(no message)
Side note: Paul Revere outlived 11 of his 16 children. That is amazingly tragic. But, people in that generation had to deal with tragedy far more often than we do.
Definitely a lot of infant mortality back then.
(no message)
(no message)
Thus controlling information?
(no message)
(no message)
You simply prove that your definition of patriot is dependent on which side of the political aisle that the target is on.
Now, when many Americans (including patriotic Republicans) seek the truth as to whether our President is beholden to Putin/Russia, and/or whether Trump campaign operatives colluded with Russia to intrude upon our elections, you, like many, no longer seek the truth, but seek to suffocate the leaks, coming from longstanding government employees who have dedicated their lives to keeping us safe.
For you, it seems it is all about power, -- making sure your side has it. Core values, national security, individual rights, . . . . all take a back seat, in your world, to power.
…the leaks being released often aren't useful. I do not mind the truth, but the president has to be able to trust his own IC to do his job. Its not the info so much as the paralysis that they cause on everything else. The DNC was private & had no effect on required government function. That is my concern with the leaks. The Wikileaks people did not take oaths to there country to secrecy either whereas the IC leakers did.
Also agree that it not a good thing for IC types to leak classified information. It does violate an oath.
The big gamechanger here is that the President may be the target or the compromised.
I do not believe these leaks are to fulfill a political agenda for IC folks, even if unhappy who their boss is. Rather, I genuinely believe that their agenda is driven by their national security concerns.
I believe we will know more in a month. In the event the agenda behind the leaks is political, than your points are valid. In the event the agenda behind the leaks is an SOS, than the leaks were righteous.
Snowdon stole documents and gave them to the Russians.
Every administration has people leaking to the press for a variety of reasons. It's one of the ways we know that that big conspiracies are false - someone would leak them. It's a check on malfeasance, and every administration hates it.
The former, while illegal in some cases, can be very good. The possibility of the latter is frightening for future generations.
I'm not saying the latter is happening. Just something to note, as the latter would mark the beginning of a Praetorian Guard phase of the Republic.
What do you think about people who leak non-illegal but potentially embarrassing behavior to weaken an administration? They are not whistleblowers, obviously.
Certainly White House staffers. Some from inside the agencies, some from the IC, some from congressional staffers, the uniformed military and - most of all - from those closest to Trump who are trying to use the press in their struggles for power.
Nobody has ever seen anything like this.
For a few days there, I thought your constitutional crisis was going to be a self-fulfilling prophecy, brought out by Trump's opponents, not Trump.
But, I think this will all pass...although some people might go to jail for leaking confidential information about non-crimes.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)