Should Sec of Def. Carter reduce GEN Petraeus back to LTG after he has retired?

SFC Dave Wynn — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 20:35:21 -0500

I think it stinks that after this long the Sec of Def. can reduce someone in rank. Even if he or she is a General officer. Yes I know he was convicted of mishandling of classified material. They should have reduced him back then. Maybe we as military community should let our voices be heard.

Response by SN Greg Wright made Jan 18 at 2016 8:40 PM

SN Greg Wright — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 20:40:28 -0500

SFC Dave Wynn I hadn't heard this. Do you have a source? Sucks if it's true, though.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Jan 18 at 2016 8:44 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 20:44:30 -0500

So he may have to trade in his Koenigseg for a Lamborghini? Even at 3 star, that retirement check would still exceed a platoons worth of active duty pay... Unless his retirement were pulled, anything is superficial stick poking at this point...

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Jan 18 at 2016 9:03 PM

SGM Matthew Quick — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 21:03:07 -0500

Source:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/18/exclusive-pentagon-may-demote-david-petraeus.html

Exclusive: Pentagon May Demote David Petraeus

The Defense Secretary is looking to put the clamp down on misbehaving generals. Pentagon insiders say Petraeus could be the next general to face the consequences.

Response by CSM Charles Hayden made Jan 18 at 2016 9:07 PM

CSM Charles Hayden — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 21:07:49 -0500

SFC Dave Wynn Will 'they' do that before/after Hillary's sentencing?

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Jan 18 at 2016 9:09 PM

SGM Matthew Quick — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 21:09:54 -0500

According to military regulations, General Petraeus can demoted to the last rank at which he “satisfactorily” served but if this mishandling of classified information happened AFTER retirement, why would a demotion even be warranted? Did he not serve “satisfactorily” as a four-star general?

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 18 at 2016 9:11 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 21:11:01 -0500

If there are new charges then I can see. He was top of the food chain and he did mishandle classified information. However, SEC DEF is still looking into the matter, so we'll just wait and see then

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Jan 18 at 2016 9:15 PM

SGM Matthew Quick — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 21:15:52 -0500

A demotion may be warranted:

General Petraeus pleaded guilty last year to giving Paula Broadwell, a writer and current Army reservist he was having an affair with, eight notebooks that he compiled while serving as commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan and that he knew contained classified information. The notebooks held some of the most sensitive kinds of military and intelligence secrets, including the identities of covert officers, intelligence capabilities, quotes from high-level meetings of the National Security Council, and notes about Petraeus’s discussions with President Obama.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 18 at 2016 9:43 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 21:43:34 -0500

And the double standard continues...

Response by LTC Kevin B. made Jan 18 at 2016 9:43 PM

LTC Kevin B. — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 21:43:57 -0500

I won't be standing up to defend someone who mishandled classified information while having an adulterous relationship. If the SECDEF has the authority to adjust the punishment, then so be it.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 18 at 2016 10:13 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 22:13:29 -0500

It seems like locking the barn after the horse and cart were sharing information and retired...what would the "benefit" be? Although it does set a precedent and puts in the minds a certain Presidential Candidate who didn't handle classified material properly...

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 18 at 2016 10:13 PM

WO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 22:13:39 -0500

No I think you should take into account his military career and how much he brought to the table being a leader.

Response by Sgt Tom Vaughn made Jan 18 at 2016 10:26 PM

Sgt Tom Vaughn — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 22:26:43 -0500

Seems there is something strange about his picture. Or does the army always have their jump wings and ribbon/medals on the right breast ? Just wondering
But who cars He was and still is out.

Response by SFC William Farrell made Jan 18 at 2016 10:27 PM

SFC William Farrell — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 22:27:19 -0500

No, General Petraeus has served his country honorably and I think his entire career should be taken into consideration. While I consider General Petraeus a friend, albeit a very, very distant one, I feel he was only thinking with the wrong head. He has suffered enough from his indiscretions and I believe he has already paid a high price for his indiscretions. There have been many before him who have done far worse than he has and have suffered far less penalties than he has. He is a patriot, true and true.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 18 at 2016 11:20 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 23:20:08 -0500

I was wondering why this was coming up now since it seems so long ago, but it turns out he just pleaded guilty to a federal misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified information in April 2015. He was sentenced to 2 years probation and a $100,000 fine. But that was all in the civilian system

Now the SECDEF has to decide whether to charge the general for anything under the UCMJ. That could include things like his adultery that aren't crimes in the civilian world. So that's the decision pending and why it's coming up now.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Jan 19 at 2016 1:15 AM

Capt Seid Waddell — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 01:15:02 -0500

That sounds like PC vindictiveness to me. Do you suppose it was due to his Benghazi testimony in secure sessions? This administration held his court-martial over his head for years to keep him quiet.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Jan 19 at 2016 2:06 AM

Capt Seid Waddell — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 02:06:01 -0500

It looks political to me. This administration held his court martial over his head for years to keep him quiet about Benghazi.

Gen Petraeus recently testified in closed session about that attack and now we see this.

Do the math.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jan 19 at 2016 2:20 AM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 02:20:42 -0500

We let him go, so leave him alone.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 19 at 2016 2:28 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 02:28:21 -0500

He did not do like what another General a decade ago did..he did not sleep with wives of his staff like another General who was going to get his 3rd star on retirement but was demoted to full-bird colonel after the wives he slept with complained. I think it stinks too..Gen. Petraus is a hero! Had he not screwed up, and had he had the desire to run... he would be ahead of Donald' epws are losers' Trump and 'Bengazi is teflon to me' Hillary Clinton!

Response by SCPO Joshua I made Jan 19 at 2016 3:20 AM

SCPO Joshua I — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 03:20:43 -0500

It's a bit odd to do that, given the time that has passed since all that happened.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Jan 19 at 2016 5:04 AM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 05:04:25 -0500

Don't know if it is Possible. Last time I checked Congress decides what Rank you retire at for a Flag Officer. As SECDEF he may be able to Petition Congress to Demote him in the Retired Ranks but It would take a bit to see if there is even Precedence for such an action.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 19 at 2016 6:37 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 06:37:29 -0500

SECDEF appears committed to holding general officers accountable for their actions. Will we see Petraeus back in uniform, brought onto Active Duty solely to be demoted? Will this open the door to actually holding retirees accountable under UCMJ? Will this lead to, gasp, holding general officers accountable for their actions, across the board?

I know it will be difficult for many of you, but let's please refrain from making comments comparing Petraeus and Clinton. If you want to discuss Clinton, start another thread. This thread is about Petraeus' misdeeds (verified, admitted, convicted), SECDEF's approach to managing the misbehavior of general officers, and what this might mean for other retirees and the UCMJ.

It could also be about the Army and its institutional policies on dealing with information received from the FBI or the CIA. We've seen the Army take extreme action against two Special Forces officers based on apparently tenuous information from the FBI and CIA, yet apparently incriminating evidence from the FBI about Petraeus gets a big nothing-to-see-here from the Army. They say justice is blind. Is this another case where rank obscures this maxim?

