PDA

View Full Version : Do you think people who leak sensitive information should be fired?



genglandoh
05-25-2017, 01:57 PM
So far we have seen many leaks about private conversations of POTUS and other sensitive information.
The latest has been leaking information about the Manchester Bombing.

POTUS has asked for a DOJ investigation.

Title: President Trump calls for DOJ investigation into alleged Manchester leak
President Trump on Thursday called for a Department of Justice investigation into an alleged leak of British intelligence information from its investigation into the Manchester bombing.
In a statement sent out upon his arrival at the NATO Leaders Summit in Brussels, President Trump called the alleged leaks -- which he says were from "government agencies" -- "deeply troubling."
"These leaks have been going on for a long time and my Administration will get to the bottom of this," Trump said. "The leaks of sensitive information pose a grave threat to our national security."
Link: http://abcnews.go.com/International/president-trump-calls-doj-investigation-alleged-manchester-leak/story?id=47636989

TomF
05-25-2017, 02:02 PM
Obama thought so.

Keith Wilson
05-25-2017, 02:03 PM
Oh, you mean like Mr Trump and his blurts to Duterte and the Russian ambassador? We have a president who has demonstrated over and over again that he couldn't find his a$$ in two weeks using both hands, a set of directions, a seeing-eye dog, a GPS, and a map, and you're blathering on about leaks?? Really? For the love of God, man, stop digging!!

birlinn
05-25-2017, 02:03 PM
Yes.
Starting with Trump.

Jimmy W
05-25-2017, 02:03 PM
You mean like the location of subs and secret info?

ljb5
05-25-2017, 02:07 PM
Well, geng, what do you think?

And how has your thinking on this subject changed over the last year?

LeeG
05-25-2017, 02:07 PM
Do you think a president who repeatedly lies should stay in office?

Figment
05-25-2017, 02:11 PM
I rather think that people who leak sensitive information WANT to be fired.

John of Phoenix
05-25-2017, 02:11 PM
Remarkable.

:D LMAO :D

Garret
05-25-2017, 02:12 PM
Yes.
Starting with Trump.

^ This

BrianY
05-25-2017, 02:12 PM
Yes of course they should.

Jim Bow
05-25-2017, 02:13 PM
I hope the investigation starts with the Manchester police. UK police departments have quite a lengthy history of colluding with the press.

Phillip Allen
05-25-2017, 02:54 PM
Do you think a president who repeatedly lies should stay in office?

Bill Clinton thought so...

oznabrag
05-25-2017, 02:58 PM
Yes. Donald F Trump should be fired.

Norman Bernstein
05-25-2017, 03:04 PM
Do you think people who leak sensitive information should be fired?



It might be worth first considering WHY someone would leak... what their intention was.

Treason?
Conscience?
Braggadocio?

birlinn
05-25-2017, 03:21 PM
It might be worth first considering WHY someone would leak... what their intention was.

Treason?
Conscience?
Braggadocio?
You missed off 'money'.

Canoeyawl
05-25-2017, 03:47 PM
Would you consider it a "leak" if a police officer told a reporter (or an investigator, or judge) that he saw his partner deliberately kill a civilian, or would you consider it worthy of a commendation?

We could talk about Valery Plame I guess...

elf
05-25-2017, 03:57 PM
It certainly would be interesting to know why. Considering how tight the Trump family is you would think they would only retain staff upon whom they could rely without question. Considering how divisive the Trump program is, you would think presenting an immaculately united front would be essential to Kushner and Bannon.

So perhaps the problem is between Kushner and Bannon, and each has their staff tattling to the press on the other.

Bannon has been clear about his goals - the destruction of the administrative state at the Federal level - and it syncs precisely with those of Ryan and McConnell. Trump, obviously, has no goals except to enrich himself and cover his ass and be admired. I suppose it's reasonable to conclude that Kushner and Trump are together on that, although Kushner may not be at all concerned with having his self-image stroked all the time.

So perhaps what we're seeing is the struggle to keep Trump around just long enough to enact McConnell and Ryan's policy goals, which some other Regressives have long since admitted is their intent.

The thing that discourages me about the whole mess is how blind the mainstream press seems to be to the whole story. I think it's completely irresponsible of the press to not continuously tie every bit of news to Bannon/Ryan/McConnell's goals. The destruction of the administrative state at the Federal level should be the only topic of reportage in the national and local press.

