Support NeoGAF

[TAJ]

Why should she be protected for committing a crime again?

I'll bet when someone gets sent to prison or executed for political protest in a country where it's illegal you just say "Well, they were a criminal.".

 

[nomis]

Ohhh, the Intercept fucked up, they should have made sure the documents were clean of identifiable data before publishing.

"Fucked up"

Incompetence and malice are completely indiscernible these days

 

[Mully]

To those that think The Intercept, "burned," their source:

That's not how reporting works.

Most likely The Intercept contacted the NSA to corroborate details, and the NSA likely figured out who leaked the document based on their own investigation. The NSA does not fuck around with internal documents since Snowden.

The Snowden and Manning leaks made the NSA revamp their entire contractor network infrastructure. Before those leaks, the NSA and State had very wide open networks for their contractors. Any contractor/grunt with a security clearance could open up a variety of files, documents, etc.

Following 9/11, the NSA and most of the IC wanted to ensure that counter terrorism investigators could access any and all information and documents at anytime. Part of 9/11 was blamed on the lack of intelligence sharing, even between different floors in the CIA, so the IC thought it would be best to allow anyone to access anything to prevent the next attack, unfortunately for them, it seems they left themselves open to leakers like Snowden and Manning.

Since then, both have made it a point to extremely compartmentalize anything and everything. The NSA knows what a contractor saw and can figure out quickly if a worker abused their power (like spying on an ex) or leaked documents.

The Intercept did not burn a source, they did their job by confirming certain aspects of the document with the NSA. The NSA likely figured out who leaked that document based on their new information sharing procedures and infrastructure with contractors.

To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised that the NSA knew who leaked the documents before The Intercept contacted them. Based on reporting by the Times and NPR over the last few years, it's clear that the NSA in particular is very proactive in investigating any and all suspicious activity committed by their own agents or contractors.

 

[sangreal]

She could face the death penalty. You know damn well Trump and Sessions will push for it too. Let's hope her jury nullifies or fails to convict under the Act.

There are a lot of crimes defined in the espionage act and the vast majority are not punishable by death, including this one. You're thinking of section 794 which relates to defense secrets -- even Snowden was not charged under that section

 

[vonStirlitz]

I hate to do this but DNC should stand up in defense for her even if it looks like they are using her. She really needs to get protected though.

She leaked state secrets, whatever the content or deemed public interest. It is a criminal act and has national security implications. There has to be a policy of charging anyone who breaches this. It is the equivalent of shoplifting or trespass, only this time with the critical information of the state. It is for politicians to change the rules, but not protect those who broke the law.

Also, the US intel community need to either do better diligence on their employees and contractors, or restrict access to intel, and its means of dissemination and reproduction, because this keeps happening.

 

[nomis]

To those that think The Intercept, "burned," their source:

That's not how reporting works.

Most likely The Intercept contacted the NSA to corroborate details, and the NSA likely figured out who leaked the document based on their own investigation. The NSA does not fuck around with internal documents since Snowden.

The Snowden and Manning leaks made the NSA revamp their entire contractor network infrastructure. Before those leaks, the NSA and State had very wide open networks for their contractors. Any contractor/grunt with a security clearance could open up a variety of files, documents, etc.

Following 9/11, the NSA and most of the IC wanted to ensure that counter terrorism investigators could access any and all information and documents at anytime. Part of 9/11 was blamed on the lack of intelligence sharing, even between different floors in the CIA, so the IC thought it would be best to allow anyone to access anything to prevent the next attack, unfortunately for them, it seems they left themselves open to leakers like Snowden and Manning.

Since then, both have made it a point to extremely compartmentalize anything and everything. The NSA knows what a contractor saw and can figure out quickly if a worker abused their power (like spying on an ex) or leaked documents.

The Intercept did not burn a source, they did their job by confirming certain aspects of the document with the NSA. The NSA likely figured out who leaked that document based on their new information sharing procedures and infrastructure with contractors.