Response by Capt Tom Brown made Jan 19 at 2016 6:49 AM

Capt Tom Brown — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 06:49:55 -0500

While I would take anything in the Daily Beast with a grain of salt I do support holding the good general accountable for his transgressions of moral character and dishonesty as one of the nations highest officials. Being dishonest to his family is not a small oversight easily forgiven, esp when it involves whispering sweet top secrets in someone's ear in return for sexual favors. His forced retirement at full status swept his misdeeds under the rug and many people feel is only an illustration of the type of behavior and mindset tolerated in the military.

Response by Capt Tom Brown made Jan 19 at 2016 6:58 AM

Capt Tom Brown — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 06:58:36 -0500

Some feel that the general should have been drummed out of the service at the time but wasn't for unknown reasons. Allowing him to retire at full pay and allowances after his transgressions is outrageous to say the least. People of lesser rank are drubbed out reduced and careers ruined on a daily basis for a lot less, this perp received special treatment at the hands of the politicos which amounted to a betrayal of every other service member who has served honorably or otherwise.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 19 at 2016 7:49 AM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 07:49:07 -0500

If UCMJ is pursued, I hope the court takes all information into account. Just my $0.02s.

Response by SFC A.M. Drake made Jan 19 at 2016 8:24 AM

SFC A.M. Drake — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 08:24:49 -0500

I would like to see the original story. I would think he served as a 4-star long enough to warrant that rank. If any punishment it should have be done then, prior to his retirement and prior to working as CIA Director.

Response by SSG Lon Watson made Jan 19 at 2016 9:21 AM

SSG Lon Watson — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:21:00 -0500

Gen Petraeus is a scape goat. Hillary Clinton did far worse than that with classified. They just want to insure his silence about Benghazi.

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Jan 19 at 2016 9:58 AM

MSgt James Mullis — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:58:23 -0500

Of course it's just an educated guess, but I it sounds like the current administration is trying to keep him from speaking out or publishing anything that might affect the upcoming Presidential elections.

Response by CPT Aaron Kletzing made Jan 19 at 2016 10:04 AM

CPT Aaron Kletzing — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:04:45 -0500

Well, then Sec. Carter should investigate Sec. Clinton, on this same basis. Both she and GEN Petraeus mishandled classified information. Am I right?

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 19 at 2016 10:48 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:48:01 -0500

SFC Dave Wynn We are all human beings and make mistakes, the level of our mistakes is what really makes the difference. There should be repercussions.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 19 at 2016 10:50 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:50:59 -0500

Ok, so when are we going to see Hilary face the music then?

Response by SSG Ray Strenkowski made Jan 19 at 2016 11:31 AM

SSG Ray Strenkowski — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 11:31:03 -0500

I think it's political. If they were going to do this it should have been done before now.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 19 at 2016 12:46 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 12:46:42 -0500

If they didn't do it then, they shouldn't be able to come back a retroactively reduce him now for something that happened several years ago. He had already retired at the time. A retiree's pay cannot be reduced/withdrawn unless the person is convicted under the Hiss Act (5 U.S. Code, Section 8311-8322.) By all accounts, Petraeus’s leak caused no damage to US national security. Therefore, he should not be subject to a reduction in retirement due to violation of the Hiss Act.

Response by SPC Andrew Griffin made Jan 19 at 2016 12:54 PM

SPC Andrew Griffin — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 12:54:49 -0500

No! If he earned it! Let him keep it!

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 19 at 2016 1:36 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 13:36:40 -0500

No! Never! Hillary has done much worse and running for CINC.

Response by COL Rich McKinney made Jan 19 at 2016 2:58 PM

COL Rich McKinney — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:58:41 -0500

Definition is retire "at the highest rank successfully served". In the case of someone that held any job successfully at O-10, he retires at O-10. If his only job as O-10 was the one he got in trouble while serving, then O-9 is the last "successful" rank held and is reduced. If the misconduct occurred while CIA Director, after he retired as O-10, he "successfully served".

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 19 at 2016 3:10 PM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:10:48 -0500

A sickening thing if it happens. You have a walking, talking female liar, cheat, and fraud running for CinC, her husband's National Security Advisor sneaking TOP SECRET documents out of the White House in his pants (Oh, I forgot they were there Berger), and SECDEF is going after General Patreaus? There is not a doubt in my mind that this is more payback by Obummer!!!

Response by CSM Colin Patterson made Jan 19 at 2016 3:24 PM

CSM Colin Patterson — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:24:54 -0500

There should be no double standards enlisted soldiers get reduced for lesser crimes. The PFC Bradley Manning is serving a life sentence for releasing classified information.

Response by PO1 Pete Sikes made Jan 19 at 2016 3:30 PM

PO1 Pete Sikes — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:30:38 -0500

Does he have the authority to do so?

Response by SGT Rick Ash made Jan 19 at 2016 3:45 PM

SGT Rick Ash — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:45:09 -0500

No. Look at what this man has given for US and our freedom. He didn't secure the material back in the proper container but there is no evidence his locked drawer was breached. He STEPPED UP and admitted it, unlike Hillary who lies, lies and lies some more. She needs to be in prison IMO but I am not the FBI or the judge.
The time to punish him was then, not now. I only served 6 years and as an enlisted soldier at that. My family went through a lot, they all missed several years of our son growing up. My wife and son even went went me to S. Korea on an unaccompanied tour and we lived in a mud hut with a thatched roof for a year.
Leave Petraeus alone, you missed your chance. And how many people have the Clinton's had killed? Last tally I had was 34. What does she have on Obama or the SCOTUS that makes her "untouchable"?

Response by MSgt Billy McDonough made Jan 19 at 2016 4:11 PM

MSgt Billy McDonough — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 16:11:56 -0500

As a GENERAL OFFICER, he should be held to the highest standards AND be sanctioned appropriately. Demotion is definitely appropriate.

Response by SMSgt William Hassiepen made Jan 19 at 2016 4:13 PM

SMSgt William Hassiepen — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 16:13:51 -0500

I think this whole thing stinks to high heaven. While yes Gen Patraeus was wrong the info in his desk was his own itinerary and nothing was released that threatened national security. Yes he mishandled classified info and yes he has already paid for it. If this administration gives him an RIR yet does nothing to our "former" secretary of state, we will know this was and always was political nothing more.

Response by SSG Jim Foreman made Jan 19 at 2016 5:08 PM

SSG Jim Foreman — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:08:36 -0500

Funny how some people can handle classified material improperly and nothing happens.

