ADVERTISEMENT

How do you defend this? Trump shares classified data with Russians.

You obviously have never dealt with highly classified information, it is not always the info that needs to be protected, it is how the information is obtained that is the most important

So instead of Trump saying we have an asset on the ground in Syria and here's what he says.

You think it goes more like, "This is Chuck our man in Pakistan' he's a Libra, his turn ons are...gimme your digits and I'll have him shoot over a selfie."
 
Last edited:
The left will never forgive Russia for ditching communism, but I personally hope Trump successfully enlists the help of Russia in fighting Islamic terrorism, the number one threat to the Western world at this time.
 
So the WaPo is part of a conspiracy to cover up the reason behind the murder of Seth Rich?

I certainly dont know why you are putting those words in my mouth.

Do you think there's a little more reasonable interpretation of what I posted?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CowboyJD
The left will never forgive Russia for ditching communism, .

jwweb_s-200x150.gif
 
I certainly dont know why you are putting those words in my mouth.

Do you think there's a little more reasonable interpretation of what I posted?

Notice the question mark at the end of my post? I am asking you if that is what you are suggesting? I didn't put any words in your mouth.
 
First of all, I'm always skeptical when its anonymous sources stating what when on.

Me too, buddy. I don't know what he said, what was classified, etc. He mentioned a city and a source apparently and the WH asked the WaPo not to provide those details. Again, I don't know what happened. I'm just a vessel of truth. It doesn't look good.

In the end, its irrelevant. Whether he did or didn't share some 'classified' info doesn't impact me on iota. It doesn't impact the markets, the job economy, or anything that connects back to me, short or long-term

Okay. You guys have been pretty fired up about Hillary possibly exposing classified stuff with her negligence, I thought you might have thought really disclosing actual classified intel to an enemy is a problem. My bad.
 
Let me spell it out for you.

Trump tells the Russian Ambassador...
"So, we got this awesome intel. from an ally that has an agent in Raqqa Syria. They told us all about the laptop plot and your country needs to know about this also".

Meanwhile, ISIS has only 3 guys, in Raqqa, who knew about the laptop plot. They grab all 3 of them and chop off their heads.

Now, we have lost our source who had infiltrated into a high level within ISIS, and our ally (let's say it is Israel) won't share future information with us, because we were responsible for their top agent being beheaded.

We aren't talking rocket surgery here.
Exactly that was 100% correct
 
Your number is three, three ISIS agents in Raqqa. Well that certainly helps the narrative you're pushing doesn't it.
 
Okay. You guys have been pretty fired up about Hillary possibly exposing classified stuff with her negligence, I thought you might have thought really disclosing actual classified intel to an enemy is a problem. My bad.

I would note that there is a significant difference between explicitly providing a piece of data to a foreign party (what Trump did above) vs. leaving all data exposed due to poor data protection and management (Hillary's server).
 
So instead of Trump saying we have an asset on the ground in Syria and here's what he says.

You think it goes more like, "This is Chuck our man in Pakistan' he's a Libra, his turn ons are...gimme your digits and I'll have him shoot over a selfie."
what was reported and the damage control that went into effect immediately after the meeting it probably was him bragging about having intel from a specific country who had an agent in a specific city. That is huge, especially considering the Russians and us despite both fighting ISIS are not on the same side
 
Given what you know about Trump, do you think he gives something away without getting something in return?

Given what you absolutely know, not what you want to know.
 
I would note that there is a significant difference between explicitly providing a piece of data to a foreign party (what Trump did above) vs. leaving all data exposed due to poor data protection and management (Hillary's server).
You obviously do not know what you are talking about. This is not a joke.And Russia is not our ally.
 
I would note that there is a significant difference between explicitly providing a piece of data to a foreign party (what Trump did above) vs. leaving all data exposed due to poor data protection and management (Hillary's server).

Sure. Like I said, I just thought you might have some concerns. I'm wrong about almost everything on this board, so I should've known that actually sharing it with an enemy isn't a big deal.

In fact, he should probably just give them an all-access tour of the NSA. Imagine the bragging.

