leak it to the hot piece of pussy you're trying to impress?

      Poontang's poontang. /Mr. Garrison

    3. Re:Summary overlooks a couple of points by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      An enlisted man would have received 10 years in Leavenworth.

    4. Re:Summary overlooks a couple of points by Uberbah · · Score: 2, Informative

      Like top-secret stuff.

      Sensitive Compartmented Information, actually, which is far beyond the Top Secret information revealed by the whistleblower Manning. Guess which one is getting probation and the other is getting to spend 3+ decades in prison?

    5. Re:Summary overlooks a couple of points by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      He's very lucky his mistress isn't working for the GRU/ISIS/al-qaeda or he'd be looking at oh wait he'd probably still get off with a slapped wrist

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    6. Re:Summary overlooks a couple of points by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's very lucky his mistress isn't working for the GRU/ISIS/al-qaeda or he'd be looking at oh wait he'd probably still get off with a slapped wrist

      More like a fapped wrist.

    7. Re:Summary overlooks a couple of points by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >This incident also involved the death of 4 Americans.

      Oh god are you still trying to get on the Benghazi thing? GIVE IT UP. There's nothing to find there, there's plenty of better things to investigate, and continuing to insist on Benghazi as something you can stick on the Clintons is just politicking.

    8. Re:Summary overlooks a couple of points by cellocgw · · Score: 1

      An enlisted man would have received 10 years in Leavenworth.

      Or eleven years in Twelveworth,
      or five to ten in Woolworth.

      Hey, someone had to quote it!

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
  11. Different Set of Rules by Kunedog · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think we will find there is one rulebook for punishing people like Snowden, and another for VIPs like Petraeus. And yet another (very thin) one for super ultra-VIPs like Clinton.

    1. Re:Different Set of Rules by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Until someone snaps and takes the law into his own hands. That's the inherent dangers of an unjust justice system: People losing faith in it.

      That is actually very dangerous to the stability of a state.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Different Set of Rules by ZeroInt · · Score: 0

      In sound byte form: Different spanks for different ranks.

    3. Re: Different Set of Rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that would be exactly as it should be. You peons NEED a ruling elite whose members should not be held accountable by the laws which were written to keep you rabble in your place.

    4. Re:Different Set of Rules by DarkOx · · Score: 0

      If there were video of Hillary physically being handed a stack of cash (right hand), cigar hung loosely from lips while strangling a kitten(left hand) from a Russian CEO over a document that said approval to process uranium; people would still apologize for her and do their best to 'splain it way. If that effort failed they'd invent some other way for her to evade accountability like 'No controlling legal authority' and the press would complicity discontinue talking about it and return focus to what sort of burrito she ordered.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    5. Re: Different Set of Rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      # The doer and the thinker,
      no allowance for the other,
      as the fading light illuminates the mercenaries' creed ...

    6. Re:Different Set of Rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, we're removing the means for you lowlifers to do that. Soon enough surveillance will be so pervasive that even *thinking* wrong will be detected. Game over for you shit people.

    7. Re:Different Set of Rules by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      We know that Snowden and Petraeus both leaked classified material, but I'm inclined to say that someone of high rank and responsibility should be punished more than a contract sysadmin for doing the same thing.

      Petraeus has pled guilty to leaking classified material, and we all know Snowden did. I've seen no indications that Clinton did anything on the same scale, or a mention of any law she appears to have broken. (Other secretaries of state have used private email for official purposes; it was only made illegal a year after Clinton left).

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    8. Re:Different Set of Rules by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Only as long as we still have something to lose. You have to be careful not to take that away, or else it's game over for you.

      You cannot win a war against someone who doesn't mind losing it because he CANNOT lose anything.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  12. Re:Should be used as precedent for sentencing Snow by dywolf · · Score: 1

    ah but Snowden isnt connected.
    Petraeus is, from having been director of the CIA.

    Also, he told secrets to the public, instead of his mistress.

    --
    The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
  13. If only he had ... by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ... stored it all on his own server in the first place, he could run for President.