American voters need to see just what it is that their elected representatives are either trying to accomplish or trying to head off, not necessarily in the details of loss of health insurance/social safety net/environmental protection etc.

The big picture seems to be what most Americans are not seeing in the constant reportage and punditry.

Hugh Conway
05-25-2017, 04:07 PM
It certainly would be interesting to know why. Considering how tight the Trump family is you would think they would only retain staff upon whom they could rely without question. Considering how divisive the Trump program is, you would think presenting an immaculately united front would be essential to Kushner and Bannon.

So perhaps the problem is between Kushner and Bannon, and each has their staff tattling to the press on the other. Nope. Donald's so dysfunctional and thin skinned he won't listen to positions in meetings or ever appear wrong. He will, however, listen to the TV and news. So his staff leaks information to get it to the Donald's attention.

SKIP KILPATRICK
05-25-2017, 04:15 PM
Fired?? I think the word you were looking for is impeached.


In that case.....Yes!

John Smith
05-25-2017, 04:24 PM
I think it definitely depends on the nature of the leak. A leak that undermines our national security is one thing. A leak that prevents the undermining of our national security is another thing.

Phillip Allen
05-25-2017, 06:01 PM
Yes. Donald F Trump should be fired.

should Clinton have been fired?

CWSmith
05-25-2017, 06:04 PM
Why do I think that this thread will circle back to Hillary Clinton? Is this a good time to mention that some of the critical "emails" have now been discredited, or is it too soon? I forget this dance.

Phillip Allen
05-25-2017, 06:17 PM
Why do I think that this thread will circle back to Hillary Clinton? Is this a good time to mention that some of the critical "emails" have now been discredited, or is it too soon? I forget this dance.

guilty conscience? :)

CWSmith
05-25-2017, 06:20 PM
guilty conscience? :)

Contempt and disappointment with the right.

Phillip Allen
05-25-2017, 06:26 PM
Contempt and disappointment with the right.

I don't doubt that at all... regardless of the event (or no event at all) you would have felt the same :)

Cuyahoga Chuck
05-25-2017, 06:53 PM
It depends on what you mean by "sensitive". If what you mean are leaks of the Trump White House I say God love 'em.

Garret
05-25-2017, 07:34 PM
should Clinton have been fired?

For telling the Russians secrets & where they were obtained? For leaking info on the Manchester bomber?

Unproven molehills vs. proven mountains...

oznabrag
05-25-2017, 07:41 PM
I don't doubt that at all... regardless of the event (or no event at all) you would have felt the same :)

While the reasons you do NOT remain obscure.

oznabrag
05-25-2017, 07:42 PM
should Clinton have been fired?

For what?

Phillip Allen
05-25-2017, 08:32 PM
For telling the Russians secrets & where they were obtained? For leaking info on the Manchester bomber?

Unproven molehills vs. proven mountains...

more liberal exceptionalism?

TomF
05-25-2017, 08:36 PM
more liberal exceptionalism?
It would indeed be exceptional to fire someone for a cause you ell not specify.

Phillip Allen
05-25-2017, 08:39 PM
It would indeed be exceptional to fire someone for a cause you ell not specify.

lying was already specified...

Garret
05-25-2017, 08:40 PM
more liberal exceptionalism?

Huh? What did she leak? Not accusations of leaking something - but something she actually leaked?

leikec
05-25-2017, 09:33 PM
should Clinton have been fired?

Yes, and he was 10 times better than President Trump. Clinton is a smarmy pr*ckwad, but he was a competent president.

Jeff C

Lew Barrett
05-26-2017, 12:20 AM
Let's try this:

Phillip, do you think Trump will acknowledge being warned about Flynn, or will he continue to deny any knowledge and go on lying about being informed that Flynn was a bad actor? Is it OK for a POTUS to lie multiple times every day?

oznabrag
05-26-2017, 07:55 AM
There are those who believe that a SCROTUS lying continuously, non-stop, without surcease is just fine and dandy, just so long as the lying irritates 'liberals', and his name is not 'Clinton'.

ljb5
05-26-2017, 08:15 AM
should Clinton have been fired?

Are you still hung up about that little bit of oral sex?

Sheesh, Phillip, you're an adult now. I think it's time someone sat you down and told you about the birds and the bees.

Honestly, you're like a ten year old who gets grossed out if there's a kissing scene in a movie.

It's been twenty years. It didn't affect you. It wasn't an issue of national security.

