Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, May 16, 2017

President Trump appeared to acknowledge Tuesday that he revealed highly classified information to Russia -- a stunning confirmation of a Washington Post story and a move that contradicted his own White House team after it scrambled to deny the report. Trump's tweets tried to explain away the news, which emerged late Monday, that he had shared sensitive, "code-word" information with the Russian foreign minister and ambassador during a White House meeting last week, a disclosure that intelligence officials warned could jeopardize a crucial intelligence source on the Islamic State.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Trump described his talks with the Russians as "an openly scheduled" meeting at the White House. In fact, the gathering was closed to all U.S. media, although a photographer for the Russian state-owned news agency was allowed into the Oval Office, prompting national security concerns.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

"Crooked Donnie and his team 'were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information,'. "Not fit!"

#1 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2017-05-16 08:29 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

He had the "right" without asking for permission from the country that provided that intel? Bull ----! He just lost us an ally in the War on Terror who now can't trust us with intelligence. This guy is f*****g crazy and needs to be impeached.

#2 | Posted by danni at 2017-05-16 08:36 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

He had the "right" without asking for permission from the country that provided that intel? Bull ----! He just lost us an ally in the War on Terror who now can't trust us with intelligence. This guy is f*****g crazy and needs to be impeached.

#3 | Posted by danni at 2017-05-16 08:36 AM | Reply

And last night he sent McMaster out to LIE to the world that he didn't do it and come morning he can't wait to brag that he happily did the very thing reported and that he wants the head of the leaker!

There is hardly a person left in the Trump White House who can be believed to tell the truth based on their own track records and the Administration isn't 4 months old yet.

Let that sink in for a minute.

#4 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-05-16 08:56 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It almost appears that he is that unhappy with being POTUS that he WANTS to be impeached.

#5 | Posted by 726 at 2017-05-16 10:02 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

With this bloated doughboy loyalty is clearly a one-way street.

His staffers go out and lie for him about the Comey firing, only to have him spill the beans to Lester Holt.

Then they go out and lie for him about his artlessly pathetic attempt to impresss the Russian foreign minister and ambassador with how looped-in on Intel he is by divulging Intel, only to have the rug yanked out from under them by those tiny Twittering hands this morning.

Trump is all about demanding loyalty, but failing to reciprocate.

#6 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2017-05-16 11:27 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Where all da Righties at? Tell us what you think.

Also, tell us what you would have said had President Obama had done it.

Now, tell us what you would have thought about it had Hillary done it.

#7 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2017-05-16 12:00 PM | Reply

Bengahhhhhhhhhhhh
ahhhh f*ckit.

#8 | Posted by schifferbrains at 2017-05-16 12:04 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

I wonder what poor bastard working undercover with ISIS may be -------- himself/herself with fear or already engaged in some serious running.

"Serpentine, Shelly, serpentine!"

#9 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2017-05-16 12:06 PM | Reply

I wonder what poor bastard working undercover with ISIS may be -------- himself/herself with fear or already engaged in some serious running.
"Serpentine, Shelly, serpentine!"

#9 | POSTED BY DOC_SARVIS AT 2017-05-16 12:06 PM | FLAG:

Yes because of this story by the post. They are accountable.

#11 | Posted by fishpaw at 2017-05-16 12:10 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

Remember when the right felt it was the presidents job the stfu?

#12 | Posted by memyselfini at 2017-05-16 12:12 PM | Reply

Pumpkinhead: Did you share classified intel with the Russians???
Trump: You're Goddamn Right I did!!!! Wait-- What is this? What's going on? I did my job, I'd do it again!

#13 | Posted by pumpkinhead at 2017-05-16 12:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Now they're guy is president and everyone else should stfu.

#14 | Posted by memyselfini at 2017-05-16 12:13 PM | Reply


Russian Roulette: what the leak revealed about Trump
www.axios.com

...After the Washington Post posted its bombshell that President Trump "revealed highly classified ['code-word'] information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in a White House meeting last week," the White House issued a series of carefully worded denials -- "playing word games," according to Greg Miller, one of the Post authors, along with Greg Jaffe.

Why it matters: Several national-security experts told me that lives could well be lost as a result of an ISIS mole hunt that's sure to follow. And a key ally (the name of the country was withheld by the Post at the White House's request, but it's apparently in the Middle East) may deny future intelligence as a result of the episode....

Be smart: what the disclosure tells us about President Trump:
...
It's illuminating about how he thinks of Russia: He wasn't on his guard, wary that Russia can be an adversary with interests that differ notably from those of the U.S.

He's super-loose at high-stakes moments. Allied governments tell us of shocking asides he makes in meetings. One West Wing visitor told me: "He just rambles. ... He doesn't care."...


#15 | Posted by LampLighter at 2017-05-16 12:14 PM | Reply

Seriously we have the original story thread with a bunch of DR Conservatives saying this never happened and the media is lying.

Then Trump confirms it.

And they STILL don't believe it.

#16 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-05-16 12:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 8

"Yes because of this story by the post. They are accountable." - #11 | Posted by fishpaw at 2017-05-16 12:10 PM

Trump: I Shared Classified Intel with Russians
Oops.

Like ☠ der Drumpfenführer, you just don't know when you should just STFU.

#17 | Posted by Hans at 2017-05-16 12:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You going to go all the way down with Trump's garbage barge, Fishpaw?

Question: How do you know the Orange Doughboy is lying?

Answer: His lips are moving or his tiny hands are Twittering.

#18 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2017-05-16 12:17 PM | Reply

Yes because of this story by the post. They are accountable.
#11 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

Because the Russians had to read it in a paper before they realized the buffoon-in-Chief spilled the beans?

Adjust your tinfoil hat.

#19 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2017-05-16 12:18 PM | Reply

Yes because of this story by the post. They are accountable.
#11 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

Its honestly hard to believe people like you exist.

#21 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-05-16 12:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Just keep tabs on everyone who supports/defends Drumpf. We'll need to know the traitors in our midst when the manure hits the fan, so we can ignore them and relegate them to their infamous place in history.

#22 | Posted by chuffy at 2017-05-16 12:22 PM | Reply

"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters."
Donald "Orange Is The New Orange" Trump

Not Fishpaw, that's for sure.

#23 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2017-05-16 12:25 PM | Reply

Seriously we have the original story thread with a bunch of DR Conservatives saying this never happened and the media is lying.
Then Trump confirms it. And they STILL don't believe it.

I find it just as amazing that anyone believes the initial denial that comes out of Trump's White House and Cabinet whenever a story like this breaks.

Trump keeps taking the legs right out from under his people by admitting that he did what he's accused of doing.

His pathological inability to admit a mistake means he has to publicly admit his actions to "prove" they weren't a mistake.

He just burned a U.S. ally that had important intel on ISIS so he could curry favor with the Russians, a hostile power allied with Iran.

Any people inside ISIS who provided the information he shared are now either burned as sources or dead.

All U.S. allies who share intel with us are now discussing whether it's safe to do that anymore.

#25 | Posted by rcade at 2017-05-16 12:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

"All U.S. allies who share intel with us are now discussing whether it's safe to do that anymore." - #25 | Posted by rcade at 2017-05-16 12:36 PM

Yeah. But didn't you know Hillary Clinton had an email server?

#26 | Posted by Hans at 2017-05-16 12:39 PM | Reply

And Bill got a -------.
All Trump does is ---- on our country.

#27 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2017-05-16 12:46 PM | Reply

I have no idea what information Trump shared with the Russians. But neither does anyone else except Trump and the Russians. I do remember that the Russians share intelligence with us on some subjects. Especially militant Islamist, as they did about the Boston bombers. There are about 3 million Muslims in the US, Russia has over 30 million. They have had some serious attacks themselves. The oldest rule in conflict still apply ,The Enemy of my enemy is my friend. Putin was correct about one thing, We created ISIS. Thank Hillery Clinton.

