No. of Recommendations: 7
DNI Gabbard and CIA Director Ratcliffe both testified under oath that there was no classified information on any of the exchanges. The Atlantic should publish it all. Today.I doubt that would be a suitable defense in the event that Gabbard and Ratcliffe were wrong, or mistaken. Or if someone in the government disagreed with them - the different agencies have classification powers, and if DoD decides something is classified it doesn't matter if DNI or CIA disagree. Plus, it wouldn't shield
The Atlantic from criminal liability, even if true. It's a crime to release information related to the national defense, whether classified or not - 18 U.S.C. 793:
(d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; orhttps://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793National defense information isn't limited to information that is designated classified. So
The Atlantic can still get in serious trouble if they release the transcripts even if the information is not classified.