Get over it.

beernd
05-26-2017, 11:53 AM
I think people who leak sensitive information should get a slap on the wrist . .










































And then be skinned a live and then be quartered.

Everybody happy now?
If I may rephrase the question : "Should anybody who endangers the safety of his(her)country stay in the position to continue to do so?"

Personnaly , I don't think they should.:rolleyes:

johnw
05-26-2017, 12:11 PM
Leaks have been part of how Washington does business for a very long time. Some have been fired for leaking particularly sensitive information, but most understand the informal rules well enough to stay within bounds.

The problem with a blanket statement that people should be fired for leaks is, then all the administration has to do is classify any information about its own wrongdoing, and no one would ever know unless someone was willing to sacrifice their career.

ljb5
05-26-2017, 02:39 PM
The real question we should be asking is why Trump and so many people in his administration are leaking information.

The way I see it, there are three possibilities:


To advance and/or protect US interests. (i.e, to blow the whistle on something the government is doing wrong.)
To advance and/or protect self interest or the interests of others not supported by official US policy (i.e., to be a double-agent or a weasle.)
Because they lack the maturity and discipline to handle information properly (i.e, to be a braggart or blow-hard.)


Before we can answer the question posed in the thread title, I think we need to determine which of these three scenarios we are seeing.

LeeG
05-26-2017, 03:00 PM
Or "do you think presidential appointees who spread disinformation should be fired?"

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/epa-scott-pruitt-climate-change-denial-scientific-paper-nature-scientific-reports-a7754871.html

In a sign of growing tensions between scientists and the Trump administration, researchers have published a scientific paper that was conceived and written as an explicit refutation to an assertion by Environmental Protection Agency administrator Scott Pruitt about climate change.

The study, in the journal Nature Scientific Reports, sets up a direct test of a claim by Pruitt, made in written Senate comments following his confirmation hearing, that “over the past two decades satellite data indicates there has been a leveling off of warming.”

After reviewing temperature trends contained in three satellite data sets going back to 1979, the paper concludes that the data sets show a global warming trend — and that Pruitt was incorrect.
.
.
In the end, Santer argued, scientists should fact-check politicians even if they’re at a disadvantage when it comes to how long it takes to do so.

“These claims were made in the U.S. Senate, in a confirmation,” said Santer. “It takes time however to set the record straight, to do due diligence, to do the research necessary to address the claims.

"And one would hope that the scientific response receives at least some token amount of attention, and that the original incorrect claim does not dominate the public discourse on these critically important issues.”

Phillip Allen
05-27-2017, 03:14 AM
this guy got fired then pardoned by the president... worth reading

http://www.ww2pacific.com/congmay.html

Hallam
05-27-2017, 06:27 AM
The real question we should be asking is why Trump and so many people in his administration are leaking information.

The way I see it, there are three possibilities:


To advance and/or protect US interests. (i.e, to blow the whistle on something the government is doing wrong.)
To advance and/or protect self interest or the interests of others not supported by official US policy (i.e., to be a double-agent or a weasle.)
Because they lack the maturity and discipline to handle information properly (i.e, to be a braggart or blow-hard.)


Before we can answer the question posed in the thread title, I think we need to determine which of these three scenarios we are seeing.

There is one commentator I'm aware of who thinks it is 1. To advance and/or protect US interests. ( as they see it ) and a large part of #1 inevitably involves #2, self interest!
This commentator is Professor Steven Cohan, professor emeritus of Russian studies at Princeton University and New York University.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_F._Cohen
Cohen is married to (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_F._Cohen)Katrina vanden Heuvel (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katrina_vanden_Heuvel), editor of the progressive (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_progressivism) magazine The Nation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nation), where he is also a contributing editor. Cohen is also the founding director of the reestablished American Committee for East-West Accord (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Committee_for_East-West_Accord).


I think its well worth having a thorough look at what he has to say on the subject, and how his peers critique his arguments.
I have only recently come across his opinions and work in this area so will be giving it a good work out. What im saying here is from a quick overview and might have some inaccuracies by using my own words etc.
His basic position is that the Meeting Trump had with the Russki's was not as out of line as the commentators are making it to be and the leaks where deliberately designed to Damage Trump by leaking half truths out of context. The meetings purpose was to move toward co operation with Russia in response to Militant Islamists. He asserts that Obama had meetings to peruse a similar agenda.
Proff Cohen maintains there is a lot of anti Russian hyperbole verging on hysteria from the Anti Russia camp with in USA, John McCain, Intelligence agencies, CIA, FBI etc and they are hell bent on preventing any thawing of relationships with USSR and are strongly polemic.
It is worth saying that Steven Cohan is not a Trump voter and dislikes many if not most of his Presidency so far. While he has been labeled Left he no longer sees the Left / Right divide as valid and all encompassing in the pigeon hole options that dominate public debate.

woodpile
05-27-2017, 08:25 AM
They should plant moles to root out the leeks, they eliminated two in the garden already.