Response by PV2 Scott Goodpasture made Jan 19 at 2016 5:16 PM

PV2 Scott Goodpasture — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:16:33 -0500

Is it too late to reduce Obama down to Community Organizer? I need a picnic planned for the neighborhood kids and don't have time

Response by Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth made Jan 19 at 2016 5:29 PM

Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:29:51 -0500

We don't know and will never know the whole story of what Gen Petraeus did or didn't do. The timing of all of his proceedings just happened to coincide with a lot of issues with President Obama and then Sec Clinton trying to subvert a lot of other issues and this drew attention away from that. I do however use this as a case study with young officers...I tell them that you can do a million great and wonderful things but one bad thing is what you will be remembered for.
Was he ever convicted of anything? Absolutely not. He may have been the fall guy for other things to distract the American people. Did he mess up with an affair...absolutely. Did he mishandle classified with a reservist/writer...by the way was she in the reservist role with the proper clearances or the writer role...did his cronies give up the paperwork and he took the fall as their leader...we may never know. All we ever get is the media spin anyway and we sit in judgment like the judge/jury/executioner! By the way, his team of battle buddies let him down as well for not looking out for him in these situations and waving him off.
But I do know this...he was and still is in my opinion one of the greatest combat military minds and leaders our DoD has had in many years. I worked for him, way down the chain but he made it a point to make it out to our area to shake all of our hands, as a four star, and to look us in the eye and tell us thank you and that he had our backs...and he did. Let the man stay retired with the 4 stars that he earned.

Response by CPO Randy Francis made Jan 19 at 2016 5:47 PM

CPO Randy Francis — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:47:01 -0500

Then I assume that Secretary Clinton will be prosecuted with the same zeal. Otherwise military members and veterans need to let their Congressman know of their displeasure of the double standard.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 19 at 2016 8:28 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 20:28:08 -0500

it wasnt even important info! it was his own work calender

Response by SSG Jeff Binkiewicz made Jan 19 at 2016 8:47 PM

SSG Jeff Binkiewicz — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 20:47:30 -0500

Sure. He was my Brigade commander, screwed everything up, caused a lot of issues, and spoke about integrity , doing what is right, he fell victim to the simplest ambush, Bush.

Response by CSM Carl Cunningham made Jan 19 at 2016 8:55 PM

CSM Carl Cunningham — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 20:55:05 -0500

He is lucky LTG is all he is getting. Still makes way more than he should in retirement. Not sure how anyone can defend it, especially if they are enlisted and make peanuts. An enlisted Soldier would get fried for doing that with classified material.
As far as the SECDEF doing it, guess what, we all work for civilian bosses in the long run...even the Generals.

Response by COL Randy Alicea made Jan 19 at 2016 10:35 PM

COL Randy Alicea — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 22:35:44 -0500

All political horse crap. Theres other important things to consider besides his affair. On the matter of classified information; if Hillary can be acquitted, with her classified email server in her unsecure basement, then his can too. If not then Both need to spend time in jail to included the CG personal staff.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2016 12:38 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Jan 2016 00:38:32 -0500

The Army is a place where a single lapse in judgement will get you nailed to the wall. A SPC who did what he did would still be sitting in Leavenworth. It needs to be shown that UCMJ applies to everyone, without regard for rank.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2016 1:01 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Jan 2016 01:01:37 -0500

What we have are skunks in the White House. Vermin.

Response by CPT Aaron Kletzing made Jan 20 at 2016 1:27 AM

CPT Aaron Kletzing — Wed, 20 Jan 2016 01:27:03 -0500

Both he and Hillary Clinton should be investigated with the same level of focus and non-bias. I'm not saying they did the same exact thing, obviously that's a stupid overgeneralization. But each of them did (or allegedly did) something that was a serious problem. "According to court documents, former CIA Director David Petraeus was prosecuted for sharing intelligence from special access programs with his biographer and mistress Paula Broadwell. At the heart of his prosecution was a non-disclosure agreement where Petraeus agreed to protect these closely held government programs, with the understanding “unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention or negligent handling … could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation.” Clinton signed an identical non-disclosure agreement Jan. 22, 2009."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/19/inspector-general-clinton-emails-had-intel-from-most-secretive-classified-programs.html?intcmp=hpbt1

Inspector General: Clinton emails had intel from most secretive, classified programs | Fox News

EXCLUSIVE: Hillary Clinton's emails on her unsecured, homebrew server contained intelligence from the U.S. government's most secretive and highly classified programs, according to an unclassified letter from a top inspector general to senior lawmakers.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Jan 20 at 2016 1:42 AM

COL Charles Williams — Wed, 20 Jan 2016 01:42:34 -0500

I disagree with @LTC Kevin B. below, but I can't comment on his comments or vote up, as he disabled them? What on earth is that about? Anyway, The SECDEF needs to do what is right, but I believe first we need to see how this Hillary thing works out... as if he is to be LTG (This is the guy who saved OIF from disaster) then Hillary should be in Prison. Again, how does @LTC Kevin B. (weird name) not allow comments or votes; I was gonna vote him up...?

Response by COL John Hudson made Jan 20 at 2016 8:41 AM

COL John Hudson — Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:41:33 -0500

All of the good works we accomplish become dust when a conscious decision is made to violate the trust placed in us. Those few seconds of 'stumbling' define our total efforts, regardless of how great they may have been just prior to that moment. The public will only remember the scandal that General David Howell Petraeus became embroiled in...his admittance that he gave classified information to his biographer and mistress while still in uniform. For those of you out there who attempt to protect him or easily dismiss his indiscretions - just how do you believe you would have been treated under UCMJ if you did the same thing? In equal measure to anyone out there, he is protected by due process and innocent until conclusively found to be guilty. There's a significant amount of fact and evidence hidden from the public due to position, security clearance, and rights under the Constitution. Such evidence is available to those with oversight of the General Officers of our military and not made known to the public due to National Security. Ash Carter, the present Secretary of Defense, is reconsidering General Petraeus's transgressions under the idea that even so highly placed a military commander is not immune to accounting for his acts. Five-star General of the Army Douglas Francis MacArthur was fired by President Truman for making public statements on Presidential policy matters. General Kevin P. Byrnes, Commander of the Army Training and Doctrine Command, was relieved of command (fired) for disobeying a lawful order from Army Chief of Staff Peter Schoomaker to break off a consensual relationship with another woman (his divorce proceedings were not yet finalized). The unique irony? I was General Byrnes's Inspector General with the 1st Cavalry Division in Bosnia during the Balkan conflict and could have easily advised him against what he was doing.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2016 6:17 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Jan 2016 18:17:06 -0500

I don't think so. That punishment is being done due to something the general is planning to present in a book. Something like that. And it's just not fair.

Response by CMSgt John Momaney made Jan 20 at 2016 9:02 PM

CMSgt John Momaney — Wed, 20 Jan 2016 21:02:43 -0500

At what point is your military career over and not effected by mistakes made as a civilian? Once you retire and no longer wear the uniform it should be over. Exception; after you are out a military investigation finds that while you were in the military you committed a crime that violated the UCMJ. You can be prosecuted and punished accordingly and reduced in rank.

Response by SFC Keith Bailey made Jan 20 at 2016 9:42 PM

SFC Keith Bailey — Wed, 20 Jan 2016 21:42:47 -0500

The one thing after 22 years in the ARMY that stuck with me was the fairness of the UCMJ. He was punished, he paid it and should be done with it. This new thing is Politics pure and simple Not the DOD.. This is Political nonsense. How many of you on active duty want to have your screw up brought up years later after you already paid your punishment ?

