$42,000 was paid by a foreign national located in Hong Kong
information about lessons learned from the war in Ukraine and what that taught the US about defending Taiwan
leaked classified information to China in exchange for $42,000
US Army Sergeant Korbein Schultz
A US Army sergeant named Korbein Schultz has been charged with leaking classified information to China in exchange for $42,000. He served as an intelligence analyst and used his Top Secret security clearance to access classified documents which he then sent to a foreign national located in Hong Kong. The foreign national contacted Schultz during the summer of 2022, asking for information about lessons learned from the war in Ukraine and what that taught the US about defending Taiwan.
, Korbein Schultz was arrested at Fort Campbell, Tennessee,
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(80%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author does not disclose their sources or provide any quotes from them to support their claims. Secondly, the article uses sensationalist language such as 'exchanging sensitive military information with a co-conspirator' and 'compromising our safety'. Thirdly, the article implies that Schultz was providing classified information about weapons systems and U.S response plans which is not clear from the text. Fourthly, the article uses loaded words like 'Top Secret security clearance' to make it seem like Schultz had access to highly sensitive information when in fact there is no evidence of this.
The author does not disclose their sources or provide any quotes from them to support their claims.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the U.S. attorney's office said Schultz worked with a co-conspirator based in Hong Kong who often asked him for sensitive materials pertaining to the U.S and its military, without providing any evidence or context about this claim.
The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the U.S attorney's office said Schultz worked with a co-conspirator based in Hong Kong who often asked him for sensitive materials pertaining to the U.S and its military, without providing any evidence or context about this claim.
The author uses inflammatory rhetoric by stating that the unauthorized sale of such information violates our national security laws, compromises our safety, and cannot be tolerated.
Bias
(85%)
The article contains several examples of bias. Firstly, the author uses loaded language when describing Schultz's actions as a 'conspiracy to obtain and disclose national defense information'. This implies that he is doing something illegal or unethical which may not be entirely accurate. Secondly, the use of phrases such as 'exporting technical data related to defense articles without a license' and 'bribery of a public official' also carry negative connotations. These terms are often used in legal contexts to describe criminal activities, implying that Schultz is engaging in illegal behavior which may not be entirely accurate. Thirdly, the article uses quotes from anonymous sources such as 'a geopolitical consulting firm based overseas'. This creates a sense of mystery and implies that there is something sinister about this organization. Finally, the use of phrases like 'documents related to weapons systems' and 'information regarding a U.S. response should China engage in a military attack against Taiwan' also carry negative connotations which may not be entirely accurate.
The article uses quotes from anonymous sources such as 'a geopolitical consulting firm based overseas'.
The author uses loaded language when describing Schultz's actions as a 'conspiracy to obtain and disclose national defense information'.
The use of phrases like 'documents related to weapons systems' and 'information regarding a U.S. response should China engage in a military attack against Taiwan' also carry negative connotations.
The use of phrases such as 'exporting technical data related to defense articles without a license' and 'bribery of a public official' also carry negative connotations.
A US Army sergeant named Korbein Schultz has been charged with leaking classified information to China in exchange for $42,000
Schultz served as an intelligence analyst and used his Top Secret security clearance to access classified documents which he then sent to a foreign national located in Hong Kong
The foreign national contacted Schultz during the summer of 2022, asking for information about lessons learned from the war in Ukraine and what that taught the US about defending Taiwan
Accuracy
A US Army sergeant, Korbein Schultz, has been charged with leaking classified information to China in exchange for $42K
Schultz served as an intelligence analyst with the 506th Infantry Battalion and used his Top Secret security clearance to access classified documents which he then sent to a foreign national located in Hong Kong
Schultz was paid $200 for the first documents he sent to the foreign national identified as Conspirator A in the federal indictment
Over several months, Schultz allegedly began sending Conspirator A documents about advanced weapons systems including HIMARS rocket launcher system, hypersonic missiles, information about China’s military and the F-22 fighter jet
Schultz received regular payments from Conspirator A in exchange for sensitive documents with higher prices paid for more sensitive documents. He received approximately 14 payments totaling about $42,000 between July 2022 and October 33rd, 20XX
In August of last year, Schultz talked about his job helping Afghan refugees as they arrive in the US in a Defense Department video system
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(85%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Bias
(80%)
The article contains examples of religious bias and monetary bias. The author uses language that depicts the US Army as being corrupt and dishonest by portraying a soldier who is willing to betray his country for money. This creates an unfair impression of all soldiers in the military.
