13 ms·
So, regardless of whether it is illegal for a US president to discuss specific classified ISIS terror threats with another country, do you agree with me that th
by vancan1ty 9y ago
So, regardless of whether it is illegal for a US president to discuss specific classified ISIS terror threats with another country, do you agree with me that the person who leaked the ISIS terror threats to the press doubtless committed a crime detrimental to US national security under US code Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 37, Section 798 [1] (regardles of his/her intentions)?
(Notice that the law as quoted below encodes that it is the president who ultimately chooses who is authorized to share classifed information).
Quote:
"The term “unauthorized person” means any person who, or agency which, is not authorized to receive information of the categories set forth in subsection (a) of this section, by the President, or by the head of a department or agency of the United States Government which is expressly designated by the President to engage in communication intelligence activities for the United States."
[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/798 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/798
- joshmn 9y ago> regardless of whether it is illegal for a US president to discuss specific classified ISIS terror threats with another country at this point I'm convinced laws are made up. I don't think it's illegal for a President to do so, though. Just really bad. Bad. > do you agree with me that the person who leaked the ISIS terror threats to the press doubtless committed a crime detrimental to US national security under US code Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 37, Section 798 I do fully agree with you. But let's not forget that any fair Judge will look at intent for the crime as well. Not that we know the leaker's intent or anything.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> So, regardless of whether it is illegal for a US president to discuss specific classified ISIS terror threats with another country, do you agree with me that the person who leaked the ISIS terror threats to the press doubtless committed a crime detrimental to US national security under US code Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 37, Section 798 No, because public accountability of elected officials is essential, rather than prejudicial, to the safety and interests of the United States.
- dismantlethesun 9y agoSo basically no information should be secret and the public should always know exactly what Intel is being shared with allied countries during a time of war?
- tw04 9y agoIt's called whistle blower. Let me guess, Nixon wasn't the one in the wrong for Watergate, it was the people who caught him...