WASHINGTON (AP) — Attorney General Eric Holder isn’t saying whether he still will be on the job when the time comes to decide whether to bring charges in the investigation of former CIA Director David Petraeus.
Holder, in several television news interviews on Sunday, steered clear of commenting directly on the investigation.
But he told CBS’ “Face the Nation” that he expects that “a matter of this magnitude” would be decided “at the highest level” of the department.
Holder has announced he’s stepping down as attorney general. President Barack Obama has nominated a federal prosecutor, Loretta Lynch, who awaits Senate confirmation.
Federal investigators have been looking into whether Petraeus improperly shared classified materials with his biographer, Paula Broadwell.
Petraeus admitted having an affair with her when he resigned from the CIA in 2012.
Holder said on ABC’s “This Week” that “any investigation that is ongoing will be done in a fair and an appropriate way.”
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the former head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, urged the government to take a pass.
“This man has suffered enough, in my view,” Feinstein, D-Calif., told CNN’s “State of the Union.”
Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Conservatives shouldn’t be mixing business with pleasure and act surprised when it comes back to haunt them. Aside from the obvious family values hypocrisy, in this case it was horrible national security. Sharing government secrets could have helped make his Surge strategy not work in two countries for all we know. I bet his emails to this woman alone gave up way too much info to anyone hacking around.
I’m all for “giving him a pass” as recommended by the shameless war profiteer Diane “Chicken Hawk” Feinstein. But only if Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden are pardoned.
Apparently too much blood drained from his brain down to the region of little David, leading him to do something incredibly stupid. Funny though, how the standard for prosecution changes when it is one of the elite insiders (who may also know where all of the Iraq War bodies are buried).
I always thought that the standard for prosecution was based on whether an actual crime was committed, not on who the alleged criminal might be. I guess that idea is foolish.
Not clear on how a senator gets to decide that a crime doesn’t need to be prosecuted because the criminal has “been through enough.”
Pretty sure that’s what judges and juries are for.
Sharing classified military information with one’s mistress on an unsecured personal computer? And Dianne Feinstein thinks he’s “suffered enough”? Wow, that’s “National Security” for ya!