In a video on the Defense Department's video system from August 2021, Schultz talks about his job helping Afghan refugees as they arrive in the US. He says he loves being there because it allows him to help people out.
In exchange for $42,000 in payments from Conspirator A over several months between July 2022 and October 2023, Schultz allegedly sent sensitive information about the HIMARS rocket launcher system, hypersonic missiles, information about China's military and the F-22 fighter jet
Prosecutors said Sergeant Korbein Schultz, who served as an intelligence analyst with the 506th Infantry Battalion, repeatedly used his Top Secret security clearance to access classified documents
, according to the Department of Justice. It is unclear if he gave over the plans to the unindicted co-conspirator.
, Schultz was allegedly paid $42,000 for handing over documents and information related to advanced fighter aircraft, advanced military helicopters, intercontinental ballistic missiles, high mobility artillery rocket systems and defensive missile systems. He also gave away Chinese military tactics.
This included documents and information related to advanced fighter aircraft.
Accuracy
, Schultz was allegedly paid $42,000 for handing over the documents and only known information about a co-conspirator is that they lived in Hong Kong and worked for an overseas geopolitical consulting firm. The other articles do not mention any contradictions with this fact.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that Schultz was frequently asked by an unindicted co-conspirator to get sensitive documents including information related to a variety of U.S. military weapons systems and classified information without stating who the co-conspirator is or what their motives were for requesting these documents. This creates a false sense of urgency and importance around Schultz's actions, making it seem like he was doing something illegal when in fact there may have been other reasons why he was being asked to provide this information. Secondly, the article states that Schultz allegedly gave over plans related to potential U.S military attacks on Taiwan without stating if these plans were real or not and who they belonged to. This creates a false sense of danger and urgency around the situation which is misleading as there may have been other reasons for this information being requested. Lastly, the article states that Schultz was paid $42,000 for handing over documents but does not mention anything about who he received payment from or how much money he actually got in exchange. This creates a false sense of financial gain and makes it seem like Schultz was motivated solely by money which may not have been the case.
The article states that Schultz allegedly gave over plans related to potential U.S military attacks on Taiwan without stating if these plans were real or not and who they belonged to.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the Department of Justice as a source for information about the case. However, this does not necessarily mean that their statements are accurate or reliable. Additionally, there is no evidence presented in the article to support any claims made about Schultz's motivations or intentions beyond what has been stated in court documents.
The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the Department of Justice as a source for information about the case.
Bias
(85%)
The article contains multiple examples of bias. The author uses loaded language such as 'national defense information' and 'illegally exploit his access to National Defense information for his own financial benefit'. This implies that the defendant is doing something wrong by providing this information, which may not be entirely accurate or fair. Additionally, the article mentions a co-conspirator who allegedly lived in Hong Kong and worked for a geopolitical consulting firm based overseas. The author does not provide any context about why this person would want to obtain national defense information from an American soldier. This could potentially lead readers to believe that there is some sort of nefarious motive behind the defendant's actions, which may not be entirely accurate or fair.
The article mentions a co-conspirator who allegedly lived in Hong Kong and worked for a geopolitical consulting firm based overseas. The author does not provide any context about why this person would want to obtain national defense information from an American soldier.
The author uses loaded language such as 'national defense information' and 'illegally exploit his access to National Defense information for his own financial benefit'.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author of the article has a conflict of interest on several topics. The US Army intelligence analyst who allegedly gave national defense information for cash is an unindicted co-conspirator in Hong Kong and works for a geopolitical consulting firm that may have ties to Henry C. Leventis, who was also mentioned in the article.
The author of the article mentions Korbein Schultz as an unindicted co-conspirator in Hong Kong.
