“unlawfully and knowingly remove[d] such documents and materials without authority and thereafter intentionally retained” them in locations unauthorized for their retention.

Even now, more than two years after his downfall, news about Petraeus’s plea deal was met, in parts of the Pentagon, with shock. Some gasped upon learning the news that the most celebrated general since 9/11 was now pleading guilty to lying to his government.

At his height, Petraeus was the public face on an unpopular war who seemingly staved off violence in Iraq, albeit temporarily. Petraeus did it, in part, by bypassing the chain of command as the Iraq commander, speaking directly to then-President George W. Bush, the media, and the American public. Military academy students and lecturers still debate his unique tactics and public persona.

Such standout conductled to a perception that the generals no longer answered to a civilian leadership. And that set off tensions between the military and its civilian leadership that remain today. In his first weeks as defense secretary, Ashton Carter has repeatedly reminded commanders and troops of the importance of the chain of command.

Neither the news that Petraeus’s name appears as the defendant on a charging sheet or that he lied to federal investigators from his Langley office shook his standing in the military community—or so it seemed.

Even those who are outraged would never publicly say so. The lingering fear that confronting Petraeus could end one’s career remains within the ranks.

Petraeus pleaded guilty to one count of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material. The deal lets Petraeus avoid a