• PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Knowingly owning or using classified info without proper clearance is, in fact, a crime.

    That’s a large part of what Trump’s classified document raid was for. Former presidents usually have a lot of classified stuff to turn over after leaving office. It’s standard practice, (and perfectly legal) to simply send it back (via the proper channels) as soon as you discover you have it. But if you conceal it and refuse to return it (like Trump did) then that’ll land you in some hot water.

      • No_Eponym@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        None, because Trump deployed an appropriately-speced Cannon as a countermeasure.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      AFAIK it’s part of being given some clearance. In most Western countries it’s fine to republish already leaked material as a private citizen. How would the media do it otherwise?

    • Liz@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s my understanding that you’re only required to protect the information if you’ve actually agreed to do so, which is obviously a retirement for being given access. Elected officials are a weird area where they have a much easier time getting clearance, but they’ve still made agreements to protect the information.

      Trump was authorized to handle classified information in the first place, which is why his mishandling was a problem. I haven’t read the actual law, but I’m pretty sure ordinary people who happen across classified information have no duty at all in any direction. If you can show me an example of a random person getting in trouble for sharing classified information that they didn’t steal or get others to steal, well, let me know.

      • lad@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        So, hypothetically, you find a source who leaks data to you, then claim you were sent it anonymously, then all good, you’re not the one who leaked it and the source is unknown. I slightly doubt that it works that way, but I don’t have specific cases to prove it

      • jimbolauski@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Publishing classified info can get you espionage charges, just ask Julian Assange.

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      No, his problem is that he was supposed to have access at some point wherein you agree to secure documents in certain ways. If you’re given it or find it you do not have that duty. Defense secrets are much more protected but still not that much of you aren’t supposed to have access.