#28 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-05-16 12:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

So, you mean there was really a problem with electing a TV reality show host to be leader of the Free World?

No one could have predicted that.

Ask HRat.

#29 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 12:53 PM | Reply

His pathoogical (sic) inability to admit a mistake

Of all the years I have been on here I have never seen Corky, Doc, and several others ever ever admit to a mistake.

RCADE, Danni, yes, rare that it is.

BTW RCADE you misspelled pathological.

Your friend,
T

#30 | Posted by tontonmacoute at 2017-05-16 12:55 PM | Reply

"We created ISIS. Thank Hillery Clinton."

Oh for God's sake, pick up a history book.

There was a middle class in Iraq, and the brilliant minds of the Dubya administration thought it'd be a good idea if we told the entire Iraqi middle class it was out of a (governmental) job. Meanwhile, they let them keep their guns.

#31 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-05-16 12:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Other than burning up North Africa what did Hillary ever do?

#32 | Posted by tontonmacoute at 2017-05-16 12:56 PM | Reply

-Thank Hillery Clinton.

"She gave us Isis ... she created a vacuum" -D. Trump

The claim that Hillary Clinton "gave" the world Isis condenses and distorts a conservative view that, closer to its original form, says that that by withdrawing American forces from Iraq, Barack Obama created a power vacuum in which Isis could rise.

This argument ignores that Isis's first segments formed out of Iraq's civil war, while George W Bush was president, that the group gained strength in Syria's civil war, where the US did not intervene until 2014, that Obama withdrew American forces in 2011 under the timeline agreed on by Bush and Baghdad, and that both Bush and Obama failed to come to an agreement with Baghdad over troops – in large part over a disagreement about whether American troops could be prosecuted by Iraq.

Trump supported the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and "surgical" intervention to remove Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, though he now claims otherwise. He also supported withdrawal from Iraq in 2007 and 2008.

www.theguardian.com

Rwingers, otoh, are totally predictable. They will repeat whatever asinine thing their Dear Leader says.

#33 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 12:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

- Corky, Doc, and several others ever ever admit to a mistake.

I haven't plonked you. See? I admit my mistakes. And I'm not even leader of the Free World.... yet!

#34 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 12:59 PM | Reply

I haven't plonked you. See? I admit my mistakes. And I'm not even leader of the Free World.... yet!

#34 | POSTED BY CORKY

A first! Your magnanimity is duly noted!

#36 | Posted by tontonmacoute at 2017-05-16 01:02 PM | Reply

I don't think Trump will ever get the gravity of what he has done. How many times did he tell us, "I know more than the generals"? This the kind of thing that happens when we have a Know-I-All-in-Chief, and someone who believes, "I alone can save you."

#37 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-05-16 01:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Seriously we have the original story thread with a bunch of DR Conservatives saying this never happened and the media is lying.
Then Trump confirms it.
And they STILL don't believe it.

#16 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT AT 2017-05-16 12:14 PM | REPLY | NEWSWORTHY 4

Trump said he shared "facts". I have not seen where he said he shared classified info. Can you guys share the link with us and not the one that is out of your as-.

#38 | Posted by fishpaw at 2017-05-16 01:06 PM | Reply

World leaders are all high fiving each other - let's see who can roll Trump better.

#39 | Posted by Bubba10 at 2017-05-16 01:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#36

You are famous for your perspicuity.

#40 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 01:10 PM | Reply

- I have not seen where he said he shared classified info.

"sensitive, "code-word" information" is prolly not classified, right?

#41 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 01:11 PM | Reply

What is the goal? What does trump hope to hain by being putins whipping boy?

#43 | Posted by kudzu at 2017-05-16 01:12 PM | Reply

#42

Everyone knew he played on the popularity of socialism at the time.

But only people who believe that the Democratic Republic of (North) Korea is a democratic republic believe that the Nazis were socialists. They killed socialists.

#44 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 01:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Latest...

During an Oval Office meeting with top Russian officials, a current and a former U.S. official said, President Trump described highly classified material about a new ISIS plot. The details had not even been shared with American allies, and the disclosure could jeopardize a crucial intelligence-sharing relationship."
www.nytimes.com

#45 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2017-05-16 01:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"sensitive, "code-word" information" is prolly (sic) not classified, right?
#41 | POSTED BY CORKY

I'm sorry Corky but the definition of "sensitive, "code-word" "information" is classified.

#46 | Posted by tontonmacoute at 2017-05-16 01:15 PM | Reply

As I take my own advice and move back into the world of academia which requires hours of daily

research, study and practice in order to study, prepare and teach.....

AND before that hiatus begins........IT"S A PLEASURE to point out that this headline placed with this

article.....is a god damn lie...which makes you.......

Trump: I Shared Classified Intel with Russians

Oops, again.

#258 | Posted by Hans at 2017-05-16 12:13

#47 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2017-05-16 01:16 PM | Reply

#46

Your serious contributions to the subject are appreciated... or will be if you ever make one.

#48 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 01:17 PM | Reply

"...the only people who believe that the Democratic Republic of (North) Korea is a democratic republic believe that the Nazis were socialists."

I'm pretty sure Saddam's Republican Guard was comprised of nothing but Republicans.

#49 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-05-16 01:17 PM | Reply | Funny: 4

BTW RCADE you misspelled pathological.

No, I didn't. I always spelt it correct. My writing skills is flawless. I don't know what your talking about.

#50 | Posted by rcade at 2017-05-16 01:17 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

I may have misspelled "prolly". I prolly did.

#51 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 01:19 PM | Reply

I have no idea what information Trump shared with the Russians. But neither does anyone else except Trump and the Russians.

#28 | POSTED BY DOCNJO

If you could read, you'd know what the information was about. The papers know what was shared but are better at keeping US Secrets than Trump apparently. Senators were briefed on the information.

You are apparently the only person on the planet who doesn't know what kind of information was shared.

#53 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-05-16 01:20 PM | Reply

#52

Trump must pay per Deflection.

#54 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 01:22 PM | Reply

I may have misspelled "prolly". I prolly did.
#51 | POSTED BY CORKY

A twofer! A second admitted mistake and in one day no less. Corky there is hope for you yet!

#55 | Posted by tontonmacoute at 2017-05-16 01:22 PM | Reply

#47 | POSTED BY AFKABL2

I'm not sure you know what the word "Lie" means.

#56 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-05-16 01:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

@#28 ... I have no idea what information Trump shared with the Russians. But neither does anyone else except Trump and the Russians. ...

Misleading statements at best.

What you say is true only for the entirety of the information Pres Trump shared.

However, there may be others, and likely are others, who do know some of the information Mr Trump shared.

We do not necessarily need to know all the information he shared, just that some of what he did share may have not been appropriate to share.

#57 | Posted by LampLighter at 2017-05-16 01:25 PM | Reply

What is the goal? What does trump hope to hain by being putins whipping boy?

I ask this all the time. My best guess is that Trump is compromised by a lot of dirt from his Russian business dealings or blackmail material he knows Putin has.

When I'm trying to come up with a more innocent theory, I go here: Trump would be out of business without the money of Russians and Russian banks. He would be a laughingstock and a failure. Russia saved him from that fate, which would make him predisposed to like Russia. Trump's ego is staggering. Anything that saves him from ego damage would be important to him.

In the last 10 years I've become a huge Anglophile. I love British soccer, TV shows, slang and some other cultural exports. I have a limited fanboy view of the country but feel like I know it well anyway. If I ever lived there it would be an education.

So if Trump's not corrupt and blackmailed, maybe he's a Russophile who thinks he knows the country but doesn't. Putin uses this to play him for a fool.

