This is true. I believe he has the power to classify or declassify any intelligence. So no law(s) were broken here. But as you said, it's a matter of liability. That's my main point of contention.
Lock Him Up! Lock Him Up! Lock Him Up!
- Thread starter chemmie
- Start date
This is true. I believe he has the power to classify or declassify any intelligence. So no law(s) were broken here. But as you said, it's a matter of liability. That's my main point of contention.
Lol exact same can be said of this administration especially when trump comes out and contradicts his own spokespeople regularly.
Really who is to be believed?
It's a MASSIVE liability. The source may fear for his safety and quit reporting. Or he may have only wanted info in the hands of Americans and may quit reporting because of that.
Furthermore, it could put further distance between our real allies and us because they may be hesitant to share info with us if it will just be disclosed. And it may anger them that Trump is so willing to talk to the Russians and not Germany, the Brits, etc.
Plus, it may make future spies even harder to recruit if they feel America will just out them on a whim conversation.
Trump is playing with fire. While he does have the authority to declassify info, in reality he is a complete national security novice. Even more so than Obama was at this point in time. He needs to sit down, stay off Twitter, think about what he says and stop doing things on a whim because they have far reaching implications, and play nice with and reassure our traditional allies. They are getting nervous. Russia can wait. While I think it's smart for us to have dialogue with them, this is not the time in terms of angering our allies and for Trump himself.
Last edited:
The only person dumbing anything down is President Trump. The main issue is this intel was from an ally. So it wasn't ours to share. So if we shared it without their permission, it is highly compromising. Because that alone means the source could be compromised and the source could be unable to prepare for an adversary having that info. Russia has different motivations. They have different allies.
Case in point: https://www.apnews.com/d941959a6ba4495993916b13d217e9ae
Now some can all handwave that away with "fakenews" if they want. But that alternate reality does not take away from the actual reality that some of our allies are now highly concerned and are now more reluctant to share critical info with the US. Which ultimately could put Americans at risk.
Once again, nothing to see here. The computer isis threat has been widely reported for months. What Trump is accused of is the releasing the City where it was determined the threat came from. I'm pretty sure isis knew the city already considering they are isis. I'm also quite sure Russia knew the city as well. Just more fake outrage by liberals.
I thought McMaster said nothing was revealed? So, now there was something revealed, but it wasn't a big deal?
Exactly, nothing was revealed that was not already done so. Just more liberal delay tactics.
So, small security leaks of classified information don't matter.
Was this security leak smaller or larger than Hillary's emails?
It is laughable hearing you discuss matters that you obviously have no clue about.
You raise a valid concern, but your argument falls apart at the bold. We don't know the answer (or even the country of origin) and your basing the rest of your argument on that assumption.
It's absolutely being dumbed down. Intelligence has value, some has more than others. If it's being disclosed as part of a trade of information, it is being used to generate value we wouldn't otherwise have. However, it's being generalized as a "Classified Leak" and being tied to his comments regarding Hillary during the election. Those are very different scenarios. In one, you get something in return. The other it is being stolen due to negligence.
No one knows the real motive behind disclosing the information. My assumption is the entire meeting relates to smoothing relations with Russia (which has value). The photographer in the Oval office and this information release have a common theme of being positive for Russia, you don't do that unless you mean to appease or improve relations with Russia.
Interesting perspective:
http://theresurgent.com/i-know-one-of-the-sources/
"What sets this story apart for me, at least, is that I know one of the sources. And the source is solidly supportive of President Trump, or at least has been and was during Campaign 2016. But the President will not take any internal criticism, no matter how politely it is given. He does not want advice, cannot be corrected, and is too insecure to see any constructive feedback as anything other than an attack.
So some of the sources are left with no other option but to go to the media, leak the story, and hope that the intense blowback gives the President a swift kick in the butt. Perhaps then he will recognize he screwed up. The President cares vastly more about what the press says than what his advisers say. That is a real problem and one his advisers are having to recognize and use, even if it causes messy stories to get outside the White House perimeter.
I am told that what the President did is actually far worse than what is being reported. The President does not seem to realize or appreciate that his bragging can undermine relationships with our allies and with human intelligence sources. He also does not seem to appreciate that his loose lips can get valuable assets in the field killed."
http://theresurgent.com/i-know-one-of-the-sources/
"What sets this story apart for me, at least, is that I know one of the sources. And the source is solidly supportive of President Trump, or at least has been and was during Campaign 2016. But the President will not take any internal criticism, no matter how politely it is given. He does not want advice, cannot be corrected, and is too insecure to see any constructive feedback as anything other than an attack.
