Discussion:
Reuters: Trump revealed intelligence secrets to Russians in Oval Office - Intelligence "Secrets" That Are Already Known PUBLICLY? Riiiiiight
(too old to reply)
AlleyCat
2017-05-16 00:30:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 15 May 2017 19:50:23 -0400, FPP says...

Reuters:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-idUSKCN18B2MX

The White House said the allegations were false.

"The president ONLY discussed the common threats that both countries
faced," deputy national SECURITY ADVISOR Dina Powell said.

Dick Durbin, "... very, very troubling" IF true.

IF? sly little tricksie "reporting". You put "if" in front of ANY
allegation, does that excuse the lie?

"(T)he president has the authority to disclose even the most highly
classified information at will." - Reuters

"The president and the foreign minister reviewed COMMON threats from
terrorist organizations to include threats to aviation," said H.R.
McMaster, the national security adviser, who participated in the meeting.

"At NO time were any intelligence sources or methods discussed and no
military operations were disclosed that were not already known publicly."

PUBLICLY KNOWN.

More fake news. Much ado about NOTHING.
--
STILL can't understand why liberal Democrats are so in love with Muslims.
Muslims are against abortion, contraception, pre-marital sex, they kill
homosexuals BY LAW and they treat women as slaves and chattel. Their old
men rape little boys and get away with it... oh, and they HATE you. Am I
leaving anything else out that you just LOVE about them?
Buzzsaw Checkerling
2017-05-16 00:36:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by AlleyCat
On Mon, 15 May 2017 19:50:23 -0400, FPP says...
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-idUSKCN18B2MX
The White House said the allegations were false.
"The president ONLY discussed the common threats that both countries
faced," deputy national SECURITY ADVISOR Dina Powell said.
Dick Durbin, "... very, very troubling" IF true.
IF? sly little tricksie "reporting". You put "if" in front of ANY
allegation, does that excuse the lie?
"(T)he president has the authority to disclose even the most highly
classified information at will." - Reuters
"The president and the foreign minister reviewed COMMON threats from
terrorist organizations to include threats to aviation," said H.R.
McMaster, the national security adviser, who participated in the meeting.
"At NO time were any intelligence sources or methods discussed and no
military operations were disclosed that were not already known
publicly."
PUBLICLY KNOWN.
More fake news. Much ado about NOTHING.
Freddie's a proven, documented moron.

If any idiot were to fall for FAKE NEWS, it's this idiot.

______________
"Dr. Thomas E. Price was sworn in as the 23rd U.S. Secretary of Health
and Human Services on February 10, 2017."
AlleyCat
2017-05-16 21:17:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 16 May 2017 03:04:07 -0700 (PDT), Matt says...
Odd that he didn't say, "No intelligence secrets were revealed."
Didn't HAVE to... The Washington Post took it upon itself to say whether
they were "secrets" or not.

"The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats
to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation."

"At no time, were intelligence sources or methods discussed,
and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not
already PUBLICLY known." H.R. McMaster - National Security Advisor

Pretty sure the National Security Advisor knows a little more than what
REALLY went on in the White House, than The Washington Post, who was
getting its information secondhand.
--
STILL can't understand why liberal Democrats are so in love with Muslims.
Muslims are against abortion, contraception, pre-marital sex, they kill
homosexuals BY LAW and they treat women as slaves and chattel. Their old
men rape little boys and get away with it... oh, and they HATE you. Am I
leaving anything else out that you just LOVE about them?
Alan Baker
2017-05-16 21:24:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by AlleyCat
On Tue, 16 May 2017 03:04:07 -0700 (PDT), Matt says...
Odd that he didn't say, "No intelligence secrets were revealed."
Didn't HAVE to... The Washington Post took it upon itself to say whether
they were "secrets" or not.
"The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats
to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation."
"At no time, were intelligence sources or methods discussed,
and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not
already PUBLICLY known." H.R. McMaster - National Security Advisor
Pretty sure the National Security Advisor knows a little more than what
REALLY went on in the White House, than The Washington Post, who was
getting its information secondhand.
Except you're ignoring that McMaster is now on record as admitting that
classified information was revealed and now merely claims it was "wholly
appropriate" to do so.

