Trump revealed highly classified information to Russian foreign minister and ambassador

[AUDub 11,182]

Actually, I'm going to start it in Politically Speaking proper. Maybe the mods can limit the garbage. 

Oh, wait. Just focus on it in the "Trump fires Comey" thread already there. 

[AUUSN 823]

1 minute ago, Bigbens42 said:

Actually, I'm going to start it in Politically Speaking proper. Maybe the mods can limit the garbage. 

Sweet

[Auburnfan91 1,407]

So what is Trump going to be impeached for? ..................... Revealing classified intelligence to Russia or firing Comey?

I think it's odd that our resident intelligence hawks and Trump bashers didn't post this article last year considering how outraged they are about intelligence being shared with Russia:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-offers-to-share-syria-intelligence-on-terrorists-with-russia/2016/06/30/483a2afe-3eec-11e6-84e8-1580c7db5275_story.html?utm_term=.f860045d8158

Quote

The Obama administration has offered to help Russia improve its targeting of terrorist groups in Syria if Moscow will stop bombing civilians and opposition fighters who have signed on to a cease-fire and use its influence to force Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to do the same.

The offer early this week of what one administration official called “enhanced information sharing” does not include joint military planning, targeting or coordination with U.S. airstrikes or other operations in Syria.

Guess what? Russia used that information to attack those sites of our allies. 

Trump is considered dangerous for what he did but no one said anything last year when "enhanced information sharing" was going on while Obama was president. The same people on here now bashing Trump over this were probably too busy bashing Trump last year to notice. 

[quietfan 233]

5 hours ago, AU64 said:

 So they write about something they did not witness and do not disclose a source...and yet you believe them..?  Amazing.

The  initial article talks about a full transcript of the meeting and a redacted-for-public transcript.  The existence of either would imply that more than Trump and two Russians were privy to the conversation.  (Don't think Trump, Lavrov, or Kislyak were taking shorthand.)  Electronic recording of some type...video/audio/both, or a stenographer?  What does the Secret Service know? Surely they were present.

Also, there wouldn't have been the rush on the part of the White House NSA to contact the CIA &NSA, for damage control and to cover their derrieres, if they didn't know what was said.  Who knows how many were aware of the content of the meeting, at either the White House or the agencies they called?

I don't buy the idea that the three principles were the only ones privy to the conversation.

* * *

News reports are not limited to 'eye-witness' accounts. It's actually rare that a reporter actually observes the incidents he/she is reporting on.  

And source confidentiality is an essential pillar of freedom of the press.  Watergate & the Pentagon Papers are just two of the times that source confidentiality was a key to us hearing the truth.  Without it, we are the blind wandering among the wolves of power & abuse.  Plus, no reputable news source publishes anything without at least two independent sources.  They are much more worried about libel than selling out to a particular political ideology.  Doesn't mean they're always correct, but if they push the envelope too much (i.e., "Fake News") they'll find themselves in libel court and they know it.

[quietfan 233]

17 minutes ago, Auburnfan91 said:

So what is Trump going to be impeached for? ..................... Revealing classified intelligence to Russia or firing Comey?

I think it's odd that our resident intelligence hawks and Trump bashers didn't post this article last year considering how outraged they are about intelligence being shared with Russia:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-offers-to-share-syria-intelligence-on-terrorists-with-russia/2016/06/30/483a2afe-3eec-11e6-84e8-1580c7db5275_story.html?utm_term=.f860045d8158

Guess what? Russia used that information to attack those sites of our allies. 

Trump is considered dangerous for what he did but no one said anything last year when "enhanced information sharing" was going on while Obama was president. The same people on here now bashing Trump over this were probably too busy bashing Trump last year to notice. 

Did Obama share information that an ally gave to us under pledges of secrecy?  Did this 'enhanced information sharing' endanger our relationship with an ally, potentially affect the trust of our other allies, or possibly shut down a source or threaten an operative on the ground?  If so, then I think that was wrong too.

[quietfan 233]

25 minutes ago, Auburnfan91 said:

So what is Trump going to be impeached for? ..................... Revealing classified intelligence to Russia or firing Comey?