To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised that the NSA knew who leaked the documents before The Intercept contacted them. Based on reporting by the Times and NPR over the last few years, it's clear that the NSA in particular is very proactive in investigating any and all suspicious activity committed by their own agents or contractors.

Regardless of legality, why the fuck didn't Ms. Winner take this to, say, the Washington Post?

Intercept is Pro-Putin narrative and she was not being a hero

 

[Dartastic]

We're losing sight of the real story with this.

 

[Plasmid]

Truly heroic. She probably knew she'd be caught immediately yet still did it. Can't imagine how that feels but good for her.

 

[Killthee]

A true American hero.

Shame she didn’t think things through and used her work email to leak it though.

 

[Dopus]

Regardless of legality, why the fuck didn't Ms. Winner take this to, say, the Washington Post?

Intercept is Pro-Putin narrative and she was not being a hero

No, it's not. This is total nonsense. At best, you can claim that Greenwald rejected the official narrative and demanded actual proof - which is indeed what happened. And here is some of it, published by The Intercept.

 

[cpp_is_king]

Man, to go down for something like this, ugh. The documents aren't even that interesting.

 

[sangreal]

Regardless of legality, why the fuck didn't Ms. Winner take this to, say, the Washington Post?

Intercept is Pro-Putin narrative and she was not being a hero

Maybe she was just trying to show them how wrong they were

 

[Malvolio]

I feel so much safer now.

 

[IchigoSharingan]

The Intercept broke the first rule of SlickDeals.

I understood that reference

 

[Kin5290]

To those that think The Intercept, "burned," their source:

That's not how reporting works.

Most likely The Intercept contacted the NSA to corroborate details, and the NSA likely figured out who leaked the document based on their own investigation. The NSA does not fuck around with internal documents since Snowden.

The Snowden and Manning leaks made the NSA revamp their entire contractor network infrastructure. Before those leaks, the NSA and State had very wide open networks for their contractors. Any contractor/grunt with a security clearance could open up a variety of files, documents, etc.

Following 9/11, the NSA and most of the IC wanted to ensure that counter terrorism investigators could access any and all information and documents at anytime. Part of 9/11 was blamed on the lack of intelligence sharing, even between different floors in the CIA, so the IC thought it would be best to allow anyone to access anything to prevent the next attack, unfortunately for them, it seems they left themselves open to leakers like Snowden and Manning.

Since then, both have made it a point to extremely compartmentalize anything and everything. The NSA knows what a contractor saw and can figure out quickly if a worker abused their power (like spying on an ex) or leaked documents.

The Intercept did not burn a source, they did their job by confirming certain aspects of the document with the NSA. The NSA likely figured out who leaked that document based on their new information sharing procedures and infrastructure with contractors.

To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised that the NSA knew who leaked the documents before The Intercept contacted them. Based on reporting by the Times and NPR over the last few years, it's clear that the NSA in particular is very proactive in investigating any and all suspicious activity committed by their own agents or contractors.

If The Intercept showed the NSA the raw report to verify it, and the NSA used what The Intercept showed them to identify the leak, then that means that The Intercept absolutely burned their source.

Doesn't change the fact that said source was a 25 year old contractor with no knowledge of tradecraft whatsoever, but The Intercept could have acted to protect that source on their end.

 

[Mully]

Regardless of legality, why the fuck didn't Ms. Winner take this to, say, the Washington Post?

Intercept is Pro-Putin narrative and she was not being a hero

Because Greenwald previously worked with another NSA leaker. There's not too many journalists with a history of working with major leaks from the NSA.

Greenwald did not have anything to do with this woman getting caught. He didn't do this on behalf of Putin. He's not a Putin stooge or Russian whataboutism narrative stringer. He's just a highly experienced and skeptical intel reporter who pisses off a lot of people by reporting his beat: US intel fuckups.

The NSA has revamped all of its protocols since Snowden. They caught her because their new system works better than their old one.

 

[Cirion]

The issue w/ Manning is that she was treated like shit b/c of her trans identity and it was inexcusable. Not that she got sent to prison.

