The curious nexus of Hillary Clinton, David Petraeus and Paula Broadwell

By 10 Comments 3,365 views

Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton delivers dinner remarks at EMILY's List 30th Anniversary Gala in Washington March 3, 2015. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas (UNITED STATES - Tags: POLITICS) - RTR4RYS4


A revelation coming out of Hillary Clinton’s emails was her keen interest in the Presidential ambitions of one General David Petraeus:

“Clemons had dinner this week with Petraeus, who freely talked about running for president,” Blumenthal wrote to Clinton.

“Will he write about Petraeus?” Clinton wrote back five minutes later.

Moments later, Blumenthal sent Clinton Clemons’ post mentioning the off-the-record dinner and discussing the relative political merits of Petraeus, Vice President Joe Biden and Clinton herself.

“Clemons… told me more detail about [Petraeus’] attitude and interest,” Blumenthal said, adding a couple of nuggets.

Within four months someone decided to throw a wrench into the spokes of Petraeus’ bicycle to the delight of Clinton:

Clinton’s top communications adviser, Philippe Reines, opined that the new assignment would be seen as a way to take Petraeus, said to describe himself as a Rockefeller Republican, out of contention as a potential presidential candidate in 2012.

According to Reines, this would “lock up” Petraeus:

“My bet on the direction this now takes is two fronts 1) does Petreaus make any big changes; can he do in Afghanistan what he did in Iraq; his health; political benefits of locking him up like Huntsman,” Reines wrote to top Clinton advisers, referring to perceptions that Huntsman was out of the running for 2012 because he accepted an appointment from Obama to be U.S. Ambassador to China. The email was later forwarded to Clinton by her chief of staff, Cheryl Mills.

Not long afterward an affair between Petraeus and Paula Broadwell was uncovered and Petraeus was taken out of the Presidential picture.

Comparisons have been drawn between the actions of Petraeus and Clinton. These comparisons were dismissed by Petraeus prosecutor Anne Tompkins:

As the former U.S. attorney for the Western District of North Carolina, I oversaw the prosecution of Gen. Petraeus, and I can say, based on the known facts, this comparison has no merit. The key element that distinguishes Secretary Clinton’s email retention practices from Petraeus’ sharing of classified information is that Petraeus knowingly engaged in unlawful conduct, and that was the basis of his criminal liability.

Of course she sees no merit. She is a Hillary Clinton supporter and campaign donor– to the max:

Noted at the bottom of the op-ed, Tompkins is a donor to Clinton’s presidential campaign. According to Federal Election Commission data, she gifted $2,700–the maximum amount–to Hillary for America in June after the email controversy broke. She also made contributions to Clinton’s failed 2008 bid for the Democratic nomination.

Broadwell was under investigation for “improperly” trying to access Petraeus’ email and “gaining access to classified information.”

Didn’t you ever wonder what happened to those charges?

They went nowhere. Why?

Paula Broadwell, who was a military intelligence officer at the time, had the security clearance to review the information she had.

She was stripped of that clearance for “storing classified military material at her home.” Ultimately, that’s what brought Petraeus down as well. I know someone else who was storing classified intelligence at her home. And in a toilet closet.

The difference? I don’t see any. Clinton’s current defense is that she is an idiot who can’t recognize classified information despite being specifically briefed on doing so.

Then there’s the issue of her ordering her underlings not to use private emails for official business.

Then there’s issue of Clinton asserting that the use of secret email accounts was treasonous.

Then there’s the issue of her asserting that there was no classified information on her server.

Then there’s the issue of her sucking at math (one blackberry plus one I-pad equals one device)

There sure are a lot of issues.

In just another one of those Cosmic Clinton Coincidences a potential adversary is dealt a political death blow. Hillary Clinton did have classified information stored at her home, just as Petraeus and Broadwell did. She violated the rules and should be treated no differently, i.e. disqualification for higher office and loss of security clearance. As they say at Think Progress, ignorance of the law is not a defense.

Exit question: How the hell is it more convenient (to carry one device!) to establish a private home email server complete with the installation both in home and in commode than it would have been to let the IT people at State do it all for you?

Likely answer: Many of the deleted emails were related to the Clinton Foundation, which shared the same IP address. Can’t have any of that quid pro quo stuff getting out.

The sheer disdain the Clinton’s have for others is breathtaking. They really think everyone else is stupid. They think they are better than you and are above all the rules.

Second exit question: How did top secret classified information even get onto the Clinton server?

Whoever sent it there is in violation of the Espionage Act.

