Mishandled is a legal term which includes stealing, etc.
I am surprised at the number of people defending this woman. We don't want the Russians to know everything we know and how we know it. When US has finished Russian investigation, that is the time to make a full report to the public and not before. Dribs and drabs of info just cause premature conclusions to be drawn.
5
The same people who were okay with Obama interfering with the democratic election in Israel. Its bad when Russians interfere but when the US does it well....you know.
The only thing we have incontrovertible proof of in this situation is that the parents did a horrible job of naming this poor girl.
6
They matched up her printer with the letter. Now if they could just find out who on the house intel committee is leaking info....that would be good.
1
I will not argue about the case against Ms. Winner, but rather about the underlying issue of public interest and right to know.
It is time we demanded a clear set of principlles concerning the secret materials classification process and standerds for its application. Clearly, the public needed to know the content of Ms. Winner's release, and there should be an overwhelming clear and present danger to the country involved for it to be classified. Was there? If not, it shoulld not have been classified. If so, then the public has a right to know a great deal about why.
Personally, in a case involving such gravity to the nation, I do not consider protection of sources and methods sufficient cause for classification.
It is time we demanded a clear set of principlles concerning the secret materials classification process and standerds for its application. Clearly, the public needed to know the content of Ms. Winner's release, and there should be an overwhelming clear and present danger to the country involved for it to be classified. Was there? If not, it shoulld not have been classified. If so, then the public has a right to know a great deal about why.
Personally, in a case involving such gravity to the nation, I do not consider protection of sources and methods sufficient cause for classification.
3
I'm still trying to figure out how the greatest Intelligence gathers in the world haven't been able to find anything on TRUMP since last summer. They haven't been able to stop the hacking at the IRS, The VA, The office of Personnel and management. They haven't found any of the leakers in the WH or in the halls of congress.....or bought any of the agents the FISA courts said violate the law to spy on Americans to heel either. But sure...lets talk about if we want any government employee to leak any information about any American or situtaion the government is involved in that they don't like....
And based on The Dems reaction to the Trump situation. Lets charge every Democratic Congressman or Senator with obstruciton of justice if they or their staff have ever called a state or federal agent and asked them not to prosecute, investigate or deport an undocumented citizen or anyone connected to them in anyway from lobbyists to interns.
And based on The Dems reaction to the Trump situation. Lets charge every Democratic Congressman or Senator with obstruciton of justice if they or their staff have ever called a state or federal agent and asked them not to prosecute, investigate or deport an undocumented citizen or anyone connected to them in anyway from lobbyists to interns.
1
Who is the contractor and who did the background check on this person....
1
She is a patriotic American citizen doing her duty. Is exposing wrongdoing a crime?
5
I really wouldn't call anyone who writes in their diary that they want to burn the White House down a patriot, let alone having the names of Taliban in there either. She's also tweeted out some real crazy stuff. It's all a bit sketchy to me. I'd wait till all the evidence comes to light before labeling her a hero or something more nefarious.
2
The comparisons being made between Winner and Snowden are laughable. Snowden's leak about the wholesale collection of telephone calls, emails, etc. of all US citizens in violation of the 4th Amendment was a bombshell! The fact that the government continues this unabated is a travesty, but I digress. Based on Winner's extreme leftist views, she simply leaked this info in the hope that it would somehow hurt the WH. News flash. It doesn't, as it has nothing to do with collusion between the Russian's and the Trump Admin.
1
Some people would think that foreign interference with our elections is a bi-partisan concern - in this particular case, they were helping out the Republicans, but I'm sure people could imagine a situation where they, or some other foreign power, might want to help out the Democrats - or might just want to sow chaos and doubt where-ever they could. So the information that the Russians had not just hacked the DNC for campaign material, but had actually attempted to get into aspects of the electoral process itself, could be seen as having relevance beyond whether it makes Trump look good or bad.
4
It looks like Reality isn't a winner. When there's no winner in this week's drawing, the prize increases the following week. A word that intelligence agencies like to throw around is "tradecraft."
Some years ago, I was on a grand jury when I, and others, refused to indict a person who had opened multiple credit cards under various permutations of her name. She had run up thousand dollar charges on each card, and hadn't paid.
The DA said that it was a crime, but I argued that setting up a card table in Times Square and piling it high with gold bars was an attractive nuisance. And I wasn't prepared to prosecute someone for taking one of the gold bars.
The situation here is much the same. Unless Ms. Winner was supposed to be using the information on the "stolen" documents, why was she given access to them?
If the documents were stored on an IBM mainframe running z/OS and RACF, perhaps with DB2, she would not have been able to access the documents without a specific grant of authority (default is no access). So the real guilty party is the security administrator and / or system designer.
The documents were, apparently, made available to anyone with access to the system. Top Secret? Secure? At least when I was working in IT, no major company would have given the security administrator that sort of access to the phone directory!
The DA said that it was a crime, but I argued that setting up a card table in Times Square and piling it high with gold bars was an attractive nuisance. And I wasn't prepared to prosecute someone for taking one of the gold bars.
The situation here is much the same. Unless Ms. Winner was supposed to be using the information on the "stolen" documents, why was she given access to them?
If the documents were stored on an IBM mainframe running z/OS and RACF, perhaps with DB2, she would not have been able to access the documents without a specific grant of authority (default is no access). So the real guilty party is the security administrator and / or system designer.
The documents were, apparently, made available to anyone with access to the system. Top Secret? Secure? At least when I was working in IT, no major company would have given the security administrator that sort of access to the phone directory!
8
I can't speak to the logic of your read on this case but I do have an issue with your grand jury decision. Based on your argument, if a customer was in line at the grocery store and reached across the counter and grabbed money from the opened cash register, it wouldn't be the thief's crime, but the grocery store for presenting an "attractive nuisance." Doesn't common sense enter into your reasoning at all?
5
I thought the document should not have been available under her login. Thanks for clearing that up. That's sloppy. I've seen it in business offices (personnel records not secured, no security at all through WP pull-down menu). I didn't go into personnel records and I found the "back door" through the pull-down menu accidentally. I had access to business records anyway and really didn't care.
NSA Security and the FBI were on her fast, so they were watching her more closely than normal. They can't watch everyone all the time (their software should), but they had a reason to keep an eye on her. Some reports say vaguely that she was stationed at Ft Meade, which speaks volumes. Something happened there to make Security suspicious. Farsi, Dari, & Pashto involve the northern tribal regions along the Afghanistan-Iran border. The USSR bailed out of there before this woman was born, before Russia was reborn.
Her clearance doesn't give her a need to know any Russian data. She's well aware of the rules.
NSA Security and the FBI were on her fast, so they were watching her more closely than normal. They can't watch everyone all the time (their software should), but they had a reason to keep an eye on her. Some reports say vaguely that she was stationed at Ft Meade, which speaks volumes. Something happened there to make Security suspicious. Farsi, Dari, & Pashto involve the northern tribal regions along the Afghanistan-Iran border. The USSR bailed out of there before this woman was born, before Russia was reborn.
Her clearance doesn't give her a need to know any Russian data. She's well aware of the rules.
1
Lots of people hate the credit card companies, but there seems to be a kind of false Robin Hood attitude about refusing to charge somebody for cheating them. I suppose if it was a poor person feeding their children, that might be one thing, but it might very well be a privileged hipster -
But anyway, all this discussion of the technicalities of security arrangements seems to miss the important point. Somehow she came across these documents - whether it was as part of her job, or by some skillful hacking, or by someone else' error, somehow she got them. The interesting question is, what then?
I for one approve of her taking the risk of releasing them. This kind of information leak has been important over the years in keeping us informed. Unfortunately, government agencies, just like private corporations, are very likely to keep things secret for all the wrong reasons.
But anyway, all this discussion of the technicalities of security arrangements seems to miss the important point. Somehow she came across these documents - whether it was as part of her job, or by some skillful hacking, or by someone else' error, somehow she got them. The interesting question is, what then?
I for one approve of her taking the risk of releasing them. This kind of information leak has been important over the years in keeping us informed. Unfortunately, government agencies, just like private corporations, are very likely to keep things secret for all the wrong reasons.
1
Prosecutors are predatory animals whose work status and income are fully dependent on their conviction rates. This self-interest makes them not an extension of the justice system, but perverters of it.
As a result, they will say and do anything, pile on unprovable charges to try to force a plea arrangement, ask to change arrest reports, and even suborn perjury from witnesses (especially those in law enforcement) to get a conviction.
