Yes, Joni Ernst is an extremist, thank you - Hullabaloo

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Saturday, January 10, 2015

TMCP on the hot seat

Posted on 3:30 PM by kitkat boom
TMCP on the hot seat

by digby

I am not the biggest fan of The Man Called Petraeus, but I think this another case of government overreach. If he is prosecuted it should be for something serious not this affair nonsense:
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.
[...]
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.
I wonder when we'll see an indictment of Leon Panetta? Or John Brennan, for that matter?  Or any number of administration members who leak classified information all the time when they are trying to build public support or justify controversial actions?

As Trevor Timm says in this piece:
[A]ll of Petreaus’s 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, 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 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.

This may seem grossly unfair (and it is!), but remember, as prosecutors themselves apparently have been arguing in private about Petraeus's case: “lower-ranking officials had been prosecuted for far less.” Under the Obama administration, more sources of reporters have been prosecuted under the Espionage Act than all other administrations combined, and many have been sentenced to jail for leaks that should have never risen to the level of a criminal indictment.
It's certainly only right that Petraeus be charged if lower level "leakers" have been. But nobody should be prosecuted under this authoritarian piece of garbage known as the Espionage Act. They classify everything in Washington, including their dinner menus and laundry lists.

They use the laws against leaking very capriciously and if Petraeus is charged it will be simply to prove that they don't just chase low level people with it, even though that's clearly the case 99.9% of the time and will continue to be so. After all, if Petraeus had consciously leaked classified information to the New York Times to valorize members of the administration you can bet he wouldn't be prosecuted for it. In fact, he probably did, many times. This sexy story is an easy one that only reflects on his personal peccadilloes.  And it will be catnip for the adolescent Villager busybodies to obscure the serious issues at stake while marching around self-righteously proclaiming it proves something about equality under the law. And the most sickening thing about it is that Petraeus will be the sin-eater that proves official Washington doesn't protect the powerful --- except, of course, it does. And will.  Unless sexytime.

I won't cry if Petraeus is charged and has to go through all that.  He's part of the power structure that supports this nonsense. But I won't be cheering it either.  It's a sad and sordid little personal story about which I really could not care less.


.
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to Facebook
Posted in | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • QOTD: "I obviously did not mean what I clearly said"
    QOTD: "I obviously did not mean what I clearly said" by digby Oh wait, he didn't mean that either: Charles Krauthammer had a ...
  • QOTD: Bob Corker
    QOTD: Bob Corker by digby Let's forget about all that oversight nonsense, shall we? "To me, Congress having oversight certainly is ...
  • QOTD: Wingnut hysterics
    QOTD: Wingnut hysterics by digby I've got your freedom loving, anti-government tyranny patriots for you right here : On a long and inter...
  • Why we still fight
    This post will stay at the top of the page for a while.  Please scroll down for new material. Why we still fight by digby Since it's Hol...
  • Why not hire a professional liar to tell the "truth"?
    Why not hire a professional liar to tell the "truth"? by digby   So, I'm watching Wolf Blitzer chat up former CIA honcho Bill ...
  • Why what we saw was totally not torture by @BloggersRUs
    Why what we saw was totally not torture by Tom Sullivan All the news about the CIA torture program reminded me of those batches of FBI email...
  • A little sunshine burns the suits
    A little sunshine burns the suits by digby Think Progress reports: After leaked emails in the Sony hack showed unequal pay between male and ...
  • Why you ... you want to punish success! by @BloggersRUs
    Why you ... you want to punish success! by Tom Sullivan I wanted to follow up on Steve Fraser's comments to Bill Moyers . Fraser is wo...
  • QOTD: Chris Matthews
    QOTD: Chris Matthews by digby Today on Chris Christie: I sort of liked his style in the beginning before I realized it was for real, you kno...
  • What can possibly excuse the police abusing a blind man?
    What can possibly excuse the police abusing a blind man? by digby Does it get any more callous that this? On August 27th at approximately 8...

