(full site)
Fark.com

Back To Main
   While the Petraeus investigation hasn't revealed a crime, it has shown the extent of the FBI's electronic surveillance capabilities. "You ask them for e-mails relevant to the investigation, but they let you look at everything"

18 Nov 2012 09:08 AM   |   6887 clicks   |   Washington Post
Showing 1-50 of 120 comments
Refresh Page 2
View Comments:
St_Francis_P     
What the bureau didn't have - and apparently still doesn't - is evidence of a crime.

Not that I'm particularly down on Petraeus, but I understand his affair violated the UCMJ. There was some question about a security breach as well, which the FBI has to take seriously.

18 Nov 2012 08:27 AM
This About That    [TotalFark]  
Thing: Damned near anything can be stated in such a way that it appears to violate the vague but all-encompassing UCMJ.

Thing: Who the f*** is so slow they don't assume that the FBI can intercept anything - anything - that goes over the Internet both in history and in real time? The FBI can easily penetrate the military, however slightly.

Thing: I'll bet you an internet Gen. Petraeus did not knowingly violate any laws and is guilty, if at all, of bad judgement in his personal life. So shut up unless he gets convicted of something, will ya.

18 Nov 2012 09:00 AM
sammyk     
The Director of the CIA is a civilian position. UCMJ does not apply.

18 Nov 2012 09:03 AM
nekom    [TotalFark]  
[isbenghaziascandalyet.jpg]

18 Nov 2012 09:09 AM
HotIgneous Intruder     
It's awesome to see the state surveillance apparatus directed up its own ass, isn't it?

18 Nov 2012 09:13 AM
incendi    [TotalFark]  

sammyk: The Director of the CIA is a civilian position. UCMJ does not apply.


(a) The following persons are subject to this chapter:

(1) Members of a regular component of the armed forces, including those awaiting discharge after expiration of their terms of enlistment; volunteers from the time of their muster or acceptance into the armed forces; inductees from the time of their actual induction into the armed forces; and other persons lawfully called or ordered into, or to duty in or for training in the armed forces, from the dates when they are required by the terms of the call or order to obey it.

(2) Cadets, aviation cadets, and midshipman.

(3) Members of a reserve component while on inactive-duty training, but in the case of members of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States only when in Federal Service.

(4) Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay.

(5) Retired members of a reserve component who are receiving hospitalization from an armed force.

(6) Members of the Fleet Reserve and Fleet Marine Corps Reserve.

(7) Persons in custody of the armed forces serving a sentence imposed by a court-martial.

(8) Members of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Public Health Service, and other organizations, when assigned to and serving with the armed forces.

(9) Prisoners of war in custody of the armed forces.

(10) In time of war, persons serving with or accompanying an armed force in the field.

(11) Subject to any treaty or agreement which the United States is or may be a party to any accepted rule of international law, persons serving with, employed by, or accompanying the armed forces outside the United States and outside the Canal Zone, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.

(12) Subject to any treaty or agreement t which the United States is or may be a party to any accepted rule of international law, persons within an area leased by or otherwise reserved or acquired for use of the United States which is under the control of the Secretary concerned and which is outside the United States and outside the Canal Zone, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.

18 Nov 2012 09:14 AM
frankmanhog     
Well, a Democrat is in the White House, so that means it's open season on Congressional Investigations of everything Executive. We'll be back into "Executive Power should not be subject to the whims of Congress" season as soon as we have another Republican president.

18 Nov 2012 09:14 AM
bunner     
When you have to train entire departments of alleged civil servants to be autocratic, hypocritical, disingenuous and out and out clinical paranoia level sneaky, what do suppose you're going to end up with? Xanadu? Utopia? Try 1984. Every behavior, a possible indictment. Welcome to gossip fence America. Don't mind the stink.

18 Nov 2012 09:17 AM
incendi    [TotalFark]  

frankmanhog: Well, a Democrat is in the White House, so that means it's open season on Congressional Investigations of everything Executive. We'll be back into "Executive Power should not be subject to the whims of Congress" season as soon as we have another Republican president.


My prediction is that we won't have a two-term democrat with a republican house majority who is not impeached during his second term during my lifetime (1987- ).

18 Nov 2012 09:18 AM
bunner     

frankmanhog: We'll be back into "Executive Power should not be subject to the whims of Congress" season as soon as we have another Republican president.