Having first hand experience in this area with a relative who was railroaded by a very ambitious assistant DA, I have witnessed the intimidation first hand and simply do not believe anything any prosecutor has to say about any case.
As a result, they will say and do anything, pile on unprovable charges to try to force a plea arrangement, ask to change arrest reports, and even suborn perjury from witnesses (especially those in law enforcement) to get a conviction.
Having first hand experience in this area with a relative who was railroaded by a very ambitious assistant DA, I have witnessed the intimidation first hand and simply do not believe anything any prosecutor has to say about any case.
8
This case will be in federal court, where prosecutors behave better than local or state prosecutors. It will almost certainly be in camera, so the classified stuff stays classified. She already knew what the rules were when she applied for the job. I'm actually surprised her arrest was made public. There may be more arrests soon.
The individuals who have chosen over the past few years to release sensitive government information have done so, I believe, with knowledge of the consequences and that there WOULD be consequences, whether legal or personal. The law exists and even as we enforce it we should seriously consider whether a little more government openness might be a good think. In the case of Ms. Winner, we have a situation where an incompetent administration forced the pursuit of "leakers" - aka "whistleblowers. In addition to making the arrest, the administrat6iion not only caught the leakerwhistleblower but will punish this act with a level of brutality that simply doesn't exist outside dictatorships, all of whom brutally suppress efforts to inform the people who are paying the bills. Another problem here, which none of the administration apologists have bothered to recognize, is that if indeed Ms. Winner is as "self-radicalized" as her social media conacts suggest, she is not only a native of this country but not black, not Muslim.
7
Reality Winner is evidently an individual who, like thousands of Americans is sickened with worry and disgust with Donald Trump and his operatives. She took a stand and decided to protest by divulging sensitive information which would help impeach Trump. This is the situation pure and simple. The fact that the US government is throwing its entire weight into her prosecution should not be surprising. What is also certain is the certain emphasis the Trump administration will demonstrate to lock her up and throw away the key. I wish her strength, she will need it.
9
I doubt the federal prosecutor cares what Trump thinks. Trump, if he's aware of this, may not even know it's a federal case. He's not smart enough to figure all that out. He's probably never heard of Annapolis Junction.
Trump is despicable and there are no depths to which he won't sink. Thankfully, he's not very bright.
Trump is despicable and there are no depths to which he won't sink. Thankfully, he's not very bright.
4
Poor judgment by a naïve young woman. A desire to 'burn the White House down' is not to be taken literally; it obviously refers to a much-needed purge of the Trump administration.
5
I see the trolls are out in force with the bothsideism about Hillary and her email server. In NO WAY are these cases similar, and AFAIK, no really serious leaks of "Intelligence Sources and Methods" or really, anything significant was "leaked' from that system.
Now, what about the guy who revealed VERY sensitive information about Israeli Humint resources? Hm, what about him?
Now, what about the guy who revealed VERY sensitive information about Israeli Humint resources? Hm, what about him?
8
The prosecutor appears to want to try the case in the news media.
4
It is not up to the leaker to decide if something should be classified or not. If It is, Ms Winner is violating the law in releasing it. Your readers seem to be able to justify anything to get Trump. Trump will undo himself soon enough.
4
Maybe privatization of the US intelligence community wasn't the best idea?
10
My understanding of the difference between procedural "mishandling classified info" and criminal unauthorized release of it is that the former involves violations of office procedure.
I don't understand how Ms. Winner can be the only person identified as the cause of this problem. Classified docs are only on classified networks, and can only be printed on classified printers ... and every copy made is a new classified document that has to be logged and labeled and numbered.
How is it that the NSA failed to observe that this copy -- 1 of 6 -- had never been logged, nor entered to the archive, nor filed in a cleared vault, nor recorded as sent to a classified shredder or burn bag? Is the NSA lax on procedure? If so, Winner has some culpable company whose identities are being shielded.
I don't understand how Ms. Winner can be the only person identified as the cause of this problem. Classified docs are only on classified networks, and can only be printed on classified printers ... and every copy made is a new classified document that has to be logged and labeled and numbered.
How is it that the NSA failed to observe that this copy -- 1 of 6 -- had never been logged, nor entered to the archive, nor filed in a cleared vault, nor recorded as sent to a classified shredder or burn bag? Is the NSA lax on procedure? If so, Winner has some culpable company whose identities are being shielded.
8
If this is illegal, then it is a case where patriotism runs orthogonal to the law. We need more leakers like this. I would be happy to be on the jury for this case. It will be hard to find 12 people who think prosecution for this important reveal is justified.
6
As a proud liberal and defender of progressive freedoms, I nonetheless feel we have to provide some calibration to young people brought up in the niceness and openness of social media that the release of information that's vital to the security of our government and people is not the right thing to do. That's a learning thing they may have to figure out on their own. Secondly and more seriously, these contractors sign agreements not to disclose information they see, and so many seem blithely able to break a promise they made in writing. Seems a moral failing that's more troubling. And lastly ... did anyone notice the mention of a search query she typed into a search engine a year before her arrest? Are our searches tracked and available for such a long time? That last one gave me serious pause.
4
Unlike our Reality TV star President, it is Ms. Reality Winner who has lived up to her name. Ms. Winner has blown the whistle on Russian efforts to penetrate our election system including voting lists and the very machines used to count votes. In doinng so, we like Ms. Winner must now face the stark reality that Russian hacking may have effected the actual vote. When one considers that the election was won by only 70,000 total votes in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, it further undermines the credibility of those results. We need an honest recount in those three states and real protections against voter fraud rather than the racial-profing voter ID laws that Republicans have passed to exclude legitimate voters. We need to prevent hacking perhaps by turning to mail ballots and early voting already in use in many states.
7
In the movie "The Recruit" the heroine carries out of the CIA a thumb drive loaded with secret info which was concealed in a coffee cup. But there are many other places to conceal a thumb drive.
In this case the info that was exposed was previously given out officially in bare bones of detail and we did not need to know more. The actual report apparently would have allowed the opposition to learn about our sources and methods and close down our access. She should get the max as an example if found guilty.
In this case the info that was exposed was previously given out officially in bare bones of detail and we did not need to know more. The actual report apparently would have allowed the opposition to learn about our sources and methods and close down our access. She should get the max as an example if found guilty.
1
with the chant of resist, resist, rather than "we are all in this together, let's have a dialogue", the country can be town apart.
let's listen more, and not take the law into our own hands, eh. such self righteousness that these folks can take state secrets and decide it's in country's best interest to let it leak. The ego that must be there in order to decide this themselves. Awful.
let's listen more, and not take the law into our own hands, eh. such self righteousness that these folks can take state secrets and decide it's in country's best interest to let it leak. The ego that must be there in order to decide this themselves. Awful.
4
And how do we get the Koch controlled Republican Congressional delegation on board for this? They are systematically freezing Democrats out of, well, everything in Washington and in the State legislatures.
5
Really? Do you have any clue how true Patriots behave? They shine light on the truth, at the risk of their own lives, to protect our alleged liberties. Ego has nothing to do with it.
You want ego: look up the words Donald Trump.
You want ego: look up the words Donald Trump.
2
In terms of ego, I think she was channeling the Fearless Leader (apologizes to Rocky and Bullwinkle).
1
If she was a whistle blower there are official channels to go through including inspectors general. Then she would be protected. The big question is, that as a translator, how did she get access to this report in the first place? It doesn't matter whether or not the report should have been classified top secret. It was, she knew it was.
2
This information should have been declassified and already released into the public domain. Thank you, Reality Winner.
11
There will be more of this.. of concerned people trying to do what they can to protect this country from the "Nut Jobs" in this Administration.
7
What Ms. Winner did pales to someone who hid a top secret E mail server in the bathroom of her house, deleted 30,000 E-mails some top secret and allowed her assistant to E mail top secret E mails to a laptop that the assistant shared with her husband who was sending pictures of his stuff on the same laptop.
9
You've got it backwards I'm afraid. Clinton's server was not a secret and it was not hidden. And you do not know what was in the deleted emails. One thing we do know is that none of them were made public.
What Ms Winner did was purposely release classified documents with the intent of undermining the president. That is a serious crime.
What Ms Winner did was purposely release classified documents with the intent of undermining the president. That is a serious crime.
1
Dumb girl. Snowden must be shaking his head. She had no idea on protecting herself.
What? Like escaping to Hong Kong and then Russia?
1
"Ankles shackled?" Seriously? So much for "innocent until proven guilty"!
6
Free Reality!
4
Put her in jail.
Throw away the key.
Throw away the key.
3
Decades from now she will be celebrated.
