Should Any Government Worker/Politician Be Tried....

[Revoltingest]

....for violating any significant law, eg, 1947 National Security Act?

Are there exculpating circumstances, eg, accident, ignorance of the law?
Republicans, Democrats, or both should be judged & held accountable?

 

[Heyo]

....for violating any significant law, eg, 1947 National Security Act?

Are there exculpating circumstances, eg, accident, ignorance of the law?
Republicans, Democrats, or both should be judged & held accountable?

Ignorance should never be an excuse in those cases. Anyone who gets near such documents should know the law (and if they don't, the person letting them get near the documents without informing them should be prosecuted).

 

[Shaul]

Have you actually read the National Security Act?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Have you actually read the National Security Act?

Does that matter, in the context of the question of this thread? If it is legally enacted, it is the law. If it has penalties for violating it, then prosecutions should follow violations, no?

 

[Shaul]

Does that matter, in the context of the question of this thread? If it is legally enacted, it is the law. If it has penalties for violating it, then prosecutions should follow violations, no?

Yes it matters to know if someone is talking from an informed position or not.

 

[F1fan]

Yes it matters to know if someone is talking from an informed position or not.

Then by your standard a person working for a government agency should know the laws that impact their job so they can perform from an informed position. If a person handles classified documents they will be taught the protocols and rules. If the worker ignores the rules, then that is on them.

So to answer the question, yes, everyone should be held accountable. Nixon was going to be held accountable and he was allowed to resign, and then pardoned by Ford.

 

[Revoltingest]

Have you actually read the National Security Act?

Nope.
Not my job, man.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes it matters to know if someone is talking from an informed position or not.

I only asked questions in the OP.
Should they not be answered if I lack expertise on the laws?
If you haven't read it, should you refrain from posting here?

 

[Revoltingest]

Back when I had a secret clearance, & access
to such documents at Northrop, I knew better
than to take them home with me. And I had
almost no training. Yet I still knew it.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Back when I had a secret clearance, & access
to such documents at Northrop, I knew better
than to take them home with me. And I had
almost no training. Yet I still knew it.

You're smart enough to be president!
Wait, no, you're too smart to president!

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Have you actually read the National Security Act?

Does that matter one bit to the OP question if this hypothetical politician has violated it?

 

[Stevicus]

....for violating any significant law, eg, 1947 National Security Act?

Are there exculpating circumstances, eg, accident, ignorance of the law?
Republicans, Democrats, or both should be judged & held accountable?

National Security Act of 1947 - Wikipedia

An Act to promote the national security by providing for a Secretary of Defense; for a National Military Establishment; for a Department of the Army, a Department of the Navy, a Department of the Air Force; and for the coordination of the activities of the National Military Establishment with other departments and agencies of the Government concerned with the national security.

 

[sun rise]

....for violating any significant law,

@Shaul ignored the OP question which was to ask whether or not anyone is above the law no matter who that is and what the law is.

My answer is that if anyone is above any law then I claim that everyone can ignore any law that does not suit them.

The corollary to this is that the country needs to enforce its laws no matter who breaks them.

 

[Revoltingest]

@Shaul ignored the OP question which was to ask whether or not anyone is above the law no matter who that is and what the law is.

My answer is that if anyone is above any law then I claim that everyone can ignore any law that does not suit them.

The corollary to this is that the country needs to enforce its laws no matter who breaks them.

To ignore the law, you need sufficient political power.
As things stand, it is so. This should change.
Far more politicians should be in prison.

 

[Truth in love]

....for violating any significant law, eg, 1947 National Security Act?

Are there exculpating circumstances, eg, accident, ignorance of the law?
Republicans, Democrats, or both should be judged & held accountable?

The needs to be enforced equally or repealed. Any other “solution” turns the law into a political tool.

 

[GardenLady]

Over many years, my colleagues and I were required to take an annual brief course on document and data security for federal contracts. We kept any confidential files in locked areas with number-pad door locks and file cabinets requiring keys. We had multi-layer computer security protocols for research data. I'm not talking about classified data here, but a fair amount was confidential (e.g., info on research participants). People who handle classified data go through much more training and background checks than I did.

Innocent errors or accidents can occur on a RARE basis, requiring remedy/remediation and more training. For carelessness or negligence, I've seen people lose their jobs over this. Never a prosecution, but as I said, we were not working with classified data. and I haven't seen cases of willful violation.

There is no way someone could work in the federal government for years and not know about this stuff. For willful violation, where classified or sensitive data are documents are concerned, I certainly favor prosecution and exclusion from further federal service, regardless of party or position.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't think that any should be tried.

Instead all should be found guilty before they enter office and after their term is over a judge could determine if they earned clemency or not;

 

[Revoltingest]

The needs to be enforced equally or repealed. Any other “solution” turns the law into a political tool.

A law can be useful even if enforced in a corrupt manner.
I just prefer to strive for curbing corruption.

 

[Shaul]

Then by your standard a person working for a government agency should know the laws that impact their job so they can perform from an informed position. If a person handles classified documents they will be taught the protocols and rules. If the worker ignores the rules, then that is on them.

So to answer the question, yes, everyone should be held accountable. Nixon was going to be held accountable and he was allowed to resign, and then pardoned by Ford.

My standard is that someone opining in a thread about the National Security Act should know what is in it. Have you yourself read it?

 

[Shaul]

@Shaul ignored the OP question which was to ask whether or not anyone is above the law no matter who that is and what the law is.

My answer is that if anyone is above any law then I claim that everyone can ignore any law that does not suit them.

The corollary to this is that the country needs to enforce its laws no matter who breaks them.

I don’t ignore the question. I pointed out that unless a poster has read the Act they are ill equipped to address it. Have you actually read the Act?