Why do we allow our leaders to escape from responsibility? I was taught that as your position ascends, so does your need to be circumspect in actions taken. Now it seems that we are told to “cut some slack” for leaders who go astray or allow others to take the fall or pay for the costs of irresponsibility.

General Patraeus leaked classified information, but rather than expect someone with rank to know better, we forgive him because he was high ranking and had previously held positions of power. Was he successful in his prior endeavors? History will tell, but they did save him from jail.

UBS launder’s murderous drug cartel money and receives only fines paid by shareholders and tax payers. No one responsible went to jail.

Hillary Clinton uses a server in her Husband’s office for official email. Could you do that at your job? Would your employer allow that? Do you know any employer that would allow that? No, I don’t either. Yet Hillary thinks she can explain it away with umbrage and lies about limits on phones she wants to carry. If you think you should be able to operate in secret as a cabinet secretary, what would you think you should be able to do as president?

The troops at Abu Ghraib who mistreated prisoners went to jail. No one in the chain of command did. The same chain of command that works so well mitigating sexual assaults.

Prosecutors, police and civil servants expect complete indemnification for official wrong-doing – where are those higher standards? When I was a young man in the army, I was trained as a military policeman. The guiding principle was that in order to “police” others, our own behavior had to be above reproach. With our authority came responsibility and the need to adhere to the highest standards.