I like how you describe her prison term in the same way you would describe a prison term for some low level first time offending crack dealer. Every single thing about her prison sentence was inhuman and barbarian, and not just because of her trans identity. by supporting her sentence, you actively do exactly the same Trump calls for constantly: Instilling fear in every potential leaker, punishing those who get caught with draconian measures like Turkey does it, getting your troops in order. No, you can't expect of every leaker, who most of the time acts alone, under extremely high pressure and without any experience in doing what he/she just does to leak everything in the "correct way". Don't parrot conservative talking points like "Leaks endanger our foreign policy/agents/whatever" Mannings leaks revealed multiple despicable, murderous crimes by the US military, among other things.

What is happening to the new leaker is horrible. But even in this thread there is morally bankrupt "well, she did break the law"-formalism happening. Shameful.

 

[SomewhatGroovy]

Why is this a two page only thread?

Are these NSA leaks uninteresting?

 

[kirblar]

I like how you describe her prison term in the same way you would describe a prison term for some low level first time offending crack dealer. Every single thing about her prison sentence was inhuman and barbarian, and not just because of her trans identity. by supporting her sentence, you actively do exactly the same Trump calls for constantly: Instilling fear in every potential leaker, punishing those who get caught with draconian measures like Turkey does it, getting your troops in order. No, you can't expect of every leaker, who most of the time acts alone, under extremely high pressure and without any experience in doing what he/she just does to leak everything in the "correct way". Don't parrot conservative talking points like "Leaks endanger our foreign policy/agents/whatever" Mannings leaks revealed multiple despicable, murderous crimes by the US military, among other things.

What is happening to her is horrible. But even in this thread there is morally bankrupt "well, she did break the law"-formalism happening. Shameful.

She provided classified intelligence to a propaganda front for the Russian Government.

That's something that should be punished, yes.

(I have much more complicated feelings on Snowden.)

 

[Dopus]

Maybe she was just trying to show them how wrong they were

Let's not play along with this "Intercept is Pro-Putin" narrative.

She provided classified intelligence to a propaganda front for the Russian Government.

That's something that should be punished, yes.

(I have much more complicated feelings on Snowden.)

Dear me.

You seriously lose all credibility when you start spouting tinfoil levels of crazy.

 

[TAJ]

Why is this a two page only thread?

Are these NSA leaks uninteresting?

There was already a thread about the leak that included this news and some people are probably just sticking to that.
And the leaks are absolutely shocking, even after the events of the last few months.

 

[Shadow Puppetry]

Apparently, she had a search warrant for a podcast transcripts, not the classified leaks.

Reality Winner, the U.S. government contractor arrested Monday for leaking top secret information to The Intercept, was picked up after a federal judge authorized a search warrant based on a request for a podcast transcript she had sent to media organization.

The search warrant application, filed on June 3, details the probable cause put forth by special agent Justin C. Garrick to investigate Winner’s home and car for documents related to the NSA leak. That leak contained evidence the Russian military “executed a cyberattack on at least one U.S. voting software supplier,” and was published by The Intercept on Monday.

As reporter Max Read points out, the FBI’s assertion that a “crease” in the document led investigators to Winner is a “dirty trick,” adding it’s “a good way to sow doubt about The Intercept’s “ability to handle sources).

 

[kirblar]

Dear me.

Wikileaks isn't a propaganda front for the Russian Government?

 

[rjinaz]

Truly heroic. She probably knew she'd be caught immediately yet still did it. Can't imagine how that feels but good for her.

Hopefully it will pay off for her in the long run, if the Trump administration does go down.

But it's got to be hell for her right now.

 

[BoogieWoogie]

What a surprise, the GOP hates Reality!

 

[Mully]

If The Intercept showed the NSA the raw report to verify it, and the NSA used what The Intercept showed them to identify the leak, then that means that The Intercept absolutely burned their source.

Doesn't change the fact that said source was a 25 year old contractor with no knowledge of tradecraft whatsoever, but The Intercept could have acted to protect that source on their end.

