100617-N-0696M-241 Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton testifies at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee on the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) and implications for national security programs on June 17, 2010 at Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C. Clinton was joined by Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, Secretary of Energy, Dr. Steven Chu and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in testimony of a new US-Russia nuclear arms treaty. (DoD photo by Mass Communication Specialist Chad J. McNeeley/Released)

THE PENTAGON — The Department of Defense is set to release new security rules later this week, making it clear that consequences for violations don’t apply equally to everyone, sources say. The revisions will make explicit what has until recently been an informal system that occasionally treated powerful people the same as peons, and, more rarely, sometimes failed to bring the wrath of God down on regular people acting out of conscience.

“When Snowden and Manning happened, releasing thousands of classified documents to civilian sources without approval, the way forward was pretty clear,” explained Col. Antonio Jimenez, who helped craft the new regulations. “Manning is in a military prison and Snowden sleeps with one eye open.”

Defense Secretary Ashton Carter says that things “get complicated” when high-level individuals start mishandling, or even deliberately leaking information to the public.

“Snowden was just a civilian analyst, and Manning was an Army private,” Carter noted. “They didn’t have a chance. Manning had the right idea, becoming a woman and all, but she did it after she was convicted, so the victim angle didn’t do her any favors. If she’d done it before she’d probably already have a book deal and a job at MSNBC.”

“When Petreaus was caught giving secret information to his mistress, my predecessors initially ignored it, because Iraq,” Carter said. “Plus she was kind of hot. Unfortunately, the new guidance from the White House says that military violations, but not political ones, must be dealt with harshly.”

Carter appointed a Committee for State Security to write new regulations to comply with the directives of the White House.

“So, we’re looking at taking a star away from him,” Jimenez said. “If he’d been a member of congress or a former first lady of the United States then it would be a different story.”

Jimenez apparently was referring to former First Lady and Senator, and current presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton.

Clinton’s use of an insecure, private server for Top Secret emails, and a complete lack of accountability, forced the Pentagon and the White House to finally address accusations that high ranking individuals are treated differently when it comes to standards for handling classified information.

“Everyone has always known that was the case,” said Jimenez. “But now we’ve clearly defined who gets away with what. If you’re a military officer you pretty much get a free pass at lieutenant general and higher. There’s a sliding scale from there down to colonel that mostly depends on who you know.”

“But we still have to nail Petraeus’ balls to the wall, because appearances.”

Jimenez discussed the progression of punishment, noting, “At the very top you can see that if you’re actually holding a Cabinet post or Congressional seat you’re also given the option to pin your own violation on someone of lesser status.”

When asked why the chart didn’t list punishments or alternatives for anyone under the rank of O-6 or GS-15, Jimenez laughed.

“Those people are still in the real military where stuff like that matters. They’re all fucked.”