Unauthorized disclosure and Corruption

Over the years, and particularly in the current frenzy of political partisanship, we are treated to days, weeks, months of ?news?, regarding unauthorized disclosure of national sensitive/classified information, and corruption on the part of public officials.

Unauthorized disclosure is typically the result of actions by Whistle blowers, Leakers, and the occasional Traitor. Traitors are those who act for personal monetary gain by ?selling? information. Leakers are those ?unnamed sources?, whose stories are ?spun? by the media to create headlines. Whistle blowers typically are motivated either by a personal grudge, or from a personal belief that something needs correction.

There exist guidelines and procedures for ?classifying? information for the purpose of protecting the Nation?s secrets. Classified information is intended to be shared by and between only those who have a ?need to know?.

Typically, where the responsibility for such is on the ?uniform? side of the military house, these guidelines and procedures are reasonably followed.

On the ?civilian? side of the house, both in the DOD and other government agencies, things get much looser. This is usually the result of a cavalier attitude toward security by those who breath the thin air in the upper reaches of the bureaucratic hierarchy. Those self anointed or political appointed intellectuals who consider themselves too important to waste time following an ?ordinary? procedure. Something may become ?classified? in this environment solely upon the perspective of a single individual, just as loosely as the classification of something else might be ignored.

Then comes the media, where news reporters, supported by editors, take it upon themselves to determine if something, in their opinion, is classified and should be protected. The ever pressing need ?to be first? with breaking news, and the political bias of the news agency, are determining factors.

And finally, we add the public. A public who didn?t know they had a need to know until a titillating headline caught their attention. The gravity of that need to know, of course, measured by the political bias of the individual.

And then we get to corruption in government, also in the news most recently.

One of an investigation of an elected official, not yet charged, whose official office was ?raided?, with prior court approval. Oh, the indignation of the individual, and other elected officials. Guess they felt that winning an election imbued upon them some sort of congressional immunity from the reach of the law.

Another ongoing activity following the adjudication of a political operative?s activity, that implicated and led to the prosecution of several others. Most recently a media source named a congressional leader as ?being in the mix?. The Justice Department has said there is no ?open active investigation of this individual?. Definition of ?is? ?

I find an interesting twist to the media hoo-rah involving the ?raid? of the congressional office. They would have us believe that almost everything done by the current administration is politically motivated. In this instance they would have us believe that the republicans had the corruption thing ?held cold?, with the coverage of the congressman from Louisiana, which essentially muted democratic noise about corruption on the republican side. That ?raiding the office? was an unwise political move, providing the democrats the opportunity to plead political overreach.

To me, it appears the Justice Department is doing their job, disregarding political considerations.