Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Ichingcarpenter

(36,988 posts)
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 07:40 AM Mar 2015

Petraeus Plea Deal Reveals Two-Tier Justice System for Leaks

David Petraeus, the former Army general and CIA director, admitted today that he gave highly-classified journals to his onetime lover and that he lied to the FBI about it. But he only has to plead guilty to a single misdemeanor that will not involve a jail sentence thanks to a deal with federal prosecutors. The deal is yet another example of a senior official treated leniently for the sorts of violations that lower-level officials are punished severely for.

According to the plea deal, Petraeus, while leading American forces in Afghanistan, maintained eight notebooks that he filled with highly-sensitive information about the identities of covert officers, military strategy, intelligence capabilities and his discussions with senior government officials, including President Obama. Rather than handing over these “Black Books,” as the plea agreement calls them, to the Department of Defense when he retired from the military in 2011 to head the CIA, Petraeus retained them at his home and lent them, for several days, to Paula Broadwell, his authorized biographer and girlfriend.

In October 2012, FBI agents interviewed Petraeus as part of an investigation into his affair with Broadwell — Petraeus would resign from the CIA the next month — and Petraeus told them he had not shared classified material with Broadwell. The plea deal notes that “these statements were false” and that Petraeus “then and there knew that he previously shared the Black Books with his biographer.” Lying to FBI agents is a federal crime for which people have received sentences of months or more than a year in jail.

Under his deal with prosecutors, Petraeus pleaded guilty to just one count of unauthorized removal and retention of classified information, a misdemeanor that can be punishable by a year in jail, though the deal calls only for probation and a $40,000 fine. As The New York Times noted today, the deal “allows Mr. Petraeus to focus on his lucrative post-government career as a partner in a private equity firm and a worldwide speaker on national security issues.”

The deal has another effect: it all but confirms a two-tier justice system in which senior officials are slapped on the wrist for serious violations while lesser officials are harshly prosecuted for relatively minor infractions.


https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/03/03/petraeus-plea-deal-reveals-two-tier-justice-system-leaks/



Another view.


DOJ quietly announced it had reached a plea deal with former CIA Director David Petraeus for leaking Top Secret/Secure Compartmented Information materials to his mistress, Paula Broadwell.

Among the materials in the eight “Black Books” Petraeus shared with Broadwell were:

…classified information regarding the identities of covert officers, war strategy, intelligence capabilities and mechanisms, diplomatic discussions, quotes and deliberative discussions from high-level National Security Council meetings, and defendant DAVID HOWELL PETRAEUS’s discussions with the President of the United States of America.

The Black Books contained national defense information, including Top Secret/SCI and code word information.

Petraeus kept those Black Books full of code word information including covert identities and conversations with the President “in a rucksack up there somewhere.”

Petreaus retained those Black Books after he signed his debriefing agreement upon leaving DOD, in which he attested “I give my assurance that there is no classified material in my possession, custody, or control at this time.” He kept those Black Books in an unlocked desk drawer.

For mishandling some of the most important secrets the nation has, Petraeus will plead guilty to a misdemeanor. Petraeus, now an employee of a top private equity firm, will be fined $40,000 and serve two years of probation.

He will not, however, be asked to plead guilty at all for lying to FBI investigators. In an interview on October 26, 2012, he told the FBI,

(a) he had never provided any classified information to his biographer, and (b) he had never facilitated the provision of classified information to his biographer.

For lying to the FBI — a crime that others go to prison for for months and years — Petraeus will just get a two point enhancement on his sentencing guidelines. The Department of Justice basically completely wiped away the crime of covering up his crime of leaking some of the country’s most sensitive secrets to his mistress.

When John Kiriakou pled guilty on October 23, 2012 to crimes having to do with sharing a single covert officer’s identity just days before Petraeus would lie to the FBI about sharing, among other things, numerous covert officers’ identities with his mistress, Petraeus sent out a memo to the CIA stating,

Oaths do matter, and there are indeed consequences for those who believe they are above the laws that protect our fellow officers and enable American intelligence agencies to operate with the requisite degree of secrecy.


