A shocking CNN scoop confirms: Officials are defending our country from Trump

[homersapien 11,812]

What good is having a secret if you can’t tell people about it?

This is the dilemma President Trump has found himself in many times. Often he just blurts (or tweets) the secret out, as he did recently when he tweeted a probably classified image of an Iranian launch facility, enabling the Iranians (and everyone else) to learn more about American surveillance capabilities.

And according to this extraordinary CNN story, from early in his presidency, the intelligence community felt it had no choice but to make decisions based on the likelihood that the person with almost unlimited access to American secrets probably couldn’t keep his mouth shut — especially when it came to Russia:

In a previously undisclosed secret mission in 2017, the United States successfully extracted from Russia one of its highest-level covert sources inside the Russian government, multiple Trump administration officials with direct knowledge told CNN.

A person directly involved in the discussions said that the removal of the Russian was driven, in part, by concerns that President Donald Trump and his administration repeatedly mishandled classified intelligence and could contribute to exposing the covert source as a spy.

The decision to carry out the extraction occurred soon after a May 2017 meeting in the Oval Office in which Trump discussed highly classified intelligence with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and then-Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak. The intelligence, concerning ISIS in Syria, had been provided by Israel.

 

In all the ongoing horrors emanating from the White House, you may have forgotten the story of that Oval Office meeting, but it was truly shocking. It concerned a spy Israel had succeeded in placing near the center of the Islamic State, a piece of information so sensitive that we hadn’t even shared it with many of our key allies. And then Trump, in an apparent attempt to impress the Russians, just told them all about it.

Then Trump defended himself by saying “I have the absolute right” to give incredibly sensitive secrets to our adversaries. This is technically true — as president, he can decide what’s classified and what isn’t, and reveal pretty much whatever he wants, no matter how pathetic or nefarious his motives.

If you were an American intelligence official and you just watched that happen, what would you do? Your obvious response would be to ask, “What else is he going to tell the Russians? What’s he going to tell Vladimir Putin the next time he sees him? What other intelligence assets is he going to burn?”

You’d have to assume the worst, which is apparently what they did.

The recent ludicrousness around “Sharpie-gate” shows how professionals in our government are constantly forced to devote time and energy to propping up Trump’s absurd lies. As my colleague Greg Sargent noted, that was just one of many times Trump has sent people in the administration scrambling to provide support for some idiotic story he has told, not only forcing them to cooperate in his dishonesty but also wasting government resources in the process.

But this story illustrates another dimension to the ways federal officials have had to accommodate Trump: They have been forced to defend the United States of America, its government and its interests from the president himself. As we have learned, this is a task of enormous difficulty and complexity; in a case like this, there are risks to national security and even lives.

And for what? To serve Trump’s embarrassing man-crush on Putin?

Try to imagine something similar happening with any other president from either party. Imagine American intelligence officials saying “We’d better exfiltrate this spy we have in the Kremlin before the president tells the Russians about him” if the president was Obama or Bush or Clinton or Reagan or Nixon or any other. You can’t do it.

It’s in part because of events like such as one that I’m certain history will judge Trump to be the worst president America has had in 230 years. Not just corrupt, not just ignorant, not just impulsive, not just divisive, not just bigoted, not just juvenile and petty and vindictive, but someone so untrustworthy that he couldn’t even be relied on to not spill intelligence secrets to our adversaries.

Some people assert that Trump is in fact a Russian asset; whether you agree will depend on how you define the term. But it has become clear that across the government and the country, everyone has had to adjust their expectations and actions to the fact that the president of the United States simply cannot be trusted to uphold America’s interests, if doing so conflicts with his greed, or his desire to please a foreign dictator, or simply some whim he had while watching “Fox & Friends.”

It may be some time before we understand the full extent of the damage that has caused.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/09/shocking-cnn-scoop-confirms-officials-are-defending-our-country-trump/

 

[Mikey 16,781]

CNN scoop? LMAO! No need to read any further than that headline. CNN is the outfit that wasted seven hours of air time trying to explain why we should give those on the Looney Left authoritarian control over what we eat, how and when we travel, what type of house we can live in and what material our bed sheets can be made of.

It's not about the environment, people, it's about control. Period.

[homersapien 11,812]

40 minutes ago, Mikey said:

CNN scoop? LMAO! No need to read any further than that headline. CNN is the outfit that wasted seven hours of air time trying to explain why we should give those on the Looney Left authoritarian control over what we eat, how and when we travel, what type of house we can live in and what material our bed sheets can be made of.

It's not about the environment, people, it's about control. Period.

Yeah yeah, don't like the news?  Attack the source. Classic denial.  Right up there with "fake news".  (Followed by a really weak attempt at diversion by changing the subject.)

 

Do you also deny Trump exposed one of Israel's key agents?

"The decision to carry out the extraction occurred soon after a May 2017 meeting in the Oval Office in which Trump discussed highly classified intelligence with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and then-Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak. The intelligence, concerning ISIS in Syria, had been provided by Israel."