So some of the sources are left with no other option but to go to the media, leak the story, and hope that the intense blowback gives the President a swift kick in the butt. Perhaps then he will recognize he screwed up. The President cares vastly more about what the press says than what his advisers say. That is a real problem and one his advisers are having to recognize and use, even if it causes messy stories to get outside the White House perimeter.
I am told that what the President did is actually far worse than what is being reported. The President does not seem to realize or appreciate that his bragging can undermine relationships with our allies and with human intelligence sources. He also does not seem to appreciate that his loose lips can get valuable assets in the field killed."
I do admit I find it hilarious people claiming wapo is full of fake news (which they are) but completely ignoring Trump's history massive lies as well. It goes both ways folks...
How exactly? These latest two tweets seem to hang McMaster out to dry, contradicting the previous "official story". Not the first time Trump has done something like that (which is why Sean Spicer is probably going to die from a stress induced heart attack before Trump's first term is over)
If true this is an utter disaster for the U.S. We need the President consulting his advisers (Mattis, McMaster) and listening to intelligence analysts. Not reading his own headlines in the news.
Your first paragraph is incorrect. The Washington Post was asked not release additional details they have, because they're classified. In addition, Trump aides went to the CIA and NSC to make them aware, because anyone with the info. could figure out where and how it was gathered.
he can't keep up this pace of chaos, the Republicans might say F it and impeach him
http://theresurgent.com/i-know-one-of-the-sources/
http://theresurgent.com/i-know-one-of-the-sources/
Last edited:
"We" was intended to mean the posters on this board. We don't know the original country of origin or whether any discussions about that intel were had prior to disclosure. I say that only to question the argument of the poster I quoted which relies entirely on that NOT occurring.
Regarding your second sentence. That doesn't surprise me. The disclosure to the press was an unintended leak so they're trying to contain the spread of that information.
And you do? What I know is that the Washington Post article did not actually state what they accused Trump of until the 17th paragraph in their article, the 17th paragraph. When they did finally say what they accused him of, it was stating the city that the source came from. Now the Washington Post went on to say they were told the City of the source from a "prior security administration personnel." So tell me again, what was leaked that was not already known?
What a disaster of a press conference. First McMaster admits Trump did share location information with the excuse that anyone could have figured it out anyway, so no big deal. He ends it saying Trump didn't even have the full information regarding the situation as he was talking about it. And that he wasn't fully briefed and he said it with no prior planning.
How do they think that will help the situation?
How do they think that will help the situation?
yeah now it will just bring up the question that if Trump even reads past the fist page of the intelligence briefings
The sad thing is that his briefings are basically already on just one page. They have to be kept short and in bullet points because he doesn't like reading a lot.
Mc Masters just spoke again and explained clearly that Trump shared nothing that wouldn't be normal in a conversation with foreign leaders , nothing that would compromise sources or intel. Everyone in the room remembers the conversation the same way. yet we should just accept the word of an anonymous source to a newspaper that clearly enjoys going after the President. I am certainly not a nuthugger and will continue to believe the General over any POS with an agenda.
As McMaster stated , what the real concern should be is who is leaking classified info to the press daily , that is a real threat to national security
It's amazing how much of the inner workings you know as a fact. You should really write a book.
That is pretty much the definition of a nut hugger...ignoring all evidence and going with what you want to be true.
No I can know Chemmie is a dumbass without being a Trump nut hugger. What factual evidence do you have that carries more weight than Mcmasters , who was actually there ?
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
It's been pretty well explained why McMasters reply leaves plenty of wiggle room for the WaPo report to be correct.
You are free to believe whatever you want of course. However if you consistently disregard facts don't lie to yourself thinking you are impartial.
McMaster said yesterday that the report was entirely false. Yet today he says some of it was true, but not a big deal. So in that regard, I'd say there's some mistruths both in the reporting and the reaction.
This thing is really blown way out of proportion. It really is. It's a legal act, but one that *may* have some diplomatic or intel-related consequences. Maybe. Perhaps. I think way too much has been read into what has been said, based on prejudices either for or against Trump.
This thing is really blown way out of proportion. It really is. It's a legal act, but one that *may* have some diplomatic or intel-related consequences. Maybe. Perhaps. I think way too much has been read into what has been said, based on prejudices either for or against Trump.
McMasters has already changed his story at least once, Copernicus.
But according to you and BT, he has some medals so he can't possibly be a dishonest guy!
Yeah, it really is strange. I think your previous post helps answer the question on why it's so prevalent but I have a difficult time wrapping my head around that being the only effective way to manipulate Trump. The president has always been manipulated and the idea dates back to absolute monarchies. One example is the advisors provide 3 actions for the President to choose from. By having control over what 3 actions to provide you effectively have control over the final decision.
Latest posts
-
-
-
OT: War in Israel, anti Israeli protests across college campuses- Latest: HoopingKnight51
-
