It's bigger than that.
Do you think pulling him aside and telling him "knock it off Donnie! That's not the right thing to do and you know it!" will really make him learn his lesson? If you do, remember you're talking about the guy who had his Twitter privileges revoked by his staff.
(Notice that the law as quoted below encodes that it is the president who ultimately chooses who is authorized to share classifed information).
Quote: "The term “unauthorized person” means any person who, or agency which, is not authorized to receive information of the categories set forth in subsection (a) of this section, by the President, or by the head of a department or agency of the United States Government which is expressly designated by the President to engage in communication intelligence activities for the United States."
at this point I'm convinced laws are made up. I don't think it's illegal for a President to do so, though. Just really bad. Bad.
> do you agree with me that the person who leaked the ISIS terror threats to the press doubtless committed a crime detrimental to US national security under US code Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 37, Section 798
I do fully agree with you. But let's not forget that any fair Judge will look at intent for the crime as well.
Not that we know the leaker's intent or anything.
No, because public accountability of elected officials is essential, rather than prejudicial, to the safety and interests of the United States.