quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

It is revealing to note that none of the Trump friendly posters who responded to the OP addressed the substance of the OP.

Bosco attacked the poster who posted the OP then attempted to deflect claiming that there was already a thread on this issue and this new thread was unnecessary duplication. Aylee chose to attack the people who leaked the info in the OP while Termy couldn't be bothered taking any of it seriously and simply called it all "bullshit".

Their refusal to address the substance of the OP is glaring. This refusal is made all the more significant because the source of the OP is Trump friendly and possesses impeccable conservative credentials. This surely adds to the credibility of the OP. Criticism from the left can be expected but criticism from within the ranks of the right, from Trump sympathetic media is another, far more damaging matter.

The refusal of Trump friendly posters to address the main points of the OP simply underlines and emphasises the credibility of the OP's claims. Unless Trump friendly posters can get it together to address and refute those claims, then their credibility can only grow and grow.

It's revealing to note that you are again making up imaginary facts and then running with them as if they are facts. It's something you do a lot.

Well, lets go to the highest level nutsucker in the government then.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/15/politics/donald-trump-classified-information/

looks like he is going to turn himself in for prosecution then.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

It is revealing to note that none of the Trump friendly posters who responded to the OP addressed the substance of the OP.

Bosco attacked the poster who posted the OP then attempted to deflect claiming that there was already a thread on this issue and this new thread was unnecessary duplication. Aylee chose to attack the people who leaked the info in the OP while Termy couldn't be bothered taking any of it seriously and simply called it all "bullshit".

Their refusal to address the substance of the OP is glaring. This refusal is made all the more significant because the source of the OP is Trump friendly and possesses impeccable conservative credentials. This surely adds to the credibility of the OP. Criticism from the left can be expected but criticism from within the ranks of the right, from Trump sympathetic media is another, far more damaging matter.

The refusal of Trump friendly posters to address the main points of the OP simply underlines and emphasises the credibility of the OP's claims. Unless Trump friendly posters can get it together to address and refute those claims, then their credibility can only grow and grow.

It's revealing to note that you are again making up imaginary facts and then running with them as if they are facts. It's something you do a lot.

Precisely what are these "imaginary facts" you are claiming I have "made up"? All the points I made in my post can be confirmed by simply reading the thread.

For instance it is a fact that the OP uses a Trump friendly source with an impeccable conservative background - I cited evidence to support that statement.

It is a fact that neither Bosco Aylee nor Termy addressed the substance of Erikson's commentary and chose to make other points unrelated to that commentary.

It is a fact that criticism of Trump coming from a right wing Trump friendly source such as Erikson carries more weight than criticism from left wing sources - it cannot be dismissed as partisan commentary.
,
It is a fact that Trump's apologists posting here ignored the substance of Erikson's criticisms and it is entirely reasonable to infer from that that those criticisms seem to have hit a nerve that other criticisms might miss.

Of course you can comment on Erikson's commentary too - something that you (just like the others) have singularly failed to do. But until you guys address the substance of Erikson's comments, it is a fact that those comments stand unchallenged and uncorrected.

Precisely this.
I posted the link yesterday and it was roundly ignored. that they are now grabbing at straws is just funny, they wont ever admit Trump is guilty of anything, because they are in denial and hillary or obama did it to him

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee
Who violated the law and leaked the info to the press?

Trump the President of the US, who has authority to release just about any info he wishes, may have said something that might tick off a third party, but never mentioned the third party. So some lesser individual who did not have authority to pass on that information and may not have had a right to that information did give that information to the press who would spread it far and wide, and somehow that leaker is noble? I don’t get the thought process.

The article explains that the leaks are a desperate strategy by Trump's own people to attempt to prevent him from seriously fucking up.
You have of course completely ignored this and rushed to the defense of a man whose own people call him ignorant, simply because you hate the left.

People like you are the reason the US is now being led by a moron.

Actually, I find Aylee cogent and you full of fantasy. So I see you're projecting. Should I now address you as moron?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

Was that also from Infowars

Or was it KOS or VOX

(Not that MSNBC, WaPo or NYT is better than your go-to bottom of the barrel propaganda rags already mentioned)

quote:


ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

From Eric Erickson, at
http://theresurgent.com/i-know-one-of-the-sources/

I tend to take these stories about the President with a grain of salt. We have seen key details of a number of salacious stories retracted within 48 hours. The media hates the President so much that they’ll run a negative story about him without very much provocation. Anti-Trump sources embedded within the administration in the career civil service, etc. will leak to the press and confirmation bias sets in.