"Vasily, we have the best computers. We can hear it all. Bob, bring up Vladimir right now, let them hear what Putin is saying! Can you believe it? Unbelievable. The guy with the headphones plays at my Virginia golf course and he challenged me to a long drive contest and I drove the ball 30 yards farther than him, but he's a great, strong guy. So strong. Really strong guy but he can't hit it as far as me. Let me show you our flowchart of our sabotage of North Korea's nuclear stockpiles, we do the best flowcharts..."
 
I would note that there is a significant difference between explicitly providing a piece of data to a foreign party (what Trump did above) vs. leaving all data exposed due to poor data protection and management (Hillary's server).
You do one when you are a senile narcissist, you do the other when you have paranoid delusions.
 
Your number is three, three ISIS agents in Raqqa. Well that certainly helps the narrative you're pushing doesn't it.

Give me a break. I created a scenario. It doesn't matter if the number is 3, 10 or 20. The potential damage is done if he shares key information. Information that our ally has not given us permission to share with other foreign powers.

If you share that information, and they find out you shared that information, your source is going to dry up quickly, regardless of whether or not the agent is killed.
 
Dude, the same three people found out the world knew about their plot weeks ago. They knew who knew what then right?

Your scenario is horse shit.
 
How,fn hard is it to understand that the ISIS agent in your scenario would already know there was a leak when the world was warned weeks ago about the plot?
 
After mostly muted reaction in the hours after the reports surfaced, congressional Republicans are beginning to speak out.

Sen. John McCain called the reports "deeply disturbing."

"Reports that this information was provided by a U.S. ally and shared without its knowledge sends a troubling signal to America's allies and partners around the world and may impair their willingness to share intelligence with us in the future," McCain said.

Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, who was a contender to be Trump's secretary of state, was one of the first Republicans to react to the news, saying the reports were "worrisome."

"The chaos that is being created by the lack of discipline," Corker said, is creating a "worrisome environment."


Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., described the entire episode as "weird" but cautioned that the president appeared to have operated within his authority.

"It's very difficult for a president to break laws related to classification," Sasse said Tuesday on Fox News. "But the debate about imprudence, that's a really important debate," he said.

"It's not helpful that this was with the Russians. Right? I mean this was just weird," Sasse added.

Others said they wanted to hear more.

"We have no way to know what was said, but protecting our nation's secrets is paramount. The speaker hopes for a full explanation of the facts from the administration," said House Speaker Paul Ryan spokesman Doug Andres in a statement Monday night.

And Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who is a member of the Intelligence Committee, has called for a complete briefing on what occurred between Trump and Lavrov.

"It would be very troubling if he did share such sensitive reporting with the Russians. The Senate Intelligence Committee should be briefed on this important issue immediately," Collins said in a statement.

And Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, also a member of the Intelligence Committee, said that he's asked the White House for more information. The White House is expected to reach out to members of Congress today to brief them on the developments.

Some Republicans have remained mum. When asked if he had any reaction to the reports, Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., simply said "none."

He refused to answer any follow up questions and proceeded to walk into the Finance Committee room to attend a hearing on Medicare.

Meanwhile, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called for the White House to release the transcripts from the Lavrov and Trump meeting to the Congressional intelligence committees.

"Producing the transcripts ... is the only way for this administration to categorically prove the report's untrue," Schumer said.
 
Alpha.

Apparently there are a handful of Republican congressmen who have been reading my posts and don't think my scenario is horseshit (as shown in my above post). How f'n hard is this to understand? You're a bright guy.
 
This thread is hilarious. First, the Washington Post reports the sharing of classified information and some posters on this board immediately dismiss it as "fake news" based on fake sources. They then point to administration officials who were engaged in damage control as evidence the report was false. However, next comes Trump with his tweets essentially admitting the truth of the report, and now those same posters are attempting to defend what Trump did.

How quickly the "fake news" excuse disappeared! And now, many on the right, who have complained for years about the misuse of classified information by a certain politician, are now going to have to defend another politician's misuse of classified information.

You just can't make this stuff up lol! One has to wonder . . . how long will Trump supporters allow themselves to be played the fool?
 
How,fn hard is it to understand that the ISIS agent in your scenario would already know there was a leak when the world was warned weeks ago about the plot?

