Wouldn't be surprised if the rumor about the intelligence agencies holding back "the good stuff" during briefings begins to actually happen, if it hasn't already started.
Eliot Cohen, another Bush-era State Department official and professor of strategic studies at Johns Hopkins School of International Studies, called the report "appalling."
"If accidental, it would be a firing offense for anyone else," Cohen tweeted. "If deliberate, it would be treason."
...
Even if Trump shared only minimal information that was considered highly classified, a number of experts said, it is a stark reminder of the lingering concerns many intelligence professionals have about entrusting sensitive national security information to a president who has dismissed their expertise and has no prior experience in government or the military.
The president is authorized by law to make public any and all classified information he or she sees fit — so anything that Trump may have shared of a classified nature was his prerogative.
But that doesn't mean doing so doesn't have the same repercussions as if someone purposely leaked classified information to cause damage, specialists said.
“It is not a legal issue. It is a question of competence and national security awareness. If the story is accurate the president fell short in those vital areas," said Steve Aftergood, a specialist on government secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists. "At face value, it appears that the president behaved recklessly and thoughtlessly and may have compromised a vital intelligence source."
...
The fallout among allied spy agencies overseas is also likely to be immediate, predicted White, who has briefed dozens of allied leaders and officials on security matters.
"It probably confirms to them that he is a loose cannon," he said. "They might all start looking into how much they might want to give the United States of a sensitive nature, particularly if this reveals sources and methods."
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/1 ... 1?cmpid=sf
. 