What sets this story apart for me, at least, is that I know one of the sources. And the source is solidly supportive of President Trump, or at least has been and was during Campaign 2016. But the President will not take any internal criticism, no matter how politely it is given. He does not want advice, cannot be corrected, and is too insecure to see any constructive feedback as anything other than an attack.

So some of the sources are left with no other option but to go to the media, leak the story, and hope that the intense blowback gives the President a swift kick in the butt. Perhaps then he will recognize he screwed up. The President cares vastly more about what the press says than what his advisers say. That is a real problem and one his advisers are having to recognize and use, even if it causes messy stories to get outside the White House perimeter.

I am told that what the President did is actually far worse than what is being reported. The President does not seem to realize or appreciate that his bragging can undermine relationships with our allies and with human intelligence sources. He also does not seem to appreciate that his loose lips can get valuable assets in the field killed.

You can call these sources disloyal, traitors, or whatever you want. 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?

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.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee
Who violated the law and leaked the info to the press?

Trump the President of the US, who has authority to release just about any info he wishes, may have said something that might tick off a third party, but never mentioned the third party. So some lesser individual who did not have authority to pass on that information and may not have had a right to that information did give that information to the press who would spread it far and wide, and somehow that leaker is noble? I don’t get the thought process.

The article explains that the leaks are a desperate strategy by Trump's own people to attempt to prevent him from seriously fucking up.
You have of course completely ignored this and rushed to the defense of a man whose own people call him ignorant, simply because you hate the left.

People like you are the reason the US is now being led by a moron.

Actually, I find Aylee cogent and you full of fantasy. So I see you're projecting. Should I now address you as moron?

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee
Who violated the law and leaked the info to the press?

Trump the President of the US, who has authority to release just about any info he wishes, may have said something that might tick off a third party, but never mentioned the third party. So some lesser individual who did not have authority to pass on that information and may not have had a right to that information did give that information to the press who would spread it far and wide, and somehow that leaker is noble? I don’t get the thought process.

The article explains that the leaks are a desperate strategy by Trump's own people to attempt to prevent him from seriously fucking up.
You have of course completely ignored this and rushed to the defense of a man whose own people call him ignorant, simply because you hate the left.

People like you are the reason the US is now being led by a moron.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


Who violated the law and leaked the info to the press?

Trump the President of the US, who has authority to release just about any info he wishes, may have said something that might tick off a third party, but never mentioned the third party. So some lesser individual who did not have authority to pass on that information and may not have had a right to that information did give that information to the press who would spread it far and wide, and somehow that leaker is noble? I don’t get the thought process.

No, the president of the United States does not have the authority to release any information he pleases, there are regulations in place dictating who can relay classified information to whom.

Any classified information needing a code word authorization is eyes only and cannot be dissimulated by anyone regardless of what office they hold.

As for 'leakers' there is an interesting twist to this.

If the leak does not actually included classified information or falls under the 'whistle blower' laws and regulations, the most that can happen is they be fired.

For example, 'deep throat' who gave the information to the reporters about Watergate did nothing illegal by passing on the information.

Basically, the individual who passed on the fact that President Trump gave highly classified information to the Russians while not actually explaining in detail what the information was in its entirety did not commit a criminal act.

The simple truth is that half the bullshit that is pulled that is either unethical or illegal coming out of Washington comes from leakers who feel that something needs to be done, and therefore forces the issue by giving it to the press.

And it is perfectly legal although it may cost them their job.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee
Who violated the law and leaked the info to the press?

Trump the President of the US, who has authority to release just about any info he wishes, may have said something that might tick off a third party, but never mentioned the third party. So some lesser individual who did not have authority to pass on that information and may not have had a right to that information did give that information to the press who would spread it far and wide, and somehow that leaker is noble? I don’t get the thought process.

The article explains that the leaks are a desperate strategy by Trump's own people to attempt to prevent him from seriously fucking up.
You have of course completely ignored this and rushed to the defense of a man whose own people call him ignorant, simply because you hate the left.

People like you are the reason the US is now being led by a moron.

And just yesterday you were singing a different tune. That was shown to be false so any port in a storm for you isn't it. What will it be tomorrow. Come on, you're a mind reader, tell us.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

Was that also from Infowars

Or was it KOS or VOX

(Not that MSNBC, WaPo or NYT is better than your go-to bottom of the barrel propaganda rags already mentioned)

Not wa po, not kos, but erick ericksons own site
not slate or vox, infowars or the NYT, but his own website and article.