Really, why's that?

18 Nov 2012 09:19 AM
XveryYpettyZ     

incendi: (4) Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay.


Can you cite a single case in the last 20 years of a retired officer on a pension being brought up on charges under the the UCMJ?

18 Nov 2012 09:19 AM
mr_a    [TotalFark]  
While I wouldn't want the guy as a brother-in-law, why exactly does infidelity make a man unfit to run the CIA? And I don't really buy the "classified material" line, unless someone can point to actual documents of value. Hell, the weather forecast is probably classified top-secret.

I am all for law and order, and having good state security- but we have gone too far. The rules of search and protection from state-sponsored snooping have not caught up with the ability of gather and analyze electronic communications.

I don't consider myself especially paranoid, but I suspect that most of my phone calls and emails are monitored somewhere along the line by some giant computer. I just hope we don't destroy our liberty and freedom in trying to protect our liberty and freedom.

18 Nov 2012 09:20 AM
bunner     
So, essentially, the job of POTUS is to say who's allowed to talk sh* about whom while businesses actually tun the country?

18 Nov 2012 09:20 AM
LazarusLong42     

incendi: sammyk: The Director of the CIA is a civilian position. UCMJ does not apply.

(a) The following persons are subject to this chapter:

(1) Members of a regular component of the armed forces, including those awaiting discharge after expiration of their terms of enlistment; volunteers from the time of their muster or acceptance into the armed forces; inductees from the time of their actual induction into the armed forces; and other persons lawfully called or ordered into, or to duty in or for training in the armed forces, from the dates when they are required by the terms of the call or order to obey it.

(2) Cadets, aviation cadets, and midshipman.

(3) Members of a reserve component while on inactive-duty training, but in the case of members of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States only when in Federal Service.

(4) Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay.

(5) Retired members of a reserve component who are receiving hospitalization from an armed force.

(6) Members of the Fleet Reserve and Fleet Marine Corps Reserve.

(7) Persons in custody of the armed forces serving a sentence imposed by a court-martial.

(8) Members of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Public Health Service, and other organizations, when assigned to and serving with the armed forces.

(9) Prisoners of war in custody of the armed forces.

(10) In time of war, persons serving with or accompanying an armed force in the field.

(11) Subject to any treaty or agreement which the United States is or may be a party to any accepted rule of international law, persons serving with, employed by, or accompanying the armed forces outside the United States and outside the Canal Zone, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.

(12) Subject to any treaty or agreement t which the United States is or may be a party to any accepted rule of international law, persons within an area leased by or otherwise reserved or acquired for use of the United States which is under the control of the Secretary concerned and which is outside the United States and outside the Canal Zone, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.


He's not being paid by the military. CIA is not a military organization.

That said, affairs like this can kill your security clearance.

18 Nov 2012 09:22 AM
mark12A     
That does it! Next international terrorist/criminal/kinky/tasteless scheme I run, it will be conducted using snail mail, sealed with wax, embossed by my signet.....

/that, or quantum crypto

18 Nov 2012 09:22 AM
bunner     

mark12A: That does it! Next international terrorist/criminal/kinky/tasteless scheme I run, it will be conducted using snail mail, sealed with wax, embossed by my signet.....

/that, or quantum crypto


Me, too. I man, if he business of humanity isn't an endless escalation of better bullets and better armor, what is?

18 Nov 2012 09:24 AM
incendi    [TotalFark]  

XveryYpettyZ: Can you cite a single case in the last 20 years of a retired officer on a pension being brought up on charges under the the UCMJ?


Just because they don't, doesn't mean they can't. 

/It'd be a silly waste of resources to try and prosecute retirees for bullshiat all the time.

18 Nov 2012 09:25 AM
incendi    [TotalFark]  

LazarusLong42: He's not being paid by the military. CIA is not a military organization.


He's a military retiree.

18 Nov 2012 09:25 AM
mr_a    [TotalFark]  

mark12A: That does it! Next international terrorist/criminal/kinky/tasteless scheme I run, it will be conducted using snail mail, sealed with wax, embossed by my signet.....

/that, or quantum crypto


Or you could go for maximum privacy and publish the updates in Newsweek.

18 Nov 2012 09:26 AM
NutWrench    [TotalFark]  

HotIgneous Intruder: It's awesome to see the state surveillance apparatus directed up its own ass, isn't it?


