Unfortunately for this Marine, to be granted access to classified info, he had to give his word that he would protect it according to the procedures established by military regulations — and it is Congress that has the authority to establish military regulations. Our Constitution grants the Congress the authority to REGULATE the military.
Therefore, this Marine violated his oath, and he actively worked against our Constitution.
Sometimes we might not like the way our leadership does things, but there is nothing illegal about how they have arranged them. Nor is there anything illegal about engaging in legal activity asking our Congress to change the way things are done.
I think "actively worked against the Constitution" is a bit of a stretch, but he definitely broke the law. A just and reasonable law. He should and will be punished.
I didn't mean to say that the law would or should go easy on him -- just that his crimes aren't in the same league as a John Walker (the Navy spy, not the Taliban kid), an Aldrich Ames or a Robert Hanssen. Not in scope, not in intent, not in damage done. And he won't face the kind of penalties they got. I'm a big fan of proportionality.
The more I think about it, the more I wonder about the other side of the equation. If they were providing documents to law enforcement, who was receiving them? I doubt they just walked into a police station or FBI office and left them at the desk. My best guess: They had a single point of contact, a guy who rose through the ranks as a "supercop" because he took credit for ferreting out what the Marines told him. That's the guy who's an interesting character to me -- it'd make a great movie.
The situation might be more convoluted. When corruption succeeds in hiding itself in more senior elements and there isn’t legitimate authority above one to report corruption to without being targeted as a risk to their security, then documenting that corruption might be more awkward.
FWIW, the most corrupt people I have met who have succeeded in receiving more worldly authority, who happen to violate the intent of nearly every law and regulation, are also the first to clamour for security and demand the righteous of not violating their command.
Many on this thread who immediately rationalize a harsh sentence for the GySgt echo the types of arguments I’ve witnessed from the most corrupt in the system, who do what is right,...in their own eyes.
FWIW, the same corruption I have witnessed has been associated with many of senior rank associated with freemasonry and its offshoots, who advance in degenerate behavior, be it lasciviousnes or legalism, but also place more faith in their brotherhood independent of faith in Christ, than they have any notion of respecting the Constitution or even its intent.
It is interesting that many who will appeal to the Constitution for authority and have authority also have no intent of ever defending it, unless it happens to be convenient. Meanwhile, those who do intend to defend it, and this nation, recognize their brothers in arms are sometimes few and far between impeded by those counterfeits who seek all forms of worldly gain other than defending the nation.
Actually, all matters pertaining to classification literally derive from the direct authority of the President. At this moment in time, George W. Bush is the ultimate classification authority in the United States, and he literally can classify and declassify information at the snap of his fingers.
Respectfully I disagree, when the “powers that be” fail to do their jobs and there is a breakdown and conflict of interest where the agenda is counter to the constitution (see just about everything about the congress and senate) then the old adage about “evil triumphs when good men do nothing” Sure he may have violated some BS security reg. but the reason he did it is because of the failure of our elected officials to quit playing stupid games with our safety.