[Mikey 16,781]

7 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Do you also deny Trump exposed one of Israel's key agents?

What you posted above is nothing but speculation on the part of the leftist CNN. I don't know what was said in a closed door meeting and CNN doesn't ether.

[kevon67 2,368]

1 hour ago, Mikey said:

CNN scoop? LMAO! No need to read any further than that headline. CNN is the outfit that wasted seven hours of air time trying to explain why we should give those on the Looney Left authoritarian control over what we eat, how and when we travel, what type of house we can live in and what material our bed sheets can be made of.

It's not about the environment, people, it's about control. Period.

If your news channel has a show called Reliable Sources that should tell you all you need to know..........If I have to tell you I am a good cook it means I am a horrible cook.

[japantiger 4,077]

Russian truther says what?

Just one day....can't do it.

[jj3jordan 2,125]

These “intelligence agencies”...Are they the ones run by Clapper Brennan Comey and Lynch? Thought so. And there is someone around who still actually believes anything that came out of their mouths?

[Tiger Sue 325]

Then there is this by CNN with false reporting according to the CIA.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cia-slams-faulty-cnn-narrative-slams-misguided-reporting-on-russian-double-agents-alleged-exfiltration

So now where are all those jumping Trump about showing "secrets"?

[japantiger 4,077]

22 hours ago, Tiger Sue said:

Then there is this by CNN with false reporting according to the CIA.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cia-slams-faulty-cnn-narrative-slams-misguided-reporting-on-russian-double-agents-alleged-exfiltration

So now where are all those jumping Trump about showing "secrets"?

Come on Sue...it was the Russians dammit...they're going to ride this one like Slim Pickens...it's all they have....just one day....they can't do it.

[homersapien 11,812]

The agent supposedly decided on his own to get out.  

Smart move after watching the POTUS compromise intelligence secrets like the satellite data and Israels Syrian agent.

[Tiger Sue 325]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

The agent supposedly decided on his own to get out.  

Smart move after watching the POTUS compromise intelligence secrets like the satellite data and Israels Syrian agent.

Pure BS. Former CIA station chief blasts CNN story.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/former-cia-station-chief-hoffman-on-disputed-cnn-story-about-russian-spy-leakers-committed-grave-transgression

Do you have any facts to support "supposedly"?

[kevon67 2,368]

2 hours ago, japantiger said:

Come on Sue...it was the Russians dammit...they're going to ride this one like Slim Pickens...it's all they have....just one day....they can't do it.

😂Riding like Slim Pickens............a whopin and a shootin all the way to Rock Ridge😂

[Auburnfan91 1,408]

Quote

As American officials began to realize that Russia was trying to sabotage the 2016 presidential election, the informant became one of the C.I.A.’s most important — and highly protected — assets. But when intelligence officials revealed the severity of Russia’s election interference with unusual detail later that year, the news media picked up on details about the C.I.A.’s Kremlin sources.

C.I.A. officials worried about safety made the arduous decision in late 2016 to offer to extract the source from Russia. The situation grew more tense when the informant at first refused, citing family concerns — prompting consternation at C.I.A. headquarters and sowing doubts among some American counterintelligence officials about the informant’s trustworthiness. But the C.I.A. pressed again months later after more media inquiries. This time, the informant agreed.

The move brought to an end the career of one of the C.I.A.’s most important sources. It also effectively blinded American intelligence officials to the view from inside Russia as they sought clues about Kremlin interference in the 2018 midterm elections and next year’s presidential contest.

-------------------------------

Leaving behind one’s native country is a weighty decision, said Joseph Augustyn, a former senior C.I.A. officer who once ran the agency’s defector resettlement center. Often, informants have kept their spy work secret from their families.

 

“It’s a very difficult decision to make, but it is their decision to make,” Mr. Augustyn said. “There have been times when people have not come out when we strongly suggested that they should.”

The decision to extract the informant was driven “in part” because of concerns that Mr. Trump and his administration had mishandled delicate intelligence, CNN reported. But former intelligence officials said there was no public evidence that Mr. Trump directly endangered the source, and other current American officials insisted that media scrutiny of the agency’s sources alone was the impetus for the extraction.

Mr. Trump was first briefed on the intelligence about Russian interference, including material from the prized informant, two weeks before his inauguration. A C.I.A. spokeswoman responding to the CNN report called the assertion that Mr. Trump’s handling of intelligence drove the reported extraction “misguided speculation.”

read all of the article at: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/09/us/politics/cia-informant-russia.html

[DKW 86 7,726]

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/looks-like-cnn-has-botched-another-major-russia-scoop

This is about another CNN Scope thy got wrong for over two years now,

Looks like CNN has botched another major Russia 'scoop'

by Becket Adams

 | September 10, 2019 12:51 PM

 

It looks like CNN has bungled another Russia scoop. Shocking, I know.

 

The network claimed Monday that the U.S. government “extracted [a] top spy from inside Russia in 2017,” a decision that CNN alleges was driven “in part, by concerns that President Donald Trump and his administration repeatedly mishandled classified intelligence and could contribute to exposing the covert source as a spy.”

