Fake news. McMaster said the information shared was standard information shared by various heads of state.
How do you defend this? Trump shares classified data with Russians.
- Thread starter davidallen
- Start date
Sticking with this talking point huh? Even after what Trump tweeted?
I feel sorry for Trump supporters. I truly do.
I heard the press conference and I heard the words directly from the mouth of McMaster. I heard exactly what he said and for CNN to report otherwise is fake news. By the way, is this a week that you like James Comey or despise James Comey?
That's the only way your scenario works.
Trumps meeting with Russia only comes into play if ISIS knows wtf was talked about in the meeting.
Nothing new was discussed. The world knew about the plot.
You probably skip the connect the dots on the kids menu for something less taxing.
Trumps meeting with Russia only comes into play if ISIS knows wtf was talked about in the meeting.
Nothing new was discussed. The world knew about the plot.
You probably skip the connect the dots on the kids menu for something less taxing.
I watched it too. CNN didn't misreport the press conference, you did.
All McMaster said was that Trump didn't have an inappropriate conversation (he repeared "wholly appropriate" over and over again).
He refused to say whether the information was classified ("what we don't do is discuss what is and what isn't classified"). He was asked a couple of times if the President shared classified information and he refuse to answer the question ("what we don't do is discuss what is and what isn't classified"). A reporter even said it was a simply yes or no answer, and McMaster went back to the same talking point refusing to answer the question. He also said he wasn't going to be the one to confirm whether the information came from an intelligence partner. And he also tried to raise concerns about those who leaked this information.
Your claim that McMaster said Trump didn't leak anything classified is false. McMaster refused to answer that question . . . and instead, dodged and deflected. He used two common talking points over and over again: "wholly appropriate" and "what we don't do is discuuss what is and what isn't classified"
That was a damage control press conference (and not a really good one at that).
Here is a link to the press conference for those who would like to see it...
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown...r-expected-address-report-trump-shared-intel/
You do understand that the MAGAheads will never change their mind, right? You might as well reason with a door. They love his incompetence, they love his dishonesty, they love it when people with a full set of teeth get mad at him, they love nazi sympathizers, they loved his sexism, they love plainly inaccurate reporting... It doesn't matter what he does, they'll defend it. Period. You're trying to reason with them. Why do this to yourself?
For my understanding.... what's the big deal?
I mean, what difference at this point does it make?
I'm earnestly curious.
Will a frothy brother help me out here?
@Been Jammin
@syskatine
@GL97
I mean, what difference at this point does it make?
I'm earnestly curious.
Will a frothy brother help me out here?
@Been Jammin
@syskatine
@GL97
1). I like to argue.
2). In this particular case, I hold a tiny amount of optimism that some lurker, who doesn't pay close attention to this board, will see NZ for what he really is and not fall into his rabbit hole.
Good point. That is why I posted earlier that I feel sorry for them. I truly do. To watch the cartwheels they have to perform in defense of Trump is hilarious on one level but sad on another.
Oh, I don't know.
Might be a big deal if it adversely affects our relationship with a key ally who has an operative that has infiltrated ISIS.
Might be a big deal if it causes other allies to lose confidence in our ability to keep shared information from Russia.
Might be a big deal if it causes our allies to be reluctant to share information with us, because they don't trust us to keep it to ourselves.
Might be a big deal if it causes our own intelligence services to not share information because they don't trust POTUS to not let key information slip.
Once again. I don't know what he did/said. But, I don't have a ton of confidence that a guy with diarrhea of the brain won't say whatever pops into his mind without considering who his audience is or the repercussions of sharing the information.
I second everything Jammin said. I would also add that it continues to illustrate Trump's incompetency not to mention the danger his incompetency represents.
Not to mention this occurred in the midst of the Russia investigation and the country he shares the information with just happens to be Russia.
There's no point, you've divorced reason.
Nothing was revealed in the article that would impact ISIS's knowledge that they wouldn't have been able to deduce weeks ago.
Unless they gleaned something directly from the meeting.
Maybe we can somehow translate the information to paint-by-numbers to help you out .....
This is where party matters. When Obama did something (like have the IRS hold up tea party applications) you give him the benefit of the doubt because it might not be bad and he's on your team. When Trump does something you disagree with, you don't, because "IT MIGHT" (your words not mine) be bad. They call that partisanship. Well done in representing the blue team.
I haven't kept up with all this...been busy.
What I see, however, at my own little version of Cheers (the OSU 24/7 board) is that the natives are notably more restless than usual.
Hence me asking: Sys why are you so restless?
I think the second part of my comment is equally important.....but that's just me. I'm not a big fan of authoritarian conduct, even if such conduct isn't illegal. Again, that's just me.
1), I never defended Obama's controversial actions.
2). I say "it might" because there is clearly no definitive proof that the WaPo story is an accurate account of what happened.
3). I was answering Brad's question.
4). How is your response anything other than partisanship?
All I was doing was clarifying a bit. You stated Trump can release "classified information." That is technically incorrect, legally speaking. A President can release information that he has chosen to declassify, which would mean it is no longer classified information.
If the president can release information he has chosen to declassify and he can declassify any information he choose, the statement he can release classified information is technically and legally correct. There is just no commentary there about "how" he goes about releasing such classified information.
But by all means, keep thinking your Google skill replaces a legal degree and 28 years in the business.
No, he can release declassified information. He has the power to declassify classified information and then release it.
Like I posted, I was simply providing a minor clarification. I meant no harm by it. No need for you to get your panties in a wad.
And you really think you are the only one on this board with a legal degree and years of experience in the business? Like I posted before, not everyone has to put "JD" in their screen name to tout their credentials.
My panties aren't in a wad.
My statements were technically and legally correct.
I know that I'm not the only one on this board with a legal degree and years of experience in the business.
I know you're not one of them ClinToon.
My actual freaking NAME is JD. My screen name isn't at all about touting my credentials. Just another thing you are wildly wrong about.
All kinds of stuff about the ISIS laptop bomb threat was leaked to the media in March, including the fact that a lot of intelligence on the devices and the bomb maker came from the Navy Seal raid in Yemen. Sure seems like a bunch of manufactured handwriting is going on right now.
Then why do you keep responding and getting hostile over such a minor point?
Relax.
And your assumption would be wrong. Just like your silly desire to assume I am another poster.
Lol. Why do you keep responding and getting hostile?
There is NO WAY you have a legal degree and years in the business.
NO WAY.
Lol.
Lol.
Lol.
Hey now. Being a player performance specialist on Twitter probably leaves very little time to pursue a degree in legal stuff. Don't be so rough on the guy.
Sorry, had to. Couldn't resist.