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Jan 20 at 2016 10:43 PM

CAPT Kevin B. — Wed, 20 Jan 2016 22:43:06 -0500

A more juicy aspect is if he's busted down in the near term and the political firestorm. That is possible given the programmed smoke screen announcements and actions that are geared to taking the public's eye off the real issues like ever increasing taxes, less purchasing power, etc. A second aspect besides this short game distraction is the long game. So the Administration flips and both Congress and the Executive are Republican. Will the juices flow enough to restore the rank? Perhaps not. It would be another example of casualty by political whim. Happens all the time.

Response by Capt Tom Brown made Jan 21 at 2016 6:55 AM

Capt Tom Brown — Thu, 21 Jan 2016 06:55:37 -0500

Sad to think this general with so much honorable service in military and government could be so easily seduced into dishonesty at the personal level and betray his family, and in the national security level by giving up national secrets so easily. This utterly destroys his credibility and should result in a loss of confidence in his ability to command anything. Retiring as a LtGen isn't all that bad either.

Response by COL John Hudson made Jan 21 at 2016 7:21 AM

COL John Hudson — Thu, 21 Jan 2016 07:21:49 -0500

We report to a CIVILIAN boss. They hire and fire us. We serve at their pleasure. Please take a moment to remember all of the countries then (and unfortunately, even now), that practiced military leadership and what inevitably happens to them.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Jan 21 at 2016 7:45 AM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Thu, 21 Jan 2016 07:45:04 -0500

I posted a link which explains why this matter has been brought to light now. Take time to listen and you will understand: https://www.rallypoint.com/shared-links/joe-biden-to-the-rescue-1-20-16-monica-crowley

Joe Biden to the Rescue? 1/20/16: Monica Crowley. | RallyPoint

https://audioboom.com/boos/4087415-joe-biden-to-the-rescue-1-20-16-monica-crowley?t=0This is fairly long, about 40 minutes, BUT will answer some questions I've seen posted here.

Response by SPC Steven Depuy made Jan 21 at 2016 1:42 PM

SPC Steven Depuy — Thu, 21 Jan 2016 13:42:32 -0500

Its all about politics. They shut him up before, because if he had been honest, a lie that would have lost an election would have been exposed. So they throw a guy in jail and blame it on a youtube video, and they sack the general so he shuts up. No one cared about his affair, until they wanted to slap him around and tell him to shut up. I am not saying he was not wrong for having an affair, but to me, this is all payback for him not behaving. I am sure they were perfectly happy he was having an affair, because it gave them control over him.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 21 at 2016 4:14 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 21 Jan 2016 16:14:15 -0500

I understand that the SecDef has the authority to do this, what I haven't seen is any indication that he has any intention of doing this. What reason do we have to believe this is likely?

Response by Maj Bill Smith, Ph.D. made Jan 21 at 2016 9:47 PM

Maj Bill Smith, Ph.D. — Thu, 21 Jan 2016 21:47:48 -0500

When does one get punished after being a civilian. Also, what does the current Sec of Defense have to do with a previously settled situation. Pure unadulterated politics and retribution by the Obama administration.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jan 22 at 2016 12:57 AM

PO1 John Miller — Fri, 22 Jan 2016 00:57:12 -0500

Only if Hillary gets punished. Otherwise, I think Petraeus should have his probation terminated and be given his $100,000 back.

Response by 1SG Charles Lyons made Jan 22 at 2016 11:43 PM

1SG Charles Lyons — Fri, 22 Jan 2016 23:43:33 -0500

Short answer ... No! If you didn't include it as part of the original punishment, the only motivation I can see now would be political.

Response by CPO Andy Carrillo, MS made Jan 25 at 2016 7:30 PM

CPO Andy Carrillo, MS — Mon, 25 Jan 2016 19:30:08 -0500

This Washington Post article describes how Petraeus managed to get off so lightly, and perhaps why he faces losing a star after all:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/how-david-petraeus-avoided-felony-charges-and-possible-prison-time/2016/01/25/d77628dc-bfab-11e5-83d4-42e3bceea902_story.html

How David Petraeus avoided felony charges and possible prison time

The former wartime commander and CIA director ended up with a misdemeanor plea agreement.

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made Jan 26 at 2016 5:55 AM

SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 05:55:48 -0500

No. His merits speak louder then anything. He wouldn't be a 4 star general for nothing! Politics is part of the reason this country is going to the dogs.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2016 7:39 AM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 07:39:12 -0500

SFC Dave Wynn, stinks? What really stinks is the idea that you can get away with something if your rank is high enough. GEN Pertaeus made a mistake. What is the appropriate response? How can the punishment be avoided?

What I'd like to see is some real leadership. I'd like to see GEN Petraeus stand up and say, "I made a mistake, and I should have to take my lumps for it. And by that same standard, Hillary Clinton not only shouldn't get off for making an ever worse mistake, but the American people should NOT stand for, 'What does it matter now', when asking why our ambassador was murdered."

I respect GEN Petraeus, but leadership means taking responsibility, not avoiding it. This nation needs a lesson in what that means.

Response by TSgt Richard Jansa made Jan 26 at 2016 8:01 AM

TSgt Richard Jansa — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 08:01:56 -0500

Then they should reduce Hillary to Civilian for mishandling of classified material...

Response by CW4 Ray Montano made Jan 26 at 2016 8:34 AM

CW4 Ray Montano — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 08:34:45 -0500

This is a difficult call. I have read, and understand, the comments, but lets just isolate the behavior and conduct. He passed on classified information and was having an affair. I don't care much about the second aspect, but have you all ever wondered if, in his career, he ended the careers of other people that conducted themselves similarly? At this point; however, it just does not matter. His actions placed a black mark on an otherwise fantastic career. He will probably always be remembered for his moment of indiscretion and not his career achievements. I think that is punishment enough and we should move on.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2016 8:40 AM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 08:40:30 -0500

GEN Petraeus must be held accountable according to UCMJ. Some skeptics out there may disagree, but Good order and Military Disciplined must be maintained and GEN Petraeus is an admitted adulterer and mishandled classified material. Read the words in your retirement orders, retirees are still subject to UCMJ!. Think of all of the soldiers that were commanded by GEN Petraeus that he presided over in non-UCMJ (Art 15s) and UCMJ actions that committed either of these offenses. Do they not deserve to have the presiding authority held to the same standard that was applied to them. GEN Petraeus was a good officer and did NO more GREAT things than any other soldier on the battlefield. GEN Petraeus must be reduced in rank. LTG (ret) Kip Ward misappropriate $80K and was reduced in rank from GEN, so why does GEN Petraeus deserve a pass; HE doesn't!! He should be recalled to active service and the presiding authority should convene and Article 32 hearing to determine if the action(s) warrant a Court Martial, if no Court Martial then an Article 15. Then GEN Petraeus should go before a grad determination board to determine the level at which he served and recommend the rank for retirement. GEN Petraeus as with all Generals that are very Senior achieve their last Permanent rank as a Major General. My recommendation, is that by his own admission he is guilty of adultery an Article 134, conduct unbecoming of an officer Article 133, and Article 92 – Failure to Obey Order or Regulation.

