Trump and his intel reveal
The Washington Post caused quite a stir last night when they put out their story entitled “Trump revealed highly classified information to Russian foreign minister and ambassador”. Apparently, the president discussed some intelligence about ISIS that had been gathered by a third party nation with the Russians.
The information the president relayed had been provided by a U.S. partner through an intelligence-sharing arrangement considered so sensitive that details have been withheld from allies and tightly restricted even within the U.S. government, officials said.
The partner had not given the United States permission to share the material with Russia, and officials said Trump’s decision to do so endangers cooperation from an ally that has access to the inner workings of the Islamic State. After Trump’s meeting, senior White House officials took steps to contain the damage, placing calls to the CIA and the National Security Agency.
“This is code-word information,” said a U.S. official familiar with the matter, using terminology that refers to one of the highest classification levels used by American spy agencies. Trump “revealed more information to the Russian ambassador than we have shared with our own allies.”
You’ll notice that the Post doesn’t name their sources on this story, probably because they admit that they depend more on “unnamed sources” than on legitimate folks who don’t mind going on the record. Margaret Sullivan, the Post’s media critic admits as much just this past weekend;
The newspaper’s media critic, Margaret Sullivan, says she’s no fan of unnamed sources because of the lack of accountability and scrutiny they provide, but she defends the use of them in the Post’s current White House coverage.
“There is no way to get at the story through talking to the White House press secretary or listening to the spin that is offered by officials who are willing to go on the record,” she says.
In short, the only way to get the story that they want is to use anonymous sources. You, know even if those sources are only in the reporters’ heads.
For the uninitiated, the President decides what information is classified and to what degree it’s supposed to be protected from prying eyes – so really, even if Trump did tell the Russians something sensitive, he did nothing illegal. However, HR McMaster, the National Security Advisor to this President says that he was at that particular meeting with the President and what the Washington Post reported “it didn’t happen”.
MORE: "I was in the room," H.R. McMaster says, responding to WaPo Russia report. "It didn't happen." https://t.co/Okz2bwUl4f pic.twitter.com/PDv9nMIJrc
— CBS News (@CBSNews) May 15, 2017
The Post mentioned McMaster;
“The president and the foreign minister reviewed common threats from terrorist organizations to include threats to aviation,” said H.R. McMaster, the national security adviser, who participated in the meeting. “At no time were any intelligence sources or methods discussed, and no military operations were disclosed that were not already known publicly.”
McMaster reiterated his statement in a subsequent appearance at the White House on Monday and described the Washington Post story as “false,” but did not take any questions.
But let’s base the story on what “unnamed sources” tell us instead.
Apparently, the information that Trump revealed was in regards to ISIS planning to use explosives in laptops on aircraft. If the Russians weren’t aware of that, they haven’t gone through TSA inspections in the last 16 years.
Thanks to Chief Tango for the tip.
Category: Media
The Bottom Line:
Hillary Clinton lost.
Carry on.
They don’t accept reality, in their minds she was cheated. I frankly am fed up with this media BS and the impeachment crowd, I think they should start revolting so I can start cappin snowflakes
I lean liberal on multiple issues, and I’m pretty glad Clinton lost. I think she ran a terrible campaign and her blaming Comey or Russia or whatever is like fumbling the ball ten times in a football game so it’s tied towards the end then getting a questionable call via a ref and saying that’s why you lost. She did countless things wrong.
But the nice thing is politics isn’t all or nothing. I can detest Clinton’s campaign and yet also still be frustrated by the lack of professionalism in the Trump administration. This was foolish and careless. How does losing a source inside ISIS, which is a possible -even probable?- outcome of this, help us in terms of national security?
I’ll give the President credit when he succeeds and take him to task when he fucks up. The latter was true in this case. But sure, go on talking about ‘capping’ your fellow Americans – that’s exactly what this country needs, not cross-the-aisle accountability for our idiots in DC.
How do you come down on his two scoops of ice cream? This story rates with that one.
That is truly the biggest story, but the Thousand Island dressing is a close second…
I am just pissed that because of this controversy surrounding Putin interfering with the election, the Andrews Commissary stopped carrying Russian Dressing. How the hell do I make a Rueben without the Russian dressing?
Check with Dave Hardin; he might have some.
1 tablespoon finely chopped onion
1 cup purchased or homemade mayonnaise
1/4 cup ketchup-style chili sauce or ketchup
4 teaspoons bottled (regular; not packed in beet juice) horseradish, or to taste
1 teaspoon hot sauce, preferably Frank’s Red Hot Sauce
1 teaspoon Worcestershire sauce
1/4 teaspoon sweet paprika
Fine sea salt
Thanks, Dave!
Bon Appetit!
You don’t have proper Worcestershire Sauce made by Lea and Perrins, only pale imitations. I am a Worcestershire man so know this.
Ahh, you bring up a valid point albeit the hot sauce selection that usually sparks the debate.
I agree Lea un Pear-uns is the best, accept no substitute.
Hot sauce…now that needs its own thread to debate.
Honest question: You really think this is comparable to the two scoops of ice cream non-story? Why?
I think everyone on both sides of the aisle rolled their eyes and maybe laughed, sadly, at the two-scoops nonsense.. but you’ve even got Republicans who are expressing concerns about this. It’s an unforced error for the Trump team.
I want a competent White House regardless of which party occupies it. We don’t seem to have that at this point.
According to McMaster Trump told Putin that ISIS was planning to use bombs inside laptops on planes.
This is already pretty well known. So ya comparable to two scoops of Ice Cream.
Details matter, especially in intelligence. I’ll bet you 100-to-1 odds the intelligence is slightly more sophisticated than: “ISIS is planning to use bombs inside laptops on planes”.
And the more detailed, the more likely it becomes to identify sources and methods.
And then there’s this: Trump is said to be so dumb he makes a rock seem smart but he retains and then spills intel briefing material?
I have called President Trump (and pretty much every other politician) an idiot from time to time. When I do that, I’m not speaking to the notion that he’s mentally challenged, just that his decision-making process is utterly suspect.
I have no reason to believe he isn’t of normal intelligence, but he’s still an idiot. Sometimes, I’m an idiot too. You’re an idiot, in the way I’m using the term, when you make poor decisions. It doesn’t mean you don’t have basic mental capabilities like remembering stuff you were recently told.
Or to put it differently, if the guy couldn’t even remember critical intelligence on which we’re basing national policy after a few fucking days, then god help us all.
Are you actually claiming that someone can’t both claim Trump is an idiot and that Trump also can retain and spill intel material?
It seems you think intel material is some sort of highly technical difficult to remember and understand material.
Some small percentage of it is. But the vast majority is just crap we know about the world, particularly our enemies, that we do not want the world to know that we know, particularly our enemies.
Most of what we know about our enemies they already know about themselves they just do not know we know.
Thus the classification of most intel material is not based on the contents of the information itself, but instead based on HOW we acquired the information; IE the sources of methods.
While the sources and methods are not in the material itself, they can be derived from the material because the enemy can deduce how we acquitted the information one they know what we know about them.
