Trump revealed highly classified information to Russians in meeting, officials say Pt 2

You don't see a difference between missile defense information and information about ISIS?

 

Nope. That is beyond them.

 

Intel vetted and cleared by the intel community scrubbed and parsed.........not like Crooked Donnie inadvertently blurted out while the Russians stroked his ego. Get it?

 

Until all the facts are in there is only a need to spin, obfuscate, or refuse to answer to protect the ones that we KNOW broke the law.

The Washington Post says, “The Post is withholding most plot details, including the name of the city, at the urging of officials who warned that revealing them would jeopardize important intelligence capabilities.”

That means that their source(s) revealed the “plot details” (apparently all) to the press, therefore, the only crime committed here was the leaking of the info to the press by someone not authorized to do so.

Do you support hanging by the neck until dead the WAPO sources who leaked the classified info to the press?

 

You want to change the subject and head down a rabbit hole........I focus on the original leaker, Trump.

 

Then the topic is over, unless you want to deal with the only ones who broke the law, because Trump had every legal authority as Commander in Chief to share information with an ally, and the right to determine that Russia is an ally in the War on Terror, until Congress declares war against Russia.

The Washington Post says, “The Post is withholding most plot details, including the name of the city, at the urging of officials who warned that revealing them would jeopardize important intelligence capabilities.”

That means that their source(s) revealed the “plot details” (apparently all) to the press, therefore, the only crime committed here was the leaking of the info to the press by someone not authorized to do so.

Do you support hanging by the neck until dead the WAPO sources who leaked the classified info to the press?

 

Is that anything like a Neocommie Senator not knowing ex post facto laws are illegal?

"We need to help struggling borrowers to weather this storm. One way to protect innocent homeowners - at least until this crisis passes - is to establish a fund to help people refinance or sell to avoid foreclosure. We can partially pay for this fund by imposing penalties on lenders that acted irresponsibly or committed fraud."
http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/29/fine_unscrupulous_mortgage_len.php

 

Nothing to see here.

 

The fact that Trump unintentionally divulges highly classified info about an ISIS source (without express permission from that source) and op to the Russians who are supporting Assad against ISIS seems to be lost on you. I understand why, denial and lack of an ability to think critically beyond a narrow focus. You obviously get your talking points from FOX.

 

Despite the name calling, do you have a link that supports your claim that the reporter wasn't in the room when ISIS was discussed? Or is that just your opinion? Google doesn't show me any kind of support for your claim. So, unless you have a link, I'm dismissing your claim.

I'm really weary of this "TDS" accusation as a retort. The entire nation is discussing this topic and new facts are coming out, as we do. I resent the implication that I am deranged because my opinion doesn't agree with yours. You'll note that I do not call you deranged because you don't interpret the facts presented the same way I do. Either address the substance of my posts or don't reply, please.

 

I don't live in PA, but it is a long time until 2020. At this point, and with the most current news, Trump needs to complete this term, before we concern ourselves with that may happen in 2020.

The situation with Trump right now has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton, and frankly, I don't see her running again. Depending on the candidate, and I do not expect it will be Hillary Clinton, his message may have to be quite different… especially if the economy hasn't improved significantly by then.

 

Hey, Putin wants to protect his Trump investment, this will get interesting .

 

I don't see any way Pence can avoid the accusation that he allowed Flynn to take office without being properly vetted and his foreign entanglements examined. Pence was in charge of the transition team, and vetting was his responsibility. He's also represented the White House's official position to the press on several occasions now, then soon after had to eat his words as Trump refuted the "official position." I think Pence's handling of the Flynn situation is politically poisonous for him. However, time will tell.

I'll agree with you that Pence hasn't been related to the Comey discussion yet. I'll also agree that the entire administration won't be condemned. There are actually some very good people in the administration that don't deserve to be grouped with others, IMO.

 

I don't see any reason why Trump did what he did and possibly put Israel at odds with us, but that's impulsiveness for you.

Foreign policy is always up for debate.

 

“Unintentionally” is a fact not in evidence. Trump did not need permission from anybody, and what he may have discussed with Israel previously is not in evidence.

In addition, “the Russians who are supporting Assad against ISIS” is not lost on me; the policy is lost on you:

"But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars." http://www.barackobama.com/2002/10/02/remarks_of_illinois_state_sen.php

I understand why you refuse to answer the question; it is not lack of an ability to think critically beyond a narrow focus, you simply seem to choose to get your talking points from the Clinton News Network (CNN) and MSNBC’s Madcow…

The Washington Post says, “The Post is withholding most plot details, including the name of the city, at the urging of officials who warned that revealing them would jeopardize important intelligence capabilities.”

That means that their source(s) revealed the “plot details” (apparently all) to the press, therefore, the only crime committed here was the leaking of the info to the press by someone not authorized to do so.

Do you support hanging by the neck until dead the WAPO sources who leaked the classified info to the press?

 

Again, instead of staying on the topic, you are distracting to a rabbit hole that you are comfortable it. Why not discuss the leaks from the POTUS? I'll wait.

 

Is this post offered in support of Obama as he was clearly right, so I'm confused?

(The link did not work so here is another:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99591469)

 

It is ridiculous to give any credence to the Russian reporter being in the room when ISIS intelligence was being discussed. Period.

I'm calling nobody deranged. I am identifying Trump Derangement Syndrome exemplified by irrational statements. I'm tired of seeing TDS posts like the one below that I responded to as well.

 

You are merely pointing out the facts, not the spin.

 

Did anyone point out.....
From the United States Code:

(a) The authority to classify information or material originally under E.O. 11652 is restricted to those offices within the executive branch which are concerned with matters of national security, and is limited to the minimum number absolutely required for efficient administration.

The President is the Chief executive. As such, can be the classification official - that's the person who decides the level of classification of information.

Follow me - If President Trump wanted to tell ME some TS stuff, he would simply re-classify the information commensurate to my level of clearance. If President Trump wanted to tell a Russian something Confidential, the president may decide the information is shareable. to the Russian.

 

I fail to see how this has anything to donwith what you quoted.

 

So, no link, just your opinion. It is ridiculous to give credence to a Russian reporter being in the room when Putin, himself, has offered to give transcripts of the meeting? Do you even keep up with the news? How in the world would Putin have a transcript, if there wasn't a reporter there? Despite the fact that I have already linked proof to you that TASS was in the Oval Office with Lavrov, and no American journalists were there, you continue to disbelieve it and throw out your opinion that the TASS reporter left before the classified information was discussed…. yet my posts show signs of TDS? That's laughable.

It is fact that Trump lies. To claim otherwise is deranged, as his lies are many and documented. Surely you're not claiming otherwise?

 

Do you have a link which proves that Putin has a transcript of the meeting ??

 

I'll find one right after you cite a link that states the TASS reporter/photographer wasn't in the room when Trump discussed classified intelligence with the Russians.