Do try to keep up.
Oleg Smirnov
2017-05-16 23:15:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by AlleyCat
On Tue, 16 May 2017 03:04:07 -0700 (PDT), Matt says...
Odd that he didn't say, "No intelligence secrets were
revealed."
Didn't HAVE to... The Washington Post took it upon
itself to say whether they were "secrets" or not.
"The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range
of common threats to our two countries, including
threats to civil aviation."
"At no time, were intelligence sources or methods
discussed,
and the president did not disclose any military
operations that were not already PUBLICLY known." H.R.
McMaster - National Security Advisor
Pretty sure the National Security Advisor knows a little
more than what REALLY went on in the White House, than
The Washington Post, who was getting its information
secondhand.
Except you're ignoring that McMaster is now on record as
admitting that classified information was revealed and
now merely claims it was "wholly appropriate" to do so.
Classification as such isn't a sacred fetish.

There may be various reasons for classification.

Some info may be classified in order not to hide it from some
other government, but rather to hide something from the terrorists
that otherwise could find it in the open press. And a president of
a country is supposed to be able to decide what share with whom,
on the merits of the case. Meanwhile the WaPo-induced hysteria goes
on the basis of bare fetishism ("classified information!") without
relevant specifics and without any credible references.
M.I.Wakefield
2017-05-17 01:28:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Alan Baker
Except you're ignoring that McMaster is now on record as admitting that
classified information was revealed and now merely claims it was "wholly
appropriate" to do so.
Classification as such isn't a sacred fetish.
There may be various reasons for classification.
Some info may be classified in order not to hide it from some other
government, but rather to hide something from the terrorists that
otherwise could find it in the open press. And a president of a country is
supposed to be able to decide what share with whom, on the merits of the
case. Meanwhile the WaPo-induced hysteria goes on the basis of bare
fetishism ("classified information!") without relevant specifics and
without any credible references.
Human intelligence provided by another nation, that has not given permission
for the information to be shared, isn't merely "classified".

And if you weren't satisfied with the level of detail in the WaPo story, it
could be because THEY SHOWED MORE GODDAMN RESPONSIBILITY IN DEALING WITH
CLASSIFIED DATA THAN THE FUCKTARD-IN-CHIEF WHO SITS IN THE OVAL OFFICE
DID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oleg Smirnov
2017-05-17 12:16:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"Oleg Smirnov" wrote in message
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Classification as such isn't a sacred fetish.
There may be various reasons for classification.
Some info may be classified in order not to hide it from some other
government, but rather to hide something from the terrorists that otherwise
could find it in the open press. And a president of a country is supposed
to be able to decide what share with whom, on the merits of the case.
Meanwhile the WaPo-induced hysteria goes on the basis of bare fetishism
("classified information!") without relevant specifics and without any
credible references.
Human intelligence provided by another nation, that has not given permission
for the information to be shared, isn't merely "classified".
In their 'report', the WaPo's theorized - "at a more fundamental level"
- about "rules of espionage" and "practice". From which they came to the
idea that it "undercuts trust". In addition to that they cited allegedly
an opinion of an unverifiable "a former intelligence official" in line
with the narrative of their perspicacious theorization.

They didn't claim it's a fact that there's a binding agreement with the
'another nation' and Trump violated it, - their claim is, they believe he
violated "rules of espionage", in their "fundamental" understanding.

Most of their other claims are also expressions of belief, however, they
decorated the text so that a reader with a lower intelligence can easily
mistake their suggestions as statements of fact.
And if you weren't satisfied with the level of detail in the WaPo story, it
could be because THEY SHOWED MORE GODDAMN RESPONSIBILITY IN DEALING WITH
CLASSIFIED DATA THAN THE FUCKTARD-IN-CHIEF WHO SITS IN THE OVAL OFFICE
DID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm greatly impressed by the WaPo's skills to use ambiguous language and
compose their writing in such a way that would make the [liberal] reader
scream with excitement.

But of course one can't be satisfied with their level of actual evidence.
M.I.Wakefield
2017-05-17 13:00:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Oleg Smirnov
But of course one can't be satisfied with their level of actual evidence.
From the NY Times:

In private, three administration officials conceded that they could not
publicly articulate their most compelling - and honest - defense of the
president for divulging classified intelligence to the Russians: that Mr.
Trump, a hasty and indifferent reader of his briefing materials, simply did
not possess the interest of the knowledge of the granular details of
intelligence gathering to leak specific sources and methods of intelligence
gathering that would harm American allies.