4
Astonishingly poor security at work here. Unlimited access to documents - have these people heard of "Need to Know"? People allowed to bring in storage devices and plug them in. It is possible to configure a PC so that can't be done.
What really happened is that the contracting company promised something - reliable people with clearance - and delivered something else. I've a feeling that companies like these get away with ripping off the taxpayer.
What really happened is that the contracting company promised something - reliable people with clearance - and delivered something else. I've a feeling that companies like these get away with ripping off the taxpayer.
11
Yeah, but the contracting company (or it's owners) are current on their donations to the Republican National Committee, etc.
3
Dishonest Media and Democrats colluded with Hillary's campaign when she had her PRIVATE e-mail server out there unprotected with classified info. (many of the classified documents ended up on Anthony Wieners computer as well), Loretta Lynch's meeting with Bill Clinton on that plane while they talked about "grand kids", while Hillary was under investigation, When Obam jumped in and said during an interview that Hillary e-mail issue was not a big deal, so on. Where was the dishonest media then? Where was the useless STUPID Republicans then? Why wasn't there any independent council investigation?
3
The email server issue was thoroughly investigated. Turns out having a private server is inappropriate but not a crime.
An independent council becomes necessary when those being investigated (i.e. the administration) have power over the FBI and could derail the process. In Hillary's case she was not in office and thus didn't have any power over the investigators and so no independent council was needed.
The Lynch/Clinton meeting was widely reported and criticized but since the FBI found no evidence of a crime it's a moot point.
Obama saying the email server was not a big deal is no different than Trump saying that Russia is fake news.
An independent council becomes necessary when those being investigated (i.e. the administration) have power over the FBI and could derail the process. In Hillary's case she was not in office and thus didn't have any power over the investigators and so no independent council was needed.
The Lynch/Clinton meeting was widely reported and criticized but since the FBI found no evidence of a crime it's a moot point.
Obama saying the email server was not a big deal is no different than Trump saying that Russia is fake news.
1
Funny you should mention HRC's server - this episode suggests that her private server might have been at least as secure as the government servers - depending on which private contractor she contracted with, I guess...
The question is: Can we believe anyone from our national "Intelligence Community" about anything?
The former director of the FBI admits to leaking information to the press.
Now we are told that information suggesting the Russians have behaved badly is "injurious to our national security."
Say, what? How could indicting the Russians pose a risk to our national security?
J. Edgar Hoover. James Comey. Solari. Oh, there is a line up of upright citizens coming from a Bureau for which "tainted" would be something of an understatement.
The lady's name is Reality Winner, for Pete's sake.
The former director of the FBI admits to leaking information to the press.
Now we are told that information suggesting the Russians have behaved badly is "injurious to our national security."
Say, what? How could indicting the Russians pose a risk to our national security?
J. Edgar Hoover. James Comey. Solari. Oh, there is a line up of upright citizens coming from a Bureau for which "tainted" would be something of an understatement.
The lady's name is Reality Winner, for Pete's sake.
3
Comey's memo was not a leak. It was not classified and he was at that point a private citizen. And he only released the memo after our president stupidly attacked his reputation and threatened him.
It's not "indicting the Russians" that poses a risk. It's random contractors having access to classified information and releasing it as they see fit.
It's not "indicting the Russians" that poses a risk. It's random contractors having access to classified information and releasing it as they see fit.
1
Very happy to see this smug, terrorist sympathizer where she belongs.
What kind of person sells out their own country! Regardless of liking the current president or not.....that's not the issue and it's not how to handle it.
I hope they set a real solid example of her.
What kind of person sells out their own country! Regardless of liking the current president or not.....that's not the issue and it's not how to handle it.
I hope they set a real solid example of her.
8
I see no reason to describe Ms Winner as being either "smug" or a "terrorist sympathizer". In fact, I rather think she might be better described as a patriot concerned about possibly illegal, not to mention, disreputable behaviors certain government officials may be involved in. If Trump and his minions fall into the latter category so be it and I sincerely hope that others come forward with both the knowledge and the proofs of conduct unbecoming any elected officials of this country.
4
When someone tugs on your sleeve and tells you your hair is on fire, do you slap them to the ground and tell them it's not their business? The info she leaked was in no way useful to enemies - unless you consider Americans concerned that the last election was not just influenced by, but STOLEN by the Kremlin, as 'enemies.'
4
It is not OK to release Top Secret documents. Knowledge of such documents by our enemies may give them clues as to how we obtain intelligence information, and could even threaten peoples lives. So, it is not just a question of what we have a right to know.
6
Winner may well have mishandled classified information on more than one occasion: But why was it classified in the first place? Seems like vital info about Russian hacking of our elections systems that the public needed to know and was entitled to know about.
7
All the weight of the law against this young, idealistic woman. But against Sessions, who committed perjury, nothing. Against Flynn, still nothing but an "investigation." I hope her lawyers are up to the task. I'd gladly contribute to a fund for her defense.
9
I wonder if she lied on her security clearance forms to leave out contacts with Russian agents. Or if she contacted foreign banks under sanction by the USA. Secret Back Channels to foreign adversaries?
9
"Secret Back Channels to foreign adversaries?"
That's Jared Kushner's job. And he's doing it. And you couldn't care less.
That's Jared Kushner's job. And he's doing it. And you couldn't care less.
1
"you couldn't care less"? Neal, she was being sarcastic.
She was doing her patriotic duty as a free American citizen
With a name like Reality Winner in these current circumstances I'm inclined to think she is an actor who is playing a role contrived by the powers that be to make a propaganda point. The CIA and other intelligence agencies create false identities on a regular basis. They are quite skillful.
On the other hand, assuming the name is real, I'm still suspicious of the circumstances and could easily believe she was set up. It's not often mentioned but those who have a top secret clearance can be, and are, monitored even in their homes and on their private phones and computers. It's authorized by executive order 12333. When a person gets a top secret clearance the government does not need a court order to monitor people 24 hours a day. (this is not classified information)
If she plugged a USB drive into a secure computer they would have known it immediately and thereafter would go about the process of setting her up. They could plant inflammatory false "intelligence" on a computer network and wait for her to take the bait. They do this sort of thing. (They did it to me. I didn't take the bait. I reported it to the agency director.)
News reports say six other people printed out the same document. Why would they need to print that out? What were they going to do with it?
Just because it was labeled secret is no indication that it is factual.
J. Edgar Hoover once said "There is something addicting about a secret."
On the other hand, assuming the name is real, I'm still suspicious of the circumstances and could easily believe she was set up. It's not often mentioned but those who have a top secret clearance can be, and are, monitored even in their homes and on their private phones and computers. It's authorized by executive order 12333. When a person gets a top secret clearance the government does not need a court order to monitor people 24 hours a day. (this is not classified information)
If she plugged a USB drive into a secure computer they would have known it immediately and thereafter would go about the process of setting her up. They could plant inflammatory false "intelligence" on a computer network and wait for her to take the bait. They do this sort of thing. (They did it to me. I didn't take the bait. I reported it to the agency director.)
News reports say six other people printed out the same document. Why would they need to print that out? What were they going to do with it?
Just because it was labeled secret is no indication that it is factual.
J. Edgar Hoover once said "There is something addicting about a secret."
4
God knows Jaye Edgar Hoover had enough secrets of his/her own!
Many are conflating Winner's action with Trump's actions. Let's for a moment separate them, and stick to Winner's actions. She knowingly leaked Information classified as Top Secret. That is against the law, period. She did not have the right to choose to do this because she didn't like Trump, as she stated. This is not a "he said, she said" issue; this is fact.
We also do not know why this was classified. Were the Feds trying to find out who was doing this, and didn't want those to become aware that they new who they were and were developing means to thwart them in the future?
And why did Comey, Obama, let this keep happening? Why did the FBI not directly inform the DNC that they were hacked, and not follow up to make sure they new?
Smells like incompetence , after Snowden, Manning, Comey's FBI failed. Also, do not ignore the fact that Obama prosecuted more leakers than any Pres before him.
PS, after many years as a moderate, of voting both Rep and Dem, I did not vote for Trump or Clinton.
We also do not know why this was classified. Were the Feds trying to find out who was doing this, and didn't want those to become aware that they new who they were and were developing means to thwart them in the future?
And why did Comey, Obama, let this keep happening? Why did the FBI not directly inform the DNC that they were hacked, and not follow up to make sure they new?
Smells like incompetence , after Snowden, Manning, Comey's FBI failed. Also, do not ignore the fact that Obama prosecuted more leakers than any Pres before him.
