Leaks have always been a part of the modern political game.
Watergate, the most well-known American political scandal, was discovered through government leaks and its reveal led to the resignation of former President Richard Nixon.
Modern America is intimately familiar with the idea of the press acting as “watchdogs” or “guardians” for the general populous, using leaked information to ensure the government stays in check, but familiarity can lead to a false sense of normalcy.
The leaks coming out of the Trump White House are not normal and they need to be plugged.
According to a Senate report, leaks are occurring at a rate of about one leak a day. The Trump Administration has suffered seven times the amount of leaks as the previous two administrations in the same span of time.
Between Jan. 20, 2017 and May 25, 2017, a total of 125 stories were leaked which could have potentially breached national security. Those numbers are staggering and they do not include “palace intrigue” stories, which are stories about the goings-on in the West Wing that do not relate to policy.
In the same Senate report, it stated there were only 18 leaks in Obama’s first 126 days in office and 10 of those were specifically about the torture methods of the Bush administration.
The remaining eight were about increased reliance on foreign intel for terrorists, a missile test by Iran and a hack on the U.S. power grid.
Even the Bush Administration, loathed by many on the left, only had nine leaks in the same time span. These discussed Iraqi weapon factories, weapons to combat China’s growing military and arms sales to Taiwan.
Comparatively, the overwhelming majority of Trump’s 62 leaked stories in the 126 days of office have been about the incompetence of his administration or the Russia probe.
These leaks are not without consequence. They have already hurt America’s standing with its allies twice.
According to The Guardian, one leak in May revealed the identity of the perpetrator of the Ariana Grande concert bombing in Manchester, which was information the British wanted kept confidential.
Similarly, The New York Times covered a leak in May about Trump discussing confidential ISIS information with Russian officials. The Times even revealed the information’s source as Israel.
Thomas Sanderson, director of the Transnational Threats Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, summed it up quite succinctly: “The UK and Israel are probably our two biggest sources of intelligence. Now they’re thinking, ‘Is this going to cause us damage every time we share?’ Then you have to calculate every piece of information.”
The same situation is applicable to the leaked phone calls between Trump and other world leaders. In August, The Washington Post leaked phone transcripts between Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull of Australia, President Enrique Nieto and Trump.
The foreign heads conducted themselves professionally and no confidential information was shared, but what if it had not been so? Now, foreign diplomats must be careful of what they say when even calling Trump, because it may be leaked.
If there is not absolute trust in America’s confidentiality, important information might be left out in fear of it making a New York Times headline.
Do not be mistaken, not all leaks are bad. The Russian probe leaks and former FBI Director James Comey’s leaks are important. The former is the reason Michael Flynn was fired as National Security Advisor—because of his obvious ties to Russia and the latter is the reason there is a special counsel investigating the Trump Administration.
However, it seems some leakers descend into revealing confidential information simply because it spites Trump. In the end, they have only harmed American interest and added one story to the overwhelming media noise.
The media cannot stop weighing consequences of stories just to get revenue or because they hate Trump. Why? Because I do not need a phone transcript to know Trump is not the best president, I saw the evidence on the campaign trail.