=============

So his staff don't think Trump meant to do any harm ... he remembered that
he saw the name of a city, and accidently told the Russian FM and Ambassador
where the Mossad had managed to embed, or turn, someone in ISIS.
Oleg Smirnov
2017-05-17 13:33:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"Oleg Smirnov" wrote in message
Post by Oleg Smirnov
But of course one can't be satisfied with their level of actual evidence.
In private, three administration officials conceded that they could not
publicly articulate their most compelling - and honest - defense of the
president for divulging classified intelligence to the Russians: that Mr.
Trump, a hasty and indifferent reader of his briefing materials, simply did
not possess the interest of the knowledge of the granular details of
intelligence gathering to leak specific sources and methods of intelligence
gathering that would harm American allies.
=============
So his staff don't think Trump meant to do any harm ... he remembered that
he saw the name of a city, and accidently told the Russian FM and Ambassador
where the Mossad had managed to embed, or turn, someone in ISIS.
The abuse of the unnamed officials looks more and more obscene.

It makes the whole US gov't look like a realm of fear where the officials
usually are afraid to talk openly. Of course it's still not exactly the case,
but the media make it look like this. Sometimes they can cite some officials
properly, other times they can distort actual claims, another other times
they can just invent nonexistent unnamed officials and their alleged claims.

Nobody can verify it, it opens a wide scope for creativity and manipulation.
M.I.Wakefield
2017-05-17 13:56:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Oleg Smirnov
"Oleg Smirnov" wrote in message
Post by Oleg Smirnov
But of course one can't be satisfied with their level of actual evidence.
In private, three administration officials conceded that they could not
publicly articulate their most compelling - and honest - defense of the
president for divulging classified intelligence to the Russians: that
Mr. Trump, a hasty and indifferent reader of his briefing materials,
simply did not possess the interest of the knowledge of the granular
details of intelligence gathering to leak specific sources and methods
of intelligence gathering that would harm American allies.
=============
So his staff don't think Trump meant to do any harm ... he remembered
that he saw the name of a city, and accidently told the Russian FM and
Ambassador where the Mossad had managed to embed, or turn, someone in
ISIS.
The abuse of the unnamed officials looks more and more obscene.
Did you intern at the White House? Their pattern is:

1) Deny it ever happened.
2) Admit that it happened, but claim it's no big deal.
3) Say that the press finding out about it was a really big deal.
Oleg Smirnov
2017-05-17 15:50:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"Oleg Smirnov" wrote in message
Post by Oleg Smirnov
The abuse of the unnamed officials looks more and more obscene.
1) Deny it ever happened.
2) Admit that it happened, but claim it's no big deal.
3) Say that the press finding out about it was a really big deal.
I can recall the Obama time, - the most weird and ridiculous claims
about Russia (in favor of the Obama admin btw) were promoted by the
MSM through the same 'unnamed officials' trick, although in that case
there were no reasons to believe that the alleged 'leaks' might put
the alleged US officials at risk within the US government hierarchy.

It suggests it's a well-rooted technique of manipulation over the
public opinion, which may be used both against external and internal
targets, on occasion, and the main goal is not to keep the informants
safe but rather to make the claims unverifiable and to disinformate
so that no person might be available to clarify his or her claims.

And what's notable, - it's mainly the American mainstream mass media
specificity, I can't notice similarly flourishing 'unnamed officials'
abuse in the national mass media in other countries.
M.I.Wakefield
2017-05-17 16:45:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Oleg Smirnov
The abuse of the unnamed officials looks more and more obscene.
1) Deny it ever happened.
2) Admit that it happened, but claim it's no big deal.
3) Say that the press finding out about it was a really big deal.
More reporting:

- the information blabbed by Trump is so sensitive that news organizations
are still being asked not to report it.

- White House counterterrorism adviser Tom Bossert, who was not in the May
10 meeting, learned about what Trump said when he read notes immediately
afterward, a U.S. official with direct knowledge told NBC News. He
immediately called officials at the CIA and the National Security Agency to
report a security breach, the official said.