David Petraeus is now proof of what a lie that statement was.


https://exposefacts.org/david-petraeus-gets-hand-slap-for-leaking-two-point-enhancement-for-obstruction-of-justice/

36 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Petraeus Plea Deal Reveals Two-Tier Justice System for Leaks (Original Post) Ichingcarpenter Mar 2015 OP
You hear funny things when your hearing is not up to par TexasProgresive Mar 2015 #1
I do think he got off light. n/t Adrahil Mar 2015 #2
He did....thanks to FBI contamination, luck, and good lawyering. msanthrope Mar 2015 #18
Fair's Fair KingBob Mar 2015 #3
It's called better lawyering, and a tougher case to prove against msanthrope Mar 2015 #4
What a spin you have Ichingcarpenter Mar 2015 #6
It's not a spin....it's an attorney assessing the cases. Petraeus msanthrope Mar 2015 #8
what would you charge him with? I am sincerely interested in the charges you might be able KittyWampus Mar 2015 #12
Well...given the FBI contamination of the case, which Greenwald msanthrope Mar 2015 #17
Martha Stewart went to prison Astrad Mar 2015 #13
Indeed....Martha did lie and was charged (they had her dead to rights.) msanthrope Mar 2015 #15
Snowden is charged under the Espionage Act. His "intent" and motives aren't allowed riderinthestorm Mar 2015 #32
Actually, you are incorrect regarding the Espionage Act....intent and motive can be argued, msanthrope Mar 2015 #33
Well then the ACLU is wrong? And every other attorney weighing on this? riderinthestorm Mar 2015 #34
You've quoted two Snowden attorneys. Oh--excuse me....two Snowden 'legal advisers.' They have an msanthrope Mar 2015 #35
See? I was right all along. Private Manning shoulda been General Manning. Hoppy Mar 2015 #5
All leaks are equal, but some leaks are more equal than others (with apologies KingCharlemagne Mar 2015 #9
"Tiered Justice System" handmade34 Mar 2015 #7
The snowden/Greenwald haters should be here soon to explain why this makes Doctor_J Mar 2015 #10
Well....I think he got off easy, but I think it's more due to luck and msanthrope Mar 2015 #16
Luck. Sure. Amazing how much luckier insiders are than rebels and whistle-blowers Doctor_J Mar 2015 #23
Well...let's not forget the FBI contamination and the crazy shit cast of characters.... msanthrope Mar 2015 #24
+1, no shit Marr Mar 2015 #28
They are invisible since last night malaise Mar 2015 #22
Those are the benefits of being in the Big Club. zeemike Mar 2015 #11
Yes. It must be this way so that others in the system know they can continue the corruption, stillwaiting Mar 2015 #14
Why is anyone surprised? Lurks Often Mar 2015 #19
So Snowden can expect the same right? nt riderinthestorm Mar 2015 #20
They want him quiet. Now he goes away. TwilightGardener Mar 2015 #21
Petraeus should have called himself a "whistleblower" Blue_Tires Mar 2015 #25
it's good to see Ichingcarpenter Mar 2015 #27
I learned that technique from the best practicioners Blue_Tires Mar 2015 #31
Like it or not, Broadwell can technically call herself a "journalist" Blue_Tires Mar 2015 #36
Lied to the FBI and gave highly-classified docs to a third party...no jail time... truebrit71 Mar 2015 #26
on top of being a war criminal mwrguy Mar 2015 #29
"Insiders don't criticize other insiders." Marr Mar 2015 #30

TexasProgresive

(12,157 posts)
1. You hear funny things when your hearing is not up to par
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 08:28 AM
Mar 2015

Yesterday I was hearing a piece on Patreaus but was not watching what I heard was betray us. I turned and looked at the TV and thought, "How appropriate."

