Saturday, March 17 , 2018, 3:50 pm | A Few Clouds 58º


Joe Conason: A Real Email Scandal — and Trump’s Hypocrisy

For well over a year, Donald Trump ranted constantly about the woman he smeared as "Crooked Hillary," insisting that her alleged disclosures of classified information — although unintentional, harmless and ultimately deemed innocent by the FBI director — were serious felonies for which she ought to be sent to prison.

"Hillary Clinton's corruption is on a scale we have never seen before," he sputtered. "We must not let her take her criminal scheme into the Oval Office."

That Trump no longer threatens to abuse his office to prosecute her doesn't change what he or his supporters said about her supposed crimes. The ugly screams of "Lock her up!" at the Republican convention still echo.

But now Trump evidently believes that David Petraeus — who pled guilty to charges that he intentionally revealed classified information to his mistress — could be trusted to serve in the same exceptionally sensitive post that Clinton once held.

The retired general, who commanded U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan before serving as CIA director under President Obama, reportedly came very close to a felony conviction that would have sent him to prison for leaking top secrets.

Petraeus also lied to FBI agents during their investigation of his misconduct, a crime that FBI director James Comey specifically said Clinton did not commit.

FBI investigators and Justice Department prosecutors wanted to indict Petraeus, and he only escaped that humiliating fate through a plea bargain — a deal achieved, ironically enough, by David Kendall, the same Washington attorney who has long represented Bill and Hillary Clinton.

When President Obama accepted Petraeus' resignation from the CIA four years ago, the ostensible reason was the exposure of an extramarital affair with his biographer Paula Broadwell.

But then a lengthy FBI investigation revealed Petraeus had leaked classified documents to Broadwell — which were found on her computer — and that he had also given her access to his CIA email account.

The matter never went to trial, so the Justice Department presented no evidence concerning the nature of those documents or the damage their disclosure might have inflicted on U.S. national security.

Trump and other Republicans have wrongly compared Clinton's alleged offenses with those confessed by Petraeus, claiming he was treated unfairly while she escaped punishment. But the differences are enormous, and point in Clinton's favor.

Unlike her case, there was no question that Petraeus knew the leaked documents were classified — nor that he gave them intentionally to his mistress, who lacked any security clearance. His lies to the FBI constituted a separate but equally serious offense.

Last year, The New York Times reported that career prosecutors and FBI officials were angry because Petraeus was allowed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor and avoid trial, although lower-level officials whose offenses were less egregious faced much harsher treatment. In the end, he was sentenced to probation and a large fine.

We shall see whether the same FBI officials who sought to smear the Clintons before Election Day will now speak out against Petraeus — or whether they commit such violations of their oath and their duty solely for partisan aims.

Meanwhile, Trump, whose advisers are battering each other over the nation's top diplomatic post, is considering whether to appoint Petraeus to the job. As The Intercept observed, it is not even clear that the former CIA chief could qualify for the security clearances required to occupy a cabinet post.

No one doubts that Petraeus is highly qualified — and he is certainly preferable in many ways to Rudolph Giuliani, John Bolton, Mitt Romney and perhaps others whom Trump may be considering. But to float his name nevertheless represents a new peak of hypocrisy, even for Donald Trump.

Nobody should be surprised if the Senate Republicans who would have to confirm David Petraeus go along with this charade, despite their own fervent denunciations of Hillary Clinton's imaginary crimes. They are all capable of the same bogus indignation as the leader they have now embraced.

Joe Conason is editor in chief of Click here to contact him, follow him on Twitter: @JoeConason, or click here to read previous columns. The opinions expressed are his own.

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click here to get started >

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made through PayPal below, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments.

Thank you for your vital support.

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.

Daily Noozhawk

Subscribe to Noozhawk's A.M. Report, our free e-Bulletin sent out every day at 4:15 a.m. with Noozhawk's top stories, hand-picked by the editors.

Sign Up Now >