#58 | Posted by rcade at 2017-05-16 01:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I have no idea what information Trump shared with the Russians. But neither does anyone else except Trump and the Russians. ...

This is not true. The Washington Post knows. They kept details out of the story at the request of our intelligence officials.

At least one senator also knows, because that person was briefed on what Trump revealed.

The country that provided the intel also knows, because they were told shortly before the story ran so they could try to get their compromised intelligence asset out of harm's way.

Other media also knows. Multiple outlets confirmed the Post story last night.

#59 | Posted by rcade at 2017-05-16 01:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Trump is a 5 year old who thinks he knows more about the world than anyone... and if he doesn't, he can always just lie about it and claim it's the truth anyway.

His keepers in the WH must be going insane.

#60 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 01:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I will reiterate that the President does not have the authority to release information if the subject of the intel is a US foreign agent. If that is the case, he broke the law.

#61 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-05-16 01:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I ask this all the time. My best guess is that Trump is compromised by a lot of dirt from his Russian business dealings or blackmail material he knows Putin has."

Ah, but the strawberries, that's, that's where I had them, they laughed at me and made jokes, but I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt, with geometric logic, that a duplicate key to the ward room icebox did exist, and I've had produced that key if they hadn't pulled the Caine out of action.

#62 | Posted by tontonmacoute at 2017-05-16 01:36 PM | Reply

Yes because of this story by the post. They are accountable.

#11 | Posted by fishpaw

Sure the press is accountable but the president is not.

If he's not paying you then you're a huge sucker.

#63 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-05-16 01:41 PM | Reply

#60 | Posted by Corky

He's like the terrible child who won't listen when the family is in public and creates an embarrassment for his family. Somebody needs to take him home, put him over their knee and paddle his bum until it is black and blue.

Unfortunately in the real world Congress won't do it, he may actually like that and Kellyanne may actually be willing...

#64 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-05-16 01:44 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

#53 | Posted by Sycophant Don't speak about filtered generalities when speaking about intelligence. That is not what is critical, the means and assets available are. So long as those are safeguarded we are in good shape- we are truly boned if they did.

#65 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-05-16 01:44 PM | Reply

Erick Erickson: The Real Problem Is Trump, Not The Leakers

Conservative pundit Erick Erickson is vouching for the reliability of a least one source who revealed to Washington Post reporters that President Donald Trump disclosed "highly classified information" while meeting with Russian officials last week.

Erickson knows one of the sources and supports their decision to go to the media, he wrote Tuesday in a blog post for his website, The Resurgent.

"This is a real problem and I treat this story very seriously because I know just how credible, competent, and serious -- as well as seriously pro-Trump, at least one of the sources is," Erickson wrote.

"You can call these sources disloyal, traitors, or whatever you want," he added. "But please ask yourself a question -- if the President, through inexperience and ignorance, is jeopardizing our national security and will not take advice or corrective action, what other means are available to get the President to listen and recognize the error of his ways?"

Erickson wrote that people close to the president find him too insecure to take constructive criticism as anything other than a personal attack. So sources have gone to the media in the hopes that "the intense blowback" may force Trump to recognize his errors.

"I am told that what the President did is actually far worse than what is being reported," Erickson said. "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."

And the bashing of Erickson by the Trump deadenders will start in 3....2.....1.....

#66 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-05-16 01:44 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

#49 | POSTED BY DANFORTH
"I'm pretty sure Saddam's Republican Guard was comprised of nothing but Republicans."

That's only a theory.

#67 | Posted by TheTom at 2017-05-16 01:50 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

East Germany was formally the German Democratic Republic.

Yet they were hardcore communist

North Korea is the Democratic People's republic of Korea.

Not a hint of democracy to be found.

Quit pretending hitler was anything but a right wing nationalist. The actual socialists were the first people to go to the concentration camps, then the trade unionists, then the jews.

#68 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2017-05-16 01:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 7

#53 | Posted by Sycophant Don't speak about filtered generalities when speaking about intelligence. That is not what is critical, the means and assets available are. So long as those are safeguarded we are in good shape- we are truly boned if they did.

#65 | POSTED BY DOCNJO

It appears from the reporters that the safeguards are not in place. The asset is compromised. And as you say, "we are truly boned."

Now can we impeach him?

#69 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-05-16 01:53 PM | Reply

TontonMacoute: You must think this is a serious mistake by Trump, because you can't stop throwing out nonsense to distract from it.

#70 | Posted by rcade at 2017-05-16 01:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Once again we are faced with inexplicable stories coming from the White House that are highly troubling," Comstock said in the statement. "We need to have immediate classified briefings on what occurred at this meeting so that Congress can at least know as much as Russian leaders and know the impact on our national security, our allies, and our men and women protecting our country."

teehee

#71 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2017-05-16 01:54 PM | Reply

From The Economist:

The accumulative damage that Mr Trump is doing to America's governing norms, it appears, has a counterpart in the damage he is doing, day by day, to his standing within the government and on the Hill, including among senior Republicans. The president never had many sincere supporters among elected Republicans. They backed him in fear of a vindictive tweet and the hope that he would sign conservative bills into law. But with the president's approval rating plummeting and a diminishing prospect of the sorts of health-care and tax reforms they once dreamed of, both fear and hope are giving way to exasperation and contempt....

Even before Mr Trump's inauguration, in January, Israeli officials were reported to be concerned that his administration could not be trusted with sensitive material. According to Haaretz, an Israeli newspaper, they feared "the exposure of classified information to their American counterparts under a Trump administration could lead to their being leaked to Russia and onward to Iran".
www.economist.com

#72 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2017-05-16 02:00 PM | Reply

Yeah, but one time Obama played basketball in a gym with a guy whose dad was born in Russia!

JeffJ

#73 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2017-05-16 02:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

"I am told that what the President did is actually far worse than what is being reported," Erickson said. "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."

#66 | Posted by tonyroma

The other day eric ericson was complaining that trump needed to just shut up and let his underlings lie for him. He seems to think the problem with the administration isn't the lying, it's just that they need to coordinate their lies better and get the president to stick to them.

#74 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-05-16 02:02 PM | Reply

I saw this a while ago on fb and posted here. Came to mind again this morning:

A Narcissist's Prayer

That didn't happen.
And if it did, it wasn't that bad.
And if it was, that's not a big deal.
And if it is, that's not my fault.
And if it was, I didn't mean it.
And if I did, you deserved it.

#75 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-05-16 02:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

So, my conjecture yesterday was correct it was Israeli Intel that Trump leaked. Something the Israeli's were concerned about when Trump became president. I am sure this cant hurt us at all.

#76 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-05-16 02:04 PM | Reply

That said...

"Israel Said to Be Source of Secret Intelligence Trump Gave to Russians"
www.nytimes.com

WASHINGTON -- The classified intelligence that President Trump disclosed in a meeting last week with Russian officials at the White House was provided by Israel, according to a current and a former American official familiar with how the United States obtained the information. The revelation adds a potential diplomatic complication to the episode.

Israel is one of the United States' most important allies and a major intelligence collector in the Middle East. The revelation that Mr. Trump boasted about some of Israel's most sensitive information to the Russians could damage the relationship between the two countries. It also raises the possibility that the information could be passed to Iran, Russia's close ally and Israel's main threat in the Middle East....

Israel's concerns about the Trump White House's handling of classified information were foreshadowed in the Israeli news media this year. Newspapers there reported in January that American officials warned their Israeli counterparts to be careful about what they told the Trump administration because it could be leaked to the Russians, given Mr. Trump's openness toward President Vladimir V. Putin.

"The Russians have the widest intelligence collection mechanism in the world outside of our own. They can put together a good picture with just a few details," said John Sipher, a 28-year veteran of the C.I.A. who served in Moscow in the 1990s and later ran the C.I.A.'s Russia program for three years. "They can marry President Trump's comments with their own intelligence, and intelligence from their allies. They can also deploy additional resources to find out details."
www.nytimes.com

#77 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2017-05-16 02:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"they feared "the exposure of classified information to their American counterparts under a Trump administration could lead to their being leaked to Russia and onward to Iran".

Ayatollah Trump Strikes Again!

#79 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 02:06 PM | Reply

twitter.com

Trump on Classified Material:

Crooked Hillary Clinton and her team "were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information." Not fit!

#80 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2017-05-16 02:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#80 lol!

Apparently Hillary's email server was no competition for Trump's mouth.

#81 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 02:10 PM | Reply

Can't wait for your next must see post featuring comments from:

Crooked Hillary Clinton and her team "were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information." Not fit!
-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 6, 2016

#82 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2017-05-16 02:11 PM | Reply

Can't wait for your next must see post featuring comments from:

It's simple: Individuals who are ‘extremely careless' w/ classified info should be denied further access to it. t.co
-- Paul Ryan (@SpeakerRyan) July 7, 2016

#83 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2017-05-16 02:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Can't wait for your next must see post featuring comments from:

The FBI's decision regarding Clinton's mishandling of classified emails once again proves that she is DQ'd from being Commander in Chief.
-- Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) July 5, 2016

#84 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2017-05-16 02:13 PM | Reply

Can't wait for your next must see post featuring comments from:

The appearance is terrible. The decision is astounding. Ppl have gone to jail for less severe classified breaches and national security.
-- Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) July 5, 2016

#85 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2017-05-16 02:13 PM | Reply

"It was during that meeting, officials said, that Trump went off script and began describing details of an Islamic State terrorist threat related to the use of laptop computers on aircraft," the Post report states, adding that Trump also revealed the ISIS-held city where the source gleaned the intelligence, which was considered "code-word information," one of the highest classification levels.

According to the Post, following Trump's meeting with the Russian delegation, senior White House officials "took steps to contain the damage, placing calls to the CIA and the National Security Agency."

from: The shifting explanations of Trump's Russia disclosures

www.politifact.com

#86 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 02:14 PM | Reply

"Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Crooked Hillary Clinton and her team "were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information." Not fit!
7:12 AM - 6 Jul 2016"

Hillary's server was more secure than Trump's mouth.

#87 | Posted by 726 at 2017-05-16 02:15 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump will visit the Western Wall in Jerusalem, Judaism's holiest prayer site, the White House said on Monday amid controversy in Israel over reported comments by a U.S. diplomat that the wall was in the occupied West Bank.

Trump will say a prayer at the Western Wall, national security adviser H.R. McMaster said, as well as pay a visit to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, considered by Christians to be the site of Jesus' tomb.

www.usnews.com

Well, unless Israel revokes The Mouth's permission to visit the country now.

#88 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 02:19 PM | Reply

I wonder if Trump will request a golden carpet ride to the Western Wall

#89 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-05-16 02:22 PM | Reply

Conservative Erick Erickson claims source who leaked latest Russia bombshell was a Trump Supporter

Conservative blogger Erick Erickson on Tuesday morning made a shocking claim: Namely, that the person inside the White House who leaked the latest Russia bombshell was at one time an ardent supporter of President Trump.

"I know one of the sources," Erickson writes. "And the source is solidly supportive of President Trump, or at least has been and was during Campaign 2016."

So why would a Trump supporter leak a damaging story about the president to multiple news organizations? According to Erickson, it's the only way to get Trump to change his behavior.

"The President will not take any internal criticism, no matter how politely it is given," Erickson explains. "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."

Additionally, Erickson's source claims that "what the President did is actually far worse than what is being reported" and that "the president does not seem to realize or appreciate that his bragging can undermine relationships with our allies and with human intelligence sources."

www.rawstory.com

#90 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-05-16 02:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 9

"Reliable Sources

Why we should believe the anonymous officials in the Washington Post's leak story over McMaster, Tillerson, and Trump.

By William Saletan

But that isn't what happened here. The dispute over the White House meeting isn't just between anonymous sources and named public officials. It's between specific claims and evasive nondenials. The Post's sources have made factual allegations that can be checked. The administration hasn't.

www.slate.com

#91 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 02:26 PM | Reply

90

NW

#92 | Posted by eberly at 2017-05-16 02:27 PM | Reply

"The President will not take any internal criticism, no matter how politely it is given," Erickson explains. "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 oBef 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."

Wishful thinking but it ain't gonna to happen. It's not that we are dealing with a child but that we are dealing with a 70 year old narcissist:

"I'm the smartest person in the room."

"I know more than the generals."

"I alone can fix it."

"I'm president, and you're not."

"Believe me."

#93 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-05-16 02:30 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 3

"You can call these sources disloyal, traitors, or whatever you want," he {Erickson} added. "But please ask yourself a question -- if the President, through inexperience and ignorance, is jeopardizing our national security and will not take advice or corrective action, what other means are available to get the President to listen and recognize the error of his ways?"

Inexperience, ignorance and narcissism: it's a helluva combination.

#94 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-05-16 03:17 PM | Reply

It's fun to watch the DR liberals quote Erickson from Redstate, a source they would normally bash.

I will say this, the writers at Redstate were extremely critical (virulently anti-Trump) of Trump during the primary, and only slightly less critical of him after he won the nomination and then the election.

Same for NRO. Personally, I take those sites' criticisms of Trump FAR more seriously than the MSM because they aren't completely unhinged and angry over Trump winning the election.

#95 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 03:29 PM | Reply

#95 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

So...what was your point?

#96 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-05-16 03:32 PM | Reply

#258 | Posted by Hans at 2017-05-16 12:13 - #47 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2017-05-16 01:16 PM

This is post #97.

I have such amazing powers over babbles.

#97 | Posted by Hans at 2017-05-16 03:34 PM | Reply

My point is that on any other occasion, if, say, me, quoted Erickson a half dozen people on this site would immediately attack the source without addressing any points. It's for that reason that I'm laughing that he's being trotted out by lefties on this thread.

#98 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 03:35 PM | Reply

This is what Jonah Goldberg had to say about this story:

I don't know if the Washington Post story is accurate, but I do think it's entirely plausible. Put aside whether the story is properly sourced and all that. When you heard the news, did you think it could be true? If your answer is yes, think about that for a moment. That right there is a problem.

No, I don't think for a moment that Trump deliberately divulged to the Russians classified information at an event covered by Russian media (but not American media) the day after he fired the FBI director for not doing more to end the investigation of his campaign's alleged involvement with the Russians. That's "resistance" paranoia stuff.

But the idea that Trump -- with his irrepressible need to boast to the point of narcissistic incontinence combined with his lackadaisical approach to the nuts-and-bolts demands of the job -- somehow just let something slip is utterly and completely believable. It was apparently believable to various members of his own administration.


www.nationalreview.com

#99 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 03:39 PM | Reply

"My point is that on any other occasion, if, say, me, quoted Erickson..." - #98 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 03:35 PM

The point is a rightwinger attacking another rightwinger.

Rightwingers were always at the ready to point out when Senator Sanders attacked Hillary Clinton.

It was news to them.

Just as a rightwinger attacking another rightwinger is news to those on the left.

#100 | Posted by Hans at 2017-05-16 03:39 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Jeff, I got the Erickson lead from a conservative twitter feed. I knew he was a never Trumper, but I thought his vouching for one of the leakers was probably legit in this case. Speaking of never Trumpers:

President Trump Just Can't Help Himself

www.thedailybeast.com

#101 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-05-16 03:44 PM | Reply

President The Rock would never do such a thing.