Trump is just smart enough to remember the stuff he is told. But seemingly too much of an idiot to realize the broader considerations concerning regurgitating the the stuff he is told.
IMHO the ice cream story rates about as seriously as those criticizing Obama for wearing flip flops while on vacation – petty detractors from the serious issues. But nothing gets clicks like (fake) outrage!
The shoe is on the other foot now, dear deplorables. I hope Donny is up to living under a microscope for the next four or eight (I hope not!) years, for all of our sakes.
I think I can answer this. The “explosives in laptops” actually hit MSM publications August 10th, 2006 via MSNBC. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/14287493/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/explosives-can-be-hidden-devices-liquids/ So, if that’s classified, it shouldn’t be. Guaranteed we knew about it ages beforehand.
He revealed more than that.
And you know this…how?
He was in the room. A little bird told him. A seekrit squirrel gave him a nut.
Me hear him like nuts.
But he still won’t reveal his tax returns. What’s up with that giant story?
ISIS did not really exist in 2006.
Terrorists putting bombs in laptops is a big “no shit, really?” these days.
If that is all Trump said than the Russians likely smiled and said; “thank you for this crucial piece of information, united we will surely win the war on terror” or some other BS line.
Bottom line is that we share information with a lot of countries and the President gets to decide who, what and under what circumstances.
The WAPO can pretend it is news to manufacture controversy but there is no smoke, no fire.
I don’t really understand libs. Back when Russia was pretending to be communist they were mostly for Russia. Now that they are pretending to be democratic they are opposed? It’s a mystery.
There is both smoke and fire on this.
Pretending this was a “lib thing” when the leaker was a conservative and pretending that sharing information provided by an allied intelligence source in violation of the intelligence sharing agreement without prior coordination and approval is no big deal is nonsense.
This was a huge mistake. And people should not be making excuses for him.
It is only when he pays a public opinion cost that he corrects his bullshit.
And you know all these details how? You were there? Read the briefs? Oh, just read all the presstitute output, right…..
A circle jerk of unattributed rumors and unnamed sources. Even Judge Kangaroo kicks this stuff out of his court.
Liberals are strongly divided on Hillary losing.
About half think she lost because she was a bad candidate with a bad platform that did not resonate. She essentially ran such a terrible campaign that tried to attack moderate conservatives while she simultaneously alienated and gaslighted her liberal base assuming they would have no choice but to vote for her anyway. She ran such a terrible campaign strategythat managed to lose to an EVEN WORSE candidate.
Most of this half of liberals also think she is a terrible person, who is untrustworthy, corrupt, puts personal ambition over country and nominating her was an idiotic thing for the democratic party to do because she was perhaps the only democrat that COULDN’T win the election. Tipping the scales to help her win the primary was even more idiotic.
The other half of democrats think she was a martyr who was robbed of the Presidency she “earned” because of Russia, Comey, Bernie Sanders, Jill Stein, GoP lies, and rampant misogyny.
It is that hafl that is keeping the DNC from learning from its mistake and it is that half that may cause the democrats to continue to lose elections unless the rest of the liberal political community rips control of the party away from them.
You forgot the third half that only shows up on election day.
Is that the half that contains the felons and the dead?
That’s the Chicago half.
That’s just “Extending the franchise to the unliving.” Shouldn’t be denied the right just because they died during the Nixon administration.
I did a couple of hundred word comment on that very subject a few years back on another site. Someone actually took it seriously and chastised me at length.
I treasure that memory.
Not just Chicago, remember the manifold discrepancies they found in Detroit during the MI recount? I’m sure the Hitlery camp was counting on the Detroit voter fraud to help her carry that State.
R-i-i-g-h-t. I forgot the Chicago half.
Asshole obama when talking with the russian prez, said “I can’t talk about it now, but after the election will be free to”…funny as hell how the deceived lying assed communists don’t remember this kind of shyt, only the lies they make up about Trump!
McMaster said that sources and methods were not revealed, but that wasn’t what was claimed – hell, I doubt President Trump even knows the sources or methods. He’s briefed on the intel, and while he could ask for the source, that would seem to be an egregious breach of protocol for CIA ops where such information is heavily compartmentalized.
As for the unnamed sources, given that this is illegal for anyone in the know to leak, I’m not surprised they requested anonymity. It’s kind of useful to point out, though, that just because they’re anonymous to us doesn’t mean they’re anonymous to a reporter. Those guys tend to require some proof that they swear they’ll keep secret.
And yes, the President decides what information is classified, but usually via a process and not a, “Whoops, did I just say that?” moment. I mean, good grief, this is just embarrassing. Had Hillary Clinton been elected and done this, impeachment hearings would’ve likely begun this morning at 9:01am. You can like President Trump’s policies, you can like his mannerisms, but I struggle to see how you can say this was anything less than carelessness with code-word level information.
“…but I struggle to see how you can say this was anything less than carelessness with code-word level information.”
Because at this point I’m not particularly inclined to wallow the WAPO’s anonymous bukkake?
Fair enough – you don’t believe the story is accurate. Hypothetical question, then: If it was proven that it is accurate, would you still dismiss it as nothing? Or would you agree that it was carelessness?
By all accounts, nobody has straight-up denied he shared classified intelligence, and on Twitter he’s made the claim (rightful, by law) that he can share what he wants. It’d be an easy thing to deny straight up, but that hasn’t yet happened. Maybe today, and then we’ll see what happens in the weeks to come.
Hypothetically, conceed the point so the apparently baseless argument can continue?
Stopped kicking dogs yet? Well if there -was- proof you were a puppy-kicker, would you then admit guilt?
A certain subset of the dems/press are willing to spin all sorts of unattributed fantasy, then follow it with “absense of proof of guilt is not proof of absense of guilt!”
Judge Red Queen presiding, in the Peoples Democratic Court.
He is making plenty of “amature” mistakes without making them up wholesale.
“A certain subset of the dems/press are willing to spin all sorts of unattributed fantasy, then follow it with “absense of proof of guilt is not proof of absense of guilt!””
Oh, the irony is so deliciously thick today! As if “the right” is above such shenanigans!
Whatever happened to convicting Hillary of mishandling classified email, or whatever, that was oh so important just last year? Ever since she lost the election all I’ve heard are crickets.
What about the underage sex dungeon she purportedly ran out of a pizza shop?
Or the fatal disease she was supposedly affected by, that would have made her unfit to handle the stresses of being a POTUS?
Or the “fact” that Obama was born in Kenia? Who was a major proponent of that theory for many years? Oh, right…
How about that ‘yuge’ scandal that Obama supposedly wiretapped Trump’s personal apartment during the campaign to help Hillary? Still waiting on the evidence! (And yes, I know about the bugs that were planted on a russian mobster running a gambling ring out of his apartment in Trump towers… in 2013. Why isn’t that a story?)
HRC’s team is widely believed to have put out the original “birther” bit. It came out as a Dem primary item. He has a Hawaii birth ciertificate, so why are you still going on about Kenya?
Oops.
HRC -did- have much classified email on a bootleg server, as has beeen well documented by all sorts of named sources, like the former head of the FBI who so stated on national TV.