They showed the report to verify it and to not disclose sources and methods that were likely on the document. It's their job. It'd be more unethical if they did not verify the authenticity of the document and divulged the sources and methods.

I'm not sure what you wanted The Intercept to do. It's standard practice to verify a leaked document with a primary source.

 

[Socivol]

She did such a poor job of leaking this if she didn't want to get caught. The article I read basically says she put a red flag on her back that she did it. Sucks for her, but honestly leaks are problematic. While I am enjoying these leaks currently because that Cheeto is an idiot, I have to admit that they are dangerous.

 

[nomis]

Because Greenwald previously worked with another NSA leaker. There's not too many journalists with a history of working with major leaks from the NSA.

Greenwald did not have anything to do with this woman getting caught. He didn't do this on behalf of Putin. He's not a Putin stooge or Russian whataboutism narrative stringer. He's just a highly experienced and skeptical intel reporter who pisses off a lot of people by reporting his beat: US intel fuckups.

The NSA has revamped all of its protocols since Snowden. They caught her because their new system works better than their old one.

Well he either didn't protect his source adequately, or he intentionally took identifying info back to the NSA. Based on some of what Glenn Greenwald has said on twitter, I just think he's subtler than most in his whataboutism.

 

[shawnbuddy]

Man, to go down for something like this, ugh. The documents aren't even that interesting.

Why am I not surprised that you're the only person who thinks proof the Russians tried to hack voter registration systems is not interesting?

 

[gravitybear]

I feel bad for her - 25 year old kid thought she was doing the right thing, but now she'll be in prison for the rest of her life, at best.

But, on the other hand, having worked in a classified environment, you do get all the training and are taught very quickly not to fuck around. She knew the consequences, especially now.

 

[skybald]

Apparently, she had a search warrant for a podcast transcripts, not the classified leaks.

Reality Winner, the U.S. government contractor arrested Monday for leaking top secret information to The Intercept, was picked up after a federal judge authorized a search warrant based on a request for a podcast transcript she had sent to media organization.

The search warrant application, filed on June 3, details the probable cause put forth by special agent Justin C. Garrick to investigate Winner’s home and car for documents related to the NSA leak. That leak contained evidence the Russian military “executed a cyberattack on at least one U.S. voting software supplier,” and was published by The Intercept on Monday.

As reporter Max Read points out, the FBI’s assertion that a “crease” in the document led investigators to Winner is a “dirty trick,” adding it’s “a good way to sow doubt about The Intercept’s “ability to handle sources).

If she was caught because of the microdots, The Intercept really did drop that ball.

 

[nomis]

Dear me.

You seriously lose all credibility when you start spouting tinfoil levels of crazy.

When people comment on anything about Russian hacking/influence/etc. and are painfully ignorant of things like Wikileaks being a de facto propaganda apparatus of the Kremlin it makes me fucking depressed

Russia is REALLY good at disinformation, they've been playing this game for decades.

Wikileaks doesn't even lampshade their affiliations ffs

 

[Socivol]

If she was caught because of the microdots, The Intercept really did drop that ball.

The article from Politico said this

According to the DOJ criminal complaint, an unnamed government agency informed the FBI on Thursday that a news organization had recently contacted it to authenticate a leaked document. The unnamed agency confirmed that the document was real and classified at the top secret level.

According to the criminal complaint, Winner printed out the document “on around about” May 9 and subsequently sent it to “an online news outlet” through the mail.

The unnamed agency that produced the report determined that only six people had printed it out. After investigating those individual's work computers, the government determined that only Winner had emailed the news outlet.


It doesn't sound like she did a good job at trying to hide her activities at all.

 

[Volimar]

Reality does have a liberal bias!

It's a shame, but Trump is going to go in hard on making an example of him considering that leaks have been the bane of his existence.

 

[LiK]

Email? Seriously?

 

[BobLoblaw]

Not to get all racial or sexist or anything, but if any type of break was to be given for this, she fits the bill. I can only imagine the demagoguery if this was a black, Muslim guy.