Blog Archive

  • ▼  2015 (157)
    • ▼  January (157)
      • Fox News squirm
      • We are all mass murderers now
      • Smokin' 'em outta their caves
      • The Jeb and Mitt club
      • QOTD: Enlightenment edition
      • "She hears the voices no one else hears" by @Gaius...
      • TP-ing the SOTU by @BloggersRUs
      • Progress (MLK Day 2015) by @Batocchio9
      • Magical orcas
      • Good pope, bad pope
      • Why they fear more people voting
      • Cranking up the crazy, Jindal style
      • The Martin Luther King speech everyone ignores
      • The super-rich won't be happy until they have it all
      • Now why would they do this?
      • Quite Simply, a Masterpiece by tristero
      • The courts: Targets of opportunity by @BloggersRUs
      • A little sunshine burns the suits
      • Analyzing the threat
      • Sunday Funny: "Shake it off" edition
      • "A more aggressive form of terrorism"? Really?
      • Clout
      • Losing our collective nerve by @BloggersRUs
      • Isolationist? I don't think so.
      • He'd think you were jerks #MLK
      • Our close allies the Islamic extremists
      • "Job creators" trickling $1700 glasses of wine dow...
      • The gentlelady from North Carolina is out of order
      • A foreign policy election it is
      • Please don’t flog the bloggers by @BloggersRUs
      • I gotcher apology for yah rightcheaya
      • Scary environmental chart of the century
      • Scary political chart of the day
      • Have DC Democrats Learned Their Progressive Lesson...
      • A little welcome perspective on the threat of terr...
      • A BFD: Holder ends federal civil forfeiture
      • Why don't most Republican state legislatures allow...
      • Arkansas Project Part Two?
      • Or the terrorists win by @BloggersRUs
      • QOTD: Chris Matthews
      • Why are hawks reacting so differently to the Charl...
      • More grown-up governance
      • How to explain tax cuts to brainwashed people
      • Colluding with the CIA to cover up torture would b...
      • Heritage flim-flam
      • Serpico Reduxby digbyI recently linked to a post b...
      • Did we mention the stonings? by @BloggersRUs
      • QOTD: "I obviously did not mean what I clearly said"
      • Playing the terrorist game
      • A long way to go #equalityforwomen
      • I'll defend his right to say it (but I'll condemn ...
      • Palin and the Nuge
      • Opportunity knocks for the authoritarians #destroy...
      • The free speech consensus challenge
      • Teach your cronies well by @BloggersRUs
      • Smell the freedom #flashbang
      • He's got the choo-choo train
      • Race has absolutely nothing to do with it
      • Queasy but not too worried #socialsecuritycuts
      • Terrorism rivals and allies
      • Hippies, fries and free speech
      • The road to bigotry in 140 characters
      • Stepping boldly into the past by @BloggersRUs
      • An elected official, ladies and gentlemen!
      • If we can't have him no one can
      • "Open Rebellion" Pays Off — Warren & Progressives ...
      • The Zombie Rises
      • Kind of pointless
      • The Warren wing nudges the Party
      • QOTD: David Brooks
      • Old Jeb, new Jeb
      • A legitimate question by @BloggersRUs
      • This is everything that's wrong with the world
      • Your majesty
      • Mass resistance
      • Speaking of violence
      • "If you can keep your head when all about you are ...
      • The Nones
      • Apologies excepted by @BloggersRUs
      • Big surprise on 4/15/15
      • TMCP on the hot seat
      • QOTD: Hezbollah and Hamas
      • Objectively pro-Islamic fundamentalist
      • Yes, wingnuts did blame campus speech codes for th...
      • Hippies still hurt their feelings
      • Defend our water by @BloggersRUs
      • Another liberal terrorist symp speaks out
      • The Paul Doctrine needs work
      • We need to "do nuance"
      • What do Independents really want?
      • People are working again (for peanuts)
      • Liberals are to blame of course
      • Keep Calm and Carry On by @BloggersRUs
      • That'll teach us
      • Prison Blues
      • Dynamic cheating
      • Just thought I'd mention it
      • Je suis Scorsese?
      • QOTD: Wingnut hysterics
      • How It's Done — Cops Bring Notre Dame's "I Can't B...
  • ►  2014 (343)
    • ►  December (217)
    • ►  November (126)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

kitkat boom
View my complete profile