Peerie Maa
05-27-2017, 09:26 AM
I have to wonder whether the US has its own version of the Official Secrets Act.

This is pertinent

3 International relations.(1)A person who is or has been a Crown servant or government contractor is guilty of an offence if without lawful authority he makes a damaging disclosure of—
(a)any information, document or other article relating to international relations; or
(b)any confidential information, document or other article which was obtained from a State other than the United Kingdom or an international organisation,
being information or a document or article which is or has been in his possession by virtue of his position as a Crown servant or government contractor.
(2)For the purposes of subsection (1) above a disclosure is damaging if—
(a)it endangers the interests of the United Kingdom abroad, seriously obstructs the promotion or protection by the United Kingdom of those interests or endangers the safety of British citizens abroad; or
(b)it is of information or of a document or article which is such that its unauthorised disclosure would be likely to have any of those effects.

genglandoh
06-05-2017, 09:32 PM
Title: NSA contractor accused of leaking top secret report on Russian hacking efforts
A federal contractor was arrested over the weekend and accused of leaking a classified report containing "Top Secret level" information on Russian hacking efforts during the 2016 presidential election.
Reality Leigh Winner, 25, appeared in U.S. District Court in Augusta, Ga., to face one charge of removing classified material from a government facility and mailing it to a news outlet, the Justice Department said Monday.
Link: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/05/nsa-contractor-accused-leaking-top-secret-report-on-russian-hacking-efforts.html

genglandoh
07-26-2017, 06:02 AM
Well it looks like some will be put in the hot seat soon for their leaking of sensitive information.

Title: Sessions to announce investigations into intelligence leaks: source
Link: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/26/sessions-to-announce-investigations-into-intelligence-leaks-source.html

John Smith
07-26-2017, 06:40 AM
Bill Clinton thought so...

Can you make a list of Bill Clinton lies? My sister-in-law couldn't.

ljb5
07-26-2017, 09:33 AM
Well it looks like some will be put in the hot seat soon for their leaking of sensitive information.

Title: Sessions to announce investigations into intelligence leaks: source
Link: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/26/sessions-to-announce-investigations-into-intelligence-leaks-source.html


What's your point? I'm pretty sure every administration since the beginning of time has had a policy of cracking down on leaks of sensitive intelligence information. Sessions isn't doing anything other than what is normal practice.

But these aren't the leaks that Trump and Scaramucci are complaining about. Trump is more concerned about leaks from staffers in his own White House spilling embarrassing (but not classified) information about the inner workings of the White House. Scaramucci specifically talked about firing members of the White House communications office.

Just the other day, Scaramucci complained about a leak to the press. Turns out, he'd actually informed the press himself on the record (http://www.salon.com/2017/07/25/anthony-scaramucci-doesnt-understand-how-leaking-works/)

You think Jeff Sessions is going to investigate that? Or you think maybe you're trying to bark up two different trees at the same time?

genglandoh
08-06-2017, 09:09 AM
I hope they catch the person who leaked this information to the press.
They should be fired, prosecuted and spend a few years in jail.

Title: Leaked Trump transcripts the latest risk to US diplomacy
Leaked transcripts of presidential calls aren’t just embarrassing to Donald Trump. They could undermine faith in Washington’s ability to protect confidential conversations and intelligence, and have a chilling effect on American diplomacy.
In the latest and perhaps most egregious sign of a U.S. administration that can’t keep a lid on its private deliberations, The Washington Post this week published a written record of phone conversations between Trump and the leaders of Mexico and Australia. The talks took place soon after Trump’s January inauguration.
Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/leaked-trump-transcripts-the-latest-risk-to-us-diplomacy/2017/08/04/3c4fb1a6-7950-11e7-8c17-533c52b2f014_story.html?utm_term=.2afb5a82a39f

McMike
08-06-2017, 09:18 AM
Fired; yes. Prosecuted: only if the leak reveals highly secret information that puts people in danger and compromises our relationships and dealings with our enemies and allies. That would require that Trump be fired and then, prosecuted.

