(12-09-2016 01:57 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(12-09-2016 12:36 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-08-2016 08:43 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-08-2016 06:25 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Have to say I'd be dead set against Petraeus. The handling of the classified information in the manner ala Hillary Clinton should be sufficient to keep him out in my book.
If he was the choice, there would have be some world class issue dancing to differentiate his behavior, especially in light of how Trump used that type of behavior for his "Crooked Hillary" vein of attack.

I think it can be differentiated quite easily, but I don't think it's worth the political risk to go there. I really like Huntsman.

You're right that it can be differentiated easily. What Petraeus was proven to have done was worse.

He exposed one secret to one person. she exposed every secret to everybody.

I agree his actions probably should disqualify him for SecState, which is unfortunate because in every other respect i think he would be great at the job.

He intentionally SHARED classified information with someone he was not supposed to, using very intentional tactics to do that.

She intentionally STORED classified information on a location that, after more than a year in office, was told she was not supposed to. Is there evidence that she intentionally shared information in secretive manners with people who were not supposed to have said information? If so, I haven't seen that.

This is the crux as to why Hillary is not on probation bu Petraeus is.