Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or perhaps you can’t read? CIA and DoD guidance has been posted. Both documents discuss a lifelong obligation, which clearly applies to books people fairly regularly write about their careers.

Yes, I am very familiar with these rules. You a moron if you think that you send them a classified document that you will face no repercussions. They will confiscate your computer at least.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Leakers are treasonable offense

Leaking classified information is a federal offense. Did Bolton put classified information in his book?

Bolton isn't even a government employee. He is writing his personal memoirs. This is equivalent to leaking the plot of a movie on the internet.

There is no indication of classified materials in the book, but by contract, it has to be reviewed, Bolton's attorney requested the rules be followed and only eyes by appropriate NSC staff review the manuscript. Likely the White House violated those rules.

Anonymous wrote:Bolton's team followed protocol.

Someone leaked during the review. This may have been expected by the Bolton team.

The review was known to the White House some time ago, which is why McConnell and Trump's team did their best to rush the trial: opening arguments in 2 days, no votes on witnesses or evidence, etc.

I expect Senators to vote for hearing witnesses, particularly Bolton, after this news. After all, you only need a simple majority. Just 4 Republican Senators.

The White House is considering trying to block Bolton from testifying, but I'm not sure that's possible.

If Bolton does testify, the Senate won't automatically vote to remove the President. This requires 67 votes, and is a much harder lift, even in the face of DIRECT WITNESS EVIDENCE. It's not circumstantial anymore! And the witness has credibility, and couldn't be further from a Democrat. He's not a Never Trumper either.

Even if the President is not removed, all this will not help the Republican side during the Presidential election.

Anonymous wrote:Or perhaps you can’t read? CIA and DoD guidance has been posted. Both documents discuss a lifelong obligation, which clearly applies to books people fairly regularly write about their careers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Leakers are treasonable offense

Leaking classified information is a federal offense. Did Bolton put classified information in his book?

Bolton isn't even a government employee. He is writing his personal memoirs. This is equivalent to leaking the plot of a movie on the internet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Leakers are treasonable offense

Leaking classified information is a federal offense. Did Bolton put classified information in his book?

Bolton isn't even a government employee. He is writing his personal memoirs. This is equivalent to leaking the plot of a movie on the internet.

And we found our Trumpster. Hi!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Leakers are treasonable offense

Leaking classified information is a federal offense. Did Bolton put classified information in his book?

Bolton isn't even a government employee. He is writing his personal memoirs. This is equivalent to leaking the plot of a movie on the internet.

Anonymous wrote:Leakers are treasonable offense

Anonymous wrote:Leakers are treasonable offense

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m talking about writing a book or something after you leave. You seriously never talked about that possibility when the PRB briefed you during orientation?

A book is an even better example of why documents not approved by pre-pub must be written on a classified system. And, no, there is no way that I could write a book about my government work. The vast majority of it was classified.

Yeah I couldn’t either. But people do.

I’m obviously talking about things written on an unclassified system.

This is CIA’s guidance, which discusses a lifelong commitment. Everyone who works there has a TS//SCI clearance, and yet plenty produce documents that need PRB review. That’s why the office exists.

https://www.cia.gov/about-cia/publications-review-board

Ok. Write a book on an unclassified machine and put some TS//SCI stuff in there. You will go to jail.

Pre-pub will thank you for self-reporting at the sentencing.

You people really don’t get it.

I really don't. Do you not know about spillage? Does your agency not have hundreds of guys whose job is to handle spillage? Do you think they give out mulligans for that? Did the FBI not launch an investigation into Hillary Clinton over this issue?

What’s your point?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m talking about writing a book or something after you leave. You seriously never talked about that possibility when the PRB briefed you during orientation?

A book is an even better example of why documents not approved by pre-pub must be written on a classified system. And, no, there is no way that I could write a book about my government work. The vast majority of it was classified.

Yeah I couldn’t either. But people do.

I’m obviously talking about things written on an unclassified system.

This is CIA’s guidance, which discusses a lifelong commitment. Everyone who works there has a TS//SCI clearance, and yet plenty produce documents that need PRB review. That’s why the office exists.

https://www.cia.gov/about-cia/publications-review-board

Ok. Write a book on an unclassified machine and put some TS//SCI stuff in there. You will go to jail.

Pre-pub will thank you for self-reporting at the sentencing.

You people really don’t get it.

I really don't. Do you not know about spillage? Does your agency not have hundreds of guys whose job is to handle spillage? Do you think they give out mulligans for that? Did the FBI not launch an investigation into Hillary Clinton over this issue?