Spelling it out again.

ISIS knows there is a leak. They have no idea where the leak is coming from or who the leaker might be. Trump tells Russia where the information came from. Now ISIS has a pretty good idea as to who the leaker is.

I'm not making this scenario up out of my ass.

Maybe it is a true story. Maybe it is BS. If it is true, it is a problem.
 
Sharing classified information off the cuff in a meeting with the Russians?

Is anyone seriously surprised that he did this with the Russians? I'm not.

The only thing I'm surprised about is why those under him continue to carry water for him. Of course, there are the massive amount of leaks which continue to take place which does show the level of mistrust that exists right now within the Trump administration.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davidallen
But there are only three guys that know and surely Trump just left the asset behind because he's a moron before he announced to the world there was a plot. Right?
 
Impeach his ass!!!! Put Pence in there and watch him go evangelical on all the liberal dipshits. Their heads will f***ing explode! Be careful what you wish for.

From the moment Pence was put on the ticket, I have always believed that a possible end game for Republican congressional leaders is just this . . . Pence as President. Pence reminds me a lot of Frank Underwood of House of Cards.

And if you notice, Pence always seems to have plausible deniability when it comes to the scandals engulfing Trump.
 
Maybe I need to figure out a way to include some pictures in my explanation of this, since you seem to be having such a tough time with reading comprehension.
 
First of all, I'm always skeptical when its anonymous sources stating what when on. Given the hostility of the media against this president, I don't rule out made up stories. As for the basis of this story, the fact the meeting went on and discussed terrorism was public record. So just the fact that the meeting occurred does not verify the claim of WaPo. Finally, Trump as president does have latitude to share data with whomever he wants. If we have classified info that says Moscow airport is going to be bombed, I'd hope we share it even if its 'classified'. Maybe not share the details of how we got it, but I'd hope we'd share the plot beforehand and not just wait for the event to show up on CNN.

My personal expectation is that he did share something classified, but in an appropriate manner expected of good partners in the fight against terror. I expect that WaPo took that knowledge and spun the story like he just gave up every state secret and missile launch code. And David and Sys, like well-trained lab rats, found the cheese from WaPo and immediate came running to show it.

In the end, its irrelevant. Whether he did or didn't share some 'classified' info doesn't impact me on iota. It doesn't impact the markets, the job economy, or anything that connects back to me, short or long-term. Its just fluff to keep those who already don't like him riled up. I imagine we'll keep seeing these types of stories every couple weeks until the mid-terms so that the anti-Trump platform (all the Dems have) is viable.


on point
 
Dude there is zero possibility they learned anything that they wouldn't've known the second the announcement was made weeks ago. Zero.
 
You obviously have never dealt with highly classified information, it is not always the info that needs to be protected, it is how the information is obtained that is the most important


i'll bet alpha never considered that let alone the president :-/
 
  • Like
Reactions: Medic007
Dude there is zero possibility they learned anything that they wouldn't've known the second the announcement was made weeks ago. Zero.
He said right after Been Jammin laid out a scenario for them learning about the location of the intelligence source.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Been Jammin
Trump has every right to release information....even classified information. The US people have very right to question his judgment in doing so.

Actually, legally speaking, the President has the right to declassify information that is classified. He can do this in a number of ways. However, this privilege is rarely invoked by a President not to mention that releasing classified information to a hostile intelligence service raises numerous concerns.

Especially since we have an ongoing investigation regarding Russia's interference with our past election.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: davidallen
Synopsis of McMaster press conference just concluded: Trump leaked nothing classified and the only possible intelligence or national security damage caused has been done by the mainstream media.
 
He said right after Been Jammin laid out a scenario for them learning about the location of the intelligence source.

Its not even my scenario. It is the scenario presented in the WaPo article. Reiterated in the quotes from GOP congressmen that I posted above. Reiterated by foreign government diplomats (US allies) that have already said they might stop sharing info with us if it turns out to be true).
 
  • Like
Reactions: davidallen
So, again, we're working on the assumption that Trump left the asset behind and that Russia somehow conveyed the information to ISIS?
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT