Quote:
Originally Posted by Von Due
I'm not going to comment on whether it was legal or illegal to share whatever he shared, simply because I have no idea about the details of what was shared. What I can say though is that, especially because it is unknown, it was unwise.
What seems clear is that the information was gotten from an allied intel organisation under agreement that the info would not be shared without the permission of the original intel organisation, as is common in that business, and if there is something that will damage the cooperation between different nations' intel, it is when trust is damaged. Regardless of legal status according to US law, this can have severe consequences on future collaboration between different nations in a time when cooperation is key to face international terrorism and organised crime.
So, right or wrong (according to US law). It was very unwise and potentially damaging to intel, US intel included.
|
You're making the assumption that whatever he said was classified. Don't you think that's a bit of a stretch given that nobody knows what information was allegedly shared? I mean I would agree with you if the story is true but so far I see nothing but phantoms and wishful thinking by a politically biased and hostile media organization.
WaPo claims they got the story from unidentified "former and current government officials". Apparently not a single person thought enough this apparent crisis to step forward and give the story authenticity, not one.
Also did you ever consider how a
former government official could possibly know what was said in this meeting? Obviously they were not there yet that doesn't stop the post from claiming them as authorities on it.
Bilge_Rat is right, it'll be about two days before this story's lack of legs causes it to crumble like every other one has before it. Not to worry though, by then the chattering classes will have moved on to the next fake outrage.