KingBob

(150 posts)
3. Fair's Fair
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 08:58 AM
Mar 2015

"Fair's fair, Henry. If I nail HotLips and punch Hawkeye, can I go home too?"

In Patreaus vs. Kiriakou, not so much.

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
4. It's called better lawyering, and a tougher case to prove against
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 09:16 AM
Mar 2015

Petraeus than Kiriakou.

I think prosecutors would never have gotten a conviction against Petraeus. Which is too bad---because he deserves jail.

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
8. It's not a spin....it's an attorney assessing the cases. Petraeus
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 09:31 AM
Mar 2015

Last edited Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:16 AM - Edit history (1)

would have been a difficult prosecution because his intent was not to leak, and it would have been difficult to find a jury that would have convicted him. Kiriakou was far more open and shut.

I still think Petraeus deserves jail. But I think the FBI screwed the pooch on this one...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026067642

 

KittyWampus

(55,894 posts)
12. what would you charge him with? I am sincerely interested in the charges you might be able
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 10:41 AM
Mar 2015

to point to. I have no idea and am sincerely interested.

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
17. Well...given the FBI contamination of the case, which Greenwald
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:18 AM
Mar 2015

forgets to mention, I think any charge involving the FBI investigation would tank.....

What prosecutor would want this cast on the stand......

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026067642

Astrad

(466 posts)
13. Martha Stewart went to prison
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 10:59 AM
Mar 2015

for lying to a federal investigator. Petraeus lied to the FBI.

Court papers, signed by Petraeus, describe him lying to government officials, including FBI agents in his office at CIA Headquarters, in acts that were “in all respects knowing and deliberate and were not committed by mistake accident or other innocent reason.”


http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/david-petraeus-plea-115723.html#ixzz3TQfsf05p
 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
15. Indeed....Martha did lie and was charged (they had her dead to rights.)
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:07 AM
Mar 2015

With Petraeus, you have a slightly harder case...so the feds opted to use it in sentencing. That's good lawyering and good use of prosecutorial discretion....no prosecutor wants this military soap opera on the stand.

And let's not forget the FBI contamination...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026067642

 

riderinthestorm

(23,272 posts)
32. Snowden is charged under the Espionage Act. His "intent" and motives aren't allowed
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 03:40 PM
Mar 2015

to be considered, just that he took classified information and shared it with a third party...

...just like Petraeus without any of the lying-to-the-FBI issues either.

This isn't just "luck and good lawyering", this is a classic example of our two tier legal system.

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
33. Actually, you are incorrect regarding the Espionage Act....intent and motive can be argued,
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 04:00 PM
Mar 2015

just not in the manner that Kiriakou's or Drake's piss poor legal teams were prepared to do.

Snowden can testify as to his motive and his intent, but he's got a problem--in order to do that, he's got to get on the stand. And that's the problem when you commit crime---jury nullification is a tricky business.

As for the case against Petraeus, I think he is getting off easy....but I think this case is very distinguishable from "whistleblowers."

 

riderinthestorm

(23,272 posts)
34. Well then the ACLU is wrong? And every other attorney weighing on this?
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 04:14 PM
Mar 2015
http://www.mercurynews.com/elections/ci_24967187/snowden-could-use-trial-showcase-spy-claims

‘The Justice Department has successfully barred defendants in leaks prosecutions from mounting any kind of public interest defense by using the Espionage Act,’ Wizner said. He said all the government would have to prove is that Snowden took national defense information and gave it to someone who wasn’t allowed to receive it.

‘The government doesn’t have to prove that the disclosures were harmful to the country. The defendant can’t defend himself on basis that documents shouldn’t have been classified … and lower courts have upheld that,’ Wizner said. ‘That’s why Edward Snowden is not taking his chances in a federal court. He wouldn’t be able to explain himself.’