Don't forget the emoluments clause and money laundering!   

[TexasTiger 13,006]

2 hours ago, quietfan said:

Don't forget the emoluments clause and money laundering!   

And obstructing justice.

[AUUSN 823]

9 hours ago, Auburnfan91 said:

So what is Trump going to be impeached for? ..................... Revealing classified intelligence to Russia or firing Comey?

I think it's odd that our resident intelligence hawks and Trump bashers didn't post this article last year considering how outraged they are about intelligence being shared with Russia:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-offers-to-share-syria-intelligence-on-terrorists-with-russia/2016/06/30/483a2afe-3eec-11e6-84e8-1580c7db5275_story.html?utm_term=.f860045d8158

Guess what? Russia used that information to attack those sites of our allies. 

Trump is considered dangerous for what he did but no one said anything last year when "enhanced information sharing" was going on while Obama was president. The same people on here now bashing Trump over this were probably too busy bashing Trump last year to notice. 

Are you seriously comparing sharing targeting Intel to this?

President Trump’s reported disclosure of classified information may have put an Israeli spy’s life at risk, according to current and former U.S. officials.

The spy, who was placed by Israel inside ISIS, provided intelligence on an active ISIS plot to bring down a passenger jet plane to the United States, ABC reported Tuesday. 

According to the report, the plan was to hide a bomb inside a laptop that could get through airport screenings, and the information was reliable enough to lead the U.S. to consider a laptop ban n flights from Europe to the United States. 

The spy reportedly offered that information at the request that the source remain confidential. 

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/333763-trump-disclosure-endangered-israeli-spy-report

[AUUSN 823]

Now where is that face palm meme?

From the AP.

BREAKING: Putin says Russia is willing to hand over to US Congress, Senate records of Trump's talks with Lavrov.

 

[homersapien 11,440]

16 hours ago, AU64 said:

 Thanks for the help but having worked for a newspaper back in the day, I probably have some idea.

For one thing, I  know that anyone who will commit treason to leak intelligence secrets to the press will also lie about what they tell them . You sound as if you think these leakers are some kind of patriots... Whereas  they really are just liars and deceivers, betraying the people they work for and our country. 

But what if they leak the fact that Trump blurted out said intelligence secrets to the Russians?  

 

[TitanTiger 20,510]

17 hours ago, AU64 said:

Thanks for the help but having worked for a newspaper back in the day, I probably have some idea.

For one thing, I  know that anyone who will commit treason to leak intelligence secrets to the press will also lie about what they tell them . You sound as if you think these leakers are some kind of patriots... Whereas  they really are just liars and deceivers, betraying the people they work for and our country. 

Hold on a sec.

You think the people who witnessed a president recklessly leaking extremely classified info to a non-ally like Russia are the ones committing treason simply for telling the press that it happened?  And that they are liars and deceivers, just because you say so?  You don't think that people who see such recklessness and irresponsibility in the halls of power have a responsibility to make sure it is known and brought to light?

[homersapien 11,440]

17 hours ago, AU64 said:

Such wit....does your teacher know you are doing this kind of thing during class hours?   No way you can be an adult...

Seriously, you didn't know the American press hadn't been invited to the meeting?

Perhaps you should do a little homework before commenting.

[TexasTiger 13,006]

59 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Hold on a sec.

You think the people who witnessed a president recklessly leaking extremely classified info to a non-ally like Russia are the ones committing treason simply for telling the press that it happened?  And that they are liars and deceivers, just because you say so?  You don't think that people who see such recklessness and irresponsibility in the halls of power have a responsibility to make sure it is known and brought to light?

If it's treason to report the autocrat, the loyalty is to an individual, not the Constitution or country.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

5 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

If it's treason to report the autocrat, the loyalty is to an individual, not the Constitution or country.

I'm honestly not trying to be an ass to anyone here.  I'm just looking at the situation and imagining if it were any other president.  Democrat or Republican.  It's a serious matter.  And I don't believe for one second that if this had occurred with Obama in office that these same people straining at gnats to come up with defenses of Trump (it's not a true story, the leakers are the real problem, it's just the left wing media hating on Trump, etc) would be screaming for everything from an independent prosecutor to getting impeachment proceedings underway.  And they know they would.  I'm just astounded that they can't, or won't, be honest enough with themselves to admit it.

[TexasTiger 13,006]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

I'm honestly not trying to be an ass to anyone here.  I'm just looking at the situation and imagining if it were any other president.  Democrat or Republican.  It's a serious matter.  And I don't believe for one second that if this had occurred with Obama in office that these same people straining at gnats to come up with defenses of Trump (it's not a true story, the leakers are the real problem, it's just the left wing media hating on Trump, etc) would be screaming for everything from an independent prosecutor to getting impeachment proceedings underway.  And they know they would.  I'm just astounded that they can't, or won't, be honest enough with themselves to admit it.

For me the best barometer is that shrinking group of principled conservatives that believe in good government.

[Auburnfan91 1,407]

12 hours ago, AUUSN said:

Are you seriously comparing sharing targeting Intel to this?

President Trump’s reported disclosure of classified information may have put an Israeli spy’s life at risk, according to current and former U.S. officials.

The spy, who was placed by Israel inside ISIS, provided intelligence on an active ISIS plot to bring down a passenger jet plane to the United States, ABC reported Tuesday. 

According to the report, the plan was to hide a bomb inside a laptop that could get through airport screenings, and the information was reliable enough to lead the U.S. to consider a laptop ban n flights from Europe to the United States. 

The spy reportedly offered that information at the request that the source remain confidential. 

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/333763-trump-disclosure-endangered-israeli-spy-report

Are you seriously deflecting Obama's intelligence sharing? The target info that the Obama administration shared with Russia put the Syrian rebels we have been backing in danger and gave Russia the ability to weaken them.

The Pentagon was not on board with the "enhanced information sharing" with Russia. They certainly didn't have the nonchalant attitude about it that you seem to have by downplaying it. By your response it doesn't seem like you were against the information sharing that occurred under Obama, because you don't think it's done any harm?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/13/pentagon-resists-obama-s-new-plan-to-work-with-the-russians-in-syria

Quote

The Obama administration has increasingly warmed to a Russian proposal that allows U.S. forces to coordinate with the Kremlin in the ongoing war against ISIS in Syria. But the White House is facing major resistance to the idea from the U.S. military and those in the intelligence community who are working with local Syrian opposition forces—the very government officials who would carry out such a plan.

The pushback comes as the U.S. has reportedly sent a proposal to Russia to share information about specific targets to strike in Syria. Secretary of State John Kerry is scheduled to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin Thursday in part to discuss the plan.

Some Pentagon officials already are saying it won’t work. They have suggested that should the U.S. and Russia agree to increased coordination, they will lobby to share as little with the Russians as possible.

There are discussions in the Pentagon about narrowing the extent of the coordination and the amount of intelligence shared, a U.S. defense official explained to The Daily Beast.

The Russians, two defense officials said, could not be trusted to honor any agreement, saying they believe Moscow would eventually exploit any agreement to bolster the regime—and weaken Syria’s beleaguered rebel fighters. As one U.S.official asked: “What do we gain?”

 

[AUUSN 823]

48 minutes ago, Auburnfan91 said:

Are you seriously deflecting Obama's intelligence sharing? The target info that the Obama administration shared with Russia put the Syrian rebels we have been backing in danger and gave Russia the ability to weaken them.

The Pentagon was not on board with the "enhanced information sharing" with Russia. They certainly didn't have the nonchalant attitude about it that you seem to have by downplaying it. By your response it doesn't seem like you were against the information sharing that occurred under Obama, because you don't think it's done any harm?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/13/pentagon-resists-obama-s-new-plan-to-work-with-the-russians-in-syria

 

You just proved my point in this thread without even knowing it. Thanks for playing.

[Auburnfan91 1,407]

53 minutes ago, AUUSN said:

You just proved my point in this thread without even knowing it. Thanks for playing.

Your only point is that you're anti-Trump. You've posted like 60 times in the last 2 days about Trump.

