DIA analyst caught leaking to CNBC journalist

[TAZ]

You’re right. I’ve never held a TS or compartmentalized super ninja clearance. With your bruised ego mended, we can return to the subject at hand. Which is that the DIA jackass should have kept his mouth shut. The end.

There’d be no question of the reporters culpability in soliciting, receiving, distributing, transmitting, reading, or interacting with the classified data if she never got it in the first place.

There would be no question of the reporters culpability had she not tried to gain access to information she had no legal right to access. Works both ways unfortunately.

They are both guilty of breaking various laws. Him for divulging info that shouldn’t have been. Her for asking for and publishing it. We can, and SHOULD, fault them for their criminal acts.

It’s been decades since I’ve been involved with sensitive info, but it was pretty clear that what I knew needed to stay with me, if anyone tried to get that info from me I needed to tell someone and just as importantly, I shouldn’t be asking for stuff I had no valid reason to know. Not rocket surgery.

They both need to fry to the fullest extent of the law.

[LSP552]

They both need to see prison but she will probably skate. Clearly, he is too stupid to have a clearance anyway.

[wvincent]

You’re right. I’ve never held a TS or compartmentalized super ninja clearance. With your bruised ego mended, we can return to the subject at hand. Which is that the DIA jackass should have kept his mouth shut. The end.

There’d be no question of the reporters culpability in soliciting, receiving, distributing, transmitting, reading, or interacting with the classified data if she never got it in the first place.

Nothing to do with ego, bruised or otherwise.
Your statement of basically saying pound the DIA dude, buuuut, reporters gonna report ("should get a promotion") is quite possibly the dumbest thing I have seen posted this week.

In your first post you pretty much give her a pass for disseminating the classified info, and your second post you say she is culpable?

Which is it?

[GardoneVT]

Nothing to do with ego, bruised or otherwise.
Your statement of basically saying pound the DIA dude, buuuut, reporters gonna report ("should get a promotion") is quite possibly the dumbest thing I have seen posted this week.

In your first post you pretty much give her a pass for disseminating the classified info, and your second post you say she is culpable?

Which is it?

Let us review the job description of a reporter. Courtesy TalentLyft.com;

They create stories and breaking news through different channels such as radio, television, online news sites, and printed newspapers and magazines.

Looks like she did her job and then some.

Insofar as her culpability in soliciting or handling classified information,I’ll restate my post from earlier- if the DIA guy kept his mouth (and perhaps his fly) shut there’d be no story. He’s the source of the problem and should be treated accordingly.

[Wingate's Hairbrush]

...There’d be no question of the reporters culpability in soliciting, receiving, distributing, transmitting, reading, or interacting with the classified data if she never got it in the first place.

Politely, you're mistaken in this and several other comments regarding the journalistic angle here; the attempt to solicit classified information is illegal and journalists do not have professional or legal protections for it, nor for any behavior that breaks the law or encourages or directs others to do so.

Receiving, handling and publishing unsolicited material is a separate matter much more protected by legal precedent, but if it is proven that she actively targeted for and coordinated a leak that's an entirely different category of behavior and she's as much a criminal as he is and no credible news organization would stand by her actions.

[Poconnor]

I thought reporters were supposed to verify the truth and source of their information. If she was getting information from only one source shouldn’t she have questioned why?

[Wingate's Hairbrush]

I thought reporters were supposed to verify the truth and source of their information. If she was getting information from only one source shouldn’t she have questioned why?

What is being reported is that she (reporter) and he (counterterrorism analyst) were romantically involved, and he provided her classified information at her request for articles she was actively writing.

Total fuck-ups, both of them.

[wvincent]

What is being reported is that she (reporter) and he (counterterrorism analyst) were romantically involved, and he provided her classified information at her request for articles she was actively writing.

Total criminals, both of them.

Great post, fixed that one niggling detail though

[RJ]

Umm, Fuck No.

You apparently never had a TS, nor went through the associated training concerning classified intelligence. If you did have a TS with that type of mindset you are displaying, then it should have been revoked.

Knowingly receiving and disseminating classified intelligence, while not an authorized recipient, needs to have some severe repercussions.

What he said.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RJ]

Politely, you're mistaken in this and several other comments regarding the journalistic angle here; the attempt to solicit classified information is illegal and journalists do not have professional or legal protections for it, nor for any behavior that breaks the law or encourages or directs others to do so.

Receiving, handling and publishing unsolicited material is a separate matter much more protected by legal precedent, but if it is proven that she actively targeted for and coordinated a leak that's an entirely different category of behavior and she's as much a criminal as he is and no credible news organization would stand by her actions.

What he said also.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk