The Trump Presidency

Status
Not open for further replies.
ThunderHorse said:
Well I never considered MSN to be conservative.
Click to expand...
The original article is from The Hill. Then Fox & Friends got their hands on it and did their usual bullshit song and dance, and because he's a fickle child who cares about this kind of stuff, the President tweeted about it immediately after F&F.
 
Salt USMC said:
This report is being misrepresented by conservative media. Comey, in total, wrote seven memos about his conversations with the President. Of those, four contained classified information. The last three were unclassified, and it was only one of those that Comey shared with Daniel Richman, who then shared it with the New York Times. But conservative media doesn't give a shit about that. They're blaring out "CLASSIFIED MEMOS!!! LEAKING!!" to the high heavens, which just isn't supported by the facts. This is fake news.

You can read all about it here: Analysis | Trump accuses James Comey of breaking the law — based on a misleading Fox News report
Click to expand...

How many of those seven did the government not own?
 
Salt USMC said:
This report is being misrepresented by conservative media. Comey, in total, wrote seven memos about his conversations with the President. Of those, four contained classified information. The last three were unclassified, and it was only one of those that Comey shared with Daniel Richman, who then shared it with the New York Times. But conservative media doesn't give a shit about that. They're blaring out "CLASSIFIED MEMOS!!! LEAKING!!" to the high heavens, which just isn't supported by the facts. This is fake news.

You can read all about it here: Analysis | Trump accuses James Comey of breaking the law — based on a misleading Fox News report
Click to expand...

I skimmed the article, thanks for posting it.

or, at least, it’s not true that each memo was marked as being classified.
Click to expand...

As you know from your professional background, and as the world knows from the Clinton email fiasco, just because it's not marked appropriately doesn't mean it didn't contain classified material.

I've got to assume that if you're the Director of the FBI and you're going to compromise your relationship with the President (if not compromise classified material), you're probably not handing it over with a giant TOP SECRET on the top and bottom margin. I haven't read the memo yet and I haven't checked the classification guide to make a determination for myself whether I think classified material was compromised, but my gut is that private conversation with the President about national security issues are probably, by definition, classified.
 
Marauder06 said:
... and as the world knows from the Clinton email fiasco, just because it's not marked appropriately doesn't mean it didn't contain classified material.
Click to expand...

Especially when the IC does a post-facto review of material (as happened with HRC). You give the SSOs of the world a document saying almost anything - and they are going to come up with some shit that should be marked classified. I've dealt with folks from the NSA that think the word SIGINT and the name of any country together equals classified.

The President also has significant leeway in both classifying and declassifying material. I would imagine when the President commits obstruction of justice he would like that classified. He's already indicated he looks at leaks that embarrass his administration as the threat - not so much if classified information is involved (he never said the word 'Israel' to the Russians after all).
 
Devildoc said:
It depends on whether the woman is considered "an agent of a foreign principal" and if the material is seen in the same context as contributions/donation. In any case, no, it doesn't look good.
Click to expand...

Well, it states in the chain that she is arriving with the info as part of Russia and it's governments support of Mr Trump. Goldstone refers to her as the Russian Government attorney. Goldstone makes it quite clear why she's visiting and who she's visiting on behalf of.

I think Kushner could be following Flynn out the door.
 
Poccington said:
Well, it states in the chain that she is arriving with the info as part of Russia and it's governments support of Mr Trump. Goldstone refers to her as the Russian Government attorney. Goldstone makes it quite clear why she's visiting and who she's visiting on behalf of.

I think Kushner could be following Flynn out the door.
Click to expand...

I am not saying his goose isn't cooked, but she redacted her credentials and why she was meeting.

Russian lawyer who met with Trump Jr.: I didn't have Clinton info they wanted

At worst he is guilty of violating FARA laws; at best, gross stupidity.
 
What if all this hoopla about the Russian interference was exactly what those damn ruskies wanted. Maybe they didn't want to help Trump win, maybe the reason was they wanted to destabilize the US government, the way was to help him win in the short term and help get a US president in trouble is the long con.

I simply can't imagine any other president being such a fucking doofus about all of this.

Edited for clarity.
 
Last edited:
TLDR20 said:
What if all this hoopla about the Russian interference was exactly what those damn ruskies wanted. Maybe they didn't want to help Trump win, maybe they wanted to destabilize the US government was to help him win in the short term and help get a US president in trouble is the long con.

I simply can't imagine any other president being such a fucking doofus about all of this.
Click to expand...

Putin has always had an eye on the long game. It was no random confluence of events that led to him becoming the leader of Russia.
 
CDG said:
Putin has always had an eye on the long game. It was no random confluence of events that led to him becoming the leader of Russia.
Click to expand...

You can argue that about any political party or leader or boy band these days though.
 
SpitfireV said:
You can argue that about any political party or leader or boy band these days though.
Click to expand...

Maybe I've read too many Tom Clancy books, but Putin and his KGB background cause me to see him as exceptionally dangerous. As @CDG said, I give Putin credit for having the patience to have his eye on the "long game".
 
SpitfireV said:
You can argue that about any political party or leader or boy band these days though.
Click to expand...

I see your point, but I disagree. Other politicians/political parties don't have much foresight beyond trying to place a certain person in the seat of power because "it's their turn". The Democrats and Republicans don't give a shit about America, as long as they personally benefit from their time in office. Putin, on the other hand, actually does something with his power. Doubtlessly, he's not in it for selfless reasons, but he has a genuine interest in turning Russia back into a premier superpower. I don't have much faith that any of our current politicians would care what America's overall status is in the world, as long as they personally are taken care of.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Marauder06
It's OK That You Didn't Go To War
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
Devildoc
Devildoc
AWP
HAPPY MONDAY FROM THE BOOK SUPPOSITORY BUILDING!!!!
Replies
13
Views
788
Muppet
Muppet
CQB
Kyiv supplied Intel to Tuareg rebels.
Replies
4
Views
678
CQB
CQB
Devildoc
Imminent national security threat?
2 3
Replies
44
Views
2K
Marauder06
Marauder06
AWP
Your Weekend Safety Brief
Replies
7
Views
1K
Mad boomer
Mad boomer
Back
Top