You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #3: That's irrelevant to the case. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. That's irrelevant to the case.
Judgment regarding the contents of the documents has no bearing on the law. The law simply prohibits transferring classified documents to people not authorized to receive them. The content of the documents is irrelevant to that law. Having held a high-level security clearance, that law was very carefully explained to me while I was in the USAF, as were the penalties for violating it. I signed a document to the effect that I understood both. Military personnel who have access to classified materials get that briefing and sign that document. It will, no doubt be presented.

Proper laws are simple in their form. Poor laws are not simple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC