ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 7 of 7
« First < 34567
Washington DC and The Holy Land>Trump's loose lips - CIA was forced to exfiltrate a top russian asset in 2017
RodeoPants2 03:24 PM 09-09-2019
Having spies placed in Russia doesn't seem important at all

Originally Posted by :
The decision to carry out the extraction occurred soon after a May 2017 meeting in the Oval Office in which Trump discussed highly classified intelligence with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and then-Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak. The intelligence, concerning ISIS in Syria, had been provided by Israel.

The disclosure to the Russians by the President, though not about the Russian spy specifically, prompted intelligence officials to renew earlier discussions about the potential risk of exposure, according to the source directly involved in the matter.
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/09/p...ted/index.html
[Reply]
EmojiMania 01:29 AM 09-11-2019
Hmm, interesting. So you're telling me that the same people who cried for years about the UTTER SCANDAL of BENGHAZIIIIIIIIIII are now convinced that any reports of government scandal are false, simply because the government says "fake news"?

Gee, I wonder what precipitated this total reversal in their skepticism of official statements! It couldn't possibly be the case that they were dumbass partisan hacks from the start, could it?!?

:-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
[Reply]
GloryDayz 06:26 AM 09-11-2019
Originally Posted by EmojiMania:
Hmm, interesting. So you're telling me that the same people who cried for years about the UTTER SCANDAL of BENGHAZIIIIIIIIIII are now convinced that any reports of government scandal are false, simply because the government says "fake news"?

Gee, I wonder what precipitated this total reversal in their skepticism of official statements! It couldn't possibly be the case that they were dumbass partisan hacks from the start, could it?!?

:-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)

[Reply]
stevieray 06:39 AM 09-11-2019
Originally Posted by EmojiMania:
BENGHAZI

:-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
stop pimping people's tragedies, troll.
[Reply]
RodeoPants2 06:50 AM 09-11-2019
Originally Posted by stevieray:
stop pimping people's tragedies, troll.
^^ worthless poster
[Reply]
Lex Luthor 07:00 AM 09-11-2019
So Trump tells everyone for years that the CIA is full of shit. He takes the word of Putin over the reports provided by his own Intelligence experts, and he calls virtually every news outlet "fake news". He brags to the Russians about getting rid of James Comey, says it will take the heat off, and has private conversations with Putin that span multiple hours.

And the Trumptards continue to insist that there's nothing to see here.


Originally Posted by :
The CIA itself issued a statement denying the exfiltration had to do with the president or his handling of classified intel, correct?

They did. I think it's worth reading that statement very carefully. The first sentence does not describe the story we wrote. It says something along the lines of, "We would never make a decision without sound analysis." But our story doesn't say that they made a decision without sound analysis. In fact, we describe in great detail how the IC grew concerned by a number of data points over the course of months.

Do you feel generally, though, that there is some pushback against the president in the intelligence community? That there are concerns about his handling of classified intelligence, but also his leadership?

Well, let's start with this. For this story, I spoke to five sources who worked for the Trump Administration, people who work for the intelligence agencies, and people who worked on Capitol Hill handling classified intelligence. They said, very clearly and without hesitation, that the intelligence agencies have deep concerns about the president's handling of intelligence, and that those concerns are not based on one single incident. One thing that got a little lost is that our story recounts another instance, two months after the May 2017 Oval Office meeting. This, of course, was the July 2017 Hamburg G-20 meeting between Putin and Trump, where Trump confiscated the translator's notes afterwards.

We reported that after that meeting, the intelligence agencies were concerned that the president had once again improperly discussed classified information. And those concerns did not end in July 2017. I've heard from people who still serve that they believe the president is undisciplined with the way he handles intelligence, and that that creates dangers.

What is the normal procedure for that kind of bilateral meeting?

You often have many people present. At a minimum, you have a US translator there along with the president, so that you have a second set of ears to confirm what took place. You might have your Secretary of State, you might have the ambassador to the country involved, national security advisor—so that you don't, in effect, grant the other country license to characterize the meeting to their advantage. That's not to say no president has ever met privately with the leader of another country, even a hostile country. But what is clear is that this president took unusual steps in meetings with the Russian president.

And of course it takes place in the context of his regular public denials that Russia interfered in the election in the first place.

Exactly. You have the private steps and then you have the very public attacks on not just the agencies and intelligence officials, but also their findings. He stood next to Putin in Helsinki and took Putin's word over the IC's. He raised public questions about the intel community's assessment that Iran was complying with the nuclear deal. He created his own narrative that contradicted the intelligence. And on North Korea, [when] it continued to expand its nuclear program—that's the intel community's assessment. And the president dismisses that in public.

Has this effected the intel community's ability to recruit new assets?

I'll tell you, the CIA has bad memories of what happened just a few years ago—and this has been in public reporting—when they lost a whole host of sources inside China. Somehow those sources were compromised, and China found them, and killed some or many of them, maybe all of them. That lost a lot of vision inside China at a time when the US needed it.

This Russian asset was so high up. It literally took more than a decade to develop this person. You can't replace that overnight. I spoke to a former senior US intelligence official who made that point. It's a glaring loss.
https://www.esquire.com/news-politic...-donald-trump/


[Reply]
Page 7 of 7
« First < 34567
Up