Leaking Classified Info to Media Is an ‘Act of Treason’

[jimnyc]

And I would agree with them. I truly hope they get whoever is leaking things from within the WH. And I think it's going to lead back...

---

Rasmussen: Over Half Think Leaking Classified Information to Media Is an ‘Act of Treason’

More than half of voters think leaking classified information to media outlets is an “act of treason,” a Rasmussen Reports poll released Wednesday finds.

A majority, or 53 percent, believe it’s an act of treason, while 30 percent disagree and 18 percent are not sure. An overwhelming majority of Republicans, or 73 percent, feel that the leaks are treasonous, as do 50 percent of independents and 36 percent of Democrats (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/may_2017/53_say_media_leaks_are_act_of_treason).

Nearly half, or 47 percent, think the media are hurting national security, while 34 percent say the media are performing “a public service” by publishing the leaks. Nineteen percent are unsure.

Breitbart News reported that at least three leakers working to undermine Trump have been identified, citing CBS News and One America News Network (OANN). “Three White House staffers have been identified for leaking classified info. POTUS will fire ‘multiple people’ when he returns to DC,” wrote OANN’s chief White House correspondent on Twitter.

A Rasmussen poll taken in February showed that 58 percent of voters believe that the leakers of classified information should be prosecuted, and 59 percent think “intelligence officials who withhold classified information from the president should be fired or punished.”

Pollsters questioned 1,000 registered voters from May 29 to May 30. The margin of error is plus or minus three percentage points.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/05/31/rasmussen-over-half-think-leaking-classified-information-to-media-is-an-act-of-treason/

[pete311]

Is it really Treason? Kath posted the definition in some other thread about it having to do with act of war or something.

[jimnyc]

Is it really Treason? Kath posted the definition in some other thread about it having to do with act of war or something.

In this scenario, I might lean again towards each instance being judged on it's own. Someone can leak classified information that is literally not much, like a lame email from Hillary's server. :) But then you have the scenario of leaking confidential information that can destroy partnerships between countries. Or maybe get someone killed. Change election outcomes.

I'm not sure each case needs to end in the death penalty, nor any of them ending up with no charges. But if someone leaks things, there has to be consequences if/when found.

[Elessar]

Is it really Treason? Kath posted the definition in some other thread about it having to do with act of war or something.

Rather that label most all of it as treason, it is simply a violation of Federal Law with the handling and
broadcasting of classified information.

[Russ]

Let's send the "leakers" to Gitmo first, or Aleppo, and then we can look up the definition of treason when we get around to it... :cool:

[aboutime]

U.S. Constitution › Article III
Article III
Section 1.

The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.

Section 2.

The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.

In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.

The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed.

Section 3.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.

[Kathianne]

AT got it right, it's the only crime defined in the Constitution. Article 3, Section 3.

[Elessar]

I looked up "Forcing a Safeguard" - Art 102 of the UCMJ, but that does not apply to this.

[Gunny]

Is it really Treason? Kath posted the definition in some other thread about it having to do with act of war or something.Treason is not limited to war time. The death penalty for committing treason is, IIRC. I think it's ridiculous to consider disclosing classified material to the public as anything else.

I think the originators of leaks who have clearances should face FAR stiffer sentences than the people they leak it to. The former are charged under oath with safeguarding the material and/or the contents therein. The latter are mostly clueless idiots putting trying to make a name for themselves ahead of what is in our best National interest.

[Elessar]

Treason is not limited to war time. The death penalty for committing treason is, IIRC. I think it's ridiculous to consider disclosing classified material to the public as anything else.

The think the originators of leaks who have clearances should face FAR stiffer sentences than the people they leak it to. The former are charged under oath with safeguarding the material and/or the contents therein. The latter are mostly clueless idiots putting trying to make a name for themselves ahead of what is in our best National interest.

Go back again to that SF-87, the Non-Disclosure Agreement that ANYONE with a clearance has to sign. That in and
of itself is an oath to handle and safeguard classified material and systems correctly.

[aboutime]

Is it really Treason? Kath posted the definition in some other thread about it having to do with act of war or something.

petey. As the constitution states "or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." Supplying ANYONE with classified information that may be HARMFUL to the security of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is....in effect, giving ANY enemy aid, and comfort".
IF YOU DOUBT THAT. Get your hands on some Unauthorized Classified Information, and give it to your local newspaper, or tv station. SEE how long you remain OUT OF JAIL.

[gabosaurus]

Why were the leaks about Hillary Clinton "an act of treason?" Trump was really proud of those. :rolleyes:

[aboutime]

Why were the leaks about Hillary Clinton "an act of treason?" Trump was really proud of those. :rolleyes:


Only to you gabby. The leaks about Hillary disclosed HER acts of TREASON in allowing people with NO SECURITY CLEARANCES to see, and have access to CLASSIFIED material that could be HARMFUL, or THREATEN OUR SECURITY.

Then again. That doesn't matter to you because YOU WILL INSTANTLY disagree to protect your own LIES.

[Kathianne]

Some interesting easy reading on treason:

https://legaldictionary.net/treason/

There's more, but the following seems pertinent:


Acts Considered to be Treason

The Constitution describes the levying of war against the United states as a treasonous act. It also states that giving “aid and comfort” to the nation’s enemies is considered treason. Aid and comfort can take many forms, though they include such acts as providing troops, weapons, transportation, or shelter to an enemy of the nation. This also refers to providing classified or sensitive information to an enemy of the U.S. In short, engaging in any act that weakens the might of the United States, is considered to be providing aid and comfort.

Treason During Wartime

The Constitution is specific, however, that the Treason clause (https://legaldictionary.net/clause/) can only be applied for acts committed during times of war. While certain acts committed during peacetime may be illegal, they would not be considered treason, according to the Constitution’s definition.

Example of Treason During Peacetime

In 1946, Andrei is caught selling both classified information and weapons to the Soviet Union. He is put on trial (https://legaldictionary.net/trial/) in 1947, and convicted of both crimes, though he was not charged with treason because the prosecution could not prove Andrei’s actions prior to the end of WWII in 1945. In this example of treason, not only were the U.S. and U.S.S.R. allies during the Great War, but the U.S. was no longer in a state of war during the period for which he was convicted.