Oops. That is hardly an “absense of evidence” there…….
You make this easy.
Swing and miss! Look up, maybe you’ll find my point.
Again, WHO spun “all sorts of unattributed fantasy” about the birth certificate, years after the ‘controversy’ was disproved? HRC’s ilk at least didn’t cling to it until 2012. But I guess it’s ok, because he “ended it,” whatever that means.
I am aware that HRC caused a spillage of classified material, but where is her conviction? Isn’t it weird how you can run on “lock her up” one day and then decide that you won’t prosecute her the next? And no one is calling for her head anymore either. Huh, guess it wasn’t such an important issue after all or no one really gave a shit to begin with.
Switch to decaf dude.
She should be wearing an orange jumper in her federal cage.
But absent any real power, she is rapidly becoming irrelevant, which for her might be a bit hellish.
I am no enthusiastic fan of the Donald, but for keeping that vindictive harpie gangster out of the white house, Trump and Obama -both- have my gratitude.
^^THIS^^
Despite my many dissents and fits of anger against what President Trump’s predecessor did, I still think he was the lesser of the two evils between him and das Hildebeast.
Perhaps “The evil of two lessers” would be a more apt description for recent elections in the USA.
“McMaster said that sources and methods were not revealed, but that wasn’t what was claimed…”
But in the Washington Post article “sources and methods” are the crux of their article.
My read of the article was that they’re claiming intel was revealed, which with a little legwork could reveal sources – again, I highly doubt the President is even told who the low-level source is, just that it comes from country X or an asset or officer of agency Y.
McMaster is apparently doing the WH briefing today with Spicer, I believe, so maybe they’ll clarify. If they give a straight up denial, and no other shoes drop in the coming weeks, I’ll chalk it up to an overzealous reporter. But if they can’t straight up deny that classified intel, not sources or methods, were given to the Russians, then I consider that to be pretty telling.
Hillary? Impeachment hearings? How can you justify saying that, LC, when she wasn’t even charged for mishandling classified e-mails?
Your disconnection from reality is bothersome.
“… require some proof that they swear they’ll keep secret”
Do they pinky swear?
Who needs clearances as long as they promise not to tell? Think how much money the gov’t. will save on investigations. Why didn’t anyone think of this before?
A question; If Trump had emailed classified information to them (a la the Hillary gang) instead would that be okay?
Funny, but as I recall the leaders of a certain prior regime decided to disclose all sorts of highly classified info about the mission to get Bin Laden. For some reason, the WaPo and the rest of the MSM (King Putt’s propaganda arm) seemed not to notice that was a story. And that was a reveal of sources and methods. Last we heard, a certain Paki doctor who was both a source and a method was still in a Paki prison for his role in getting Osama. That story is so yesterday; and then who cares when you have important “news” like Ice Creamgate.
Oh, snap! You were not supposed to bring that up!
One comment here…..
DUH
Apparently, the information that Trump revealed was in regards to ISIS planning to use explosives in laptops on aircraft. If the Russians weren’t aware of that, they haven’t gone through TSA inspections in the last 16 years.
lot longer than that…. you don’t remember being forced to turn your laptop on in the ’90s? Was a real PITA with W95’s incredibly slow boot/shutdown. Was an open secret in the computer biz that with a small circuit board/battery, you could make your screen mimic the boot and shut down and leave about 90% of the laptop’s volume free for ‘splodey stuff while keeping the weight pretty close.
I got one better than that. One time in the 90s I went through the screening with two laptops in my bag. They told me to open the top one up and turn it on and then let me pass.
That was back in the 90s, so different security setup, but I rather enjoyed the security lapse in that regard. A friend of mine worked for FAA security and her jaw dropped when I told her that.
Good thing they don’t make you turn it on anymore, I so often have a dead battery going thru TSA.
As one theory for the downing of a commercial Russian flight in the Sinai was that there was bomb concealed in a laptop, I’m pretty sure the Russians already know this.
I ran across this little gem while perusing the pep rally over at The_Donald at reddit.
The Washington Post is a 100% objective and unbiased news source! Totally! Exhibit A:(i.redd.it)
It has a side-by-side comparison of the same story from two different administrations.
Ding! Ding! Ding!
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. Etc.
Nice one valerie. Perfect.
Ba da boom, ba da bing. Nicely done, Val.
Please tell me you see the difference.
The first one was a coordinated and planned OFFER to share information. One that the source of the information was OK with SINCE WE WERE THE SOURCE.
TRump’s was an impulsive and unplanned sharing of information that violated the information sharing agreement we had with the source of the information. Jeopardizing not only the source but the future of the information sharing agreement with the nation providing the information.
Now it’s conclusive, eh Lars? No more speculation. As Saint Ronald famously said, “Well, there you go again.”
Saying “sources and methods weren’t revealed” is a cop-out, though. Sometimes (often, in fact, where the information is of an extremely sensitive nature) the information ITSELF will reveal the source.
Of course, this isn’t the first time something like this has happened. Anyone else remember when President “Jimmeh” Carter (AKA History’s Greatest Monster) revealed to the world that we had spy satellites that could take detailed photos of Soviet installations? The intel community had a collective heart attack over that casual revelation.
Then there was the time that a previous president – either Nixon or Johnson, can’t remember which – was photographed in public carrying a folder emblazoned with the code word for the most sensitive intel information, a code word that was itself classified.
Honestly, I think crap like this happens all the time, especially when you have presidents who have little or no intelligence or national security background (like Trump, Obama and Clinton.)
To me (and I’m FAR from a Trump supporter – I didn’t vote for him and in fact, I detest him) without more information this seems like another tempest in a tea pot, another weak “gotcha!” attempt from the Trump-hating media.
I think Trump is going to turn out to be a pretty awful president (because he’s a pretty awful person) but the nakedly partisan attacks of the media are looking more shrill and hysterical with each passing day.
The real damage here is not going to be to the national security or to Trump’s presidency but to any remaining shreds of credibility that the major media organs have.
Concur with all you stated, but when it came down to the wire, I had to vote Trump so that pathetic excuse for a human being (Clinton) didn’t get the nod.
The president being an OCA means he can declassify much of what is classified, as I understand. But, I doubt there’s anything to this anyway.
I actually feel the opposite – whereas most things he does that get the media riled up earn a big shrug or yawn from me, this is a critical issue. Fighting terrorists like ISIS is fundamentally an intelligence war, and anything that reduces our ability to get sources inside these organizations hurts our ability to wage this war effectively.
And when we finally do get a seemingly well-placed source and we’re told, “Uh, don’t give up this information to anyone, it’s that sensitive!”, and then the President reveals it to Russia in a casual, seemingly unplanned manner… well, that’s going to hurt our intelligence capabilities. Which could very well translate to lives lost.
I hope I’m wrong. God, I fuckin’ hope I’m wrong. But if true, this is a pretty glaring problem with long term ramifications.
Thank you Martinjumper.
Good to know some of you on this board see McMaster’s answer for the bullshit it was.
Again, you know it was bullshit how? Please, name the source for your alleged knowledge* on what has thus far transpired.
*IOW, name names of who saw/heard what Trump did.
The source is McMaster’s own words.
He never said that Trump did not share highly classified material. He never said the sharing of the information was planned and coordinated with the source nation. He never said that it WONT compromise the source.
What he said was the Trump did not discuss sources and methods.
Meaning Trump did not explicitly say where the information came from.
Anyone who worked in the intel community for any reasonable length of time can see that McMaster’s words were CAREFULLY chosen because people in the intel community are VERY aware and CONSTANTLY COGNIZANT of the distinction between the classified information itself and the source and method used to collect it. Sometimes the information itself is classified. Usually the source and method is what causes the information to be classified and the information is only classified because its disclosure will likely compromise the source and method.
McMaster’s comments that the source and methods were not discusses while he EXPLICITLY AVOIDED saying that classified was not discussed is a absolute clear statement that the information itself was disclosed.
Which is everything.
In almost all cased of foreign and threat intelligence information the information itself is NOT classified. We classify the information only to protect the source and method so the enemy does not know were know and cannot then determine how we are coming to know the things we know.
Think about. The enemy already knows the shit about themselves that we have collected. The information itself is already known to the enemy. The enemy already knows what they are up to and what their plans are.
What they do not know is what we know, how much we know, and how we are coming to know it.
So we classify the information we collect about the enemy to keep the enemy from knowing how we got it.
Babble, babble, babble, babble and you wonder why I refer to you as BABBLES McBUTTHEAD.
I don’t wonder anything about why you do what you.
Beyond your unhealthy stalker behavior toward me.
And only because I cannot fathom how someone has such a pathetic and pointless existence.
I just listened to Gen McMaster’s briefing goat fuck with the press in the white house. I almost feel sorry for him, though he’s getting GO pay so just almost.
He reiterated multiple times answering with the same statement….”Wholly appropriate”.
He most especially indicated that POTUS didn’t even KNOW where the information came from.
We share intelligence with other countries all the time, even if we aren’t “allies” with them because it is a necessity for a particular activity.
They really need to find and stomp out these leakers because this is getting ridiculous.
Mcmaster’s answer is bullshit. “At no time were any intelligence sources or methods discussed, and no military operations were disclosed that were not already known publicly.” He knows damn well the the disclosure of the information itself compromises the sources and methods. You do not need to actually discuss them sources and methods. If an intelligence target knows what we know about them it is usually not difficult for them to determine how we found out. Which is why we classify the information itself and not just classify the sources and methods. So using McMaster’s INTENTIONALLY misleading statement to dismiss this as an issue is flat bullshit. Trump is the president, and as the president he generally can disclose whatever classified information he wants to. However, that does not mean he should and when he does it to a potential threat country HE DAMN SURE BETTER HAVE GOOD REASON. And not just be bragging or carelessness. Despite the fact that he claims he was trying to “warn” the Russians of a potential threat tactic there are other ways to have done that without revealing anywhere near as much as he did. I find it disgusting that the right does not have issue with this. You sure as shit would have issues with Obama doing this. This whole meeting was a massive exercise in stupidity. The timing, the release of information, allowing a foreign collector into the Oval office (Russian government photographers are not just trained in taking pictures). Did he do something illegal? No. President is the ultimate classification authority. SO he can’t be charged with releasing classified information (privacy act information is different) Did he did something stupid? Yes, completely. And he keeps doing incredibly stupid shit. Repeatedly. Pathologically. But, it is also completely legal for the president to be a moron. However, that does not mean we should be making and perpetuating bullshit excuses for it. I know for a fact that a lot of people in the intelligence community are deeply disturbed by Trump’s unrelenting idiocy and recklessness. Most of them conservative and ALL of them more… Read more »
*Did he do something stupid…
Unnamed sources are more reliable, huh, Lars. As I said above, if the article isn’t about Trump revealing “methods and sources” they have no story.
IMHO “unnamed sources” these days means they made most of it up in a cubicle or break room.
“He knows damn well the the disclosure of the information itself compromises the sources and methods.”
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Your bias is showing.
Did you get this worked up when the Clinton administration was destroying security at places like Los Alamos, etc.? Remember the missing hard drives, etc.? I imagine there were some long term effects from that.
I was this worked up over Clinton.
And in this case he not only provided the information but the CITY it originated from.
And I was far MORE worked up over Clinton.
My biggest issue with this is how so many of you care so little when Trump does stupid shit but bitch like it was an act of treason when a liberal does stupid shit like this.
WAIT, you were a Bernie-head, RIGHT? Your Candidate suddenly bought a CHOICE waterfront vacation Home for a real sweetheart price RIGHT after he dropped out of the race. Happenstance? Coincidence? I personally doubt that. YOU and your ilk always ask things like “WHY does a politician have THREE or more houses…” while you blindly support a wrung-out has-been who has NEVER held a legitimate job in his life while your ilk acts JUST LIKE Hitler’s SA did toward those who dissent with their ideology, agenda and mantras.
Not quite “JUST LIKE Hitler’s SA”.
Most of them are far too cowardly to actually try to bust heads. They let the masked nincompoops of Red Abteilung break stuff and bust heads, and nod sagely about how the victims somehow had it coming / created a provocation / should have known that expressing a counter opinion might lead to a retaliatory outburst, etc And those masked folks are not actually part of The Movement, of course, just coincidently trooping the storm for it..
“..but the CITY it originated from.”
So? Where else would it originate? If the Russians were planning something nasty I would bet it originated in Moscow, whatever the source.
And now, thanks to the media and “anonymous sources”, the world (including ISIS) knows it was a spy, not technical means.
If I were a foreign intelligence service I too would be reluctant to give information to the US. Not because of Trump but because of the legion of leakers.
What the hell is there to get worked up about? We give a lot better intel to much less trustworthy people. I don’t like Trumpster at all but I fail to see where he did anything wrong.
Obama commuted Manning. People were killed and imprisoned over the information he gave away and that was just fine by him.
Better men than “WAPO nameless” did take Obama to task for revealing the methodology (if not the names) of how Bin Laden was captured. That resulted in a couple of murders and the doc going to prison.
There were more leaks and more crucial leaks under Obama then in the history of the US and practically no one was held accountable. Now the WAPO wants to jump on a horse and scream OPSEC? Where the Flip have they been for the last eight years?
Where? Playing Cockholster for the Left, of course. Just like now.
Call them “Aquaculture”, as they are entirely in the tank for the Proggies.
On the positive side, at least the Democrats are now paying attention to safeguarding classified information. I wish that they were this enthusiastic last summer.
Some of us were very concerned.
And some conservatives are concerned about what Trump is doing.
The rest of you a partisan hacks putting party over country.
Where was the WaPo story when Hillary compromised classified material through her e-mails?
Oh, that’s right. James Comey sort of gave her a pass and said there wasn’t “intent” involved – but enough of that.
“What difference does any of this make?!”
Yes, many conservatives are keeping a watchful eye on the President. If he screws things up, he should be held to account for mistakes. Meanwhile, we’re not calling for his failure like the media has been doing.