As I said, it was roundly ignored, here is the post 68 from http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=5032752 fronm "Trump revealed highly classsified info" thread.

quote:


ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

From Eric Erickson, at
http://theresurgent.com/i-know-one-of-the-sources/

I tend to take these stories about the President with a grain of salt. We have seen key details of a number of salacious stories retracted within 48 hours. The media hates the President so much that they’ll run a negative story about him without very much provocation. Anti-Trump sources embedded within the administration in the career civil service, etc. will leak to the press and confirmation bias sets in.

What sets this story apart for me, at least, is that I know one of the sources. And the source is solidly supportive of President Trump, or at least has been and was during Campaign 2016. But the President will not take any internal criticism, no matter how politely it is given. He does not want advice, cannot be corrected, and is too insecure to see any constructive feedback as anything other than an attack.

So some of the sources are left with no other option but to go to the media, leak the story, and hope that the intense blowback gives the President a swift kick in the butt. Perhaps then he will recognize he screwed up. The President cares vastly more about what the press says than what his advisers say. That is a real problem and one his advisers are having to recognize and use, even if it causes messy stories to get outside the White House perimeter.

I am told that what the President did is actually far worse than what is being reported. The President does not seem to realize or appreciate that his bragging can undermine relationships with our allies and with human intelligence sources. He also does not seem to appreciate that his loose lips can get valuable assets in the field killed.

You can call these sources disloyal, traitors, or whatever you want. 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?

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.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
He's so used to...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


Who violated the law and leaked the info to the press?

Trump the President of the US, who has authority to release just about any info he wishes, may have said something that might tick off a third party, but never mentioned the third party. So some lesser individual who did not have authority to pass on that information and may not have had a right to that information did give that information to the press who would spread it far and wide, and somehow that leaker is noble? I don’t get the thought process.

No, the president of the United States does not have the authority to release any information he pleases, there are regulations in place dictating who can relay classified information to whom.

Any classified information needing a code word authorization is eyes only and cannot be dissimulated by anyone regardless of what office they hold.

As for 'leakers' there is an interesting twist to this.

If the leak does not actually included classified information or falls under the 'whistle blower' laws and regulations, the most that can happen is they be fired.

For example, 'deep throat' who gave the information to the reporters about Watergate did nothing illegal by passing on the information.

Basically, the individual who passed on the fact that President Trump gave highly classified information to the Russians while not actually explaining in detail what the information was in its entirety did not commit a criminal act.

The simple truth is that half the bullshit that is pulled that is either unethical or illegal coming out of Washington comes from leakers who feel that something needs to be done, and therefore forces the issue by giving it to the press.

And it is perfectly legal although it may cost them their job.

Yes the president can declassify anything or name anyone to the classified list and share information with them.

http://time.com/4780593/president-trump-russia-declassified/

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Except, which is the key part, if releasing the intelligence jeopardizes the source, or persons who gathered that intelligence.

In other words, if his giving the information compromises the source of the information, be it another government's intelligence service, or in this case, since the intel he passed on was code word authorized, it would probably jeopardize an individual, he cant.

While the president is technically immune from arrest on criminal charges, any action that directly impacts national security, such as disclosing highly classified information to a foreign government official, without an over riding damn good reason, such as an attack on that nation along the lines of Pearl Harbor or 9/11, he cant give out that information.

For example, when part of a MAGIC intercept was found in a white house waste basket prior to Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt was taken off the list of who could see the intercepts, BECAUSE his (or in this case, his aid) mishandling that information could jeopardize the source, in that instance, the fact the US War Department was decoding word for word the Japanese Diplomatic code.

In another historic instance, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, the photographic proof of the Soviet Missiles that was in the hands of the President and his staff could not be disclosed to the Soviets prior to the introduction of that proof in the UN Security council session simply because President Kennedy, as much as he wanted to, could not further endanger the pilots of the reconnaissance aircraft overflying Cuba.

Also, the disclosure in private could have just forced the Soviets to accelerate making those missiles operational.

Every step taken during the crisis was presented as from 'reliable sources' and 'high possibility.'

At no point, prior to the security council session, was the absolute proof shown to anyone outside of the intelligence community or his staff.

While technically he has the authority to disclose whatever the fuck he wants, he does not have the authority to jeopardize an intelligence source, be it an agency or field agent or double agent.

As soon as he does so, the Intelligence community can, with regard to national security, stop telling him shit, and all they have to do is prove to congress their reasons.

At which point, congress has two options, deal with a president that the intelligence people cannot trust to keep his fucking mouth shut or impeach his ass for endangering national security because he cannot keep his mouth shut.