National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster told reporters Tuesday that what
Trump shared was "wholly appropriate," and that Bossert acted "maybe from an
overabundance of caution."

McMaster, a serving Army general who is not steeped in counterterrorism, did
not immediately realize the impact of what Trump had said, the U.S. official
recounted.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-uncovered/trump-gave-russians-secrets-news-orgs-are-being-asked-withhold-n760811
NoBody
2017-05-18 10:16:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Oleg Smirnov
The abuse of the unnamed officials looks more and more obscene.
1) Deny it ever happened.
2) Admit that it happened, but claim it's no big deal.
3) Say that the press finding out about it was a really big deal.
- the information blabbed by Trump is so sensitive that news organizations
are still being asked not to report it.
- White House counterterrorism adviser Tom Bossert, who was not in the May
10 meeting, learned about what Trump said when he read notes immediately
afterward, a U.S. official with direct knowledge told NBC News. He
immediately called officials at the CIA and the National Security Agency to
report a security breach, the official said.
Another unnamed source = bullshit. Putin is laughing his ass off at
us.

Zinger
2017-05-17 07:24:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by AlleyCat
On Tue, 16 May 2017 03:04:07 -0700 (PDT), Matt says...
Odd that he didn't say, "No intelligence secrets were revealed."
Didn't HAVE to... The Washington Post took it upon itself to say whether
they were "secrets" or not.
"The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats
to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation."
"At no time, were intelligence sources or methods discussed,
and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not
already PUBLICLY known." H.R. McMaster - National Security Advisor
Pretty sure the National Security Advisor knows a little more than what
REALLY went on in the White House, than The Washington Post, who was
getting its information secondhand.
Except you're ignoring that McMaster is now on record as admitting that
classified information was revealed and now merely claims it was "wholly
appropriate" to do so.
Give us a legitimate Ci9te.
Post by Alan Baker
Do try to keep up.
--
Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to
the security of a free State, the right of the people
to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed
Rudy Canoza
2017-05-17 07:42:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Zinger
Post by Alan Baker
Post by AlleyCat
On Tue, 16 May 2017 03:04:07 -0700 (PDT), Matt says...
Odd that he didn't say, "No intelligence secrets were revealed."
Didn't HAVE to... The Washington Post took it upon itself to say whether
they were "secrets" or not.
"The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats
to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation."
"At no time, were intelligence sources or methods discussed,
and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not
already PUBLICLY known." H.R. McMaster - National Security Advisor
Pretty sure the National Security Advisor knows a little more than what
REALLY went on in the White House, than The Washington Post, who was
getting its information secondhand.
Except you're ignoring that McMaster is now on record as admitting that
classified information was revealed and now merely claims it was "wholly
appropriate" to do so.
Give us a legitimate Ci9te.
No, fuck off. This "Ci9te" [sic] game is bullshit - an attempt to send
your intellectual and moral betters off on a wild goose chase.
McMaster's confirmatory comments on the matter are public record. You
can fuck off and die with your cuntly demand for a "Ci9te". Eat shit
and bark at the moon, cunt.
PaxPerPoten
2017-05-17 08:15:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by AlleyCat
On Tue, 16 May 2017 03:04:07 -0700 (PDT), Matt says...
Odd that he didn't say, "No intelligence secrets were revealed."
Didn't HAVE to... The Washington Post took it upon itself to say whether
they were "secrets" or not.
"The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats
to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation."
"At no time, were intelligence sources or methods discussed,
and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not
already PUBLICLY known." H.R. McMaster - National Security Advisor
Pretty sure the National Security Advisor knows a little more than what
REALLY went on in the White House, than The Washington Post, who was
getting its information secondhand.
Except you're ignoring that McMaster is now on record as admitting that
classified information was revealed and now merely claims it was "wholly
appropriate" to do so.
Give us a legitimate Cite.
No, fuck off. This "Cite" game is bullshit - an attempt to send
your intellectual deficients off on a wild goose chase.
McMaster's confirmatory comments on the matter are public record.
No they are not. Watch/read them again.
You
can fuck off and die with your cuntly demand for a "Cite". Eat shit
and bark at the moon, cunt.