Response by MAJ David White made Jan 26 at 2016 9:13 AM

MAJ David White — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:13:58 -0500

Going back to original question- should the SecDef reduce the General in rank. I say "no". He was judged and sentenced per law. At that time the court may have had the authority to take a star, perhaps not. That's a legal issue I don't have an answer to but IF this is for his "crimes" then it should have been addressed in his sentencing. If not for a convicted offense, and he is retired then I don't believe there is legal grounds to demote him. Think of ramifications if anyone can be demoted after retirement or separation apparently for political reasons. These issues are supposed to be beyond "command interest", including that of SecDef. Changing a legal decision except for commuting sentence just seems wrong, morally and legally.

Response by SPC Steven Nihipali made Jan 26 at 2016 9:16 AM

SPC Steven Nihipali — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:16:25 -0500

Y'all are all racist bigots who couldn't possibly think career ending bullshit like this would end Obama's term in office on a high note... (sarcasm). Dunno about anyone else, but there is no fucking possible way I'd ever stay in with this shitbag in chief fucking over my commanders like this. I understand my unit roles are different and have no major concern at the D.C. level... Except leadership from the top shows what kinda shit we do in the field. Leave the general alone!

Response by LTC Dean Russell made Jan 26 at 2016 9:29 AM

LTC Dean Russell — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:29:17 -0500

Dave Petraeus is a good man and has done great things for this country. I have known him for over 40+ years since we were cadets and he has only wanted to do the best job for the good of this country. He made a mistake and admitted to his mistake and took his punishment legally and personally. Enough is enough. This country is considering Hillary Clinton for President. A woman that is dishonest and unethical in every sense of the word: emails, foreign monies for her foundation and the Bengazzi cover-up. When will she be held accountable by this weak administration? The answer is Never because Obama is too worried about his legacy. He will go down in history as the worst President - weak, arrogant, uninformed, etc. The one thing this President could do is to hold Hillary Clinton accountable for her actions or lack of actions. Dave Petraeus paid his dues.

Response by PO2 Robert Cuminale made Jan 26 at 2016 9:39 AM

PO2 Robert Cuminale — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:39:15 -0500

Those to whom much has been given much more will be expected of them. You would expect a four star general to be more circumspect in his personal affairs (no pun intended) Instead he acts like some low class rutting hog and used the wrong head to do his thinking.
General officers get where they are because they are politicians most of all. As a politician he should have known better than to put himself in a position to be abused.

Response by SSgt Jim Gilmore made Jan 26 at 2016 9:44 AM

SSgt Jim Gilmore — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:44:39 -0500

I think double jeopardy is attached and will lose on appeal if he does bust him back.

Response by SSgt Boyd Welch made Jan 26 at 2016 9:50 AM

SSgt Boyd Welch — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:50:13 -0500

Okay...if you are going to handle General Petraeus in this manner, then the White House and the former Secretary of State deserve similar if not more severe punishment given the gravity of the information that has been released. I, for one, am sick of the military being painted as "unethical" when even more grave offenses have been committed by civilians with little or no repercussions.

Response by SSgt Boyd Welch made Jan 26 at 2016 9:51 AM

SSgt Boyd Welch — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:51:32 -0500

If Petreaus is going to be handled in this manner then the same standard should apply to the White House and the former Secretary of State.

Response by CPL Ted Eaton made Jan 26 at 2016 9:53 AM

CPL Ted Eaton — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:53:51 -0500

They didn't do it to General Mc Arthur. the answer is no!

Response by LTC William Bridgeman made Jan 26 at 2016 10:00 AM

LTC William Bridgeman — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:00:34 -0500

This is political punishment for bucking the administration.

Response by CAPT Hiram Patterson made Jan 26 at 2016 10:01 AM

CAPT Hiram Patterson — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:01:18 -0500

Absolutely not. I met GEN Petraeus on several occasions while at the Palace at Camp Victory, so of course I oppose it. He's already been judged and fined after the initial investigations and had his Army career cut short. You punish people while they are in uniform and not years later. This is just a political vendetta by an out of control SECDEF who never served in the military.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Jan 26 at 2016 10:03 AM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:03:52 -0500

Only if they are going to prosecute HRC to the fullest extent of the law for doing the same thing or much more.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2016 10:05 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:05:31 -0500

My thoughts are before doing anything to a General Officer that has had so much influence on Insurgency Operations, think about a certain Secretary of State currently running for POTUS. If no accountability in that realm, then lay off the General!

Response by PO1 Clint Miller made Jan 26 at 2016 10:22 AM

PO1 Clint Miller — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:22:48 -0500

It is not right what he did, or to dog pile on after the fact - let's not punish twice for the same offence, if this should have been part of original judgement then we are well past the point of tacking it on now.

Response by COL Stanley Zezotarski made Jan 26 at 2016 10:36 AM

COL Stanley Zezotarski — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:36:15 -0500

Absolutely not. Troops died, or were willing to die for Petraeus while Hillary squandered loyality, choosing to leave warriors behind. What Petraeus personally was not reprehensible, only objectionable. What Hillary did with classified materials is unforgivable. Gen. Petraeus apologized with a contrite heart, Hillary remains condescendly proud in her denials. The Nation may need Petraeus' skills, experience, and talents again to minimize the loss of our National Treasure, it will never need a Hillary who believes she's entitled to be commander in chief of our National treasure. Petra's has paid the political consequences, he should be Hillary's scapegoat for consequences she fears to face.

Response by CSM Guy R. Niles made Jan 26 at 2016 10:49 AM

CSM Guy R. Niles — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:49:42 -0500

Ab-so-damn-lutely Not! Why Now? The double-standard is an extremely sore subject with this particular Retired CSM. Leave the Good General Alone. yeah he screwed up. Yet, we always knew whose team he played for and whose team he supported! Liberals have no place within the DoD! Y'all know whom I refer to! SEC DEFS like Presidents should have had served in boots.

Response by PO3 Michael Cienfuegos made Jan 26 at 2016 11:06 AM

PO3 Michael Cienfuegos — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:06:46 -0500

This doesn't pass the smell test. If the government is willing to politically destroy this man, they should be willing to indict and prosecute the former secretary of state for what she is alleged to have done.

Response by Sgt Frank Rinchich made Jan 26 at 2016 11:09 AM

Sgt Frank Rinchich — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:09:35 -0500

A person set and listen to Carter will notice he is not the brightest star in the sky. This is coming from Obama , what better way to get the active upper echelon to do as they are told . this is a political action by Obama, make an example out of one of the greatest generals and the rest will do as they are told, there must be some background talk from the military leaders, this is a good way to shut them up, go back after months and still double jeopardy a crime already tried and punished. This the work of a king, not a president.

Response by SPC David S. made Jan 26 at 2016 11:19 AM

SPC David S. — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:19:51 -0500

As long as Hillary goes to prison too, sure.

Response by MSgt Roger Hoyle made Jan 26 at 2016 11:27 AM

MSgt Roger Hoyle — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:27:25 -0500

IF he was an NCO would he get the same treatment? or if he were Muslim?
How many high ranking Officers speed out against the WH?