You haven't engaged in our discussion, all you've done is give a condescending dismissal of an opposing view. You make my point that you weren't against information sharing under Obama. All we've heard from Democrats and intelligence hawks are about how dangerous Russia is but Obama's "enhanced information sharing" with Russia is a non-issue to a lot of the anti-Trump crowd.

[AUUSN 823]

8 minutes ago, Auburnfan91 said:

Your only point is that you're anti-Trump. You've posted like 60 times in the last 2 days about Trump.

You haven't engaged in our discussion, all you've done is give a condescending dismissal of an opposing view. You make my point that you weren't against information sharing under Obama. All we've heard from Democrats and intelligence hawks are about how dangerous Russia is but Obama's "enhanced information sharing" with Russia is a non-issue to a lot of the anti-Trump crowd.

Oh you got that right. I'm anti Trump. Bigly. 

However your conflation is epic. I never once wrote my approval of Obama wanting to share intel with the Russians. I did however call out your silly attempt to try to compare targeting Intel to what Trump just shared, and I tell you is WORLDS apart. It was a major screw up.

Now you did, in this thread demonstrate how dangerous it is to share intel with the Russians, a point I was making, in this thread.

To that I say well done and once again, thanks for playing.

[Auburnfan91 1,407]

21 minutes ago, AUUSN said:

Oh you got that right. I'm anti Trump. Bigly. 

However your conflation is epic. I never once wrote my approval of Obama wanting to share intel with the Russians. I did however call out your silly attempt to try to compare targeting Intel to what Trump just shared, and I tell you is WORLDS apart. It was a major screw up.

Now you did, in this thread demonstrate how dangerous it is to share intel with the Russians, a point I was making, in this thread.

To that I say well done and once again, thanks for playing.

But you have admitted that you think what Obama did was minor and a non-issue. The point you've proven is that you didn't even call Obama out on it. I guess it wasn't dangerous enough for you to point out. 

 

[TitanTiger 20,510]

[AUUSN 823]

8 hours ago, Auburnfan91 said:

But you have admitted that you think what Obama did was minor and a non-issue. The point you've proven is that you didn't even call Obama out on it. I guess it wasn't dangerous enough for you to point out. 

 

Your first comment in this thread was a whiny "but Obama" response. Why should you be rewarded and validated? 

You want to discuss Obama sharing targeting Intel? Go start your own thread.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/17/politics/trump-coast-guard-speech/

I didn't even realize the quote from Dolt 45 about being persecuted was at the Coast Guard graduation ceremony.  The man literally has zero sense of what's appropriate - when or where.  The graduation ceremony isn't about him, just like the prayer breakfast wasn't about his little tiff with Schwarzenegger.  But the black hole vortex of narcissism that is Trump can't help itself.  It must bend all events back around to being about him.

[japantiger 4,051]

Still waiting on the nature of the info that was leaked and an actual credible source to the alleged classified leaking....if  the leak was was "ISIS is planning on putting bombs in laptops"; then you've got to be kidding....was there something more that I missed?  And have we devolved into Trump Hate Hysteria to the point that we believe "unnamed sources of unconfirmed unreported directly contradicted information" over human beings actually in the room?  This has gone on for 8 pages and there has still not been one single piece of actual evidence that this "actually" happened...again, did I miss a real piece of evidence?  Real....not "I want it to be true so I will believe anything anybody says bad about Trump" evidence.   

[AU64 10,122]

6 hours ago, japantiger said:

Still waiting on the nature of the info that was leaked and an actual credible source to the alleged classified leaking....if  the leak was was "ISIS is planning on putting bombs in laptops"; then you've got to be kidding....was there something more that I missed?  And have we devolved into Trump Hate Hysteria to the point that we believe "unnamed sources of unconfirmed unreported directly contradicted information" over human beings actually in the room?  This has gone on for 8 pages and there has still not been one single piece of actual evidence that this "actually" happened...again, did I miss a real piece of evidence?  Real....not "I want it to be true so I will believe anything anybody says bad about Trump" evidence.   

This was BS to begin with and still is. The aim of the piece was to damage DT...no facts and no attribution.