According to news reports, confidential information about the terrorist investigation in Manchester was leaked to the New York Times. The New York Times, as usual, printed the information, which now removes any sharing of information with the U.K. authorities. Otherwise, not only is critical information being removed from U.S. officials, it's now apparent the New York Times is not only involved with sedition, they're involved with espionage.
So far, those leaking information are doing so with impunity; but sooner or later, one will be caught, and that person will lead do more, or they'll be thrown under the jail. Their family will become suspect, all their associates will be investigated, and those in charge will find they're under the microscope.
This is going to be interesting, and I'm wondering how the New York Times will handle any demands for sources.
In Case You've Wondered
My blog is where my wandering thoughts are interspersed with stuff I made up. So, if while reading you find yourself confused about the context, don't feel alone. I get confused, too.
If you're here for the stories, I started another blog: scratchingforchange.blogspot.com
One other thing: sometimes I write words you refuse to use in front of children, or polite company, unless you have a flat tire, or hit your thumb with a hammer.
I don't use them to offend; I use them to embellish.