#102 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2017-05-16 03:51 PM | Reply

My point is that on any other occasion, if, say, me, quoted Erickson a half dozen people on this site would immediately attack the source without addressing any points. It's for that reason that I'm laughing that he's being trotted out by lefties on this thread.

#98 | Posted by JeffJ

So if lefties use a lefty source, it doesn't count. If they use a righty source, it's laughable.

Any source you'd take seriously?

#103 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-05-16 03:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

So if lefties use a lefty source, it doesn't count.

I didn't say that.

If they use a righty source, it's laughable.

It's laughable only because if that same source said something they (not all liberals) disagreed with, that source would just be dismissed out-of-hand. Having said that, Hans does a nice job articulating why he's being quoted on this thread.

#104 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 03:54 PM | Reply

Tea Pain‏ @TeaPainUSA

Trump says he can release the most classified data anytime he chooses, but can't release his tax returns due to an "audit."

twitter.com

#105 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-05-16 04:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

I have such amazing powers over babbles.

#97 | Posted by Hans at 2017-05-16 03:34

as I said...I'm pleased to show you as the god damn liar that you are.

#106 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2017-05-16 04:28 PM | Reply

but....HAAAAANS..... I AM excited that you responded.....it's a 'red letter day' for anyone when someone of your

'stature' responds to them as well as heart warming to see your still entrenched in your pathetic little

life keeping a DR archive......make sure there's plenty of air flow in the basement where you're

writing.

Hate for anything to happen to one of my main sources I use elsewhere to show just what

slimeball liars and stooges are masquerading as posters on liberal sites these days.

go astros...

hasta laredo...

BM

#107 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2017-05-16 04:39 PM | Reply

#105 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

Pity that FISA info on wiretapping has not been declassified

theintercept.com

Pity that so many believers in Trump U haven't even graduated.

#108 | Posted by worldasifindit at 2017-05-16 04:42 PM | Reply

"I'm pleased to show you as the god damn liar that you are." - #106 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2017-05-16 04:28 PM

If ti weren't for your fantasy life, babbles, you'd have no life at all.

Meanwhile...

#18 "typing fast/double, sometimes triple tasking and fighting over a printer not working...yeah making that error tells you all about texas education. again,.,you're a punk with no clue of what you speak."...Babbles

OK, Babbles:

Lets pretend you have not spent your entire time here, since 2005, mutilating every grammar, spelling, capitalization and punctuation rule in the English language, shall we?

Now lets pretend you could have written in real 'subject, verb, object' grammar, and proof read your pearls of wisdom, and corrected the embarrassing 4th grade reading/writing level on display here every day, had you so chosen.

Now lets pretend that you could have cared enough about presenting yourself as a life long educator so that, had you wanted to, you could have put fifteen cents worth of effort into your communication and done it well.

That fantasy would hold more real truth than the content of any of the simple minded drivel that you puke out.

Don't like being called stupid?

Then stop being stupid.

Take some pride in your work.

If you don't care enough about living up to the standards of a self described professional educator, do all the other teachers in Texas a favor, and tell the world that you are a home schooled doofus who has never had the advantage of a real education. Stop bragging about Texas and admit that there is no worse example of public education failure on the Retort, than you.

Your posts are the turd in the punch bowl that other, proud, hard working teachers have dedicated their life to eliminating.

Own it.

Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2013-08-16 12:15 PM

That is so perfectly on-target.

#109 | Posted by Hans at 2017-05-16 04:58 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Same for NRO. Personally, I take those sites' criticisms of Trump FAR more seriously than the MSM because they aren't completely unhinged and angry over Trump winning the election.

Please tell me you don't actually think that that absurd nonsense is true...

#110 | Posted by jpw at 2017-05-16 05:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#110

Absolutely, I do. I have seen the MSM get a LOT wrong in their reporting since Trump was elected and it's almost always been negative against Trump when it was wrong. That doesn't mean I don't take reporting seriously. I do. The reaction to the news is where my comment is applicable. The talking-heads, pundits and opinion writers in the MSM have been mostly unglued when it pertains to all things Trump. Did you know that Trump taking 2 scoops of ice cream is proof that he's an -------? Conservative media is currently the only place to get fair, measured criticism of Trump. At least currently.

#111 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 05:32 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

" I have seen the MSM get a LOT wrong in their reporting since Trump was elected ..." - #111 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 05:32 PM

Not really.

But to you just one would be a LOT.

Not unexpected.

#112 | Posted by Hans at 2017-05-16 05:34 PM | Reply

Dude, in the first few weeks alone there were over 5 instances of a rush to report on Trump only for it to be proven wrong.

The problem isn't journalism itself. 100% accuracy 100% of the time is an unrealistic standard. ALL outlets, no matter how well-run, get it wrong sometimes. That is why retractions and corrections are issued.

The problem is bias. Usually that entails misleading by omission. It also involves qualifiers, like "Far-right Politician x. You simply almost never see a Democrat pol labeled as 'Far-Left' or 'Extremely liberal', but it's not uncommon to see Republicans labeled that way. Then there is emphasis. Trivialities that make Republicans look bad usually are treated to breathless front page coverage. Something more serious about a Dem pol is relegated to page A-7. Then there is the amplification. The Valerie Plame outing was covered relentlessly for a year. When the Obama administration outed the CIA station chief in Afghanistan (which was FAR more damaging to our intelligence efforts than the outing of a desk jockey who had previously compromised her covert status by appearing on the cover of a magazine) it was a footnote for a day with the tone being along the lines of, "That goofy Obama administration accidentally outed a covert CIA agent'.

8 years of fawning coverage immediately transposed by spittle-flying rabid and intensely negative coverage at the snap of a finger (to be fair, Trump is his own worst enemy and I would have expected coverage of him to be more negative than coverage of Obama even if the MSM weren't biased). The whipsaw effect is very evident to anyone paying attention.

#113 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 05:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"When the Obama administration outed the CIA station chief in Afghanistan (which was FAR more damaging to our intelligence efforts than the outing of a desk jockey who had previously compromised her covert status by appearing on the cover of a magazine)"

Who told you this?
Or are you just thinking out loud?

#114 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-05-16 05:48 PM | Reply

- Conservative media is currently the only place to get fair, measured criticism of Trump.

That's hilarious.

The conversion of JeffyJ from nice moderate conservative boy to TP'er to Trump Pet appears to be nearly complete.

#115 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 05:51 PM | Reply

Who told you this?
Or are you just thinking out loud?

#114 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

White House mistakenly identifies CIA chief in Afghanistan

www.washingtonpost.com

Had that happened during Bush it would have been an impeachable offense. The Obama admin does it and it gets a yawn. I guaran-fricking-tee you that this was more damaging than anything Trump revealed that everybody is having a cow over right now.

Notice that they threw "accidentally" into the headline? That's not reporting, it's editorializing.

#116 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 05:51 PM | Reply

Snoofy,

Be honest - you had no idea that it happened, right?

That's NOT on you - it's on the fact that the MSM barely reported on it.

#117 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 05:53 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

First Hans bites my ankle, now Corky?

It's getting crowded down there, guys. Snoofy - I don't characterize your post as ankle-biting. It was simply a snarky way of getting me to source my claim. I have no problem with that when it's not something that is common knowledge, and that is DEFINITELY something that is not common knowledge, which speaks to my argument.

#118 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 05:55 PM | Reply

#118

That wasn't an ankle-bite Jeffy, unless your throat is that low.

#119 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 05:56 PM | Reply

My throat? You're a vampire?

#120 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 05:57 PM | Reply

Absolutely, I do. I have seen the MSM get a LOT wrong in their reporting since Trump was elected and it's almost always been negative against Trump when it was wrong. That doesn't mean I don't take reporting seriously. I do. The reaction to the news is where my comment is applicable. The talking-heads, pundits and opinion writers in the MSM have been mostly unglued when it pertains to all things Trump. Did you know that Trump taking 2 scoops of ice cream is proof that he's an -------? Conservative media is currently the only place to get fair, measured criticism of Trump. At least currently.

#111 | Posted by JeffJ

The things that the media has gotten wrong are inconsequential crap, like - did he remove the statue of MLK?
Trumpers scream and cry that that proves you can't listen to the media on anything.

What CONSEQUENTIAL stories about trump has the media gotten wrong?

I guess when your side throws away all maturity and credibility, the only thing left to do besides switching teams is to attack the ref?

#121 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-05-16 05:59 PM | Reply

- You're a vampire?

I have my own cereal.

#122 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 06:00 PM | Reply

"Trump once demanded Edward Snowden's execution for giving 'serious information' to Russia"

www.washingtonpost.com

#123 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 06:06 PM | Reply

#123

Oops! There's that MSM making mistakes again. Turns out that "execution" may have originally been, "--------".

Sorry about that.

#124 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 06:08 PM | Reply

What CONSEQUENTIAL stories about trump has the media gotten wrong?

This article references some recent WaPo examples:

thefederalist.com

#125 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 06:15 PM | Reply

Jeff,

You cannot use anyone in the White House to shoot down an anonymously sourced story because that same source is someone else in the White House! The Trump White House lies as a matter of daily business, they have zero credibility on anything at this point and that's nearly a universal, unbiased opinion leaving politics out of the equation.

Your story wrongly implies that last night's denials were correct with no recognition that Trump himself admitted that he spoke about the Israeli-given intelligence and no one is denying that Congress is acting on the belief the event did happen. So you quote a story of denials that were lies to impugn the Washington Post for reporting the truth.

Fail.

#126 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-05-16 06:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine said sardonically Monday: "Can we have a crisis-free day? That's all I'm asking."

#127 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-05-16 06:32 PM | Reply

@therealdonaldtrump

No, Susan, shut your yap. If I want to hear from you, I'll grab your p.....

#128 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-16 06:34 PM | Reply

"Snoofy,
Be honest - you had no idea that it happened, right?"

I'm asking you why it was worse and more damaging to our intelligence capabilities than deliberately outing Plame.

Be honest, can you substantiate that?

#129 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-05-16 06:43 PM | Reply

#108 From the article you linked to:

"Whatever the case, Trump has the power to clarify it and everything else about the Russia story right now by declassifying whatever surveillance records exist of contacts between people in his orbit and Russia. If he and his associates did nothing wrong, he has every incentive to do so as soon as possible."

#130 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-05-16 06:47 PM | Reply

This article references some recent WaPo examples:

thefederalist.com

#125 | Posted by JeffJ

So you're going to take the word of a white house full of known and proven liars, in order to say press reports are wrong?

Call me crazy, but I'll take the word of journalists whose careers and paychecks depend on accuracy and credibility over daily proven liars.

#131 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-05-16 06:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I'm asking you why it was worse and more damaging to our intelligence capabilities than deliberately outing Plame.

Again, Jeff applies a false metric in trying to create an alternative reality which never existed. Valerie Plame lived her private life as Valerie Plame-Wilson. Her NOC identity wasn't Valerie Plame and to my knowledge it's never been publicly released. To imply that the existence of Valerie Plame-Wilson who is married, has children and could be identified by public records somehow compromised her NOC cover is to misunderstand how the spy business works. Her photo was never classified and her public existence was openly known. The right-wing disinformation campaign against her is stupid on its face and inconsistent with all the other domestically-based NOCs employed by our intelligence services.

She had a separate persona as well as identity(ies) and cover stories to mask her true identity. No one knows if she traveled abroad under a disguise of some sort, so to claim that a photo in a magazine as Valerie Plame-Wilson "outed" her as a CIA agent is ridiculous.

I'm truly surprised that Jeff didn't think the situation through beyond believing an implausible story that makes little sense. All NOCs aren't James Bond types, many are highly skilled professionals in many technical areas that work largely through a cover identity to those with whom they interact with. Though I'm sure they largely shun the overt spotlight, they do live and exist openly within their own communities.

#132 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-05-16 07:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

You missed the point entirely, Tony.

The Plame outing was covered relentlessly for at least a year. The outing of the Afghanistan station chief was covered for a day and with a yawn.

#133 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 07:06 PM | Reply

So, anonymous sources have WAY more credibility than primary sources (those who were present)?

I get the argument that they are part of the administration. That just automatically makes all of them liars? WaPo cited a ''former official familiar with'. Translation: a former OBAMA official. That it's an Obama guy doesn't automatically mean the source is untrustworthy. But it does calll into question motive.

#134 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 07:11 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Accident vs. deliberate, think that might be a reason JeffJ? Only one of those could be treason, right?

#135 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-05-16 07:11 PM | Reply

Trump transition handling of classified info raised concern

President Donald Trump's disclosure of classified information to Russian officials isn't the first time his team's handling of secrets has raised alarms bells.

In the weeks before Trump took office, Obama administration officials were so concerned by the Trump transition team's handling of classified documents that they moved swiftly to exert more control over the sensitive materials, according to two former U.S. officials.

The officials said transition officials removed classified materials from secure rooms and carried them between buildings in Washington without permission. Worried about keeping tabs on the highly sensitive material, the Obama administration officials set new limits on some classified information and explicitly barred Trump aides from viewing that material in their transition offices.

The Associated Press previously reported on Obama officials' concerns about the transition team's handling of classified material as the Trump team prepared to take the reins of government. The new details about their concerns come amid mounting questions about whether Trump himself has been careless with the nation's secrets.

apnews.com

#136 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-05-16 07:13 PM | Reply

#129

That's not what you were initially asking and you didn't answer my question.

#137 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 07:13 PM | Reply

Obama White House makes a mistakes, acknowledges the mistake, takes measures to mitigate the mistake and corrects the mistake

Yeah, that is the same as the Plame affair,

you need to up your game jeffie

#138 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-05-16 07:13 PM | Reply

So, if it's accidental, it warrants a media yawn regardless of the damage? Was the leaking of Seal Tram 6 to Hollywood accidental?

#139 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 07:15 PM | Reply

I don't miss the point. Plame was outed because of POLITICS and related to a crime for which Scooter Libby was tried and found guilty.

The Afghanistan station chief was outed by ACCIDENT and had nothing to do with overt politics but for the very nature of war. There was no intent to out the chief, where it was fully intended to out a CIA asset because she and her husband stood to thwart the efforts of the Bush Administration to lie us into war in Iraq.

That you even conflate the two shows the depth of your own depravity in trying to carry water for one of this nation's most catastrophic foreign policy mistakes. Obama was trying to clean up yet another mess that Bush's crew started and then neglected in order to focus on their illegal war of choice which still reverberates as a global threat to peace.

#140 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-05-16 07:15 PM | Reply

So, anonymous sources have WAY more credibility than primary sources (those who were present)?

I get the argument that they are part of the administration. That just automatically makes all of them liars? WaPo cited a ''former official familiar with'. Translation: a former OBAMA official. That it's an Obama guy doesn't automatically mean the source is untrustworthy. But it does calll into question motive.

#134 | Posted by JeffJ

They're anonymous jeff, you don't know they weren't present.

#141 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-05-16 07:15 PM | Reply

Isn't it ironic that JEFF is trying to paint a source as "biased" by using a biased extremist right wing source. The hypocrisy is amazing.

#142 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2017-05-16 07:19 PM | Reply

Jeff,

One WAPo source, as known by Erickson is a loyal Trump official. Why would you focus on the former official and ignore the current official verified by Erickson's screed along with their reason for speaking up due to the recklessness of the President?

You have to try hard to smear credible information don't you?