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2016 11:35 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:35:34 -0500

Is anyone really paying close attention to the 1300 plus emails that are all considered Classified and above including SAP! And this is from a former SOS and what the GEN is guilty of is the least of all of these infractions! Yes he screwed up and paid for it more than anyone will ever truly appreciate! Ironic that they continue to badger one of the greatest Warriors in modern times! Someday soon I hope there will be a reckoning and the Senator that referred to him as GEN "Be Tray Us!" will also have to pay for her mishandling of Classified material! There you have my .02 cents worth! I stand with the GEN!!!

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2016 11:47 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:47:24 -0500

Only if they send Sec. Clinton to jail for doing something just, if not more, damaging.

Response by LTC Charles T Dalbec made Jan 26 at 2016 12:41 PM

LTC Charles T Dalbec — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 12:41:05 -0500

The only reason the reduction in grade is being discussed is because of Hillary and the fact that BHO does not have his 'stuff' together.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2016 12:58 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 12:58:41 -0500

I have a lot to say on this subject... In short I believe it is very political, they went after all the top Officers. Definately a double standard, burn Petraeus... And Clinton runs for President wth....

Response by MSgt Jim Bain made Jan 26 at 2016 1:11 PM

MSgt Jim Bain — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 13:11:27 -0500

All his past years in the military should be held accountable, the General was good man and a leader of good men and women! Just another Obama political move, can not wait till this administration is gone!!!!

Response by Cpl Franz Buhlmann made Jan 26 at 2016 2:30 PM

Cpl Franz Buhlmann — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:30:53 -0500

If the Sec of Def needs to wait this long to act, it shows his own incompetence. Why did he fail to act sooner? Maybe the Sec is the one that needs to be demoted?

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2016 2:43 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:43:53 -0500

As I recall the mishandling took place after he had retired and was working for the CIA. If this is the case do we reduce in rank every retired veteran that get a DUI or drug bust after they've left the service?

Response by SSG Brian MacBain made Jan 26 at 2016 3:41 PM

SSG Brian MacBain — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 15:41:00 -0500

I would have to say no. If that is the case, then everyone that is retired would be subject to UCMJ. They had a chance and did not take that route.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2016 3:42 PM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 15:42:48 -0500

No, but I'm biased. I worked with the man for 3 years and know more about him than I care to. The affair was wrong but he claims it did not begin until he was out of the military. There is no proof to the contrary. He was charged in federal court for the illegal disclosure of classified information to a USAR Intelligence Officer with a TS clearance (but not operational need to know and for mishandling classified information. He had to perform his attrition to make Holly comfortable to remain in their marriage and he resigned his position at the CIA.

So, we take one of America's war heroes, who made the same mistake Eisenhower and others did, and crucify him with the threat of losing a star. His personal relationship had no influence on his ability to lead or serve. It did not disrupt the 'good order and discipline' and was not known until the young lady, acting like too many women, went nuts and started to threaten and stalk others via email.

The reason for the threat is obvious. GEN P is testifying about Bengahzi and all things related to the middle east. His statements place the current administration and Hillary in a bulls eye they wish to avoid. To silence him, they are threatening a demotion because in 12 months, Obama, Hillary and Ash Carter are most likely gone. Unless, of course, Congress Impeaches Obama and Carter while the DoJ indicts Hillary. There are two sets of rules and the current set of government criminals are trying to avoid responsibility and justice while applying the same to GEN P.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2016 4:24 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:24:16 -0500

If this happens, there are politicians who should be indicted upon the same grounds. However, this seems like "kicking a man while he's already down". He's been forced into retirement and has been publicly shamed and humiliated; I'm pretty sure that's more than enough.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2016 4:25 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:25:14 -0500

SFC Dave Wynn I totally agree. And what's worse, is they give Hillary a virtual pass.

Response by SGT Ronald Audas made Jan 26 at 2016 5:45 PM

SGT Ronald Audas — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 17:45:07 -0500

People still refer to Nixon and Clinton as President. The Gen.earned his rank,he should keep it.The Sec.of Def. was appointed. Enough said !

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2016 6:41 PM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 18:41:15 -0500

I suggest SECDEF wait for Justice Department decision on whether Hillary is charged for her flippant use of TS SCI material on her private server and blackberry. If she is prosecuted following the ongoing FBI investigation, consider his reduction. If not, recommend he be promoted to 5-Star rank.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2016 7:22 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 19:22:39 -0500

A rank reduction is something that should be handled exclusively by the military. I don't think civilians, even the Secretary of Defense, should have jurisdiction.

Response by SFC Ron Gitzendanner made Jan 26 at 2016 8:16 PM

SFC Ron Gitzendanner — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 20:16:29 -0500

I thought The General and the Government agreed to a plea bargain. It was executed. Deal done. To go back afterwards, re-evaluate, add "more penalty" seems to me to be awfully close to double jeopardy. Also, the Government allowed the General to retire with 4 stars. I don't think they should be able to go back on the terms of retirement years alter and change their mind. Is there a precedence for this???
This entire Administration is crooked, unscrupulous, unethical, and makes up the rules as the game is in progress. If they do reduce the General, I hope he sues and if he does, I will be first in line to contribute to his defense fund. The very idea is despicable.

Response by CW4 Angel C. made Jan 26 at 2016 8:26 PM

CW4 Angel C. — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 20:26:19 -0500

He should keep his rank bc this is a more of a political dilemma than anything else!

Response by CWO3 John Bails made Jan 26 at 2016 8:40 PM

CWO3 John Bails — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 20:40:26 -0500

And to what purpose does this late action serve? The General has retired, is this some type of double standard? One for Civilians and another for Military? If he is a Dem oh my!

Response by SPC Byron Skinner made Jan 26 at 2016 10:42 PM

SPC Byron Skinner — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 22:42:46 -0500

Sp4 Skinner, I will admit up front I'm not a fan of Gen. Petraeus. He was a self promoting car rest that had a dismal record of accomplishments with his biggest sell a very flawed Counterinsurgency Warfare program along with Marine General Amos the wrote a now infamous manual FM-3-24. Its flaws were glaring but he was able to promote himself as an "expert" and got and absolutely clueless administration to go with this flawed program. To answer I saw this manual way before his program was implemented in iraq and pointed out some flaws in it. But only an enlisted guy and the lowest rank the ate in the discussion was an 06 Colonel. Well several billions of dollars and more then a few American live later during the famous Surge in iraq my criticisms of FM-3-24 showed themselves. We are still paying for Petraeus's promoting himself to four stars with The Radical Islamic State. It was during the surge in the Anbar where the late al Baghdadi was tutored in politics and field craft from USMC General Mattis. General Petraeus knowingly passed on information he knew to be classified to a person that lacked the security clearance to receive this information. This is inexcusable and one again General Petraeus hid behind the mess called FM-3-24. No politicians want the truth to come out about this failure they were sucked into by a so called expert that was a failure in all of his commands. He should be hung, the traditional form of execution for a traitor, and General Petraeus certainly is one.