This. They're probably actually wondering, "what group of post-9/11 pants wetting knuckleheads" gave them THIS kind of surveillance capability?

Some federal prosecutors have sought to establish a "wall" whereby one set of agents conducts a first review of material, disclosing to the investigating agents only what is relevant.

Blow me, Feds. You asked for indiscriminate, unaccountable surveillance, now deal with it.

18 Nov 2012 09:28 AM
incendi    [TotalFark]  

18 Nov 2012 09:30 AM
XveryYpettyZ     

incendi: XveryYpettyZ: Can you cite a single case in the last 20 years of a retired officer on a pension being brought up on charges under the the UCMJ?

Just because they don't, doesn't mean they can't. 

/It'd be a silly waste of resources to try and prosecute retirees for bullshiat all the time.


The fact that they don't ever prosecute retirees, and won't in this case, is a pretty firm indicator that the UCMJ is completely irrelevant to the Patraeus issue.

18 Nov 2012 09:30 AM
Jim_Callahan     
... yes, work e-mail servers generally keeping indexable backups is definitely evidence of a sinister FBI doom conspiracy and not industry standard for the last two decades for literally every industry in existence.

18 Nov 2012 09:31 AM
t3knomanser     
And she's scrambling around, trying to get her files back on, but it's too late. I've seen everything.

18 Nov 2012 09:31 AM
bunner     
The Republic of gotcha smells of despair and boot leather.

18 Nov 2012 09:32 AM
incendi    [TotalFark]  

XveryYpettyZ: The fact that they don't ever prosecute retirees, and won't in this case, is a pretty firm indicator that the UCMJ is completely irrelevant to the Patraeus issue.


For all practical purposes, yes. But this is Fark. Where would we be if there wasn't one dickbag picking nits in every thread?

/happier? maybe.

18 Nov 2012 09:33 AM
Mean Daddy     
No crime yet. The president and his accomplices in the media tell a story 180 degrees contrary to the general. The media laps it up, a film maker goes to jail and not a peep out of the liberal first amendment lover Larry Flynt. Does that about cover it?

18 Nov 2012 09:37 AM
XveryYpettyZ     

incendi: XveryYpettyZ: The fact that they don't ever prosecute retirees, and won't in this case, is a pretty firm indicator that the UCMJ is completely irrelevant to the Patraeus issue.

For all practical purposes, yes. But this is Fark. Where would we be if there wasn't one dickbag picking nits in every thread?

/happier? maybe.


"You ask them for e-mails relevant to the investigation, but they let you look at everything"

"You start talking about things that actually matter, and some arse starts talking about the impact of astrology or power-stones on the investigation."

18 Nov 2012 09:39 AM
sammyk     

LazarusLong42: He's not being paid by the military. CIA is not a military organization.

That said, affairs like this can kill your security clearance.


Serious question. Does the pension he receives from the military subject him to the UCMJ?

He did the right thing by resigning. There is good reason it should kill his security clearance.

18 Nov 2012 09:39 AM
kokomo61    [TotalFark]  
Petraeus doesn't have to worry as much about prosecution (there's not a lot of 'there' there other than bad judgment), than he does about future employment / income. He's screwed himself with the CIA and any other Federal post, a lot of civilian employers won't touch him (although some company will likely hire him as a 'consultant')...

.....his wife, however, can get half of his military pension, half of his social security, probably half of any property / investments. THAT'S what he's got to worry about.

18 Nov 2012 09:40 AM
incendi    [TotalFark]  

Mean Daddy: The media laps it up, a film maker goes to jail and not a peep out of the liberal first amendment lover Larry Flynt.


Blatant violation of the terms of one's probation on the international stage is not a first amendment issue.

18 Nov 2012 09:40 AM
incendi    [TotalFark]  

sammyk: Serious question. Does the pension he receives from the military subject him to the UCMJ?


Technically yes, but as we've noted, it would be EXTREMELY unusual for them to actually do anything about it.

18 Nov 2012 09:43 AM
LandOfChocolate     

NutWrench: HotIgneous Intruder: It's awesome to see the state surveillance apparatus directed up its own ass, isn't it?

This. They're probably actually wondering, "what group of post-9/11 pants wetting knuckleheads" gave them THIS kind of surveillance capability?

