In response to: "could be interpreted as a violation of his oath of office" The oath of office of the president of the united states is as follows: "I do solem

In response to: "could be interpreted as a violation of his oath of office" The oath of office of the president of the united states is as follows: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." [1] There is nothing in this oath about the president not having the ability to make a judgement call over what national security information to share with an ally in a given conflict. Nor does the constitution say anything on the matter. Whenever we get into "could be interpreted territory" with no basis in the letter of the document we are getting in to the territory where we let our prejudices decide our verdict. This unfortunately seems to be the trend across American political discussion today. Whether this was a good call or bad call by the president, neither you nor I are really in a position to say, as we both know that we are getting an incomplete and politically motivated leak without full context of the discussions. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_office_of_the_President_of_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_office_of_the_Presiden... [2] http://constitutionus.com http://constitutionus.com