Response by LTC Richard Cooper made Jan 27 at 2016 1:10 AM

LTC Richard Cooper — Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:10:54 -0500

I would say no. The man made one mistake and there was no impact on National Security and he did turn around the war in Iraq even though the politicians gave away the gains. He's retired now so I say leave the man alone, there will always be that little notation next to his name.

Response by SFC Ernest Thurston made Jan 27 at 2016 1:23 AM

SFC Ernest Thurston — Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:23:42 -0500

Hell no! he shouldn't be reduced. He already received punishment. And that should end it. Are we now going to go back and start reducing people after the fact in every instance. He retired with honor. Leave him alone. Go after Hillary before she either gets elected or gets pardoned by Obama.

Response by Sgt Joe Quesada made Jan 27 at 2016 2:56 AM

Sgt Joe Quesada — Wed, 27 Jan 2016 02:56:30 -0500

Yes, he should be demoted! If it were you or I we would be in prison.

Response by AN Wayne Stanley made Jan 27 at 2016 4:32 AM

AN Wayne Stanley — Wed, 27 Jan 2016 04:32:31 -0500

People in high positions need to hold themselves accountable. They knew the rules. They broke them and knew they broke them. Are these the people you want leading your country or representing the armed forces? It isn't an easy job, that is why they were offered the position. They failed. I feel sorry for them. Now they pay the price. That's it.

Response by 1SG Patrick Sims made Jan 27 at 2016 6:52 AM

1SG Patrick Sims — Wed, 27 Jan 2016 06:52:51 -0500

First of all General Petraous is not a member of the active U.S. military, he's retired. Unless he is a member of the Retired Reserve, he can't be reduced in rank. This sounds more like political revenge by a corrupt administration.

Response by SFC Dr. Joseph Finck, BS, MA, DSS made Jan 27 at 2016 8:01 AM

SFC Dr. Joseph Finck, BS, MA, DSS — Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:01:11 -0500

SFC Dave Wynn No. This is at best a political statement and at worst out and out targeting. If the DOJ and the Attorney General put this emphasis on indicting Hilary Clinton, she would be scheduled for trial by now.

Response by SGM Maurice Risley made Jan 27 at 2016 10:21 AM

SGM Maurice Risley — Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:21:40 -0500

I don’t think I know all the facts of this case and I think the General is one of the finest leaders this country has produced. Having said this, I can assure you as a Commander with GCMCA he has adjudicated many Chapter 10’s and Court Marshall for Adultery. I am not sure at what point the General disclosed classified documents to the female so I will not address this. I believe he should have been recalled to AD at the point it was discovered that he had an affair while on AD and faced whatever UCMJ action that was appropriate and even think a Star should have been taken, at the least. However, that time has passed. Let the man be.

Response by 1SG Gladstone Everard made Jan 27 at 2016 12:16 PM

1SG Gladstone Everard — Wed, 27 Jan 2016 12:16:03 -0500

If this was going to done it should be done while he was on active duty and not when he is retired. After all he has served this country well

Response by SGT Ruben Guzman made Jan 28 at 2016 12:18 PM

SGT Ruben Guzman — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 12:18:24 -0500

Negative!

Response by Sgt Oswaldo Garcia made Jan 28 at 2016 1:44 PM

Sgt Oswaldo Garcia — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 13:44:47 -0500

I say hell no. We have worse perpetrators walking around free enjoying a stress free life.

Response by SPC Rob Robinson made Jan 28 at 2016 4:29 PM

SPC Rob Robinson — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 16:29:59 -0500

Leave the good general alone. He's paid. Any administration would leave a Petraeus turning slowly in the wind if it were to their benefit. This administration does not need a reason to do damage to a military man. They do it because they like it.

If all it takes to damage our military is the use of the expression "workplace violence" rather than go to the truth, they will and already have done it.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 29 at 2016 11:31 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 29 Jan 2016 11:31:22 -0500

No. As a General officer, he probably gave himself a GO letter of reprimand, which would have ended his career anyway.

Response by CPO Andy Carrillo, MS made Jan 30 at 2016 2:12 AM

CPO Andy Carrillo, MS — Sat, 30 Jan 2016 02:12:06 -0500

In a totally "unrelated" case of senior officer corruption: http://www.militarycorruption.com/malaki.htm
The phrase "different spanks for different ranks" seems to apply, however...

NAVY LCDR TODD MALAKI

NAVY LCDR LATEST OFFICER TO PLEAD GUILTY IN "FAT LEONARD" BRIBERY SCANDAL - ADMITS TAKING ENVELOPES OF CASH - SERVICES OF A PROSTITUTE - TODD MALAKI FACES UP TO FIVE YEARS IN PRISON WHEN SENTENCED JULY 6 IN FEDERAL COURT SAN DIEGO

Response by CPO Andy Carrillo, MS made Jan 30 at 2016 1:13 PM

CPO Andy Carrillo, MS — Sat, 30 Jan 2016 13:13:02 -0500

UPDATE: Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter has decided not to impose any further punishment on David H. Petraeus, the former CIA director and retired Army general who was forced to resign in a sex-and-secrets scandal in 2012.

In a brief letter sent Friday to the leaders of the Senate Armed Services Committee, the Pentagon reported that Carter had agreed with the Army’s recommendation not to discipline Petraeus.

“Given the Army’s review, Secretary Carter considers this matter closed,” Stephen C. Hedger, the assistant secretary of defense for legislative affairs, said in the three-sentence letter, obtained by The Washington Post. The letter did not elaborate.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/pentagon-decides-no-further-punishment-warranted-for-petraeus/2016/01/30/b503348e-c767-11e5-8965-0607e0e265ce_story.html

Pentagon won’t punish David Petraeus any further in sex-and-secrets scandal

The retired general and former CIA director is avoiding discipline by the military for leaking secrets.

Response by SPC James Dollins made Jan 30 at 2016 9:12 PM

SPC James Dollins — Sat, 30 Jan 2016 21:12:43 -0500

Simply put.... YES!

Response by CPO Daniel Holmes made Jan 31 at 2016 4:43 PM

CPO Daniel Holmes — Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:43:22 -0500

No, I'ts a political tool now. Leave him alone. This administration has wrongly used it's powers to hurt enough people and to protect enough wrong people.

Response by LTC Richard Cooper made Feb 4 at 2016 3:57 PM

LTC Richard Cooper — Thu, 04 Feb 2016 15:57:29 -0500

I believe that this question has already been decided when SecDef Carter recently announced that he considered the case closed and that there would be no further action on the part of DoD.

Response by SFC Michael Garner made Feb 15 at 2016 11:05 AM

SFC Michael Garner — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 11:05:57 -0500

I usualy guard my language here but this deserves a hell fucken no!

Response by SPC Rob Robinson made Feb 18 at 2016 12:17 PM

SPC Rob Robinson — Thu, 18 Feb 2016 12:17:04 -0500

As a soldier who made Spec Four twice, I have sympathy for the good General. When I add to it the great work he did for the Army and our concerted efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, I think Carter and the current administration should leave him alone. They, being blindly ignorant to what every grunt knows, will blunder along like blind elephants in the China shop and probably do something "legal" and stupid.