PS, after many years as a moderate, of voting both Rep and Dem, I did not vote for Trump or Clinton.
1
"PS, after many years as a moderate, of voting both Rep and Dem, I did not vote for Trump or Clinton."
A write-in for Sarah Palin?
A write-in for Sarah Palin?
2
Not voting for Clinton was an automatic vote for Trump. When faced with two evils I believe choosing the lesser evil is a better choice.
2
To me, the most concerning part of this is that they know about her internet searches. That bothers me. You'd think an NSA contractor would be knowledgeable enough to at least use a VPN when online, although I suspect the government probably has developed some of getting at VPN users' actual IP addresses.
Trump can inform the Russians about Israeli intelligence yet Ms Winner leaks documents about Russian interference in our elections and she is arrested. Seems they need to arrest Trump as well as he is the real Reality Winner in the show we now call the White House.
5
The Prosecutor thinks Ms. Winner is "frightening". No doubt the Trump administration does too!
The American People, however, are severely frightened by what the leak revealed, not Ms. Winner. The fear of the world's second largest military / nuclear power corrupting our country seems like a much MUCH bigger priority to address than any "fright" this young former Air Force member represents!
The American People, however, are severely frightened by what the leak revealed, not Ms. Winner. The fear of the world's second largest military / nuclear power corrupting our country seems like a much MUCH bigger priority to address than any "fright" this young former Air Force member represents!
5
I still can't believe this woman is being lauded as a hero, no matter what side of the aisle you are on. We can't possibly give individuals the authority to break the law as they see fit. It is too arbitrary, too dangerous, too subjective. Today it's Russian interference with the election. Tomorrow it's a disgruntled or delusional employee who takes it upon him- or herself to decide what is best for the rest of us. "Well it's not as if she gave away nuclear codes or exposed us to grave danger," you say. Maybe not today, but what about tomorrow? People are giving her a pass, saying she's "young" and "naive" and "idealistic." Exactly. Just the sort of characteristics you want in someone who is in possession of classified information. What could possibly go wrong?
19
If I remember my Jesuit teaching concerning St. Thomas Aquinas and Scholastic Philosophy a person is not required to obey an unjust law. Scholastic Philosophy may no longer be "popular" but honesty never goes out of style and a true patriot never condones official misconduct by government officials.
I seem to recall Paul Ryan offering the "inexperienced" excuse only yesterday in defense of Trump's obstruction of justice.
2
Did she attempt to set up a back channel for communicating with Russia? Carry out top secret info to give to her married lover who was writing a book about her? Did she leave off her foreign contacts from her security clearance forms? Did she consult with Russian banks which were sanctioned by the US gov?
1
Where is the follow up on the actual story - that the document indicates the Russians hacked elections systems?
28
Because there is none. You just made that up.
So much for Donald John's Trump extreme vetting in the national security intelligence defense interests of the United States.
Unlike the Trump family,both Reality Leigh Winner and Chelsea Manning patriotically, honorably and bravely volunteered to serve in the military uniform of an American armed force. Something that only 0.75% of Americans have done since 9/11/01.
The failure to detect, deter and defeat the 9/11/01 attacks was the result of incompetence and ignorance. So was the failure to detect, deter and defeat Russian interference in the 2016 American Presidential Election.
Those failures rather than these leaks and leakers are my main concerns.
Unlike the Trump family,both Reality Leigh Winner and Chelsea Manning patriotically, honorably and bravely volunteered to serve in the military uniform of an American armed force. Something that only 0.75% of Americans have done since 9/11/01.
The failure to detect, deter and defeat the 9/11/01 attacks was the result of incompetence and ignorance. So was the failure to detect, deter and defeat Russian interference in the 2016 American Presidential Election.
Those failures rather than these leaks and leakers are my main concerns.
11
Obviously, someone failed to vet you.
1
Has there been any investigation into the training this 'contractor' received from either her employer or the agency she was attached to?
If she indeed googled whether plugging a flash drive into a government computer was detectable, that indicates she was *not* properly trained in secure document or IP handling procedures. USB port access is routinely blocked by corporate IT at Fortune 500 companies. If NSA is failing to take even that minimal precaution, it is as culpable as she is.
If she was able to physically carry a printout of the document out of the workplace, that's an entirely different level of agency incompetence.
She should not have done what she did, but despite her grossly naive actions, was able to do so. Let's have the names of the parties responsible for *that*.
If she indeed googled whether plugging a flash drive into a government computer was detectable, that indicates she was *not* properly trained in secure document or IP handling procedures. USB port access is routinely blocked by corporate IT at Fortune 500 companies. If NSA is failing to take even that minimal precaution, it is as culpable as she is.
If she was able to physically carry a printout of the document out of the workplace, that's an entirely different level of agency incompetence.
She should not have done what she did, but despite her grossly naive actions, was able to do so. Let's have the names of the parties responsible for *that*.
31
It is really interesting to see the morality of the left: "We hate Trump, therefore it is ok to break any laws to advance the hatred"
We need to send a very clear signal. If you have a Top Secret clearance and steal and leak documents, compromise Top Secret computers by inserting (often virus infected) USB drives, write about burning the White House down, you will go to jail for a long, long, long time.
We need to send a very clear signal. If you have a Top Secret clearance and steal and leak documents, compromise Top Secret computers by inserting (often virus infected) USB drives, write about burning the White House down, you will go to jail for a long, long, long time.
21
Welcome to the New York Times!
2
@Baron 95: What happens when folks working on your campaign discuss setting up secret communication channels in the Russian Embassy, so as to avoid being monitored by US security agencies? And then "forget" to mention those meetings/discussions when you are seeking a security clearance? How should that be handled?
3
I don't think you can say she represents "the morality of the left." She represents only her own "morality," which was quite obviously misguided. Her political leanings or feelings aren't what caused her to commit a crime--her ignorance and stupidity did.
From what I can tell of most of the New York Times readership,
anyone who seeks to harm this country--Snowden, "Chelsea" Whatever, Obama, Sanders, Clinton--is in their eyes a "hero."
anyone who seeks to harm this country--Snowden, "Chelsea" Whatever, Obama, Sanders, Clinton--is in their eyes a "hero."
8
Who says their actions actually harm the country? I have seen no harm so far, but I do see information that should have not been withheld from the public.
1
@Pat If you're lumping Obama in with Snowden, your blind ideology is showing.
Let me fix your list, so you can compare apples with apples: "Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, Michael Flynn, Jared Kushner".
Now, go ahead, pick the hero.
Let me fix your list, so you can compare apples with apples: "Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, Michael Flynn, Jared Kushner".
Now, go ahead, pick the hero.
1
They blame people for not being able to discern fake news from the real thing.
This whole episode is exhibit A. in defense of the people who can't always discern the difference between reality and fiction. This whole plot seems fake and hard to believe. Seems more like a setup to advance some agenda.
This whole episode is exhibit A. in defense of the people who can't always discern the difference between reality and fiction. This whole plot seems fake and hard to believe. Seems more like a setup to advance some agenda.
1
Millennials do not understand these kinds of things. To them, it's all about inclusion and complete disclosure, no matter how harmful or false the outcome is.
1
If It was wrong for Trump to have a private conversation with Comey in his office because supposedly he had some suspect motive he was trying to hide, why is everything in Washington DC disguised at classified like it does as well? Shouldn't we be applauding Ms. Winner as we are James Comey rather than prosecuting her?
4
Apples and oranges. James Comey did not divulge classified information. Reality Winner did.
I do not understand why this information was classified. It seems that it is the type of information that should be widely distributed so that we can guard against further attacks.
I think whatever agency had this information should change their policy.
I think whatever agency had this information should change their policy.
5
Why was this report classified as top secret in the first place? We ALL have the right to know the information contained in the report, that Russian hackers tried to make their way into our voting system! Given the context of the Russian hacking attempts that are KNOWN, Reality Winner via the Intercept brought important information to our attention which would have otherwise been obscured.
60
It should be explained and no one should assume in advance that because of the nature of what has been exposed it should not have been kept secret. We do not know why it probably has to do with tracing the sources of those efforts and maybe laying a trap for them in future. Now that it is in the open the Russians can alter strategy for interference in 2018.
4
Hate to break it to you but the Russian part remains an *hypothesis* in the report, not an established conclusion.
5
Yes, but the efforts in the report were rather crude phishing attempts that were not sophisticated. My guess is that they were feeling out weaknesses before investing in more sophisticated attempts. The Russians, regardless of this report and information it reveals, will continue to hack us regardless. Their efforts will not stop because our government in this administration is more concerned about the legitimacy of the president than the actual attempts at hacking and propaganda. However, with this information, I, as a citizen, can now put pressure on my government to investigate electronic voting systems and question whether or not they are secure.
