Posted on 11/30/2016 5:22:01 AM PST by rktman
Gen. David Petraeus may be on the short list to be our next secretary of state, but his affair with his biographer, Paula Broadwell, led to him being convicted of mishandling classified information; Broadwell had access to journals of Petraeus that contained sensitive material. I’m not so sure he’s the best pick to lead the State Department. Moreover, isn’t mishandling classified information exactly what we’re trying to avoid and what we slammed Clinton for? Well, another venture Gen. Petraeus is diving into is gun control policy (via CNN):
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Dick Cheney should invite this guy on a hunting trip...
No gun-control proponents.
Which also means no Romney.
Petraeus is NOT pushing gun control. He is part of a group which wants to reduce gun violence but is fully supportive of the 2nd Amendment (i.e. keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and gangs).
There’s no way “Build a Wall” Trump should be considering “Erase the Southern Border so we can have a North American Union” Petraeus for ANYTHING, but especially not Sec State!
Obviously you forgot the “/S” tag on your comment. Right?
Is it not true that Broadwell also had a Secret or Top Secret clearance at the time? She was given material that she was not authorized to have. Is that not so?
The infraction was a thimble of water compared to an ocean in the degree of mishandling classified information. The scale and scope of damage done by Hillary has yet to be documented.
In my opinion Petraeus was persecuted by the Democrats selective enforcement of the law for political purposes.
He’s out. If he thinks a defenseless population against a tyrant like Obama or Hillary is a good thing it means he’s playing for the other team or believes that the government will protect the people. The last 8 years has clearly proven that is not the case.
Probably MOST Generals are for gun control.
Past the rank of Colonel the job becomes very, very political.
Most coups and revolutions led by military people are led by Colonels.
The State Department interprets and enforces the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, which “control[s] the export and import of defense-related articles and services on the United States Munitions List (USML).” ITAR’s regulations implement the provisions of the Arms Export Control Act.
In July of this year, the State Department Directorate of Defense Trade Controls issued a guidance requiring gunsmiths to register as “manufacturers” with DDTC and pay a $2,250 annual fee, even if they don’t export anything. As a group of GOP lawmakers stated in their letter of opposition:
“The vast majority of our constituents engaged in gunsmithing make little to no income from their activities and often do it as a hobby or side business. They most certainly do not export firearms. They also do not manufacture firearms in any widely understood sense of the term.”
Back in June 2015 the State Department announced a proposal that claimed “to be ‘clarifying’ the rules concerning ‘technical data’ posted online or otherwise ‘released’ into the ‘public domain.’” Technical data includes blueprints, photographs, plans, et cetera. If the rules were interpreted to mean that posting a plan to create a 3-D gun on a blog constituted exportation of technical data, as some State Department bean counters believe, you’d have to apply for authorization from the government before posting the information on your blog. If you didn’t, the penalty could be up to 20 years in prison or a $1 million fine.
https://www.firearmspolicy.org/blog/what-would-david-petraeus-mean-for-gun-owners/
Asked family members who served about Petraeus and they’re not supportive of him in any prominent position. It’s going to be a real hard sell.
They should put a different General at State.
The FACT is that, clearance or not, Broadwell had NO NEED TO KNOW. And THAT is one of the prime requirements for viewing classified information. NOT a thimble, IMO.
The way I recall my security clearances is that even if you have a high level clearance, if you don’t need to know it, you don’t need to see it. Pretty simple. Guess some people understand that more than others.
'Directorate', eh? Classic Orwellian Commie speak.
LOL! We sure are thinkin’ along the same lines this morning.
Is that group associated with Gaby Giffords and Mark Kelley?
Do you have a link to it?
“Shall not be infringed” means exactly what it says. I do not want anyone in President Trump’s cabinet who wants to subvert our Constitution. [BTW, I love saying “President Trump” after eight years of never using that title.]
Bullshit! If Petraeus is aligned with Mark Kelly, Michael Bloomberg, “Americans for Responsible Solutions” and the “Veterans Coalition for Common Sense” (Read: “common sense gun control laws”) - which he IS, he’s for gun control. Can you or General Betrayus cite one single gun law that’s been discussed, entertained or proposed that will have any impact whatsoever on criminals and not further erode the freedoms of law-abiding, legal gun owners? No, you cannot.
That’s only strike two for Petraeus, strike one being that he’s a lying, cheating scumbag, one of the most political general officers the Army has ever known and he’s been convicted of mishandling classified information. In my not-so-humble opinion, he’s out; this ain’t baseball and you don’t get three strikes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.