Some federal prosecutors have sought to establish a "wall" whereby one set of agents conducts a first review of material, disclosing to the investigating agents only what is relevant.

Blow me, Feds. You asked for indiscriminate, unaccountable surveillance, now deal with it.


If you read the article, there was no "surveillance" going on at all. They call up your email provider with a warrant and ask for your emails. The same process they have been using to look at your phone records, bank statements, etc

18 Nov 2012 09:43 AM
incendi    [TotalFark]  

kokomo61: .....his wife, however, can get half of his military pension, half of his social security, probably half of any property / investments. THAT'S what he's got to worry about.


So he'd have to live out the rest of his life on a pauper's measly $110,000/yr. The horror!

18 Nov 2012 09:44 AM
St_Francis_P     
In the wake of Benghazi, there's no way this wasn't going to turn into a huge investigation. You can blame whichever political party you like, but that's reality. The only valid discussion is the proper extent of the FBI's access to evidence.

18 Nov 2012 09:45 AM
ZAZ    [TotalFark]  
We got the Video Privacy Protection Act after somebody important had his video rental records published. Maybe we'll get the Google Mail Protection Act out of this.

Probably not.

18 Nov 2012 09:45 AM
Abox     

Mean Daddy: not a peep out of the liberal first amendment lover Larry Flynt.



Larry Flynt is more of a hypocrisy hater and I don't remember Petraeus building a career on fake family values.

18 Nov 2012 09:48 AM
NewportBarGuy    [TotalFark]  
I think you can technically be in violation of UCMJ unless you officially resign your commission. I'm not 100% certain of this, but I'm pretty sure we had this discussion regarding some officers during the Iraq war or something (maybe torture? There were some retired military people involved in that)... T'was years ago, and I can't recall the specific case.

I don't really care, either way... But, if they really want to prosecute under UCMJ, I think they could. Although, in this instance, I'm sure the FBI will focus more on the handling, storage, and dissemination of classified material.

18 Nov 2012 09:48 AM
AtlanticCoast63     

LazarusLong42: incendi: sammyk: The Director of the CIA is a civilian position. UCMJ does not apply.

(a) The following persons are subject to this chapter:

(1) Members of a regular component of the armed forces, including those awaiting discharge after expiration of their terms of enlistment; volunteers from the time of their muster or acceptance into the armed forces; inductees from the time of their actual induction into the armed forces; and other persons lawfully called or ordered into, or to duty in or for training in the armed forces, from the dates when they are required by the terms of the call or order to obey it.

(2) Cadets, aviation cadets, and midshipman.

(3) Members of a reserve component while on inactive-duty training, but in the case of members of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States only when in Federal Service.

(4) Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay.

(5) Retired members of a reserve component who are receiving hospitalization from an armed force.

(6) Members of the Fleet Reserve and Fleet Marine Corps Reserve.

(7) Persons in custody of the armed forces serving a sentence imposed by a court-martial.

(8) Members of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Public Health Service, and other organizations, when assigned to and serving with the armed forces.

(9) Prisoners of war in custody of the armed forces.

(10) In time of war, persons serving with or accompanying an armed force in the field.

(11) Subject to any treaty or agreement which the United States is or may be a party to any accepted rule of international law, persons serving with, employed by, or accompanying the armed forces outside the United States and outside the Canal Zone, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.

(12) Subject to any treaty or agreement t which the United States is or may be a party to any accepted rule of international law, persons within ...



Petraeus was on active duty when he started boinking Ms. Broadwell. IN THEORY, he could be recalled to active duty and be court-martialed for adultery, but it's damned unlikely - the number of people liable to UCMJ action under that line of reasoning could reach into the tens of thousands.

18 Nov 2012 09:49 AM
Summoner101     

AtlanticCoast63: Petraeus was on active duty when he started boinking Ms. Broadwell. IN THEORY, he could be recalled to active duty and be court-martialed for adultery, but it's damned unlikely - the number of people liable to UCMJ action under that line of reasoning could reach into the tens of thousands.


I don't think Petraeus has the level of political enemies required to make that come to fruition. Then again, the GOP have almost completely turned on him.

18 Nov 2012 09:56 AM
Cyrusv10     

incendi: LazarusLong42: He's not being paid by the military

For more detail, here's just how much he's still getting paid by the military, and will continue to get paid until he dies.


Gosh, this guy, LazarusLong42 is either a troll or lacks basic literacy skills.