I have a great love and admiration for the Army, and a deeper understanding of it than those who walked between the raindrops. Let me put it this way, Norman Mailer as said, "You never really know a woman until you meet her in court," and I'll leave it at that.

Petraeus mishandled documents, fulfilling the adage that behind every skirt there's a slip. So, as far as we know, the damage was more symbolic than tactical. His situation should have been handled by a man I worked under in '69, SMAJ John Dennison. He hit Omaha Beach on day one in a glider and walked all the way to and through Germany, gathering wisdom with each step.

These REMFs now sitting judgement of Petraeus should leave him alone, credit for time served, like that.

I hope the man runs for office.

Response by Sgt Tom Cunnally made Feb 18 at 2016 12:29 PM

Sgt Tom Cunnally — Thu, 18 Feb 2016 12:29:19 -0500

No General Petraeus has paid for his mishandling classified data. I also think Ash Carter is not in the same league as General Petraeus and he should not even consider any reduction in rank for this General who I have the utmost respect for. He screwed up big time. admitted it and took his punishment. Let him enjoy his retirement from the Army and try to restore his reputation.

Response by Sgt Frank Rinchich made Feb 25 at 2016 11:17 AM

Sgt Frank Rinchich — Thu, 25 Feb 2016 11:17:21 -0500

only one way to answer that. ( NO ) if anything Carter should be gone. to answer SFC Dave Wynn post, yes the military should be heard . but it should be heard against unequal treatment. compare Clinton to the General. it sucks. and they wonder why the people of this country are pissed.

Response by LTC Richard Cooper made Mar 10 at 2016 12:34 PM

LTC Richard Cooper — Thu, 10 Mar 2016 12:34:16 -0500

I have a better question Why is this issue still being debated even though Secretary Carter has already made his decision which is that no further action be taken against the General. The case is closed so maybe it would be best if folks get over it and move on.

Response by LTC Jaime Franco made Mar 24 at 2016 1:37 PM

LTC Jaime Franco — Thu, 24 Mar 2016 13:37:51 -0400

If my memory serves me correctly this happen while he was Director of the CIA, as I recall he lost that position because of it. If he was retired and was not on terminal leave at the time I do not believe that he should have been reduced in Rank. For them to make any kind of Military discipline he should fall under UMCJ action.

As I recall his mishandling of classified information is extremely minor compared to what Hilliary Clinton did with her private server and then deleting large numbers of emails, which now are being recovered and shown to have been highly classified. If the American people are unintelligent enough to elect her as the next POTUS, it will show that there is an extremely difference in how people with money can manipulate the system and get away with breaking the law. At the least she should be invited and made to answer for her crimes. In my heart, I am sure that her action while Sec of State, cost America lives and if she gets into office many more American lives will be endanger.

Response by Sgt Frank Rinchich made Mar 31 at 2016 3:30 PM

Sgt Frank Rinchich — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:30:13 -0400

simple answer NO

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 4 at 2016 1:06 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 01:06:23 -0400

I think we were heard. I wrote my Congressman, who is on the Armed Services Committee. Forbes is a big Seapower supporter. My two Senators are Obamanation minions, but I write Sen Warner anyway. Tim Kaine is not worth the effort, and he wants to be Hillary's (gag) running mate.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Apr 4 at 2016 12:14 PM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 12:14:58 -0400

If he is demoted, then Hillary Rotten Clinton should go to jail

Response by CPT Joseph K Murdock made Apr 4 at 2016 3:42 PM

CPT Joseph K Murdock — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 15:42:03 -0400

Presidents who were Veterans Highest rank held by Presidents in uniformed service. George WashingtonGeneral and Commander in Chief, Continental Army1775-1783Thomas JeffersonColonel, Virginia Militia1770-1779James MadisonColonel, Virginia Militia1775-1781James MonroeMajor, Continental Army1775-1778Andrew JacksonMajor General, U.S. Army1814-1821William Henry HarrisonMajor General, Kentucky Militia1812-1814John TylerCaptain, Virginia Militia1812James K. PolkColonel, Tennessee Militia1821Zachary TaylorMajor General, U.S. Army1805-1815, 1816-1849Millard FillmoreMajor, Union Continentals (home guard)1861Franklin PierceBrigadier General, New Hampshire Militia1846-1848James BuchananPrivate, Pennsylvania Militia1814Abraham LincolnCaptain, Illinois Militia1832Andrew JohnsonBrigadier General, U.S. Army (Volunteers)1862-1865Ulysses S. GrantGeneral, U.S. Army1866-1869Rutherford B. HayesMajor General, U.S. Army (Volunteers)1861-1865James A. GarfieldMajor General, U.S. Army (Volunteers)1861-1863Chester A. ArthurBrigadier General, New York Militia1858-1863Benjamin HarrisonBrevet Brigadier General, U.S. Army (Volunteers)1862-1865William McKinleyBrevet Major, U.S. Army (Volunteers)1861-1865Theodore RooseveltColonel, U.S. Army (Volunteers)1898Harry S. TrumanColonel, Army Officer Reserve Corps1919-1945Dwight D. EisenhowerGeneral of the Army, U.S. Army1915-1948, 1951-1952John F. KennedyLieutenant, U.S. Naval Reserve1941-1945Lyndon B. JohnsonCommander, U.S. Naval Reserve1940-1964Richard M. NixonCommander, U.S. Naval Reserve1942-1966Gerald R. Ford, Jr.Lieutenant Commander, U.S. Naval Reserve1942-1946Jimmy CarterLieutenant, U.S. Navy1946-1953Ronald ReaganCaptain, U.S. Army1942-1945George BushLieutenant (junior grade), U.S. Navy1942-1945George W. BushFirst Lieutenant, Texas Air National Guard1968-1973 - See more at: http://www.va.gov/health/newsfeatures/2015/february/list-of-presidents-who-were-veterans.asp#sthash.eRwkYbgr.dpuf

List of Presidents who were Veterans

Do you know how many of our Presidents served in the military? 26 of 44. As we celebrate President's Day this month, here is a list of Presidents who are Veterans. From George Washington to George Bush.

Response by SFC Alfredo Gonzalez made Apr 4 at 2016 7:10 PM

SFC Alfredo Gonzalez — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 19:10:34 -0400

No! I will remember GEN Petraeus as the model statesman-soldier, commander of two wars, and chief intellectual author of a counterinsurgency doctrine that advances American interests. Did he F'up? Yes. Did he pay for his F'up? Absolutely!

Response by SFC Ralph E Kelley made Apr 7 at 2016 9:35 AM

SFC Ralph E Kelley — Thu, 07 Apr 2016 09:35:29 -0400

Can't do it without a courts-marshall and if he received any thing less than an a Honorable or General (no pun intended) discharge it still can't be done.

Response by SFC James Asbill made Oct 17 at 2019 6:04 PM

SFC James Asbill — Thu, 17 Oct 2019 18:04:41 -0400

Absolutely NOT .... If you are not going to prosecute the Secretary of State .... ten more than enough has been done....