What is the point of shackling her? Because she has a violent history of folding paper after hitting print? I'm surprised they didn't put the Hannibal mask on her to prevent her from biting. This is so unnecessary, I hope Trump feels like a big man again.
23
If she didn't want to be shackled, she shouldn't have mailed a classified document. She is facing very serious charges and could very well attempt an escape or violence if she were not shackled.
1
Well most people consider this a serious crime, including the federal government--which by the way brought this prosecution without the need for Mr. Trump's input or approval. Remember the whole issue about the FBI needing to be independent?
1
How is this any different than the Comey leaks.
They both sneaked the info to third parties to hide their leaking.
They both sneaked the info to third parties to hide their leaking.
7
The difference is that Comey leaked his own memo, which did not contain classified information.
1
How is it different? Comey leaked his memos as a private citizen and was careful to remove classified information from those memos. Reality Winner was a government employee that took a classified document and sent it off. Those two things are indeed different.
Comey's memo wasn't classified, is a fairly significant way the cases are different.
It's notable that you don't bother to condemn Trump for "sneaking", he who fired Comey because Rosenstein recommended it, no wait, because Comey botched the Clinton investigation, no, wait, because Comey made errors testifying to the Senate, no, wait, because Comey was "a showboat", no wait, to relieve the pressure from the FBI Russian investigation.
It's notable that you don't bother to condemn Trump for "sneaking", he who fired Comey because Rosenstein recommended it, no wait, because Comey botched the Clinton investigation, no, wait, because Comey made errors testifying to the Senate, no, wait, because Comey was "a showboat", no wait, to relieve the pressure from the FBI Russian investigation.
1
Leaker. Whistle Blower. It all depends on whether one agrees or disagrees with the defendant. So far, she looks like a Whistle Blower.
24
Traitor, who after a fair trial should be put in front of a firing squad.
2
Thank God for whistle blowers. We need more of them.
One down, and hundreds more to go. I do not want a government populated by ideological activists or any political stripe.
11
Ms. Winner has pledged her allegiance to the flag of the United States, and has sworn to protect and defend the Constitution.
I can think of no greater threat to that Constitution than tampering with the election system through which the people choose their lawful representatives, and no stronger defense than to make such tampering as clear as possible to the public at large.
Ms. Winner did what she was morally obliged to do. The fault lies with the people that enabled that tampering, concealed it from the public, and profited from its effects. The very same people, it seems, who now confront her in the role of prosecutors.
I can think of no greater threat to that Constitution than tampering with the election system through which the people choose their lawful representatives, and no stronger defense than to make such tampering as clear as possible to the public at large.
Ms. Winner did what she was morally obliged to do. The fault lies with the people that enabled that tampering, concealed it from the public, and profited from its effects. The very same people, it seems, who now confront her in the role of prosecutors.
46
It seems to be necessary to clarify three abaolute basics for folks, unfortunately.
1. There are such things as national secrets. I wish there weren't, but there are. And there need to be. And revealing them really can do enormous damage: beyond the info revealed, there are sources, and the way ine bit of info fits with others to be considered.
2. Civil disobedience rests on two propositions: a) at times, a moral principle or the need to right a wrong is more important than a law; b) if you feel you really have to break a law for a higher purpose, you break the law AND take responsibility for breaking the law. Because that's the point, and the only way you can possibly get things to change. I'd respect Edward Snowden, if he'd leaked, then marched into the nearest FBI office and told them.
3. It's vital to weigh importances. In this case, I just don't see how what was revealed is nearly a big enough whoop to justify breaking the law, simply because anybody paying attention already knew what the Russians hd been doing.
This is a case of laziness, not of a crusade.
By the way, special bonus for the "let her suffer," types: we have these pesky things called laws. You want people tortured, move to Iran or to North Korea.
1. There are such things as national secrets. I wish there weren't, but there are. And there need to be. And revealing them really can do enormous damage: beyond the info revealed, there are sources, and the way ine bit of info fits with others to be considered.
2. Civil disobedience rests on two propositions: a) at times, a moral principle or the need to right a wrong is more important than a law; b) if you feel you really have to break a law for a higher purpose, you break the law AND take responsibility for breaking the law. Because that's the point, and the only way you can possibly get things to change. I'd respect Edward Snowden, if he'd leaked, then marched into the nearest FBI office and told them.
3. It's vital to weigh importances. In this case, I just don't see how what was revealed is nearly a big enough whoop to justify breaking the law, simply because anybody paying attention already knew what the Russians hd been doing.
This is a case of laziness, not of a crusade.
By the way, special bonus for the "let her suffer," types: we have these pesky things called laws. You want people tortured, move to Iran or to North Korea.
18
I am eager to hear what Ms. Winner's motivation was in sharing this document with the press. She does sound like an unskilled Snowden. She will obviously have to pay some penalty, but I hope she will still be able to find work in the future. It seems a shame to destroy the career of such a brilliant young women for what appears to be, an ill considered, but principled leak.
As others have pointed out, too much is classified in the US and leakers of of documents let us know when the government is not doing its job. If Ms Winner leaked this document for moral reasons, then I don't think she should be sent to jail for life.
As others have pointed out, too much is classified in the US and leakers of of documents let us know when the government is not doing its job. If Ms Winner leaked this document for moral reasons, then I don't think she should be sent to jail for life.
9
For me, I am surprised to learn that the government gives top security clearance to a 25-year-old. While she is certainly a young adult, it's a big burden to carry and I would think it would be better to establish a track record for several years. I am sure for someone that age, it might be hard to know if there is a "bigger picture" that mitigates the need to tell the press.
5
How is she brilliant? She took a classified document out of the building. That is a mind-boggling act for a person holding a security clearance. The email conversations with the media outlet were made on her work computer. This is dumb. The media outlet did her no favors by giving the document to the FBI. It was child's play then to identify her as the source. It is frightening to know that this person had a security clearance. Brilliant she is not.
2
How about she gets the same punishment as the military fellow who gave classified info to his lover to help her write a book about him?
The truth is this, none of the commenters including myself have all the facts of this case. Let us wait a little longer for the case to unfold.
5
We have a president who denies clear evidence of Russia's hack of our elections as "fake news", and tried to lift the sanctions imposed on Russia for that activity. Who is more dangerous to our democracy, a 25 year old who disclosed a document that indicates that our intelligence agencies know what Russia did, or an administration that lies to the American people daily? This young woman needs a great lawyer and her day in court. By the time she goes to trial, there is a good likelihood that her disclosure, (if she did in fact disclose this information,) will be seen as understandable, rather than nefarious.
16
Sadly this action supports the contention that our country is affected by deep government in an invasive mammoth spying operation. Simply put, they have too much power. In the past 20 years we created a monster that has power over our elected leaders. Wake up call.
3
Reality ought to have been smart enough to have taken a screen shot of this document instead of printing it out. If she had it wouldn't have been so easy to trace. Something about this story seems off. Like it's being staged.
5
In our current form of government, if you don't have the power you are the problem. She shared info that did no harm to the U.S., and yet there she is, shackled and jailed. Gen. Flynn, on the other hand, is wandering about free as a bird, and probably still making money off traitorous deals with impunity. Make America wacky again.
20
Reality L. Winner is a hero. Yes, we are a Nation of laws but when the President is corrupt, Reality is a Patriot.
14
Criminal
And she will pay dearly
And she will pay dearly
2
I think we need to examine what criminal charges might apply to someone who classifies a document "top secret" solely for political purposes.
9
Winner was clueless. She chose self-aggrandizing blowhard Glen Greenwald and his Intercept as her media outlet, and was failed by their incompetence. She didn't realize her computer and printing activities would be monitored, or that her printouts would be traceable.
Still, she was considered qualified to work at the NSA.
Still, she was considered qualified to work at the NSA.
14
Until we arrest our president for "mishandling secrets," we should not arrest this young woman.
9
No, that's what Hillary did.
Because of her, hundreds of thousands of State Department emails ended up, among other places, on the laptop of a convicted sex offender--
who, by the way, was married to Hillary's personal assistant.
Because of her, hundreds of thousands of State Department emails ended up, among other places, on the laptop of a convicted sex offender--
who, by the way, was married to Hillary's personal assistant.
2
Ahhhhhh .... all the trolls are busy today. Hard days work in Moscow ....