  14. obviously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any story that provides an excuse to bash the USA or a rich, powerful person makes the front page these days.

  15. dishonourable discharge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    He should get dishonourable discharge as well and no pension.

    1. Re:dishonourable discharge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He should get dishonourable discharge as well and no pension.

      That's be pretty hard to do since he's already retired from the military. You only get discharged once.

    2. Re:dishonourable discharge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, draft his ass so you can then dishonorably discharge him.

  16. Re:Stalin purged his generals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obama is just following in his footsteps.

    Look at this guy.

    Just look at him.

  17. Motivation and punishment by duckintheface · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Snowden disclosed illegal activity on the part of his employer and the US government. He should be protected by the whistle-blower law. Petraeus gave classified material to his biographer (and lover). In addition to displaying his machismo to his female, he was also trying to provide background info for the book about him. Petraeus was motivated by self-serving benefit. Snowden was doing a service to his country. In a just world, Petraeus should be the one hiding in Russia to avoid life imprisonment or a death sentence.

    --
    "He took a duck in the face at 250 knots." -- William Gibson, Pattern Recognition
    1. Re:Motivation and punishment by dcw3 · · Score: 0

      Immoral maybe (opinions vary), illegal no.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    2. Re:Motivation and punishment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Snowden disclosed illegal activity on the part of his employer and the US government. He should be protected by the whistle-blower law.

      He should be protected for those leaks. However he also leaked many thing that were clearly legal. For example the NSA doing it's job by spying on other countries, including allies. Leaks about that would not be covered by any whistle-blower law. Not everything he leaked was illegal activity, even when you ignore the legal games they are playing.

    3. Re:Motivation and punishment by nucrash · · Score: 1

      If they were doing nothing wrong, they shouldn't have had anything to hide. At least, that's how we are told to treat citizens of this country, right? Why shouldn't the government abide by the same rules that it expects its citizens to abide by?

      Oh wait, they need an exemption because government. Because "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others"

      I am sorry, I was going to continue, but now I feel like I am giving a book report on Animal Farm.

      --
      Place something witty here
    4. Re:Motivation and punishment by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      That sounds exactly like what I would expect from this government, without regard to who is in office. Oh you did something stupid for personal gain? No harm no foul.....but if you are an idealist, that scares them.

      The last thing they want is to be held accountable, and this is a clear indication of that.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  18. If you wanna be my lover by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Howz it go again? Gimma all your loving, hugz and kizzez too? Then gimme dem secretz.

  19. I haven't heard what the lady did with the info by Streetlight · · Score: 2

    Where did the secret stuff given to the mistress go? Was it shared with certain governments not allied with the USA? Could it be treason? And the punishment for treason is pretty serious for a soldier - a firing squad.

    --
    In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
    1. Re:I haven't heard what the lady did with the info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was put into his up-and-coming biography, which will be publicly available.

      Just remember: When the elite leak secret information to the public for their own greedy purposes, it's A-OK.
      When a whistleblower leaks secret information tot he public for the good of the nation, it's horribly wrong and they are an evil person.

    2. Re:I haven't heard what the lady did with the info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the punishment for treason is pretty serious for a soldier - a firing squad.

      Well, it would appear that this is pretty much what Petraeus chose for himself. Except that it was a firing gonad.

  20. People at the top pay? by Sarius64 · · Score: 2

    Sandy Berger got probation, community service, and a $50,000 fine I bet he didn't pay. Petraeus received essentially the same.

    Funny that normal civilians and enlisted people get decades plus for the same crime.

  21. Re:I wonder what Hillary will get? by Sarius64 · · Score: 1

    Still wondering how she passed and destroyed classified information with no investigation. Supposedly produce a child with the President and you get to break regulations all around apparently.

  22. Traitor Gen. [B]etraeus Walks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How far will the traitor Gen. walk?

    1. Re:Traitor Gen. [B]etraeus Walks by jsepeta · · Score: 1

      Apparently Attorney General Holder has never heard of a PLANK on a Ship at Sea, where there are Sharks with fucking laser beams. So General Petraeus' walk will be a long one.

