Post #2795756

@uptill3@hacked.af Sorry, but that's all just a bit nonsensical. As I explained in the original post, the EO lays out the classification framework, and the courts rely on that framework to delineate violations of the law. The law also lays out some basic foundations (notably intent) and hits constitutional limits, which is why random people don't get prosecuted for handling publicly leaked classified. However, go take a look at the active case against Julian Assange, who's facing a whole raft of Espionage Act charges specifically for his active involvement in leaking classified. As for why congress doesn't need clearances to access classified, it's because EO 12333 specifically exempts them, in favor of directly managing their access (anything else would be an administrative nightmare). However, the whole reason why the Gravel v. United States precedent exists is because the DoJ was quite serious about charging Gravel and his aide under the Espionage Act for mishandling classified. Anyway, I'm kinda getting the impression I'm being trolled here. So, I'm just going to leave it at this, and respond no further.