Does Petraeus Plea Say NO Classified Info Appears in “All In”?

Sorry to be all Petraeus-centric.

But I wanted to follow up on one more detail about his plea deal, because it has been a point of discussion on whether he faces an appropriate punishment.

A number of people are saying that Paula Broadwell did not publish any classified information that David Petraeus shared with her.

Do we actually know that?

I’m not sure whether we know that to be true or not. What the plea deal says (and unless I’m mistaken, all it says) is that she did not publish any information from his Black Books, those notebooks full of code word intelligence and covert operatives identities and deliberative conversations with NSC.

No classified information from the Black Books appeared in the aforementioned biography.

That’s different from saying that he did not share and she did not publish any classified information.

This plea deal, as all plea deals I’ve seen do, notes that not everything known is in the plea deal.

This Factual Basis does not attempt to set forth all the facts known to the United States at this time.

The early stories on this leak suggested that FBI saw things in their emails and in things seized from her home that suggested he had shared classified information with Broadwell. The Black Books were likely the most classified thing he shared with her (one would hope), but that leaves open the possibility that he shared a lot less classified information (which would be less problematic to share with a Reserve Officer, but not if she published it).

I don’t know one way or another. But unless I’m mistaken, neither does anyone else, based on the public record. Clearly DOJ wanted to set Petraeus up with a sweet plea deal, which it did. That would have been a lot harder to do if it also admitted that Broadwell’s book included classified information she got from him.

To some degree it doesn’t matter (after all, Leon Panetta got away with classified information too!). But I just want to note that I, for one, don’t actually know whether Broadwell published any information that was classified.

Update: This piece seems to suggest there may be a good deal of classified information in Broadwell’s book. It shows that Broadwell sourced some key discussions from June 2011 involving National Security Council discussions to an interview with Petraeus the day after he retrieved his Black Books which would have included descriptions of those discussions.

image_print
7 replies
  1. phred says:

    Fwiw, “from” and “about” are not the same. You say,
    “she did not publish any information from”
    .
    but the highlighted quote says,
    “No classified information about the Black Books appeared”
    .
    The latter seems to leave a lot more wiggle room for interpretation. However, I have not read the plea deal, perhaps the context makes it clear that “from” and “about” are the same in this instance.

    • bloopie2 says:

      The correct quote, as see in the documents that appear when you click on the link above, is this (from Paragraph 25 of the Factual Basis portion): “No classified information from the Black Books appeared in the aforementioned biography.” So, although the quote in the article above is incorrect, the discussion thereon is, it seems, correct.

  2. earlofhuntingdon says:

    As George Smiley replied to Roddy Martindale, when asked whether his former boss kept any secrets from him, “I don’t know. That’s the point about secrets.”

  3. wallace says:

    quote”To some degree it doesn’t matter (after all, Leon Panetta got away with classified information too!). But I just want to note that I, for one, don’t actually know whether Broadwell published any information that was classified.”unquote

    To some degree it doesn’t matter ..after all..the rule of law is just a myth, right? I mean, you just said so your self emptywheel..ie..”Leon Panetta got away with classified information too!”

    sheeezusHfuckingchrist.. bartender..give me whatever the DOJ is drinking and a chaser of whatever the CIA is spiking it with.

  4. OSS says:

    I don’t know about the book, but she did let it slip that the CIA annex in Benghazi was being used to house a couple of detainees:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xn_TACkSVLs

    I think that at this point(10/26/2012) the official point was that the CIA wasn’t involved, even though we had seen a Congressional poster with “CIA Annex” on it by that point.

Comments are closed.