2
Re; Without bail...does anyone remember E.Snowden, if so, there's your answer; if not, there's always Google.
1
You fail to show anything but the fact of his cowardice. She at least stayed put and is going to make her case in court like an actual patriot would without having to think about it.
1
I tend to believe that top secret is only for US citizens. Meaning the Russians usually know more than we the people do. Why would the NSA not want us to know that the Russians are working our system behind the scenes. Of course our President wants to deny deny deny. I do remember Watergate well might have been kept quiet was it not for a leaker. And for that matter we would never know that the NSA was taping our personal phones without a leaker.
27
Her job isn't to only keep the secrets that she agrees with or to only keep the secrets that she thinks are secrets. I know a lot of you don't like Trump, but come on. Do I think this young woman should be sentenced to life without parole, no, but she clearly broke the law... and to those who choose to respond, two wrongs don't make a right.
13
Mysterious motives and a seemingly odd person and set of circumstances, especially with the notes about Taliban and "burning down the White House." But the result, important "classified" information that the public should know, seems like a win for America. But it's like robbing a bank and giving the money to the poor. She's still a bank robber.
11
Too bad President Trump doesn't care as much about Russian interference in the election as Ms. Winner.
15
Rather sad that a woman who gives "evidence" will be legally charged but a person in the white house who lies, cheats, steals and is ignorant remains in office. We need information so badly and we are not receiving any. The public has a right to know.
29
Barack Obama is no longer in office, so you may rest assured that the person you describe is no longer in a position to harm this country.
There. Now you have received information.
There. Now you have received information.
4
All of this story sounds absurd. Reality Winner? The "biggest, bestest food fight?" Why has the NY Times read more like The Onion for the past year?
13
Because our government *has* become something right out of The Onion, one that (like an actual onion) gives us tears whenever those at the counter top cut and mutilate it.
1
Ms Winner will face prosecution to the fullest extent of the law, i.e., 'they" will throw the book at her. She provided classified information to a shambling incompetent news organization that failed to protect her, information that clearly should have been in the public domain. She was foolish.
But one can already see the extent to which the prosecuter intends to go after her, already describing her with ridiculous hyperbole, e.g., "downright frightening". Morever, she is being held without bond which on in its face, is patently ridiculous. One would have hoped her lawyer was able to successfully aregue for bond but it was not to be.
With all due respect to Nichols, her assigned public defender, Winner will also need a heavy hitter, star co-counsel to assist him. Who is the mensch of the highest order who will have the courage to step forward to help this young woman knowing that he and NIchols will face rheumy eyed, malignant anger and suspicions and a fusillade of vicious, attacking tweets?
Otherwise, Winner will end up in prison for at least 10 years where she will be rubbing shoulders with murderers, drug dealers and robbers who got off with a lighter sentence.
But one can already see the extent to which the prosecuter intends to go after her, already describing her with ridiculous hyperbole, e.g., "downright frightening". Morever, she is being held without bond which on in its face, is patently ridiculous. One would have hoped her lawyer was able to successfully aregue for bond but it was not to be.
With all due respect to Nichols, her assigned public defender, Winner will also need a heavy hitter, star co-counsel to assist him. Who is the mensch of the highest order who will have the courage to step forward to help this young woman knowing that he and NIchols will face rheumy eyed, malignant anger and suspicions and a fusillade of vicious, attacking tweets?
Otherwise, Winner will end up in prison for at least 10 years where she will be rubbing shoulders with murderers, drug dealers and robbers who got off with a lighter sentence.
So she got riled up reading false narratives on Facebook and risked her freedom because of it. I may yet agree with former Secretary Clinton - time to ban "fake news".
2
Glenn Greenwald, The Intercept, and Wikileaks, are SO much worse than Fox News. I'll take fake partisan news over pro-treason news any day of the week!
1
Reality Winner has been charged by the FBI with breaching paragraph (e) of 18 US Code Section 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information:
'Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or'
An intelligent, thoughtful jury of Winner's peers will acquit her of this charge because there is reasonable doubt that Winner had reason to believe it could be used to the injury of the US or to the advantage of any foreign nation.
'Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or'
An intelligent, thoughtful jury of Winner's peers will acquit her of this charge because there is reasonable doubt that Winner had reason to believe it could be used to the injury of the US or to the advantage of any foreign nation.
14
I hope you are right. As infractions go, this is a small one -- certainly no worse than the one Trump committed in the Oval Office. The government though makes her sound like a dangerous and determined spy. I am eager to hear more.
6
This lady is in jail and Edward Snowden is a hero. I don't get it.
3
So what is your recommendation? A medal of honor perhaps? Are we now allowed to leak government documents when don't agree?
6
Snowden fled the country, Miss Reality didn't.
What does Snowden have to do with this case. If he comes back he will be prosecuted. Or should Miss Reality join him in Russia?
Top Secret means that the information could cause grave harm to the US if exposed. This particular information clearly does not rise to that level - it might cause embarrassment but other than that how does it cause harm much less grave harm. This classification was clearly political and nothing more. As long as government abuses classification of government to hide information from the American public I hope there will continue to be heroic individuals who leak that info.
136
It is possible revealing what we know compromised an effort to tracing its source or revealed to the Russians how we know. Permutations of that sort of not apparent on the first look are usually the reasons seemingly innocuous things remain hidden. That said this principle has been so abused by selfish actors in our government whose names I wish I knew to list them here that one can see that a young person untrained in critical thinking processes might make a rash judgment and act upon it.
1
Right notion, wrong end. If the info was as minor as you say, there is no moral justification for breaking the law and leaking it.
3
Actually Top Secret means Top Secret. People who receive top secret clearance understand perfectly well what top secret means. People who violate that trust are traitors and should be prosecuted as such. No individual has the right to divulge top secret information simply because they feel like it. Neither you nor Ms. Winner have the capacity or experience to understand the implications of how a particular piece of information effects things at other levels nor do either of you have some sort of "right" to break the law and should be prosecuted.
7
She should have wiped he2r document. You know, with a cloth.
5
She was caught because there was a record of her printing out a copy of the document and she was the only person who could not produce it or explain its whereabouts when asked. The Intercept gave her away by presenting the document or an image of it to the FBI for confirmation. They FBI saw that it had been folded and realized it had been printed out, folded and carried out. That was in one of the initial reports.
3
History will prove Mister Trump right: We'll be sick and tired of all this Winnering.
10
The NYTimes has an ongoing love affair with treasonous leakers.
21
Is it treason to tell us the citizens the truth. Or do you believe that the government is free to keep from the citizens anything they want. Why sould we not know that Russia is meddling in our election. Just because some spy/spook stamps it classified.
7
Naw, they don't seem to favor Trump, the biggest and most treasonous leaker of all.
What are you talking about? The intercept published the document. The government confirmed its authenticity. It is newsworthy. BTW, why is the fact of Russian hacking of local election offices and a voting software company classified? Is it because Prez Chaos sez a 400 lb. dude did the hack?
4
In a true democracy there should be few secrets.
13
We do not have a true democracy for the very good reason that "true democracy" just like Communism cannot work. Thus the genius of the founding fathers design of a Republic with Representative Democracy.
Democracies with no secrets don't last long. You are very naive.
We do not have a "true democracy" we have a Republic governed with Representative Democracy.
True democracy is government by everyone at the same time. That cannot work. people simply do not cooperate long term in groups larger or longer than it takes to play a game like football or soccer and even they have a hierarchy of governance which is undemocratic.
I think you may have the wrong ideas about what our government is and how it is supposed to work.
True democracy is government by everyone at the same time. That cannot work. people simply do not cooperate long term in groups larger or longer than it takes to play a game like football or soccer and even they have a hierarchy of governance which is undemocratic.
I think you may have the wrong ideas about what our government is and how it is supposed to work.
1
We do not have the right to obey the laws we agree with and to break the laws we don't like, even if you believe the end justifies the means, that leads us down a dangerous path. She broke the law, violated her oath to protect classified data, and should be prosecuted.
59
Uh, civil rights? Jim crow? then get to the back of the bus.
4
Since when is obeying the law "a right"?
Breaking a law, OTOH, in certain situations, could be called a right, however.
Breaking a law, OTOH, in certain situations, could be called a right, however.
@Common Sense - There are legal proceedings going forward, so she is being prosecuted. She took oath to protect classified data, but she also took a broader oath to protect the country. Sometimes, laws conflict.
1
Prosecution and jail time is too easy a sentence for this traitor. She should be expelled from America and left to wander in the foreign wilderness. Her new "reality" will be nothing but pain, and it is well deserved.