Or this one:
http://pando.com/2014/01/22/how-whistleblowers-are-barred-from-defending-themselves-in-court/

Or this from Jesselyn Radack in the Wall Street Journal

http://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303595404579318884005698684


 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
35. You've quoted two Snowden attorneys. Oh--excuse me....two Snowden 'legal advisers.' They have an
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 04:31 PM
Mar 2015

agenda in defending the actions of their cowardly client, but those of us who practice law know that nothing, and I mean nothing can prevent Edward Snowden from taking the stand and testifying as to his intent and motive. But jury nullification is tricky, and frankly, Snowden doesn't stand a chance convincing a jury in the rocket docket. Why? Because he's guilty.

What Wizner and Radack are bemoaning is that Mr. Snowden won't be able to introduce a "whistleblower" defense, because their idiot client failed to make himself one, legally. And, let's face it---Radack's prior losses on behalf of "whistleblowers" in federal court are probably the reason she's searching for an excuse as to why her clients keep losing and going to jail.

You are conflating two things here---the ability of Mr. Snowden to testify on his own behalf, and the availability of the "whistleblower" defense. Nothing prevents the former. It's the latter that he's prevented from introducing because of his own hubris.....

And something else.....and I've never understood why Glenn Greenwald has not been held to account for this. Apparently, Mr. Snowden contacted Greenwald pretty early on. Greenwald was an attorney.....why did he not ensure that Snowden would have the legal protection of the whistleblower defense? Okay---less sexy story perhaps, but at least Snowden would have been protected.

 

KingCharlemagne

(7,908 posts)
9. All leaks are equal, but some leaks are more equal than others (with apologies
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 09:38 AM
Mar 2015

and a hat tip to Orwell's Animal Farm).

 

Doctor_J

(36,392 posts)
10. The snowden/Greenwald haters should be here soon to explain why this makes
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 09:51 AM
Mar 2015

perfect sense, and is in fact just as it should be

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
16. Well....I think he got off easy, but I think it's more due to luck and
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:14 AM
Mar 2015

decent lawyering......and FBI contamination.

I think no prosecutor wanted the crazy-shit cast of characters this drama....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026067642

stillwaiting

(3,795 posts)
14. Yes. It must be this way so that others in the system know they can continue the corruption,
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:00 AM
Mar 2015

gain huge personal financial benefits, and nothing will happen to them.

It is a MUST that the system works this way to continue the corruption.

 

Lurks Often

(5,455 posts)
19. Why is anyone surprised?
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:24 AM
Mar 2015

Does anyone really think that the Federal government wanted to take this case to court?

I'll defer to the attorneys here, but I'm thinking the defense would have had a lot of fun subpoenaing people who would really rather not testify under oath and I don't think the government would be too happy to have the defense ask Petraeus under oath questions that the government would rather not have answered.

Blue_Tires

(55,445 posts)
25. Petraeus should have called himself a "whistleblower"
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 02:09 PM
Mar 2015

Then both Greenwald and Wheeler would be getting in bed with him

Blue_Tires

(55,445 posts)
31. I learned that technique from the best practicioners
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 03:35 PM
Mar 2015

The dudebro emoprogs...I'd thought you'd recognize the style...

No need to thank me for the kick, I personally try to kick all of Greenwald's single-minded bullshit...The admins can rename GD "50 shades of Greenwald" for all I care...

Blue_Tires

(55,445 posts)
36. Like it or not, Broadwell can technically call herself a "journalist"
Thu Mar 5, 2015, 10:58 AM
Mar 2015

Which means Greenwald's cabal, the ACLU and EFF will be obligated to defend her should she face prosecution...

Assuming, of course, that they aren't a bunch of fuckin' hypocrites...

 

truebrit71

(20,805 posts)
26. Lied to the FBI and gave highly-classified docs to a third party...no jail time...
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 02:22 PM
Mar 2015

Yup...makes perfect sense...

So Chelsea Manning is being released anyday now, right? Right?

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
30. "Insiders don't criticize other insiders."
Wed Mar 4, 2015, 03:32 PM
Mar 2015

And they don't really apply the law to them, either. That's for outsiders.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Petraeus Plea Deal Reveal...