In other words you are lying and wouldn't know how to find the proof,
even if it existed. There is help for you Mentally retards. I take it
you were a asshole baby.
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Zinger
2017-05-17 08:17:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Alan Baker
Post by AlleyCat
On Tue, 16 May 2017 03:04:07 -0700 (PDT), Matt says...
Odd that he didn't say, "No intelligence secrets were revealed."
Didn't HAVE to... The Washington Post took it upon itself to say whether
they were "secrets" or not.
"The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats
to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation."
"At no time, were intelligence sources or methods discussed,
and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not
already PUBLICLY known." H.R. McMaster - National Security Advisor
Pretty sure the National Security Advisor knows a little more than what
REALLY went on in the White House, than The Washington Post, who was
getting its information secondhand.
Except you're ignoring that McMaster is now on record as admitting that
classified information was revealed and now merely claims it was "wholly
appropriate" to do so.
Give us a legitimate Cite.
No, fuck off. This "Cite" game is bullshit - an attempt to send
your intellectual deficients off on a wild goose chase.
McMaster's confirmatory comments on the matter are public record.
No they are not. Watch/read them again.
You
can fuck off and die with your cuntly demand for a "Cite". Eat shit
and bark at the moon, cunt.
In other words you are lying and wouldn't know how to find the proof,
even if it existed. There is help for you Mentally retards. I take it
you were a asshole baby.
I agree, Paxie.... Trudy is just another ass licking inbred Democrat.
--
Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to
the security of a free State, the right of the people
to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed
Rudy Canoza
2017-05-17 08:31:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Alan Baker
Post by AlleyCat
On Tue, 16 May 2017 03:04:07 -0700 (PDT), Matt says...
Odd that he didn't say, "No intelligence secrets were revealed."
Didn't HAVE to... The Washington Post took it upon itself to say whether
they were "secrets" or not.
"The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats
to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation."
"At no time, were intelligence sources or methods discussed,
and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not
already PUBLICLY known." H.R. McMaster - National Security Advisor
Pretty sure the National Security Advisor knows a little more than what
REALLY went on in the White House, than The Washington Post, who was
getting its information secondhand.
Except you're ignoring that McMaster is now on record as admitting that
classified information was revealed and now merely claims it was "wholly
appropriate" to do so.
Give us a legitimate Cite.
No, fuck off. This "Cite" game is bullshit - an attempt to send
your intellectual deficients off on a wild goose chase.
McMaster's confirmatory comments on the matter are public record.
No they are not. Watch/read them again.
You
can fuck off and die with your cuntly demand for a "Cite". Eat shit
and bark at the moon, cunt.
In other words you are lying and wouldn't know how to find the proof,
even if it existed. There is help for you Mentally retards. I take it
you were a asshole baby.
I am a cunt, Paxie....
Agreed.
Rudy Canoza
2017-05-17 08:31:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Alan Baker
Post by AlleyCat
On Tue, 16 May 2017 03:04:07 -0700 (PDT), Matt says...
Odd that he didn't say, "No intelligence secrets were revealed."
Didn't HAVE to... The Washington Post took it upon itself to say whether
they were "secrets" or not.
"The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats
to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation."
"At no time, were intelligence sources or methods discussed,
and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not
already PUBLICLY known." H.R. McMaster - National Security Advisor
Pretty sure the National Security Advisor knows a little more than what
REALLY went on in the White House, than The Washington Post, who was
getting its information secondhand.
Except you're ignoring that McMaster is now on record as admitting that
classified information was revealed and now merely claims it was "wholly
appropriate" to do so.
Give us a legitimate Cite.
No, fuck off. This "Cite" game is bullshit - an attempt to send
your intellectual deficients off on a wild goose chase.
McMaster's confirmatory comments on the matter are public record.
No they are not.
Yes, Poxed Pee-Pee, they are. McMaster *confirmed* that Trump - the
mentally defective child - transmitted classified information to the
adversarial Russians. This is not in rational dispute.
NoBody
2017-05-17 09:43:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Alan Baker
Post by AlleyCat
On Tue, 16 May 2017 03:04:07 -0700 (PDT), Matt says...
Odd that he didn't say, "No intelligence secrets were revealed."
