HIFLYR

I guess is depends on when it started.

Military law means that if CIA Director David Petraeus began his affair with biographer Paula Broadwell while he was serving in Afghanistan – while he was General David Petraeus – he can be prosecuted. Petraeus’ former aide, Peter Mansoor, acknowledged, “For him to allow the very first biography to be written about him, to be written by someone who had never written a book before, seemed very odd to me.”



Under Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, it is still possible to prosecute members of the military who involve themselves in behavior “of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.”


It is unclear that Petraeus would actually be prosecuted in any case.

rickair7777

That's true, if the affair started when he was AD it would be a UCMJ violation. But he would never be prosecuted for that...he's no longer subject to the UCMJ. While they might technically be able to recall a retiree to AD for the sole purpose of prosecution, that would unprecedented for anything short of murder or high treason.

Also I don't think they can prosecute you for ANY UCMJ violation which occurred during a previous period of AD...they had to catch you during the period of AD in which the offense occurred. At least that's the way it used to work.

FDXLAG

He had a secret email account. I guarantee that is a violation of at least one of the agreements he signed under penalty of perjury when he became director of the cia.

Do I think he will go to jail, no he is not a member of the same political party as say, Scooter Libby, and so far he has backed the administrations Benghazi fairy tales.

N2264J

Petraeus seduced America. We should never have trusted him.

"Until this weekend, Petraeus had been incredibly successful in making the public
think he was a man of great integrity and honor, among other things..."

By Michael Hastings

The Sins Of General David Petraeus

jungle

Surely the pace will pick up on fantastic stories to discredit the management of the wars, and rightly so.
The real question is who was charged with managing the wars.
It was not the generals.

General Jack D. Ripper: Mandrake, do you recall what Clemenceau once said about war?
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: No, I don't think I do, sir, no.
General Jack D. Ripper: He said war was too important to be left to the generals. When he said that, 50 years ago, he might have been right. But today, war is too important to be left to politicians. They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought. I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.


So, who is running your wars?

I would guess that many of you don't know who Smedley Butler was or what he said in a time when a real general spoke his mind:http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html

EasternATC

Perhaps you could do just a smidgen of research on Holly Petraeus, then you'd understand why her husband and your comment are dead wrong.

KC10 FATboy

This entire episode of The Military Housewives of Tampa has nothing to do with sex scandals. There are much bigger issues and story lines at stake.

jungle

This is often called a purge in other countries.






"Purges (or simply purges, Russian: "чистка", chistka – "cleansing") with a "small-p" purge was one of the key rituals during which a periodic review of party members was conducted to get rid of the "undesirables"."

JamesNoBrakes

Actually this is the point. We *think* we know people because of what we read and see...

Moby Dick

Everyone makes mistakes.