18 Nov 2012 09:57 AM
RodneyToady    [TotalFark]  
"You ask them for e-mails relevant to the investigation, but they let you look at everything"

i345.photobucket.comView Full Size


"I've seen everything. I've seen it all."

18 Nov 2012 10:00 AM
angryjd     
Adultery is not only a crime under the UCMJ, it is a crime in the Commonwealth of Virginia

18 Nov 2012 10:07 AM
liam76     

incendi: sammyk: The Director of the CIA is a civilian position. UCMJ does not apply.

(a) The following persons are subject to this chapter:


(4) Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay.


ll they can do is take away his pay, and I think we can all agree that is a waste of resources for the FBI.

However as head spy chief, I got no problem with them researching him for security reasons and him losing his job over that.


mr_a: While I wouldn't want the guy as a brother-in-law, why exactly does infidelity make a man unfit to run the CIA? And I don't really buy the "classified material" line, unless someone can point to actual documents of value. Hell, the weather forecast is probably classified top-secret.


Blackmail over infidelity. I don't put too much stock in classified material coming from him to the chick he was banging, but I don't think we should risk it (rational for shiat canning him, not saying he committed a crime).

18 Nov 2012 10:17 AM
jso2897    [TotalFark]  

Mean Daddy: No crime yet. The president and his accomplices in the media tell a story 180 degrees contrary to the general. The media laps it up, a film maker goes to jail and not a peep out of the liberal first amendment lover Larry Flynt. Does that about cover it?


You forgot Reverend Wright and the Lizard people. And the squirrels - don't forget the squirrels.

18 Nov 2012 10:21 AM
Abox     

incendi: frankmanhog: Well, a Democrat is in the White House, so that means it's open season on Congressional Investigations of everything Executive. We'll be back into "Executive Power should not be subject to the whims of Congress" season as soon as we have another Republican president.

My prediction is that we won't have a two-term democrat with a republican house majority who is not impeached during his second term during my lifetime (1987- ).



LOL that's probably true. Filibuster...Republican for 'waaahhh!'. Impeachment...Republican for 'WAAAHHH!'

18 Nov 2012 10:22 AM
beta_plus     
Both Sides Are Equally Bad, so let Democrats edit CIA talking points to blame a terrorist attack that killed 4 Americans including an Ambassador on the First Amendment while forcing out the head of the CIA immediately after a close election but before he is supposed to testify!

/The Pilgrims abused free speech to criticize another religion - it's too bad they didn't get killed by terrorists

18 Nov 2012 10:22 AM
St_Francis_P     

jso2897: Mean Daddy: No crime yet. The president and his accomplices in the media tell a story 180 degrees contrary to the general. The media laps it up, a film maker goes to jail and not a peep out of the liberal first amendment lover Larry Flynt. Does that about cover it?

You forgot Reverend Wright and the Lizard people. And the squirrels - don't forget the squirrels.


What about ACORN? I'm sure they're right in the thick of this.

18 Nov 2012 10:23 AM
jso2897    [TotalFark]  

St_Francis_P: jso2897: Mean Daddy: No crime yet. The president and his accomplices in the media tell a story 180 degrees contrary to the general. The media laps it up, a film maker goes to jail and not a peep out of the liberal first amendment lover Larry Flynt. Does that about cover it?

You forgot Reverend Wright and the Lizard people. And the squirrels - don't forget the squirrels.

What about ACORN? I'm sure they're right in the thick of this.


Look, f**ker - it's 7:25 AM in California, and I have had exactly one half of one cup of coffee - a little slack here, if you don't mind?

18 Nov 2012 10:25 AM
St_Francis_P     

beta_plus: Both Sides Are Equally Bad, so let Democrats edit CIA talking points to blame a terrorist attack that killed 4 Americans including an Ambassador on the First Amendment while forcing out the head of the CIA immediately after a close election but before he is supposed to testify!

/The Pilgrims abused free speech to criticize another religion - it's too bad they didn't get killed by terrorists


i18.photobucket.comView Full Size

18 Nov 2012 10:29 AM
Showing 1-50 of 120 comments
Refresh Page 2
View Comments:
This thread is closed to new comments.


Back To Main

More Headlines:
Main | Sports | Business | Geek | Entertainment | Politics | Video | FarkUs | Contests | Fark Party | Combined