Garret
08-06-2017, 09:45 AM
Highly secret like NH being a drug infested den? How would we know that was so if it hadn't been leaked?

With a normal president, I'd agree about prosecution - but with this phenomenal liar, we really need to know what he's saying to people. Of course with a normal president, they wouldn't have to leak for him to notice it.

genglandoh
10-15-2018, 10:55 PM
I expect more will come.

Title: Ex-Senate aide pleads guilty to lying to the FBI in leak probe
A former Senate aide who became the focus of a leak investigation entered a guilty plea on Monday to lying to federal investigators about his contacts with reporters.
Former Senate Intelligence Committee Security Director James Wolfe, 57, admitted to a single felony count of making a false statement in the course of a federal investigation.
Link: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/10/15/ex-senate-aide-pleads-guilty-900592

gypsie
10-15-2018, 11:44 PM
I do not think people who leak sensitive information should be fired in all cases.
We have a royal commission proceeding at the moment, into banks. If whistle blowers (leaking in the public interest) were rewarded, we wouldn't have to spend millions, of public money, exposing the extraordinary corruption of the rentier class.

Public interest should be a consideration.


And there are many situations where they should be jailed.


Reducing everything to a binary is such a $h!t way to think.
Do you think exploring life would be more rewarding if your questions had nuance?

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
10-16-2018, 12:08 AM
24490

genglandoh
10-17-2018, 07:08 PM
Title: Treasury employee charged with leaking financial info on Trump team was arrested with flash drive in hand, prosecutors say
The top Treasury Department employee who was charged Wednesday with leaking confidential financial documents pertaining to former Trump officials was apprehended the previous evening with a flash drive containing the allegedly pilfered information in her hand, prosecutors said in court papers.
The dramatic arrest late Tuesday came on the heels of other high-profile, leak-related prosecutions under the Trump administration, which has pledged to go on the offensive against leakers that the president has called "traitors and cowards."
Natalie Mayflower Sours Edwards, 40, a senior official at the department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), is accused of illegally giving a reporter bank reports documenting several suspicious financial transactions, known as Suspicious Activity Reports (“SARs”), from October 2017 to the present.
Link: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/treasury-employee-charged-with-leaking-financial-info-of-trump-team

S.V. Airlie
10-17-2018, 07:12 PM
So far we have seen many leaks about private conversations of POTUS and other sensitive information.
The latest has been leaking information about the Manchester Bombing.

POTUS has asked for a DOJ investigation.

Title: President Trump calls for DOJ investigation into alleged Manchester leak
President Trump on Thursday called for a Department of Justice investigation into an alleged leak of British intelligence information from its investigation into the Manchester bombing.
In a statement sent out upon his arrival at the NATO Leaders Summit in Brussels, President Trump called the alleged leaks -- which he says were from "government agencies" -- "deeply troubling."
"These leaks have been going on for a long time and my Administration will get to the bottom of this," Trump said. "The leaks of sensitive information pose a grave threat to our national security."
Link: http://abcnews.go.com/International/president-trump-calls-doj-investigation-alleged-manchester-leak/story?id=47636989So geng, do you think Trump should be fired then. He leaked classified information to the Russian Ambassador.

S.V. Airlie
10-17-2018, 07:14 PM
Or this geng!

At a Manhattan fundraiser last week, President Trump told a group of wealthy supporters about a battle in Syria that saw the U.S. military kill between 100 and 300 Russians, Politico reports (https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/29/trump-bragged-about-classified-syria-skirmish-at-fundraiser-611599). Problem is, details of that battle are classified.
The $50,000-a-head fundraiser was held at the Lotte New York Palace Hotel in midtown, where Trump pulled in around $5 million for his campaign and the Republican National Committee. Bragging to the crowd about U.S. military might, Trump reportedly revealed that American F-18 pilots bombarded Russian mercenaries for around “ten minutes” last February, leading to mass casualties. A New York Times report from last week broadly confirms (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/24/world/middleeast/american-commandos-russian-mercenaries-syria.html) the details Trump provided the crowd.

skuthorp
10-17-2018, 07:15 PM
In the future she is likely to be regarded as a patriot.
Some members of the admin. and their collaborators another category entirely.

Just because it's illegal under the law does not make it wrong. I quote the 2nd, she has a duty to act, no?

Canoeyawl
10-17-2018, 07:38 PM
"Fired" is so passé, dismembered is the only way to go now.