“Party over country”, huh?
Have you been paying attention at all?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-on-her-private-server-wrote-104-emails-the-government-says-are-classified/2016/03/05/11e2ee06-dbd6-11e5-81ae-7491b9b9e7df_story.html?utm_term=.6c70cddb0cdf
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/08/17/bill-clintons-misleading-claim-about-marked-classified-information-in-hillary-clintons-emails/?utm_term=.36f95c87e513
Lars is still pissed b/c he was going to be Bernie Sander’s fact checker.
There is a difference between concern and hysteria.
Poor security practices seem to be a bipartisan failing. “Concern” seems to be a response of the party in power and hysteria the response of Democrats and liberals to Reps. and conservatives in general.
A segment of both sides get hysterical over this.
And a segment of both sides only seem to care when the OTHER side screws up.
That second part is what I have issue with.
Too many people giving Trump a pass on this.
It was an idiotic thing to do. While there is no action that does not mean we should be making excuses for him or accepting when his administration gives us patently BULLSHIT excuses or explanations.
“Too many people giving Trump a pass on this.”
I can’t speak for others, but I am going to wait for the hysteria to die down and some more facts before I get too worked up. After all, sharing intelligence with other countries, even non-allies, is nothing new. Especially when faced with a common enemy.
No.
Most of us deplore the long-standing Democrat tradition of the Lynching.
Was this any different than the president telling Stalin about our Atomic Bomb?
Hmmmm…
Yes, it was different.
One; the Russians were an ALLY at the time.
Two, telling them about the atomic bomb did not compromise in source of information. Meaning we did not LOSE any assets or put any at risk by disclosing that information.
Third, it served a vital strategic purpose since they were gong to find out anyway when we used it telling them ahead of time helped to reduce suspicion about our future motives as the war came to an end.
So the Russians aren’t allies in the war against ISIS?
No, they are not allies in the war against ISIS.
ISIS is a common enemy. But Russia and Syria also attack groups allied with the US and it allies in the region.
Syria, Russia, and to an increasing extent Iran are allies in Syria.
The US is not part of the Syria-Russia-/-Iran alliance.
Proof of that is the 50 missile strike we did against Syrian forces a month ago.
And the fact that Syria calls the US an “invader” in the region just a few weeks before that.
We didn’t have a formal alliance with the Soviet Union, just a series of negotiated understandings. We would not acknowledge their conquests, which the Soviets of course demanded.
Sorta like now.
There is a huge difference between “allies” and “co-belligerents”.
Ally, or co-belligerant?
Then and now.
“One; the Russians were an ALLY at the time.”
Technically, yes. But an ally dedicated to destroying us in the long term.
” telling them ahead of time helped to reduce suspicion about our future motives”
Are you really that ignorant or naive? I repeat, the Soviet Union was dedicated to the triumph of Communism and the defeat us us dirty Capitalists. Their core ideology requires them to be suspicious of Capitalists.
Heard this hilarious quip this morning on the local AM radio morning talk show:
“Yeah, I heard that Putin already put out a statement from the Kremlin on this supposed intel slip-up. Putin said that Trump didn’t tell them anything that the Russians didn’t already know. That’s because the Russians already took everything that they want to know from Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail server.”
Ha ha ha
Partisanship over country is so funny….
Ja, sehr komisch.
Hau ab, Herr Kommissar.
Ja, es ist lustig. Allerdings entschuldigt er nicht die Dummheit von Trump.
FACT: You’re a 24K weapons grade IDIOT and imbecile, Babbles McButthead.
My God, der Piuperdink is so dumb he doesn’t know when he’s being told to piss off?
Отвалить и умереть, ублюди.
That quip of yours explains quite a bit of laghter directed at -you- Zampolit.
Trump to Russian Foreign Minister: “I farted.”
Russian FM: “Damn. Had a few last night, huh?”
Trump: “No, I had that cheap ass vodka I made”.
Washington Post: “Breaking News……Trump reveals classified information”.
Don’t you mean “Breaking Wind….”?
President Trump could fart while overseas and the libtard leftist mess media would immediately accuse him of employing Chemical Warfare on Foreign Heads of State.
That was Bush versus Japan, I thought….
There is a thoughtful post over at InstaPundit (at 8:45 by Stephen Green) giving a thoughtful look at the story.
Also another at https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/05/15/analyzing-the-trumprussia-intelligence-story/
that give a balanced evaluation of what we know vs what WhaaPo wants us to think we know.
Sharing info regarding a mutual enemy that A) likely benefits us AND the Rooskies, and B) they likely already know via their own sources (including but not limited to Das Hildabeast’s inbox) isn’t exactly on the same level as giving them the launch codes for our nukes.
Not if it violates an information sharing agreement with have with the foreign Intel service that gave us the info with no intention of it being shared with the Russians. And not if it causes the source to be compromised and potentially lost or pulled out.
If and if. That’s what passes as news. If this, then OMG! There are old and sage expressions for most every human situation. I think even you may know the one about “if,” Lars.we all know
This entire thing is afar too reminiscent of WaPo’s glory hound days and Deep Throat and Woodward and Bernstein. Richard Nixon and the White House burglars – all of that was the ONLY potato WaPo has had in a long time, and if they aren’t after another glory run, then it’s winter in my area and the sunshine is really snow.
They have nothing and they know it, but they aren’t going to give up because their darling Hillary, the incompetent classless clown, didn’t win the election and they are going to get even with Trump for it. Period.
They have nothing and they know it, but they sure can make up stuff using alleged anonymous sources. They don’t have a story, but they do have gossip and inuendo, and they really hate Trump, whose worst offense to date is having two scoops of ice cream while everyone else had one.
Q)Who got the bill for the ice cream, and who paid the bill.
A) DJT and DJT.
Why was this a ‘thing’ in the first place?
Why was it ‘a thing’? Because the braindead dweebs and dweebettes in the media have nothing important to say, so they make a mountain out of a molehill.
At this point if you’re using the Post as anything more than a bird cage liner, you’re wasting your money. I suppose this source was in the room? The source is probably Jacques Cousteau because this is another fishing expedition.
The left hammers Trump because he speaks in general terms until it suits their narrative to have him speak in specific terms to “divulge secrets”.
The Post is just another tabloid fish wrap like The National Enquirer & The Globe. They probably have an exclusive of J-Lo & A-Rod next to this story…hacks.
If I understand the fact correctly the source was not in the room. WaahPo admits as much.
👍🏻👍🏻
The real issue, then, is whether this “revelation” was in fact unprecedented or unusual. The only people saying they were are highly questionable, at best.
Bias reveals itself in many forms, but the most pernicious form is where an act that is dismissed as insignificant or unremarked upon when done by someone you support is elevated to “ZOMG THIS IS THE END OF THE WORLD!!!!!!!1!!!” when done by someone you oppose.
Sadly, both sides do this and I suspect that the “sky is falling/Chicken Little” aspect will ultimately lead to those who haven’t already chosen sides simply tuning out the “outrage of the day.”