CNN's reporting stresses the extraction took place in 2017 shortly after the president “discussed highly classified intelligence with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and then-Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak. The intelligence, concerning ISIS in Syria, had been provided by Israel.” The network alleges further that "the removal happened at a time of wide concern in the intelligence community about mishandling of intelligence by Trump and his administration.”

The implication is clear: Because of incidents like his 2017 meeting with Lavrov and Kislyak, Trump compromised a high-level CIA asset, costing the American intelligence community an invaluable informant embedded deep within the Russian government. That is certainly the takeaway CNN’s readers got from Monday's report, which was authored by chief national security correspondent and former Obama administration official Jim Sciutto.

However, follow-up reporting from the New York Times and the Washington Post suggests the cable network both omitted and botched key, thesis-altering details in its original scoop. Namely, the Times alleges the CIA's efforts to extract the informant date back to 2016, before Trump was even sworn in as president. The Times claims also that the American press, not the Trump administration, was responsible for compromising the informant's cover.

The Times reports:

As American officials began to realize that Russia was trying to sabotage the 2016 presidential election, the informant became one of the C.I.A.’s most important — and highly protected — assets. But when intelligence officials revealed the severity of Russia’s election interference with unusual detail later that year, the news media picked up on details about the C.I.A.’s Kremlin sources.

C.I.A. officials worried about safety made the arduous decision in late 2016 to offer to extract the source from Russia. The situation grew more tense when the informant at first refused, citing family concerns — prompting consternation at C.I.A. headquarters and sowing doubts among some American counterintelligence officials about the informant’s trustworthiness. But the C.I.A. pressed again months later after more media inquiries. This time, the informant agreed.

 

The Washington Post flatly contradicts CNN’s story, stating that Trump’s 2017 disclosure of classified information to Lavrov and Kislyak “was not the reason for the decision to remove the CIA asset.” It never made sense anyway that a high-level, covert source in Russia would have been compromised by intelligence gathered by Israeli officials. The Times similarly contradicts CNN's characterization of events, reporting that, "former intelligence officials said there was no public evidence that Mr. Trump directly endangered the source, and other current American officials insisted that media scrutiny of the agency’s sources alone was the impetus for the extraction.

We are a long way off now from CNN’s original framing of the story, which suggested the Trump administration’s mishandling of classified information in 2017 prompted the hasty and deadly necessary extraction of a key Russian informant.

Sciutto, for his part, is standing by his story.

“Given NYT has now made details on Russian spy public, I can now report additional info we had withheld. Asset had direct access to Vladimir Putin, including the remarkable ability to take photos of presidential documents, and had served U.S. for more than a decade,” he tweeted Monday evening.

He added, “Asset had risen to the highest levels of Russia’s national security infrastructure. U.S. offered extraction months earlier during Obama administration, but asset refused. Asset’s information was crucial to [intelligence community’s] assessment that Putin had directed election interference to favor Trump.”

Curiously enough, neither the original nor the updated version of Sciutto’s article makes any mention of the CIA reportedly offering to extract the Russian asset in 2016, during the Obama administration.

What readers are left with is this: two reports from two competing newsrooms throwing cold water on what appears to be a very misleading CNN scoop. Basically, choose whom you want to believe. But considering the national press’ unflattering track record of covering Russia in the Trump era, it is also possible that everyone is wrong. Hell, the supposed asset may not even be real. Fool me once, and all that.

[AU64 10,122]

If you follow any of these major news media you believe them at your own risk.  

I don't trust any of them to get it right....not Fox and not MSNBC and nothing in between.   All have some kind of agenda and see no apparent ethical issue in slanting stories to suit their own purposes.  JMO but the American public is really in a fix....trying to know what is true. 

Kind of reminds me of the situation in Russia back in the cold war days when their citizens had two news papers....Pravda and Izvestia…..which meant  "the truth" and "the news" respectively.     A popular saying was "there's no truth in Pravda and no news in Izvestia".    We used to laugh about that back in the day.....but unfortunately we have it no better.  

 

[kevon67 2,368]

24 minutes ago, AU64 said:

If you follow any of these major news media you believe them at your own risk.  

I don't trust any of them to get it right....not Fox and not MSNBC and nothing in between.   All have some kind of agenda and see no apparent ethical issue in slanting stories to suit their own purposes.  JMO but the American public is really in a fix....trying to know what is true. 

Kind of reminds me of the situation in Russia back in the cold war days when their citizens had two news papers....Pravda and Izvestia…..which meant  "the truth" and "the news" respectively.     A popular saying was "there's no truth in Pravda and no news in Izvestia".    We used to laugh about that back in the day.....but unfortunately we have it no better.  

 

I watch none of the networks and agree 100%..........I've watched them all including Charles Groden back in the day.........they're just not the same and remind me of the magizines at the check out that read Cher gives birth to 100 lb sea creature.

[japantiger 4,077]

[kevon67 2,368]

10 minutes ago, japantiger said:

Yes you nailed it sir.👍