 

[Dopus]

Wikileaks isn't a propaganda front for the Russian Government?

If it was you'd hear direct language from the IC or the previous administration. But you didn't and you don't because there isn't evidence for it beyond a severe case of confirmation bias. That is unless we are shown it.

The assessment of the previous administration, and more directly the POTUS himself was that they didn't know "whether WikiLeaks was witting or not in being the conduit through which we heard about the DNC e-mails that were leaked."

So unless you have actual evidence for it, it's a nice theory but you should probably add that you think it *might* be a front for the Russian government or that you believe it was compromised by them in the last 5 or 6 years.

When people comment on anything about Russian hacking/influence/etc. and are painfully ignorant of things like Wikileaks being a de facto propaganda apparatus of the Kremlin it makes me fucking depressed

Russia is REALLY good at disinformation, they've been playing this game for decades.

Wikileaks doesn't even lampshade their affiliations ffs

You talk of ignorance when you're trying to present opinion as fact. Please.

 

[Cirion]

She provided classified intelligence to a propaganda front for the Russian Government.

Seriously?!

That happened years and years ago, when Wikileaks was commonly held in high regard by almost everyone and was seen THE go-to platform for leakers. It's really high mental gymnastics to claim Manning was BACK THEN leaking to a tool of the Russian government. Second, there is no evidence whatsoever that Wikileaks nowadays is simply a part of Russian intelligence like you claim. It's probably influenced by Russia and Assange is an asshat, but your claim is on Louise-Mensch-level without any actual evidence.

By the way, what is happening right now on her Facebook-Page is sad and shameful, hundreds of Trump-supporting morons full of hate and schadenfreude.

 

[Rentahamster]

Intercept is Pro-Putin narrative and she was not being a hero

She provided classified intelligence to a propaganda front for the Russian Government.

Oh c'mon now. The Intercept's and Greenwald's track records have been pretty consistent over the years. What changes is whom they're pissing off.

 

[cpp_is_king]

Why am I not surprised that you're the only person who thinks proof the Russians tried to hack voter registration systems is not interesting?

Because you're biased and looking for things to justify your dislike for me based on words on the internet.

We already knew there was proof, the CIA / NSA had already said they had evidence of it. Why do we need to see the actual evidence? Who cares, not worth committing treason to release some information that we basically already knew

It's not like she leaked something that intelligence agencies were trying to hide. Use your brain before you jump to conclusions

 

[shawnbuddy]

The article from Politico said this

According to the DOJ criminal complaint, an unnamed government agency informed the FBI on Thursday that a news organization had recently contacted it to authenticate a leaked document. The unnamed agency confirmed that the document was real and classified at the top secret level.

According to the criminal complaint, Winner printed out the document “on around about” May 9 and subsequently sent it to “an online news outlet” through the mail.

The unnamed agency that produced the report determined that only six people had printed it out. After investigating those individual's work computers, the government determined that only Winner had emailed the news outlet.


It doesn't sound like she did a good job at trying to hide her activities at all.

She had to know she would get caught. She didn't cover her tracks and didn't deny it when they questioned her. She must have felt it was worth it.

 

[PSYGN]

Something strikes me weird about young adults having access/clearance to sensitive information like this.

 

[nomis]

I have no beef with people expressing solidarity with Chelsea Manning, I think she was treated completely unfairly. At best people like Manning and Snowden were completely unaware that they were aiding Russia through its ties to wikileaks or merely by the fact that if something hurts U.S. intelligence, it aids Russia's. But knowing what we know now about Wikileaks and the FSB's symbiotic relationship, and the Kremlins efforts to undermine your democratic institutions, I think it's by default "whataboutism" to say that the end result of their whistleblowing was objectively good for Americans.

If it was you'd hear direct language from the IC or the previous administration. But you didn't and you don't because there isn't evidence for it beyond a severe case of confirmation bias. That is unless we are shown it.

The assessment of the previous administration, and more directly the POTUS himself was that they didn't know "whether WikiLeaks was witting or not in being the conduit through which we heard about the DNC e-mails that were leaked."