The “victim” in that case is really the press’s credibility and the danger there is that once the press is seen as one sided, their credibility is shot and then if the president then DOES do something unprecedented or outrageous, it will likely be dismissed as just another “manufactured crisis” by all but the most partisan.
And that, in turn, could tempt the president to push the limit to see just how much he could get away with.
Can we all agree that Trump met with the Russian ambassador?
How do any of us really know? Because he said he did? Because someone else said he did? Through some source we trust?
Guess one’s assignment of credibility depends entirely upon the faith one has in the source of information. What they said – exactly why should I care? At least there are no pics of Trump bowing to the man. (Is the Russian ambassador even a man??)
Speaking of which, am I the only one who’s surprised to see the Dems hating on the Russians? Gotta be the first time since the Cuban Missile Crisis that that’s happened.
Having lived through the Cold War I remember all those years when liberals of all stripes told us how swell the Russians were and who tut-tutted and wagged their finger at us knuckle-dragging conservatives who didn’t like the Russians. Sting even wrote a song about it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHylQRVN2Qs
But now that Trump is in the white house, apparently we’re supposed to hate the Russians, huh?
“am I the only one who’s surprised to…”
Surprised? Meh. The hypocrisy of the left no longer surprises me. It still amuses me, though.
What still surprises me is the sheer gall and lack of embarrassment. As you say, the Dems doted on Communists and anti-westerners in general. Still do. This is just a temporary aberration. Call it “Situational Ideology”. They were for the Russians until they were against them and they will “reset” relations when they need to.
It replaced the myriad stories of poor people and street people and tent people that were rolled out when a Republican took the White House and tucked away when a Democrat did.
I think unnecessarily revealing classified information and potentially jeopardizing a source is something to be more concerned about than bowing to someone.
so to summarize your concern is that an anonymous someone who was not in the room says the President may have disclosed information which might reveal sourcing of information which an otherwise credible named source (McMaster) says did not happen? I just want to make sure I understand correctly.
You got it, David.
“…unnecessarily revealing classified information…”
What do you base that conclusion on? At best, it is your opinion.
Fake news with a standard side of libtard hysteria.
I think they supersized their side order this time.
It’s all about controlling the narrative, the office chatter, the issue of the day, week, or month. That’s the heart of this matter. Much of America gets it. Trump got it and latched onto it, exposing the media bias and contrived news. Many of us ceased trusting the media long ago but, thankfully, nowadays there is Algore’s invention. Commissar doesn’t much use it to check on his facts, but the rest of us do.
Media bias? What bias? So what if it has been confirmed that the WaPo Trump story’s gazillion tweets prompted the news room there to burst into applause? Doesn’t mean anything.
It’s not just bias, even worse is the incompetence, ignorance, and laziness. Once CSPAN started broadcasting the events covered by the media it was just a matter of time before sane people noticed the lack of credibility of the media.
Back when Ben Bradlee and Kate Graham ran the Washington Post, the rules on anonymous sources were actually fairly simple. Reporters could not use a single anonymous source, and multiple anonymous sources could not be connected to each other. Similar to a double-blind check.
The result was that the use of anonymous sources tended to be rare, and used only as a last resort.
What also used to be true is that if the Washington Post ran a story that pushed the edge of credibility, the New York Times would be on it like a pit bull on a pork chop to prove the Post were idiots.
None of that apparently matters anymore. In reading various versions of the story in the Post, Times, Politico, and a few others, it’s fairly obvious that the MSM’s jihad against Trump is taking precedence over quality journalism. Back in the day, if I had turned in a story as poorly sourced as the one in the New York Times, for example, an editor would have probably told me I had a brighter future working as a chiropodist.
Sadly, that time is no more.
Whether it shall be again remains to be seen.
I trust the media. So should you!
I can only watch so much of that before the bilge starts bubbling, and then the laughter starts bubbling up, and finally, an enormous giggle starts but won’t stop.
They lost. Pity them. It’s the real reason they haven’t given up yet.
fapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfap….liberal tears are the best lube
Perfect example of media trying to tell us what is important; #BlackLivesMatter. It was everywhere. You couldn’t escape it. And then? Damn truth started to roll out independent of the media and poof! Gone. But, boy, they sure tried.
I didn’t know there was a BLM-themed comic book, but there was. http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2017/05/15/marvel-comics-cancels-african-american-hero-book-exec-said-minority-comics-dont-sell/
Re: Comic Book “The [Marvel] executive made his comments based on recent sales figures but later tried to roll it back after a backlash in the liberal comic book community slammed him as racist.” The liberal comic-book community? That explains a lot.
‘But, but, but these are social justice heroes! This is a diverse group of no jobs, no justice type people. We even have a token whitey. Of course, he’s trans. The comic-book-buying public will eat this up!’ So, after two issues and few sales, he’s a racist. That’s the answer for damn near everything. (Isn’t it, Lars?)
Snicker. Yeah, the standard reply to everything from the SJWs.
Apparently, the SJW comic consumer is only generous with other people’s money.
They probably read it at the comic book store, and put it back for someone else to buy. According to their needs, of course.
“That’s the answer for damn near everything.”
Unfortunately, that’s the almost immediate go-to escape route when proof flies in the face of their woe-is-me crutch. I sometimes, sometimes believe we are beyond ever getting squared away to the point where people are responsible for themselves and their actions. Oh, how stupid of me to think that is possible? It’s much easier to whip out ‘The Card’ and become a victim in a matter of seconds. The MSM eats up that stuff.
Oh sweet, SWEET schadenfreude!!!
Now, I mean to be serious. If you watch that video above and listen to the newsies and then are told that most Americans get their news from TV, what do you think just might be up with this and other reports concerning Trump and his administration?
Correct me if I’m wrong here, but isn’t the President the final arbiter on what can and cannot be classified or declassified, and who can or cannot have access?
I’m pretty sure I read that in the news when there was some minor flare up about President Obama discussing/releasing classified intelligence.
Correction … it wasn’t about President Obama. It was in reference to Presidential Candidate H. Clinton’s mishandling of classified documents.
See excerpt and link below.
I think that everyone (including most of those on the left) acknowledges that from a legal standpoint there is virtually no limit to what classified information a president can release.
Most people are not talking about the legal standard, i.e. did he do something illegal. The general consensus is that even if he did exactly what he is accused of doing, it did not violate the law because the president has unlimited discretion in this area.
The controversy is whether it was a wise thing for him to do.
And the part of it that seems to be getting glossed over, from what I’ve seen, is whether or not his “disclosures” – to the extent that they did happen – were “unprecedented” or not.
His opponents of course are saying yes, they were unprecedented, as if no US president before DJT had ever discussed sensitive or classified information with a representative of another (presumably non-allied) country.
His supporters are saying that any ‘disclosures’ of classified information were within the bounds of generally accepted practices among world leaders and were general enough not to ‘burn’ any confidential sources.
As usual, people are spinning the rather sparse facts of the case in whatever direction suits their purposes.
Like a fortune teller reading tea leaves, people will see in this exactly what they want to see. 😉
Some observations:
To find a leaker, dangle some juicy but relatively harmless information.
Even better if it is -dis- information.