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

10 Responses to “The curious nexus of Hillary Clinton, David Petraeus and Paula Broadwell”

  1. 1


    Well personally I wished that General David Petraeus had been a damn site more discreet if nothing else…

    My real question is, why isn’t this Republican congress at least pushing publicly for a contempt citation against Shrillary the Hag?

    Is there some sort of RI NO stoppage involved?

  2. 2


    @juandos: Personally i think they are following the old dictum of not going after royalty… ie. we wont clobber you if you dont clobber us… a version of, if we fight, and we get your kid, we will ransom him instead of putting his head on a pike, and you can do that too, and us elite people will just use others while staying safe ourselves.

  3. 3

    another vet

    Those of us who have handled classified information know that we would have been removed from our positions and punished, possibly criminally, for what Hillary did. I saw people have their clearances revoked for less than what she did.

  4. 4

    james raider

    Likely answer: Many of the deleted emails were related to the Clinton Foundation, which shared the same IP address. Can’t have any of that quid pro quo stuff getting out.

    DrJohn, . . . it is also evident that she didn’t trust Obama/Jarrett and did not want them to have access to any of her communications.

    She put the Nation and its interests at risk. She also didn’t want Obama/Jarrett to have “blackmail” evidence against her on the obvious conflict of interest — working for her pretend-foundation, while working for the taxpayers in the second-most powerful position in America. This is a pathetic stain on America, allowed to persist by an ideologically blinded media, and a fearful Congress.

    Plus, if she is guilty, so is Obama. Clinton knew. Obama knew. Jarrett knew. Holder knew. That’s called “guilty”.

  5. 5


    The Hillaroids are running out of times they can say “This doesn’t matter” without looking foolish to anyone but their fellow worshippers of this inexplicably popular, extremely boring, and apparently sociopathic person.

  6. 6


    While she was secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton wrote and sent at least six e-mails using her private server that contained what government officials now say is classified information, according to thousands of e-mails released by the State Department.

    The classified e-mails, contained in thousands of pages of electronic correspondence that the State Department has released, stood out because of the heavy markings blocking out sentences and, in some cases, entire messages.

    All told, 188 of the e-mails the State Department has released contain classified material.

    then here comes you know who to say no.

    then we will point out that one of the emails is about north korean nukes, which is never declassified…e ven google maps blots that stuff out…

    But it also highlights concerns raised by Clinton and her supporters that identifying classified material can be a confusing process, and well-meaning public officials reviewing the same material could come to different conclusions as to its classification level.

    only leftist idiots who cant drive, operate a fax machine, cheat constantly having to make excuses, shirk their jobs, and pretend ignorance on top of idiocy have that problem… here is the rule… when in doubt, have the office in charge of classification that is supposed to get a copy of everything make the determination… get a clue…
    One e-mail Clinton wrote in October 2009 was addressed to former senator George J. Mitchell (D-Maine), who was a special envoy for peace in the Middle East. The entire message, as released by the State Department, is blacked out and tagged with a designation noting that the information was classified. The only part now public is Clinton’s opening: “George . . . .”


    Another note went from Clinton to Melanne Verveer, who was ambassador for global women’s issues, on Dec. 9, 2010. It was entirely withheld from release. The subject line reads, “Re: latest . . .,” with the rest redacted, making it impossible to discern the topic of the exchange.

  7. 7

    another vet

    @Artfldgr: Fret not, the leftist puppets will still claim there is nothing to see here and that she did nothing wrong. Ask them about what their qualifications and background are to make the statement and they will simply tell you it doesn’t matter.

  8. 8


    The real Achilles Heel for Hillary lies in these emails. She’s not the bright, strong woman she proclaims to be. Her leadership at State is uninspiring, there is no singular event or policy accomplishment that says, “it advances US interests in multiples.” The strong woman, the emails reveal her pettiness. Sounds awfully familiar.

    @another vet #3 –

    I heard of one guy who forgot to put the top secret document he was reviewing back into its folder, he had to face a Captain’s Mast (Article 15). He was reduced in rank, forfeit of one month’s pay, and stripped of his clearance. He was able to regain a “confidential” clearance about 20 months later.

  9. 9


    @Artfldgr: “Personally i think they are following the old dictum of not going after royalty“…

    You raise an interesting and probably valid point… Yet I was under the impression that the Republican victories in 2014 was to fight that…

    Silly me…

  10. 10

    Scott in Oklahoma

    I may have missed something in the email deal. Nobody ever mentions the possibility that there were other communications outside of our government agencies, between Hillary and who knows? Back-door deals, promises made; emails that wouldn’t be saved by our government employees because they weren’t involved in the email chains. I’m thinking that is some of what she may be hiding….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *