Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html

Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html

Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html

Back in October, the U.S. Department of Defense — yes, I know what the administration calls it, but check the Federal Register or the most recently passed appropriations bill — instituted a new set of rules that stated that Pentagon correspondents who "solicit" "classified national security information" or "controlled classified information" may be considered a security risk. Although there is no single statute that provides criminal penalties for all types of unauthorized disclosures of classified information, disclosing classified information is almost always treated as a crime. That is, unless a jury is likely to find you "a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory."

In the wake of last weekend's U.S. military action in Venezuela, the news media got something it has seldom heard from the Trump administration: a "thank you." Secretary of State Marco Rubio credited news organizations that had learned in advance about Saturday's strike that led to the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro with not putting the mission in jeopardy by publicly reporting on it before it happened. Rubio's acknowledgment was particularly noteworthy because Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has cited a mistrust of journalists' ability to responsibly handle sensitive information as one of the chief reasons for imposing restrictive new press rules on Pentagon reporters. Most mainstream news organizations have left posts in the Pentagon rather than agree to Hegseth's policy.

Location, location, location: Greenland's position above the Arctic Circle makes the world's largest island a key part of security strategy. But for whom? Increasing international tensions, global warming and the changing world economy have put Greenland at the heart of the debate over global trade and security, and U.S. President Donald Trump wants to make sure his country controls this mineral-rich island that guards the Arctic and North Atlantic approaches to North America. Greenland is a self-governing territory of Denmark, a longtime U.S. ally that has rejected Trump's overtures. Greenland's own government also opposes U.S. designs on the island, saying the people of Greenland will decide their own future...

Why does the United States want control of Greenland? President Trump has made it clear that he thinks the U.S. needs to control the Arctic island to ensure the security of America and its NATO allies, a point those allies — and Greenland — vehemently disagree with. But there's more at play here, including a valuable shipping route and access to mineral resources. Here's what interests the U.S. about the semi-autonomous Danish territory...

China, Russia, and Iran had to be alarmed by the display of US power in the Venezuela incursion — but so did Denmark, a NATO ally of the United States. In the aftermath of the snatch-and-grab of Nicholás Maduro, President Donald Trump spoke to The Atlantic about his other foreign-policy priorities: "We do need Greenland, absolutely." It might have been easy not too long ago to dismiss this as bluster. Not anymore — not after the successful strikes on the Iran nuclear program and the Venezuela operation...