Even better if it burns a turned or treacherous agent besides the leaker.
The current man plays to win, unlike the prior one.
Lets see how this plays out.
Have wondered for a while now which of these “stories” lately were set ups designed to expose some of the leakers. Unfortunately, there could be so many of them that they will never all be identified.
You mean like fresh water needed at Midway?
2/17: Are you telling me AF is short of fresh water? They fell for that hook, line and sinker. Four front line carriers sunk to our loss of one carrier and, I think, a cruiser and/or destroyer. Massively lopsided battle.
Why are we so worried about the leaked?
He is not the one flat unnecessarily and carelessly released classified information.
Trump did.
The leaker just made the public are of it.
And the leaker is a conservative.
Would you stop with that “we” business. There is no “we” where you are involved. Your’re part of “the them.”
Tribal, partisan, mindless bullshit Fromm you as usual.
Tribal? Actually, I am quite independent, but, more often than not, my views are the same as other conservatives. Partisan? I like that cheese and I have never been to Paris. Mindless bullshit? I suppose when one is frequently accused of precisely that by others, he assigns that tag to others. In other words, you use what you are familiar with.
Fact check:
The President gets to decide what is appropriate to disclose.
The leaker, by providing the info to the press ….
Broke the law
Which an O-4 should know, right?
And the -leaker- Provided the source and other details. Thus espionage.
Which an O-4 should understand right?
You singularly fail to impress me with your savvy.
No, the leaker almost certainly did not break the law.
You can say the president did something stupid.
Not a crime.
Even if he did it in the white house.
As long as what you say is not in of itself classified, or some other form of protected information (operational security, law enforcement, privacy act etc) then you can leak it to the press. Or put it on Facebook. Whatever.
You will get fired if they find out it was you and did not agree with your decision to do it.
But you would not have committed a crime.
This leaker did not disclose the classified information. Only the NATURE of the information and the fact that Trump shared it. With is not classified.
They could try to spin an operational security accusation against the leaker but since the leak did not jeopardize any ongoing operations it will not hold up.
Not embarrassing the president is not an operational security issue.
Diplo conversation is “born classified “. Even this former E-4 knows that.
Anything from that conversation is protected, until the president or designee says otherwise.
Thus release by unauthorized person is -espionage-. There is no exception for “press leak”.
“Why are we so worried about the leaked? [sic]”
Says the guy who’s faux concerned with OPSEC.
11B Mailclerk nails it, again.
“Since then, presidents have regularly updated executive orders related to secrecy, relying for some decades now on a Supreme Court ruling that found the authority to classify information related to national security arises from the president’s constitutionally granted status as commander-in-chief.
In the case of Department of the Navy v. Egan, the court ruled, “Authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security … flows primarily from this Constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant.””
From this article on July 8th, 2016, by Rob Garver (Fiscal Times)
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2016/07/08/Deserving-or-Not-President-Clinton-Would-Have-Access-Classified-Information
The question is not whether he legally can compromise classified information. The question is whether he should be doing it as carelessly as he did with no prior plan or coordination to do so.
The question is what he says the question is, knucklehead. That you don’t like the question is a separate matter.And you don’t like the question b/c it would not result in an ugly conclusion regarding Trump.
Nonsense.
Whether he legally can release classified is not disputed.
So that is objectively NOT the question.
I don’t remember you ever being smart. But you seem dumber than usual the last few days.
Did you ever post an apology about Chief Clark?
You might want to reconsider throwing that sort of stone.
Regarding Clark, I found additional sources and now conclude that he latched onto the race card to gain himself some creds, that he was indeed an embellisher, and that he may have lied about where he was and what he did in the Navy. So, there you go, Lars. Your effort–and that of SEA–prompted me to look deeper and, as far as I am concerned, you owe me an apology. As for the question, you really are that dumb, so I can’t explain it in any simpler terms. The question is what he said his question was.
I know you got all atwitter when others agreed with you. Don’t misunderstand that singular occurrence. Oh, and “atwitter” has nothing to do with Twitter. I thought I’d help you on that before you gave another embarrassing reply.
And let’s be clear;
You called him a liar WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER at first.
Disparaging a career Chief Petty Officer and WWI veteran with ZERO basis for your accusation he was a liar.
And you STILL have not produced a shred of evidence to support your bullshit accusations and have the audacity to claim I owe you an apology?
No, asshole, you owe Chief Clark and his surviving relatives an apology. And you should post it on the Chief Clark blog post page so that any relative or other visitor can see you RETRACT and APOLOGIZE for your bullshit.
*WWII veteran.
Find the word liar in what I wrote. Go ahead. You commies are all alike. You used that man for your own twisted purposes and the truth be damned.
Still won’t retract you bullshit accusation against Chief Clark?
Still have not provided evidence to support you bullshit accusation but claim you “looked deeper” and found some?
Shitbag.
And yes; a liar.
Bullshit. You are calling him a liar and an embellisher and I have yet to see you post a shred of information backing your apparently baseless claim.
The cruise book crew list for the day SHOWS HIM ON BOARD THE DAY OF THE ATTACK.
The only other living survivor of the attack CONFIRMED HIS ACCOUNT AND SAID THE NAVY SHOULD AUTHORIZE THE AWARD.
The Navy, after investigation, was able to determine sufficient facts to give him an award for the action.
You have ZERO evidence but your own opinion and some bullshit claim you “looked deeper”.
Well, I actually looked up the cruise book for the ship and verified he was there.
Wrong thread, asshole. You thought you had your moment in the sun, but the clouds came and rained on your sorry self. By your comment, which you are repeating from the other, the appropriate thread, I can see that you haven’t visited there lately. Try it. You won’t like it. I’ll be waiting for your apology. By the way, did I mention that if had been white, you would not have commented at all there? Injustice is just everywhere isn’t it?
“I don’t remember you ever being smart.” I never said I was smart. I know a thing or two, such as it’s not “you ever being” but is your ever being.
This is not just a minor thing that should be dismissed and we should not be making excuses on this. Nor should we let this be regarded as a partisan issue.
http://theresurgent.com/i-know-one-of-the-sources/
Says you. Evidently you think we are ‘managed’ by Erickson or Limbaugh or Coulter and the like, just because you and yours are guided by your progressive commenters and politicians. This is a nothing story, much as you would like it to be otherwise. Hell, you would leap for joy if Trump actually laid bare some intel that was of value to Ivan. And then you pretend, as you did above, that country comes first for you. Go find the front end of a speeding bus, Lars.
Not just me and I linked a conservative source who also has issues with this.
One you did not even read because you falsely assumed it was a liberal source.
You just can’t see beyond partisanship.
You dumb fuck. You are wrong once again. Did you notice the first name I listed above? I read the article. Then I read a connected piece. You really are a dumbass. My point was that by referencing Erickson, you think that we would slavishly adhere to his words as you and yours do to those of the Old Commie you worked for. Dumbass.
You need to see another shrink, Taylor. Or find a bus route.
You cite an article by a NeverTrumper? I thought that someone as factually challenged as you could do better.
Fair enough.
I was not aware that he was a Never Trumper. Just that he was a conservative.
