4 ms·

Sadly because of partisanship, almost everyone is worried about their "side" so they will do whatever it takes to protect them. Anyone who has security clearanc

Sadly because of partisanship, almost everyone is worried about their "side" so they will do whatever it takes to protect them. Anyone who has security clearance will tell you they would be locked up already if they even did a fraction of what she did.

lern_too_spel 10y ago
Anyone with security clearance who understands the law knows that purposely disclosing classified information like Snowden did will result in prison, while negligently allowing classified information to leak like Clinton did will just get you fired.
- Avenger42 10y ago
  > purposely disclosing classified information like Snowden did will result in prison Not necessarily. General Petraeus purposely handed over documents to his biographer / girlfriend, and he got nothing more than a slap on the wrist. It seems again to be a high court / low court thing. If you're important enough, your crimes get you lesser sentences, but if not, they throw the book at you.
  - gfodor 10y ago
    A slap on the wrist? It ended his career. (Any charges, etc, were a means to that end, but he resigned.)
    - oarsinsync 10y ago
      Compared to possible life in prison, possible capital punishment, possible gitmo, currently exiled in Russia, I'd say losing one's job is a comparative slap on the wrist
      - GVIrish 10y ago
        True, but the magnitude and scope of the disclosures were far different. One would reasonable expect the (potential) punishment to be different.
    - Avenger42 10y ago
      His public service career may have ended, but he got gigs at several private firms, as well as Harvard, Exeter, and several other universities. I think most people believe it's unlikely Clinton will serve any time for the email lapse; instead, she's considered the front-runner for the White House. On the other hand, Snowden had to flee the country and, like Assange, he may never be able to set foot in a country with the relevant extradition treaties. I think the high/low court point still stands.
      - JackFr 10y ago
        Snowdens's purpose was to undermine the intelligence apparatus of the US, while that clearly was not Petraeus's intent.
        jazzyk 10y ago
        Undermine? You mean: Disclose that the intelligence apparatus is spying on its own citizens/taxpayers who pay their salaries? There, fixed it for you.
- rqebmm 10y ago
  Not sure why you're being downvoted. Here's a corroborating source written in 2013 for the Congressional Research Service > leaks of classified information to the press have relatively infrequently been punished as crimes, and we are aware of no case in which a publisher of information obtained through unauthorized disclosure by a government employee has been prosecuted for publishing it. https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/R41404.pdf https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/R41404.pdf

lern_too_spel 10y ago

Anyone with security clearance who understands the law knows that purposely disclosing classified information like Snowden did will result in prison, while negligently allowing classified information to leak like Clinton did will just get you fired.

Avenger42 10y ago
> purposely disclosing classified information like Snowden did will result in prison Not necessarily. General Petraeus purposely handed over documents to his biographer / girlfriend, and he got nothing more than a slap on the wrist. It seems again to be a high court / low court thing. If you're important enough, your crimes get you lesser sentences, but if not, they throw the book at you.
- gfodor 10y ago
  A slap on the wrist? It ended his career. (Any charges, etc, were a means to that end, but he resigned.)
  - oarsinsync 10y ago
    Compared to possible life in prison, possible capital punishment, possible gitmo, currently exiled in Russia, I'd say losing one's job is a comparative slap on the wrist
    - GVIrish 10y ago
      True, but the magnitude and scope of the disclosures were far different. One would reasonable expect the (potential) punishment to be different.
  - Avenger42 10y ago
    His public service career may have ended, but he got gigs at several private firms, as well as Harvard, Exeter, and several other universities. I think most people believe it's unlikely Clinton will serve any time for the email lapse; instead, she's considered the front-runner for the White House. On the other hand, Snowden had to flee the country and, like Assange, he may never be able to set foot in a country with the relevant extradition treaties. I think the high/low court point still stands.
    - JackFr 10y ago
      Snowdens's purpose was to undermine the intelligence apparatus of the US, while that clearly was not Petraeus's intent.
      - jazzyk 10y ago
        Undermine? You mean: Disclose that the intelligence apparatus is spying on its own citizens/taxpayers who pay their salaries? There, fixed it for you.
rqebmm 10y ago
Not sure why you're being downvoted. Here's a corroborating source written in 2013 for the Congressional Research Service > leaks of classified information to the press have relatively infrequently been punished as crimes, and we are aware of no case in which a publisher of information obtained through unauthorized disclosure by a government employee has been prosecuted for publishing it. https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/R41404.pdf https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/R41404.pdf