15
Seriously? Yes, she broke the law and she is going to pay for it. But, to her, our government had been subverted by former members of the KGB (of the Soviet Empire). You should learn a thing or two about who they were and are today is a slightly modified form.
As far as Donald and his administration is concerned. He is a disgrace not just to America but all of humanity. He is a severely damaged being. I don't hate him. I pity him and pray for his tortured soul. But his enablers? That is another story .... I am not sure what their excuses are .... ignorance, bottomless immorality .... on and on. I just wish they could just inflict it on themselves and those who choose to be their friends and keep it away from the rest of the world.
As far as Donald and his administration is concerned. He is a disgrace not just to America but all of humanity. He is a severely damaged being. I don't hate him. I pity him and pray for his tortured soul. But his enablers? That is another story .... I am not sure what their excuses are .... ignorance, bottomless immorality .... on and on. I just wish they could just inflict it on themselves and those who choose to be their friends and keep it away from the rest of the world.
President Trump is not a disgrace.
He was elected to remedy a disgrace.
He was elected to remedy a disgrace.
One person's traitor is another person's patriot. You are very quick to condemn this individual. Are you as quick to condemn Mr. Trump and his cronies?
1
A lot of stuff here. Clearly the prosecution is using the old throw the whole book at them tactic to scare a plea out of the young lady. In that effort they have leaked damaging items that will influence many potential jurors to help extort that desired plea. The judge should recuse herself now that she has expressed a bias.
We do not know what Ms. Winner has done or what she may have intended. Based on the leak we are meant to believe she is responsible for the leaker clearly wanted us to know that the Russians were far more involved in trying to affect the vote count and got much further than we have been told.
It makes it worse when you realize that the authorities claim they cannot know if HRC private servers were hacked yet assure us 100% that the Russians did not affect the vote! I'm sorry if you can't know how a thing you have in your hand has been accessed you surely cannot tell us that hundreds of business and government agencies whose systems you do not have the same access to have not been infiltrated by the many spear fishing casts. We simply do not know yet. I suspect they are laying dormant to see what the fallout of the current mess is and to make sure they are well placed to go at us in 2018.
We do not know what Ms. Winner has done or what she may have intended. Based on the leak we are meant to believe she is responsible for the leaker clearly wanted us to know that the Russians were far more involved in trying to affect the vote count and got much further than we have been told.
It makes it worse when you realize that the authorities claim they cannot know if HRC private servers were hacked yet assure us 100% that the Russians did not affect the vote! I'm sorry if you can't know how a thing you have in your hand has been accessed you surely cannot tell us that hundreds of business and government agencies whose systems you do not have the same access to have not been infiltrated by the many spear fishing casts. We simply do not know yet. I suspect they are laying dormant to see what the fallout of the current mess is and to make sure they are well placed to go at us in 2018.
8
Put yourself in her shoes. Our current "government" is not only taking women's rights away but has challenged human and environment rights as well.
Reality Leigh Winner is young and naive but from what I've read she is a true American.
Reality Leigh Winner is young and naive but from what I've read she is a true American.
35
You can't define what a True American is based on who acts in ways you agree with
4
When the US government denies citizens basic rights it's American to break those laws.
3
What basic rights is the US government denying its citizens?
You're making that up, aren't you.
You feel good when you say it, don't you.
You're making that up, aren't you.
You feel good when you say it, don't you.
6
Why is she being held without bond until trial? I cannot see that the safety of the community is threatened by this woman, and surely she is not a flight risk.
19
Does anyone, other than the judge and AUSA remember E. Snowden? If you do, there's your answer.
Wait for the trial. There will be so much that will not be available to her for her defense. Many issues that a normal defense wants to raise will not be allowed or even to mentioned. She will not face justice, but will face a huge cover up.
2
To make an example of this traitor and deter others.
I totally agree with it.
I totally agree with it.
1
Lets begin with the real charge against MS Winner, i.e. divulging TOP SECRET documents. How are these defined by the US government itself (I quote):
'Intelligence reporting is classified Top Secret level, indicating that its unauthorized disclosure could reasonably result in exceptionally grave damage to the national security "
Ms Winner's release document tops of RUSSIAN attempts to hack the US system not the other way around. In what conceivable way would such a disclosure possibly result in "exceptionally grave damage to the national security"?????
'Intelligence reporting is classified Top Secret level, indicating that its unauthorized disclosure could reasonably result in exceptionally grave damage to the national security "
Ms Winner's release document tops of RUSSIAN attempts to hack the US system not the other way around. In what conceivable way would such a disclosure possibly result in "exceptionally grave damage to the national security"?????
71
So, is she being prosecuted for revealing American or Russian state secrets? And how can this young woman be refused bail? What she did seems, at worst, grounds for termination, not incarceration.
27
This woman signed up for a clearance which spells out exactly what is allowed and not, and the penalties. The left hates to punish its own law breakers.
I have complex feelings about this case. 45's line has been that anything having to do with Russia is "fake news." He has made baseless claims that miliions voted illegally and that Obama tapped his phone during the "Sacred" election, but shown little concern about Russian influence in our election. It is important for citizens to know there is evidence contradicting those claims. That doesn't mean Ms. Winner is a hero. She knew what she was doing was illegal, but felt strongly enough to do it anyway. She will have to face the consequences.However, I don't see her as the monster the prosecution seems to be portraying. She seems more like a young fool driven by strong political ideology. We have plenty of old fools that are doing much more damage to the country.
95
Hey, every organization (including NYTimes) have rules for confidential documents. Otherwise, you just have anarchy, like this --
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/black-budget-summ...
Reality Winner had choices, and she has to live with them.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/black-budget-summ...
Reality Winner had choices, and she has to live with them.
I certainly feel no loyalty to #45. Nor do I trust him to deal appropriately with this important information. He and/or his masters are Russian puppets, illegitimate in the eyes of many, and I'm convinced this intelligence would have been buried on his desk - he does, after all, claim the right to "do anything". He does not love this country – he loves only the money he can scam out of it and the rest of the world from his newly exalted position. He is much less the "true American" than this beleaguered twenty-something.
He has never taken Russian interference seriously - at least in public - because he's known all about it all along; even in private I'm sure his feeling about it is gratitude, pure and simple. He certainly doesn't share our outrage (which is the only truly American response. May this recent evidence bring him low, very low.
He has never taken Russian interference seriously - at least in public - because he's known all about it all along; even in private I'm sure his feeling about it is gratitude, pure and simple. He certainly doesn't share our outrage (which is the only truly American response. May this recent evidence bring him low, very low.
1
How do people like this get hired? How did she pass clearance requirements? It boggles the mind.
11
Security clearance is easy its the Civil Service exam and dealing with fellow professionals daily that dishonest folks cannot get past hence the GOP inventing privatization as a ploy to get access to data they want to change and spend our money in wasteful ways, they don't care that it has also allowed espionage to flourish.
1
The new Regime in Washington probably thought she was a Republican .... The RNC (Russia's National Committee) insists on that now. Priebus' replacement is continuing to do his job for him while he and the rest of those fools turn over the US Government to the former KGB of the Soviet Empire.
1
You are delusional.
Now go get your shine box.
Now go get your shine box.
1
So. Many. Puns. Must. Resist...
5
"Will anything I ever type into an internet search engine come back to bite me?"
17
Yes.
1
Her mother basically ensured that this young woman would be troubled when she named her. I can only imagine what she went through as a child.
15
I just saw her mother describe her. She told us how she always tried to fix things and make them right. Yet there was no mention of establishing context beyond first impressions and then using reason to work out what was taking place outside initial impressions before drawing a conclusion, the number one defect in every person under the age of 50 today.
4
I agree with you with one exception. Many people over 50 are guilty of the same thing.
2
Its definitely more ubiquitous than it was when I was a kid and the powers that be were working so hard to destroy our education system. I know what I know because I persistently asked questions of adults until I knew the answer and could use in independently and objectively prove it worked.
I expect that instead of abuse and labeling me as disruptive and stupid, socially isolating me and otherwise seeing to it that I was abused daily to limit my mind with the effects of trauma I would be diagnosed and legally drugged into submission.
I expect that instead of abuse and labeling me as disruptive and stupid, socially isolating me and otherwise seeing to it that I was abused daily to limit my mind with the effects of trauma I would be diagnosed and legally drugged into submission.
Apparently, anything the government wants to hide from the people is declared "classified." As far as I'm concerned, she is a hero for providing us with this information.
