Writer of "Art of the Deal" isn't surprised by all this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...rump-his-self-sabotage-is-rooted-in-his-past/
Oh come on, Denny. Even you are not that naive, surely? You think Theresa May would come out and say "that's it, we're not sharing any more details!"? That means nothing about what's actually going to happen with intelligence agencies. Even if May truly meant that, it's on the agencies to reveal stuff, and if there are people there who care about their agents in the field, they're going to clam up.
The actual "grist" is proving to be inaccurate or contradicted by other sources. It's not about declaring everything as fake news, but... 1) Comey did not request extra funding as reported, this was contradicted by the acting FBI director in sworn testimony 2) The acting FBI director contradicted the narrative that Trump or anyone else made any effort to impede their investigation 3) Trump fired Comey because of the Russia investigation I can list quite a few more, and already have in this thread (like Israel wanting to deepen the intel sharing relationship with the US), or going back to prior to the election, the declaration that Clinton was going to win handily. Occam's razor really tells us to be extremely wary of the media misrepresenting what's going on, and that the likelihood of today's hair on fire "scandal" is much ado about nothing, or making mountains out of molehills. This is a serious problem for the nation when the media is failing to be accurate and as unbiased as possible. The ethics of journalism for reporting is that bias should not color or determine the outcome of investigation. This is not the same as opinion, editorial, etc. I've repeatedly said I don't like the man but I am happy Clinton lost. Elections have consequences. I have posted several times that my hope is the republican congress contains his more reckless agenda items and that we get two awesome candidates in 2020. I have issues with many of Trump's policies, particularly those based upon religious agendas and the border wall and the treatment of hispanics and muslims (these things are what the media should be talking about 24/7, IMO). His fiscal agenda is perfectly fine by me, and a welcome change from the past 8 years. I'm perfectly fine accepting that he's not a polished politician, he's not hired many polished political aids, that he came into office lacking training in government operations. I can see he talks without talking points and from his stream of consciousness, which we're not used to in government officials. On the other hand, I want a government that doesn't require membership in some royalty class to be fit to serve. My preference is everyone in government would not be career politicians. By the people of the people for the people. When there's actual evidence of crime or high crimes and misdemeanors, I will be all aboard the impeachment bandwagon. Until then, the burden of proof is incredibly high and I'm not going to just go with the obvious rage about the democrats' political failures. When I post links like the ones below, it's because I am fact checking what the media is claiming. I'm finding there's outright lies and omissions and single sentences taken out of context. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/11/us/politics/andrew-mccabe-fbi-chief-russia-trump.html By ADAM GOLDMAN and MATTHEW ROSENBERGMAY 11, 2017 But Mr. McCabe, in only his second full day as acting director, made clear that he had witnessed no covert effort by the White House to influence the inquiry. He said that he had not talked to anyone at the White House about it and that there had been “no effort to impede our investigation.” Mr. Warner sought assurances from Mr. McCabe that if the White House or others tried to intervene, he would sound the alarm. ... Days before he was fired, Mr. Comey had asked the Justice Department for more prosecutors to aid in the investigation, according to four congressional officials, including Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois. Mr. McCabe was not asked on Thursday whether Mr. Comey had specifically sought more prosecutors, but he was asked whether Mr. Comey had requested additional resources more broadly. Mr. McCabe said he was unaware of any such appeal. “We don’t typically request resources for an individual case,” he said. He also said the F.B.I. had secured and preserved Mr. Comey’s files after he was fired. Here Trump states that firing Comey would lengthen the investigations, but that firing him was the right thing to do. Not that he fired Comey because of the investigations. http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...ey-whether-he-was-under-investigation-n757821 Holt asked Trump if he was "angry with Mr. Comey because of his Russia investigation." "I just want somebody that's competent," Trump responded. "I am a big fan of the FBI, I love the FBI." Trump said he never tried to pressure Comey into dropping the FBI probe of the Trump campaign and insisted, "I want to find out if there was a problem in the election having to do with Russia." "As far as I'm concerned, I want that thing to be absolutely done properly," Trump said. "Maybe I'll expand that, you know, lengthen the time (of the Russia probe) because it should be over with, in my opinion, should have been over with a long time ago. 'Cause all it is, is an excuse but I said to myself, I might even lengthen out the investigation, but I have to do the right thing for the American people." Trump added of the investigation, "I want that to be so strong and so good. And I want it to happen." Asked by Holt if by firing Comey he was trying to send a "lay off" message to his successor, Trump said, "I'm not." "If Russia did anything, I want to know that," he said.
Well Putin agrees the conversation was "wholly appropriate" and has offered up the transcript of the meeting from the Russian spies, I mean journalists, who were there. We can easily cross reference the truth about the meeting with the transcript from the US journalists who was there and... oh wait...
It could be worse. The spy (or set up guy as spy) may be a head slash vid direct from the barbarians. That would really fuck up Trump.
Both the US and Russia had official photographers present, not media. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/10/...-meeting-american-reporters-blocked.html?_r=0 But the Russians ... brought their own press contingent in the form of an official photographer. ... official White House photographers have broad access to the president,
Oh my! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-to-tell-Russia-Britains-nuclear-secrets.html WikiLeaks cables: US agrees to tell Russia Britain's nuclear secrets Information about every Trident missile the US supplies to Britain will be given to Russia as part of an arms control deal signed by President Barack Obama next week. Defence analysts claim the agreement risks undermining Britain’s policy of refusing to confirm the exact size of its nuclear arsenal. The fact that the Americans used British nuclear secrets as a bargaining chip also sheds new light on the so-called “special relationship”, which is shown often to be a one-sided affair by US diplomatic communications obtained by the WikiLeaks website.
Compromising an ally's bomb count isn't a great look, but compromising the safety of a human intelligence asset who is in the field is another thing entirely.
@Denny Crane do you think I was an Obama supporter? I certainly had issues with the previous president and now I have even deeper concerns about the current one.
Ummmm, why do I always have to be the one to ask the obvious? Is spy dead? Is spy still there? If the answer to the first is no, and the second yes Trump isn't at fault if he dies.
We'll never know unless whomever he is spying on makes a public show of his capture/torture/execution.
If he is still alive, not captured and they can remove him it isn't on trump if they keep him there past the first opportunity to get him out. Unless as I said, Trump makes him stay.
The title is "loose lips may get spy killed" Should have been "loose lips COULD have gotten spy killed" at the very most.
No, I don't think you were an Obama supporter. My point in bringing these things up are that nobody freaked (call for immediate impeachment!) when he did the same things. It also speaks to precedent. And the media is making mountains out of molehills OR it covered up Obama's malfeasances.