      --
      Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
  23. This guy was seriously bad news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This guy was seriously bad news. He didn't come from a background of high security, so he didn't make even the most basic security concerns a priority. His Blackberry was lost in a foreign country with no password set. He really didn't think that a password was needed because he deemed it inconvenient.

    His disclosure of sensitive data to his mistress was a surprise to absolutely nobody.

  24. Re:Should be used as precedent for sentencing Snow by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    That ship already sailed with MEK. Carry a Hezbollah tv channel - the feds will send you to a Federal Pound Me In the Ass Penitentiary. Take money from MEK to lobby, aka propagandize on their behalf? We'll just take them off the terror watch list.

  25. I'd do it too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seen the thigh muscles on Paula the Fitness Soldierette? Those legs could squeeze the cum out of Mount Rushmore. All four.

    They say once a cheater, always a cheater. I want to be next!

  26. And by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    He gets to keep the freedom to bang the hot woman to whom he leaked government secrets (as she will remain free too).

    "They hate us for our* Freedom!"




    * - 'Us' being the power elite, not the filthy commoners subject to all the rules.

  27. Ever see Petraeus' wife? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Case closed.

    He must have pissed off someone higher up to get such treatment. Adultery is the National Sport, especially in Washington.

  28. Re:Should be used as precedent for sentencing Snow by spacepimp · · Score: 1

    "Also, he told secrets to the public, instead of his mistress."

    Snowden gave the documents to journalists for them to reveal. Don't be lazy and misrepresent it even accidentally. Beyond that they weren't even just "journalists" they were lawyers etc.

  29. It's Hillary's turn now, right? by acoustix · · Score: 2

    Gen Petraeus had a handful of documents in his desk. Hillary had tens of thousands of government emails stored in her own server and then wiped it without any government oversight.

    --
    "A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
    1. Re:It's Hillary's turn now, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i'm with you , the helldog is withholding document in her basement, (by the way felony) and now she is running for presidency?

  30. General Petraeus = Traitor by jsepeta · · Score: 1

    And traitors of the Bush White House Occupancy are supposed to be handed stiff bonuses, not flabby penalties

    --
    Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
  31. Re:I wonder what Hillary will get? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    Still waiting for a statement on the alleged classified alleged information she allegedly leaked, or for that matter a law that she may have broken. (Using a private email server was SOP until Kerry, at which point it became illegal.)

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  32. Not severe enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He should also forfeit all his retirement benefits including pay and medical care.

    That is FAR in excess of the $40k slap on the wrist they recommend.

  33. Re:Should be used as precedent for sentencing Snow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Snowden gave the documents to journalists for them to reveal

    ... to the public. A better comparison than Snowden would be with Wen Ho Lee where neither (allegedly) intended the documents to go public or to a foreign power.

  34. Re:Should be used as precedent for sentencing Snow by dywolf · · Score: 1

    oh shut up.

    the point of his actions were to reveal the NSAs actions to the public, so that the public knew about the shady/illegal snennigans the NSA and government were engaging in.

    unlike Petraeus who's motivation in leaking was apparently to get into his biographer's pants.

    and my lil joke was simply pointing out which one the government believes to be the bigger sin
    (and since you're a little dense apparently, that would be "telling the public")

    --
    The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
  35. so... by hitmark · · Score: 1

    in about 8 years, give or take, we will see him as the GOP candidate?

    --
    comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  36. Re:I wonder what Hillary will get? by Sarius64 · · Score: 1

    No, you're wrong. Discussing classified information via unclassified sources has been illegal for some time.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 12065

    Executive Order 12356

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 12958 (notice the signatory)

    So, please express how the government can address this without a complete record of the Secretary's e-mails? That's assuming you wish to trust the person receiving legal bribes from foreign governments $200K to $500K at a time through speaking fees for her or her husband.

  37. Re:Haha FTA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    #treasonisforthelittlepople