Post: #176

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national...bled=false

The latest is that Broadwell essentially threatened in emails to use her connections to "make you go away." Damn...Petraeus must have REALLY been giving her some good dick!

Post: #177

Shes pretty hot

Post: #178

Dude, it is not all hypergamy, it is access and how horny you are, if you spend enough time with any woman,had some game and/or status, and her BF/husband is less attractive than you, you can fuck her.

Post: #179

Completely undone by thirst: Petraeus gets a suspended sentence and 100 000$ fine for leaking classified information

http://www.wsj.com/articles/david-petrae...9?mod=e2fb

Post: #180

(11-09-2012 06:01 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  They have to sign some kind of morality/code of conduct agreement. Any kind of high profile job like makes you do it.
They have to maintain the image of the CIA or whatever. Thank our Puritanical roots for that one.

Nope - The Agency does not have the same puritanical rules .mil has via UCMJ.

If you have been through CIA recruiting, you will know they do not care if you are banging mistresses on the side. They do care if you try to hide it from them.

Oh and they do care if said mistresses are non-citizens.

The issue here wasn't that Petraeus was banging Broadwell. He let her have access to documents she should not have. A CIA recruit or GS employee would have felony charges and most probably jail time if they were found guilty of the same thing he was.

Post: #181

(11-09-2012 03:57 PM)Belize King Wrote:  Has to be something else for him to resign. Probably pushed out. If not, then what the fuck does getting some on the side has to do with him protecting our country. Our President got dome and finished his job. Why cant the CIA Director?

Many in the Agency didn't want him in that office on the 7th floor in the first place. Loyalty and 'one of their own' is a huge thing at the Agency. Brennan is one their own. Petraeus wasn't.

Post: #182

New information out in an article in Politico. What stood out is at the end when former AG Holder explains why they convicted on a misdemeanor and not felony:

"There were some unique things that existed in that case that would have made prosecution at the felony level — and conviction at the felony level — very, very, very problematic," the former attorney general said last October. "In some ways, the thing that seems to distinguish the case from other resolutions is the nature of the person, the position of the person, the lawyering done for or on behalf of the person. But I can honestly tell you that was not the reason why that case was resolved in the way that it was. A felony? That would have been hard — beyond hard."

If you want the whole article: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/fb...z4BkVk6TfS

TL;DR: "Problematic to enforce the law, no big deal, come on guys"

My prediction: New classification level for senior officals "KOS" or "Kind of Secret"

Post: #183

^ that quote encapsulates the problem with collectivism (socialism, communism, etc)

When you treat people based on who you know rather than merit.

"I know this guy, he's cool" so treat him differently than you would someone you don't know. That's human nature, sure. Most hiring decisions are made on that basis.

But the purpose of our justice system and the rule of law is to counter our human nature and combat favorability. The founders hated nepotism.

Post: #184

The establishment made a point with Howard Dean and Petraeus, for real leaders to stay out of politics. The rot runs deep. Several Billionaires tried to get Mad Dog Mattis to run, even as Trumps VP, but he won't touch it. These men, unfortunately, are waiting for the call when the 1st shot us fired. The military won't listen to the current political leaders. Starving or not. An oath was sworn, one that never expires.