Didn't HAVE to... The Washington Post took it upon itself to say whether
they were "secrets" or not.
"The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats
to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation."
"At no time, were intelligence sources or methods discussed,
and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not
already PUBLICLY known." H.R. McMaster - National Security Advisor
Pretty sure the National Security Advisor knows a little more than what
REALLY went on in the White House, than The Washington Post, who was
getting its information secondhand.
Except you're ignoring that McMaster is now on record as admitting that
classified information was revealed and now merely claims it was "wholly
appropriate" to do so.
Give us a legitimate Cite.
No, fuck off. This "Cite" game is bullshit - an attempt to send
your intellectual deficients off on a wild goose chase.
McMaster's confirmatory comments on the matter are public record.
No they are not. Watch/read them again.
You
can fuck off and die with your cuntly demand for a "Cite". Eat shit
and bark at the moon, cunt.
In other words you are lying and wouldn't know how to find the proof,
even if it existed. There is help for you Mentally retards. I take it
you were a asshole baby.
Don't forget that Rudy lives in his own reality where what he "thinks"
is fact.
Rudy Canoza
2017-05-17 19:16:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Alan Baker
Post by AlleyCat
On Tue, 16 May 2017 03:04:07 -0700 (PDT), Matt says...
Odd that he didn't say, "No intelligence secrets were revealed."
Didn't HAVE to... The Washington Post took it upon itself to say whether
they were "secrets" or not.
"The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats
to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation."
"At no time, were intelligence sources or methods discussed,
and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not
already PUBLICLY known." H.R. McMaster - National Security Advisor
Pretty sure the National Security Advisor knows a little more than what
REALLY went on in the White House, than The Washington Post, who was
getting its information secondhand.
Except you're ignoring that McMaster is now on record as admitting that
classified information was revealed and now merely claims it was "wholly
appropriate" to do so.
Give us a legitimate Cite.
No, fuck off. This "Cite" game is bullshit - an attempt to send
your intellectual deficients off on a wild goose chase.
McMaster's confirmatory comments on the matter are public record.
No they are not.
They are.
Post by PaxPerPoten
You can fuck off and die with your cuntly demand for a "Cite". Eat shit
and bark at the moon, cunt.
In other words
The words are clear. Fuck off and die with your rancid-cunt shriek for
"cite".
kleine klauschen
2017-05-16 21:34:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by AlleyCat
On Tue, 16 May 2017 03:04:07 -0700 (PDT), Matt says...
Odd that he didn't say, "No intelligence secrets were revealed."
Didn't HAVE to... The Washington Post took it upon itself to say whether
they were "secrets" or not.
"The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats
to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation."
"At no time, were intelligence sources or methods discussed,
No one said they were, idiot. However, the revelation of the highly
classified information is sufficient to identify the source.
NoBody
2017-05-17 09:39:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by AlleyCat
On Tue, 16 May 2017 03:04:07 -0700 (PDT), Matt says...
Odd that he didn't say, "No intelligence secrets were revealed."
Didn't HAVE to... The Washington Post took it upon itself to say whether
they were "secrets" or not.
"The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats
to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation."
"At no time, were intelligence sources or methods discussed,
and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not
already PUBLICLY known." H.R. McMaster - National Security Advisor
Pretty sure the National Security Advisor knows a little more than what
REALLY went on in the White House, than The Washington Post, who was
getting its information secondhand.
Correction: they get their information from made up "sources".
RW Maroon
2017-05-17 12:41:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by AlleyCat
On Tue, 16 May 2017 03:04:07 -0700 (PDT), Matt says...
Odd that he didn't say, "No intelligence secrets were revealed."
Didn't HAVE to... The Washington Post took it upon itself to say whether
they were "secrets" or not.
"The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats
to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation."
"At no time, were intelligence sources or methods discussed,
and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not
already PUBLICLY known." H.R. McMaster - National Security Advisor
Pretty sure the National Security Advisor knows a little more than what
REALLY went on in the White House, than The Washington Post, who was
getting its information secondhand.
Trump himself admitted it on Twitter this morning. Did you not see?
--
A Canyon is just a big hole.
Loading...