So unless you have actual evidence for it, it's a nice theory but you should probably add that you think it *might* be a front for the Russian government or that you believe it was compromised by them in the last 5 or 6 years.

I don't believe anyone here has said that there are literal Russian intelligence officials running Wikileaks, or that they are actually a "front" name. However, questioning their clear and present ties and mutual backscratching is beyond thick.

 

[kirblar]

Oh c'mon now. The Intercept's and Greenwald's track records have been pretty consistent over the years. What changes is whom they're pissing off.

I wasn't referring to Greenwald - Manning leaked to Wikileaks.

 

[Mully]

Well he either didn't protect his source adequately, or he intentionally took identifying info back to the NSA. Based on some of what Glenn Greenwald has said on twitter, I just think he's subtler than most in his whataboutism.

She emailed the document from her personal account according to Politico. There's not much The Intercept could do to protect her from her own ignorance.

 

[The Albatross]

I'll bet when someone gets sent to prison or executed for political protest in a country where it's illegal you just say "Well, they were a criminal.".

Going to jail for a political protest is a good deal different than going to jail for leaking classified intelligence on a foreign government hacking your election...

And to a third rate garbage website at that.

If you leak to the NYT, WaPo, ProPublica, or NPR, they do more to cover the ass of the leaker. The Incercept exposed this leaker in their attempt to prove their gravitas, but even then she likely would have been found out because of the small number of people who had access to this.

*Edit*

Correction, like TestofTide said, she probably leaked it to more than the Intercept but legitimate news sources weren't running with it without more evidence or a trustworthy source.

 

[TestOfTide]

For people who think that she was part of the constant leaks against Trump: WRONG

For people who think that she was secretly working for the Russians: WRONG

What is much more likely:

She was a newbie NSA contractor that thought she could get away with leaking a big scoop to the press that she literally saw was recently as May 5th. The only press outlet that would bite is the intercept because she was not the usual source of leaks and because the intercept was stupid enough to run with a story that would clearly be easily traced back to the leaker. The intercept decided to contact the NSA to have them corroborate the main details (because that's what journalists do), which according to the article they did under the condition that key details were omitted which the intercept agreed to. NSA then was able to IMMEDIATELY figure out who leaked this shit, because it was a goddamn newbie, and turned them over to the FBI, because their reaction can best be described as "Hey what the fuck are you doing? We are still fucking investigating that shit."

Any questions?

 

[Cirion]

She had to know she would get caught. She didn't cover her tracks and didn't deny it when they questioned her. She must have felt it was worth it.

Bullshit. She probably didn't really grasp the full possible consequences. No one coming from a normal background willingly sacrifices a large chunk of his life for some document.

If you leak to the NYT, WaPo, ProPublica, or NPR, they do more to cover the ass of the leaker. The Incercept exposed this leaker in their attempt to prove their gravitas.

You absolutely do not know this and pull things out of your ass because of your anti-Intercept-bias. People already explained why the Intercept most likely isn't at fault. You are justifying destroying a young peron's life because she leaked some documents about a foreign authoritarian government helping to install a racist, demented wannabe-fascist as POTUS. A Potus who has already proven that he intends to obstruct justice at every turn, with a party that has proven that it doesn not give a damn about the crimes of its president. Shameful and without any compassion.

 

[Socivol]

She had to know she would get caught. She didn't cover her tracks and didn't deny it when they questioned her. She must have felt it was worth it.

Yeah it was done so sloppily it's hard to imagine she wasn't trying to get caught and be some kind of martyr for the cause.

 

[shawnbuddy]

Because you're biased and looking for things to justify your dislike for me based on words on the internet.

We already knew there was proof, the CIA / NSA had already said they had evidence of it. Why do we need to see the actual evidence? Who cares, not worth committing treason to release some information that we basically already knew

It's not like she leaked something that intelligence agencies were trying to hide. Use your brain before you jump to conclusions

We knew the Russians had hacked the DNC, not that they'd actually hacked the election system. That is new, and very interesting, news.