95
Be serious. You can't let every individual working with classified material copy whatever they don't agree with and release it. Individuals are given top secret clearances because they are believed to be trustworthy. They need to be held to account.
31
Well said, Randy.
What this nation needs is more leakers and fewer classified documents.
My interests as a vet and and as a long-time defender of U.S. government policies are no longer being served by rulers in Washington D.C.
My disaffection did not begin in 2016.
Lies exposed through the Pentagon Papers, the lies upon which the invasion of Iraq was justified, and so many others convince me that "classified" no longer protects those principles upon which our country was founded.
Now, too many facts are held secret for protection of one or another political party.
What this nation needs is more leakers and fewer classified documents.
My interests as a vet and and as a long-time defender of U.S. government policies are no longer being served by rulers in Washington D.C.
My disaffection did not begin in 2016.
Lies exposed through the Pentagon Papers, the lies upon which the invasion of Iraq was justified, and so many others convince me that "classified" no longer protects those principles upon which our country was founded.
Now, too many facts are held secret for protection of one or another political party.
45
>>"You can't let every individual working with classified material copy whatever they don't agree with and release it."
No, but you can look at each case separately and forgive those who leak what shouldn't be classified in the first place. The traditional rules break down when classification is abused for political purposes under the guise of national security. Fix that problem, then we can talk about punishing righteous leakers because they broke a law.
No, but you can look at each case separately and forgive those who leak what shouldn't be classified in the first place. The traditional rules break down when classification is abused for political purposes under the guise of national security. Fix that problem, then we can talk about punishing righteous leakers because they broke a law.
I find it ironic that the first person to be indicted as a "leaker" is a naive but idealistic young woman. What about the more senior male leakers? It smacks of bullying. So what else is new with this administration. Hopefully she won't get a long sentence.
46
She's the first one they have evidence on. Turns out the Intercept whom are apparently just as naive gave her up when they tried to confirm the validity of the doc.
They have a *tad* more intelligence than her in regards to covering their tracks. Or not publishing her tracks for the world to see.
1
Time to set an example and prosecute her to the fullest extent of the law if the facts as presented are accurate. Paid salary by the USAF to learn a skill and then use it against our country's policy/ laws and act and speak recklessly - throw her in a cell for 20 years. Short sighted traitor behaviors must be punished and be held as an example to deter others.
25
Trump should be up for about 40 years by your standards then
Always important to make an example of people rather than treating them as people.
5
There were no "facts" presented in the article. The article presents us with what the prosecution who does not want a trial wanted to be printed so they could prejudice the jury and by that scare the defendant into taking a plea. Ditto the over charging, focusing on a use of plural rather than singular grammar in a conversation with family and making what are private things public to use them out of context to paint a picture all to avoid going to trial because they don't want to show what they really have which is basically nothing otherwise there would be no article telling us these opinions in the NYT. If they had a solid case they would stay quiet and show it in court.
5
I wonder: could Ms. Winner be just the tip of an iceberg of "leakers"? Seems to me that this happens way too often to be random leaking.......
5
Its the GOP privatization of our government that is allowing people who could not make it as a civil servant for not being stable or able to pass the tests and security checks or are unable to interact with other professional civil servants without being detected are getting access so the GOP can dole out money to its masters.
4
What she did was clearly illegal, but there are varying degrees of criminality. Let's not pretend she gave away nuclear launch codes here. Or, say, classified intel on the Islamic State to an enemy. Or the positions of nuclear subs to a murderous despot.
110
Of course the NYT, once an advocate of free speech, immediately jumps on a whistleblower as being "scary". If the NYT did their job we wouldn't need whistleblowers.
9
Leakers are intrinsically necessary to a democratic system when government employees who should be named always are hiding things they should not hide. Manning. Snowden and Winner all chose to act on their own without proper consultation with others to verify their concerns first. Manning and Snowden have done us great harm. Winner has if she is responsible, at least shown us that our government is lying about how deeply the Russians had gotten into our systems.
5
It should not be that easy. Why does the network not recognize "need to know" from the user's log-in information? Her clearance should not give her access to subjects she's neither assigned to nor read in on. It's just a clearance. Not identifying and recording portable media is a big software error. The system should know what's copied to where. Did they learn nothing from that mole Snowden?
28
Looks like someone mistook The Resistance for an actual political movement. Whoops!
>Growing up in Texas, Ms. Winner was a scholastic star who was offered a full scholarship to study engineering. Instead, she chose the Air Force and became a linguist. She was honorably discharged last year, and she recently moved to Augusta, about two hours east of Atlanta, to begin work as a contractor.
It's too bad, I wonder if she could have lived a normal life, had her mind not been poisoned by the hyperbole that comes out of MSM outlets every day? After Kathy Griffin et al, making death threats to the President probably seemed like a normal thing for her.
>Growing up in Texas, Ms. Winner was a scholastic star who was offered a full scholarship to study engineering. Instead, she chose the Air Force and became a linguist. She was honorably discharged last year, and she recently moved to Augusta, about two hours east of Atlanta, to begin work as a contractor.
It's too bad, I wonder if she could have lived a normal life, had her mind not been poisoned by the hyperbole that comes out of MSM outlets every day? After Kathy Griffin et al, making death threats to the President probably seemed like a normal thing for her.
14
Your comments are laughable, I don't know where you get your information but how is it that you are so certain it is truth?....Because you agree with it? Ridiculous.
3
Speaking of hperbold . . . "poisoned"?
2
There is a bumper sticker you should see. It was created by a woman who owns a music store somewhere in NM. Anyway.....
"Don't believe everything you think."
"Don't believe everything you think."
3
I don't know anything about Ms. Winner's character or motives. I do understand she broke the law and will be prosecuted. But I am greatful that she released this information and am baffled why Americans are being kept in the dark about another Russian interference with our elections. If Russian operatives roamed the US on Election Day and disrupted the election by blocking polling places in any way they could we would be mobilizing in every way to fight Russian interference. Remember when Republicans in Congress renamed French Fries because the French didn't want to join the 2nd Gulf War. Yet today when our very Democracy is at risk we hear silence and excuses from them. I am in my 60's. I have seen assasinations, resignations, an impeachment, the attacks on 9/11 and not one but two Electoral College victories and yet I have never been more worried for my country than I am today.
120
So what do we do if Russia indeed tried to interfere? Ineffective sanctions? Go to war. This is standard SOP by Russia and it our job to keep our elections secure.
1
You are right. It is our job to keep our elections secure. But the Trump administration thinks voter fraud by non citizens is the big problem and is interested in easing Russia's sanctions. Any other administration would appoint a special commission to prevent future hacking and would not be cozying up to Putin and friends.
4
The media needs to be cautious in attributing motives to Ms. Winner. In many cases the media has abetted political operatives that want to stain leakers and the media becomes echo chambers for unfounded claims. Bowe Bergdahl, for instance, another passionate and confused young individual who was falsely accused of being a Taliban sympathizer/recruit.
6
Does anyone happen to have the address for her legal defense fund...?
25
I think the New York Times should print it as part of their journalistic inquiry into the matter.
As a side benefit, it might keep me from cancelling my subscription out of anger at the pretty one sided coverage here.
As a side benefit, it might keep me from cancelling my subscription out of anger at the pretty one sided coverage here.
3
I wonder if any of the troubling things investigators have found involved repeated contacts with Russian government officials or banks? Or maybe a failure to disclose such contacts while having a background investigation done for security clearance. You wouldn't want someone like that with access to classified information, would you?
39
Agree. I wish Reality had resigned instead of trading a secure working environment for a maximum security cell.
Seriously. Come on. This is all silly compared to who Trump is and what he's done.
4
"You wouldn't want someone like that with access to classified information, would you?"
Of course not. That's why I voted for Bernie and Hillary instead!
Of course not. That's why I voted for Bernie and Hillary instead!
5
"N.S.A. Contractor May Have Stolen Secrets Before"
The article headline: "N.S.A. Contractor May Have Mishandled Secrets Before, Prosecutor Says"
The difference between "mishandled" and "stolen" is obviously qualitative, not quantitative. One involves intent, the other does not. Criminally, they are entirely different. It is much like the difference between manslaughter and murder (in most jurisdictions.) Meanwhile, another Home Page headline reads: "Trump’s Interactions With Comey: Criminal or Clueless?" In this case, the headline writer and editor (if there actually is one and not just another Times Google algorithm) acknowledges the distinction.
Now that the Public Editor has been axed, I can't help but wonder if the Times, in its rush to have people breathlessly sign up for the latest gossip and testimony from the Cosby trial, no longer cares about these distinctions.