But I still stand by what I said. And agree with MartinJumper on RedDevil on this issue.
As a former career intel guy and keeper of secrets and one who struggled mightily with foreign disclosure issues for years when dealing with allies like the Brits and Aussies, here is my take. First and foremost, POTUS is the ultimate classification authority. If he decides to disclose information, it is now disclosable, legally. So, whatever Trump did, by virtue of the fact that he is POTUS it is completely and totally legal and within his discretion. Whether or not it was a good idea is a separate question. McMaster’s statement yesterday was true in a very narrow sense and was carefully crafted to be so. The phrases ‘as reported’ and ‘no sources and methods’ were the big clues that Trump revealed some secrets. The other interesting tidbit is the ‘big reveal’ about threats to civil aviation. That seemed odd to me, because it would seem to hint at exactly what Trump revealed, which is why I think it was was a red herring- in other words, it provided a logical but harmless explanation that hides the actual nature of what was revealed. Just a theory. There are four big problems here. The first is that regardless of the fact that the revealed intel was already common knowledge (if it was indeed the laptop on airlines threat), confirming it or revealing details that would give an indication of source is never a good idea. The second, of course, is that if we did indeed learn this from another nation we could potentially shut ourselves out of their intel. Not good. Third, we are using up McMaster’s 9 lives pretty quick. He can’t keep carrying the credibility water for Trump for very long; look what’s happened to Spicer. We need McMaster and Mattis to stay in the game. If Trump keeps trotting him out to make technically true statements he will lose all credibility and be forced to resign. The nation needs H.R. right where he is. The biggest problem is that once again Trump can’t keep his mouth shut, and neither can his closest advisors. The guy simply can’t stop… Read more »
I should add: Why the Russians, and why now? Why?????
Doesn’t anyone in the White House read a paper or get their news from anything besides Fox or Breitbart?
The scariest part of this is that it was so stupid and easily avoidable on so many levels.
Someone- Trump, Preibus, Bannon, Kushner- SOMEONE- needs to get control of the White House.
I’m going to watch Dr Strangelove now.
I agree. Also as a former Intel gut.
*guy
Gut worked and is more appropriate, in your case.
I wasnt an intel guy, but still know just as much as y’all regarding what happened in that office. Nothing.
We know Trump intentionally or carelessly disclosed information given to us by an ally that was never intended to be given to the Russians prior to Trump walking in that room.
We do know that McMaster chose his words very carefully.
We also know the leaker is a conservative.
And we know that Trump had not coordinated with the ally Intel agency before he revealed this classified information. Indicating it was a spur of the moment act.
That editorial (or is it royal?) “we” really needs to be jettisoned. Or, better still, the we stays and you get jettisoned.
You missed one major problem. This entire story came from a single, anonymous source.
That’s what’s technically known as a “rumor.”
Get back with me when someone has actual proof of, well, anything…
And that’s the real crux of the problem because what it shows is a casual, almost contemptuous attitude towards the job.
I was convinced, right up until the day before the election, that Trump didn’t really want to be president, that he was doing the whole thing to boost his gargantuan ego and to gain the attention he craves.
I though “why would this guy want to be president? He’s Donald Freaking Trump, that’s a WAY better gig than being president.”
Being president is a job, and while it’s a job that carries some pretty sweet perks, it’s also a job where at any given time you can figure that millions of people will be scathingly critical of what you do – and taking criticism is not something that Trump does well.
Surrounding yourself with people who take the job of president seriously is not going to help him if he does not take the job seriously himself.
In his defense, he never realized that it would be so much work or that issues like healthcare would be complicated…
Reddevil and MJ. Thus far in Trump’s brief presidency, he has substantively done what to merit disdain? Ice cream? Tweets? Unidentified sources say….
Assuming that this is a serious question (and I have no reason to believe that you have a sense of humor), the tweets alone merit disdain. For the love of God, will someone please knock that Blackberry out of his tiny hands?!?!?!?
The ice cream is kind of funny, but seriously, is there not a dietician in the White House. Does no one have the courage to say, “Two scoops? Really? You know you have to pay for your own clothes, right? Those pants will only go out so much…”
Of course, his mishandling of his own personal staff, lack of understanding of the rule of law, oblivion to the complexities of the issues facing the nation, and willingness to forget the promises that got him elected also weigh into my disdain.
Of course, there is the hair, but that was there long before he became president.
(that last one is bitterness because I am bald and don’t have the guts to attempt such a ridiculous combover).
There’s substance in there somewhere. I’ll look in his hair. Could be in there.
I now have reason to reconsider that sense of humor jab…
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/fbe1fdd0-ec4e-4aa2-9c49-8e8d1a46f764
I concur with RD regarding the tweets. When he was just DJT, private citizen, that stuff was OK because the only thing he was damaging was his own reputation.
But as president, he represents the USA, whether he realizes it or not. Furthermore, the most powerful leader in the world should not be getting into pissing matches with reporters or TV show hosts – that makes him look like a thin skinned, weak, shallow and rather stupid bully.
Which, again, if he is in his capacity as a private citizen, I don’t really care about, but in the way it diminishes the office of the presidency, it’s not a good thing.
This isn’t Hollywood where the worst thing that can happen is low ratings or a cancelled show. What the president does (or doesn’t do) has real world, life-and-death consequences and I’m still not sure that Trump understands that.
The bottom line is that Trump is all about Trump, first, last and always. But the office of the President should be about the Nation, about all of us. Trump still thinks it’s about HIM.
Have the press and the other loudmouths played their role by abandoning even the fig leaf of “objectivity?” Oh, hell yes.
But there’s a difference: The WaPo, the NYT and the major networks don’t owe ME jack shit. They don’t work for me and if I don’t like their drivel I can turn it off (and I do.)
The President, OTOH, DOES owe a duty to me and to the American people – all of the American people, not just those who voted for him – to uphold the seriousness and the dignity of the office. If he can’t do that he has no business being in the office.
Shorter version: I don’t like Teh Donald.
As for the “dignity of the office,” have you seen some of the goobers elected to the Presidency?
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, Trump is the real world equivalent of Al Czervik. The Democrats are, collectively, Judge Smails.
…Which leads me to conclude Lars is Spalding…
On a completely unrelated note, Mitch Rapp is making his big-screen debut.
https://youtu.be/ySxRlsAbEpw
Sorry, TOW. I’m in a Lars-beating mood. I do hope he stays around for more.
I’m curious why the Washington Post is hiding the names of the “unnamed sources from the current and former administration” who openly violated the Espionage Act by sharing classified information with them that they admit to receiving.
Flagwaver,
Above, in the thread, our Zampolit asserts that what you said is not so.
Apparently espionage doesnt apply when opposing this particular president by leaking “born classified” diplomatic conversations via unauthorized persons.
Weird, eh? A former E-4 thinking that leaking classified stuff is espionage, and an 0-4 giving it a pass.
the dead giveaway is the “former” tag… some career mandarin, probably a graduate of some Ivy League type school, who is so much smarter than his bosses that he/she alone can judge what should be leaked to The Right People.