#143 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-05-16 07:20 PM | Reply

I can definitely see a McMasters (if he were a serious patriot) leaking the info in an attempt to corral trump

#144 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-05-16 07:21 PM | Reply

She had a separate persona as well as identity(ies) and cover stories to mask her true identity. No one knows if she traveled abroad under a disguise of some sort, so to claim that a photo in a magazine as Valerie Plame-Wilson "outed" her as a CIA agent is ridiculous.

"My wife has made it very clear that -- she has authorized me to say this -- she would rather chop off her right arm than say anything to the press and she will not allow herself to be photographed," he declared in October on "Meet the Press."

But that was before Vanity Fair came calling.

The January issue features a two-page photo of Wilson and the woman the magazine calls "the most famous female spy in America," a "slim 40-year-old with white-blond hair and a big, bright smile." They are sitting in their Jaguar.


www.washingtonpost.com

#145 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 07:25 PM | Reply

Plame was outed in 2003. Vanity Fair was in 2004.

Do the math.

#146 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-05-16 07:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

You have to try hard to smear credible information don't you?

#143 | POSTED BY TONYROMA

I'm not smearing anything. That would be you. I already acknowledged that even if WaPo was relying exclusively on an Obama-guy it could very well be credible. We are getting conflicting information regarding what was said and the implications of it. Trump makes matters worse with his stupid tweets. Regardless of the conflicting reports, particularly those of McMaster, who I understand is widely respected on both sides of the aisle, many (not necessarily you) are convinced of the absolute worst - yet when Team Obama outs a key CIA asset it is immediately dismissed as accidental - for the record, I believe it was accidental, but there was never even an iota of media scrutiny into that defense.

I am calling out the media double-standard and I've tried very hard to be clear about that.

#147 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 07:30 PM | Reply

JeffJ excels at math you do as a Republican.

#148 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-05-16 07:31 PM | Reply

"JeffJ excels at math you do as a Republican."

It comes from calculating all those Cadillac Taxes paid by non-Union workers.

#149 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-05-16 07:33 PM | Reply

Jeff do you even read what you write?

Even you believe that the Obama outing was accidental. It was covered. The Obama administration admitted it, they addressed it. Yet you conflate that to Plame being outed? Intentionally! And again, you don't know that McMasters isn't the Trump insider leaking the information. I would lay money on it that he was. WashPo et al, are saying the insider is credible. The inside information conforms to the other information available.

#150 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-05-16 07:35 PM | Reply

JeffJ, unless the same standards apply to accidents and deliberate actions, there should be a double standard.

Why are some killings murder and some manslaughter and some not even charged as a crime? Double standards, huh?

You still haven't said why it's worse for out Intel community than deliberately outing Plame. I'm guessing you never will, because you can't support that assertion.

#151 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-05-16 07:41 PM | Reply

I am calling out the media double-standard and I've tried very hard to be clear about that.

You haven't identified a double standard, you've created a controversy out of thin air. Do you possess one iota of evidence that NO ONE IN THE MEDIA ever investigated the circumstances surrounding the station chief's disclosure? Do you have one iota of evidence that any investigator was stonewalled in the attempt to investigate the matter? Do you have one iota of evidence that anyone in the Obama Administration deserved more than what they received for the unquestionable mistake?

You've created something out of thin air with nothing behind it but for your fertile imagination and ridiculous need to find something, anything to conflate with the unprecedented -------- going on daily inside and around the Trump White House.

The reason no one wrote a story might simply be that there was no salacious story to report. Lord knows the right wing has investigators too, why not ask them Jeff instead of assuming something for which you have zero basis in fact but for the actual absence of any evidence to support your delusions.

#152 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-05-16 07:42 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#146

Silly me, assuming that the photo came before the outing. I didn't know he was referring to Vanity Fair, I thought her photo showed up in some local publication with her kids or something. My bad for being ignorant.

And shame on you Jeff for yet again wasting our time with something so incredibly irrelevant to the issue at hand.

Why does that seem to be your raison d'etre these days?

#153 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-05-16 07:47 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Conservative media is currently the only place to get fair, measured criticism of Trump. At least currently.

#111 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Ehhhh I partially agree.

Some of the segments I've watched with Chris Wallace have been good, fair critiques of Trump.

But they're also usually Wallace standing alone against the host(s) who are asking leading questions and trying to guide the discussion to less damaged places.

As for the other instances you cite I would agree (if true, I haven't seen them...) that they're egregious and over the top.

But I think you're taking the exceptions in both cases and making it the norm. Is that because you want to maintain an anti-MSM narrative? Or do you actually believe Trump hasn't earned the majority of the ire sent his way?

#154 | Posted by jpw at 2017-05-16 07:55 PM | Reply

A number of good points have been raised. Forgive me - I am cooking on one of my charcoal grills and am popping in to post very quickly. I'll consider the points that have been made against the arguments I've made and will go from there.

#155 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 07:55 PM | Reply

The things that the media has gotten wrong are inconsequential crap, like - did he remove the statue of MLK?
#121 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

And even that wasn't "the media". It was a Tweet from a reporter that was quickly corrected.

#156 | Posted by jpw at 2017-05-16 07:56 PM | Reply

Forgive me - I am cooking on one of my charcoal grills and am popping in to post very quickly

Damn your priorities are all f---ed up.

#157 | Posted by jpw at 2017-05-16 07:57 PM | Reply

But I think you're taking the exceptions in both cases and making it the norm. Is that because you want to maintain an anti-MSM narrative? Or do you actually believe Trump hasn't earned the majority of the ire sent his way?

#154 | POSTED BY JPW

It's no narrative. Having said that, please see this from an earlier post of mine:

8 years of fawning coverage immediately transposed by spittle-flying rabid and intensely negative coverage at the snap of a finger (to be fair, Trump is his own worst enemy and I would have expected coverage of him to be more negative than coverage of Obama even if the MSM weren't biased). The whipsaw effect is very evident to anyone paying attention.

#113 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2017-05-16 05:46 PM

#158 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 07:58 PM | Reply

#157

You got that right! :-)

I'm heading back out RIGHT NOW!

#159 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-05-16 07:59 PM | Reply

I get the argument that they are part of the administration. That just automatically makes all of them liars?

#134 | Posted by JeffJ

No lying makes them liars. When they all say trump fired comey because of a recommendation, that's a lie. When they say he had the biggest inauguration ever, that's a lie. And there are already dozens or hundreds of examples and he's only been president 4 months.

If they weren't liars, trump would have fired them by now.

#160 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-05-16 08:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Conservative media is currently the only place to get fair, measured criticism of Trump. At least currently.

#111 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

No conservative media is where you go to feel like you're not a supporter of the most evil corrupt government in american history.

#161 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-05-16 08:09 PM | Reply

yet when Team Obama outs a key CIA asset it is immediately dismissed as accidental - for the record, I believe it was accidental, but there was never even an iota of media scrutiny into that defense.
I am calling out the media double-standard and I've tried very hard to be clear about that.

#147 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Maybe because there no rational reason to suspect the outing by Obama's administration was intentional? That and the fact that they owned up to it, didn't give a gagillion conflicting stories and fixed the situation?

Damn near everything associated with the Trump administration is surrounded by a thick cloud of black, billowing smoke. More often than not it's the behavior of Trump himself or his surrogates, and how they don't jive when compared, that fans the flames and puts up the smoke.

#162 | Posted by jpw at 2017-05-16 08:24 PM | Reply

"That wasn't an ankle-bite Jeffy, unless your throat is that low.
#119 | POSTED BY CORKY"

Actually, Jeffy's throat is full of Orange Steak right now. Give him a minute, and he'll be able to talk again.

#163 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2017-05-16 08:26 PM | Reply

It's no narrative. Having said that, please see this from an earlier post of mine:
#158 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

I saw it. I've also seen your frequent critiques of Trump.

But I just don't see your angle on the media. More often than not it comes across to me as being a conclusion looking for evidence, not evidence driving a conclusion.

That's why I asked those two lines as questions as opposed to stating them.

#164 | Posted by jpw at 2017-05-16 08:26 PM | Reply

So... why no similar media angst last year over Obama Admin's Pentagon giving Russia secret intel on location of US SOF commandos in Syria to deconflict Russian bombing campaigns?

#165 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2017-05-17 10:53 PM | Reply

"why no similar media angst last year over Obama Admin's Pentagon giving Russia secret intel on location of US SOF commandos in Syria to deconflict Russian bombing campaigns?"

So, let me get this straight: you've yet to condemn Trump, and your excuse is because Dems didn't condemn Obama enough?

#166 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-05-17 11:03 PM | Reply

So, let me get this straight #166 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

I'm being curious and opening dialog into whether it is merely my perception of a divergence between media scrutiny of Presidential administrations occasionally sharing secret intel with Russia, or whether the selective media outrage is also visible to others.

#167 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2017-05-17 11:19 PM | Reply

"I'm being curious"

Well, time to step up and make a decision. Show by example.

Should you be condemning Trump, or should you be defending Obama?

One without the other just makes you a partisan attempting a deflection.

#168 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-05-17 11:31 PM | Reply

Should you be condemning Trump, or should you be defending Obama?

Why attack or defend the men themselves, as presidential figures, and not analyze their actions in the specific instances? Only partisans would view such events, in which both Administrations shared secret intel with the Russian government, as a Trump vs Obama situation.

If you're asking my personal opinion, then I feel that the media should treat both Administrations consistently in their past and present dealings of sharing secret intelligence with Russians. According to a recent NYT Op-Ed, Presidents have the authority to leak classified information.


To be sure, leaders, including Israeli ones, do on rare occasion leak classified information. And they have the authority to do so. Often, such leaks reflect a conscious political calculation that the potential reward justifies any possible damage. In such circumstances, the intelligence community simply has to roll with the punches...

Regarding relations between Russia and Israel. Mindful of the potential hazards created by the civil war in Syria, the two countries already maintain close contact and consult on tactical issues of mutual interest. Indeed, for all we know, it is possible that Israel had already shared the intelligence leaked by Mr. Trump directly with the Russians.(www.nytimes.com)

#169 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2017-05-17 11:52 PM | Reply

"Only partisans would view such events, in which both Administrations shared secret intel with the Russian government, as a Trump vs Obama situation. "

In that case, reread your initial post until you recognize yourself.

"According to a recent NYT Op-Ed, Presidents have the authority to leak classified information."

It sounds like your answer is folks were too tough on Obama...not that anyone believes that.

"Often, such leaks reflect a conscious political calculation"

Well, that leaves out Trump.

#170 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-05-18 12:22 AM | Reply

In that case

In post #169, I was tactically calling you out as making this a binary issue based on partisanship.

It sounds like your answer is folks were too tough on Obama
Is that how you interpret me questioning whether the media is treating Obama Admin's leak of secret intel to Russians, vs, Trump Admin's leak of secret intel to Russians, with equal amounts of coverage/tone?

Well, that leaves out Trump. #170 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

President Trump has been underestimated by most observers ever since he joined the GOP primary. He was underestimated by the ReTort (among many other institutions) during the presidential race. Trump is no doubt being underestimated now.

#171 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2017-05-18 12:34 AM | Reply

It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is.

-2nd Impeached ..

#172 | Posted by Greatamerican at 2017-05-18 12:38 AM | Reply

"In post #169, I was tactically calling you out as making this a binary issue based on partisanship. "

What a coincidence. Earlier, I'd pointed out your obvious hypocrisy.

"Is that how you interpret me questioning"

Well, when you've yet to condemn Trump, and change the subject to Obama, you either think they treated Obama too harshly, or you're trying to deflect.

"Trump is no doubt being underestimated now."

Agreed. I'm sure he's done a lot worse than we currently know.

#173 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-05-18 12:54 AM | Reply

Danforth, i had assumed you were above it, but your recent comments indicate that you have a mild case of Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS). It is clear that while you want to make this a Trump vs Obama issue, I've been examining the intel leak situation as Media vs [Obama & Trump].

"When you've yet to condemn Trump"
- because there's nothing worth condemning

"And change the subject to Obama"
-using Obama as a recent example of a presidential administration who leaked intel to Russians, and the media coverage of the event wasn't as dramatic as when Trump leaked intel to the Russians.

Hope this helps your understanding. From your comments, do you believe both Obama and Trump deserve harsh media treatment from their leaks of classified intel to Russian government figures?

#174 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2017-05-18 09:59 AM | Reply

"It is clear that while you want to make this a Trump vs Obama issue,"

You were the first one who brought up Obama, wanting to compare his treatment to Trump's, before you'd ever said a negative word about Trump.

"- because there's nothing worth condemning"

Lies aren't worth condemning? Since when??? Trump has been caught in at least a dozen of them. Should I start a list?

"using Obama as a recent example"

Again, when you complain Obama wasn't condemned enough--without condemning Trump AT ALL--it's just a partisan deflection.

#175 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-05-18 10:05 AM | Reply

"you complain Obama wasn't condemned enough--without condemning Trump AT ALL"

It has been your assumption that I want[ed] the media to condemn Obama for his leak of classified Intel to the Russians. Frankly, I've been drawing comparisons of media reactions to the two occurances of two administrations leaking classified intel to Russians. As both Presidents had it within their abilities to make the decision to leak said classified intel, both shouldve been similarly not condemned. Obama wasn't condemned; Trump was condemned. I'm trying to type slow so you can understand the different media reactions to two similar recent events.

Now, time for you to get off the fence on this issue, Danforth, should both obama and Trump have received dissimilar media treatment when they committed similar actions via leaking classified intel to Russians?

#176 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2017-05-18 10:18 AM | Reply

"It has been your assumption that I want[ed] the media to condemn Obama for his leak of classified Intel to the Russians."

Yeah, and an obvious one. Everyone sees it, except you, it seems.

"As both Presidents had it within their abilities to make the decision to leak said classified intel, both shouldve been similarly not condemned."

Yet without saying a single negative things about Trump, you deflected to Obama. Since then, you've actually suggested Trump hasn't done anything worth condemnation.

"Obama wasn't condemned; Trump was condemned."

Not by you. All you were interested in was a deflection.

"I'm trying to type slow"

Try rereading your initial post, as many times as it takes.

#177 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-05-18 10:24 AM | Reply

Everyone sees it, except you, it seems. -Danforth.

You, and many others here, assume that I, like some other "Righties " have ObamaDerangement, but that is wholly incorrect. Obama was the first president I ever voted for, in 2008, And while I didn't agree with everything during his terms, unlike many on the reTort, I have no need to be a partisan shill about events.

So Obama isn't able to be used as an example of media coverage afterward leaking classified info, because using his administration a source a comparative example is deflection? Lol, seems like a weak excuse by you, danforth, to prevent yourself from engaging in the comparison.

Also, it appears you're still sitting on the fence in this comparison of two presidencies leaking classified info to Russians on two separated occasions...

#178 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2017-05-18 10:34 AM | Reply

"because using his administration a source a comparative example is deflection?"

It is when you've yet to say a negative word about Trump, while immediately deflecting to Obama, upset he wasn't condemned.

But keep pretending you're so fair and balanced.

#179 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-05-18 10:37 AM | Reply

No one has ever been treated as badly as Trumpelthinskin....?

Say what??

Signed,
Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley & Kennedy

#180 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2017-05-18 12:28 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2017 World Readable

-->
Drudge Retort