More Republicans criticizing Trump since the Comey memos.
Quote:
Republican Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, a deputy whip who has frequently defended Trump in the past, now says he “won’t defend anyone who obstructs justice,” according to CNBC’s John Harwood.
GOP Rep Tom Cole (OK) to me: "While I'm no Comey fan, I won't defend anyone who obstructs justice. time for Comey to appear before Congress"
5:46 AM - 17 May 2017
Cole, often considered a bellwether for Republican House members, went to bat for Trump just weeks ago — after Republicans’ first push to overhaul health care laws collapsed. “This is not a failure of leadership; it’s a failure of follow-ship,” he said at the time.
But the Oklahoman expressed alarm at Trump’s praise for President Andrew Jackson earlier this month. And after Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, the congressman wrote that the agency needed to be led by “a person of unquestioned character and completely divorced from partisan politics.”
AltaGuy has a magnetic personality and exudes positive energy, which is infectious to those around him. He has an unparalleled ability to communicate with people, whether he is speaking to a room of three or an arena of 30,000.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: At le pub...
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by calculoso
Other than "both are wrong", who's drawing an equivalence between the two actions?
If Wapo contacted Israel prior to divulging the information and made a considered choice as to whether publishing would have more benefit than harm (we just do not know this information), did they do anything wrong at all?
I can't see how Republicans are going to get anything done, by the midterms, with this going on
It'll be mired in impeachment and investigation talks till the midterm. GOP will hopefully abandon the administration when it becomes clear they won't be getting their reverse robin hood tax plan and super health care cuts any time soon.
If you're going to play the card that Trump was okay to share the information
I don't see anyone playing that card
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
then the media was more than free to share all details revealed in that meeting. The media has responsibility to maintain the integrity of sources and data received from those sources.
The media picks and chooses what it shares. This is true in sports and is true in politics. They have no responsibility or expectation to share verbatim what is received.
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
You see, a President does have the legal right to classify and declassify information, but he does not have the right to declassify then reclassify it, especially when it is to cover up his own incompetence. That's what the EO 11652 said and started us down this rabbit hole, and what EO 13526 states and still is the rule for such action.
Thanks for the lesson that pertains to absolutely nothing about what I had said.
And while the Russian intelligence services may be very good, I'm not sure just having the city means that they would somehow figure out it was an Israeli agent, as opposed to American signal intelligence or drones or prisoners, etc.
You not being sure probably shouldn't be the deciding factor. Many from the IC I've read and listened to recently say even the fact that Trump didn't know the means and sources was itself a massive failure; the President should be briefed on things so that they're aware of the context and implications. So that the President doesn't dissuade intelligence partners from sharing information (which will likely happen now) by sharing information that isn't theirs to share.
Many in the IC I've read and listened to have said that knowing the city could very well be sufficient for a highly developed intelligence state like Russia to figure out the source/means. That's why the info was classified the way it was.
But as has been said, knowing the context or the risks doesn't apply to Trump, he wanted to make himself feel important for a few seconds.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
If Wapo contacted Israel prior to divulging the information and made a considered choice as to whether publishing would have more benefit than harm (we just do not know this information), did they do anything wrong at all?
Says:
"The Post is withholding most plot details, including the name of the city, at the urging of officials who warned that revealing them would jeopardize important intelligence capabilities."
and does not mention Israel anywhere in the story.
I haven't read any updated or follow-on stories from WaPo, so I do not know if they've subsequently shared more information. Regardless, I feel they were right in restricting the info in the beginning and would have hoped that more Media would have done the same.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to calculoso For This Useful Post:
I haven't read any updated or follow-on stories from WaPo, so I do not know if they've subsequently shared more information. Regardless, I feel they were right in restricting the info in the beginning and would have hoped that more Media would have done the same.
Pretty sure, CNN said they had this info in March, and did not publish any details on the request of the IC, even though they could have. Donny beat the lying fake news to the punch.
__________________
Pass the bacon.
The Following User Says Thank You to DuffMan For This Useful Post:
Leaking this information, regardless of which moth it came from had the potential to put a life/lives in danger. If Trump is wrong to put that life in danger, so are the press.
Your being obtuse if you're equating declassified information with publicly available information. The press involved chose to make it publicly available in an effort to outscoop each other
Seems you might be the obtuse one. Trump made this "declassification" off the cuff and in front of the press of one of America's greatest enemies. If the President is willing to share that information with the press of a foreign nation, what responsibility does the domestic press have to anything?
Declassified information is freely available information and the government is compelled to produce if asked for it. Declassified information is public information. This is why the declassification of information is normally run through a process by people who understand the information and context of that information. Unless the information is at the end of its life, and is about to automatically be declassified, the information is reviewed and changes in classification and handling labels are applied accordingly. Depending on the sensitivity of information scheduled for automatic declassification, a review may take place to apply an extension to that information with a new label. But once declassified, the proverbial cat is out of the bag. Trump should be educated on this stuff so he doesn't step on his dick in the future and make information that should remain classified, classified.
There are multiple reports of Israeli intelligence and leaders being "stunned" at Trump's disclosure to the Russians. I have seen no reports of Israeli leaders or anyone at all in Israel sharing concern over Wapo's naming of the country in question or giving details. If you could point me that way, great.
This defense doesn't hold muster either as Israel seems unconcerned with Trump's leak as well, at least to the press.
You're assuming something with no basis for one side and the opposite for another with no basis
The impeachment motion doesn't mean a vote will happen today. All this does is force Paul Ryan into the difficult position of publicly denying the vote on record. This will hopefully anger any Congressional Republicans that still have a spine and eventually put pressure on him.
Unknown how long this will take, but given Congress and the Senate have neither allowed a special commission or prosecutor into Trump, it'll take a lot more embarrassment and loss of support before Ryan caves.
Declassified information is freely available information and the government is compelled to produce if asked for it. Declassified information is public information.
You seem to lack the understanding of the distinction between public information that people or groups have to hunt for and public information that is widely publicized.
Support among his base is starting to show signs of weakening? Either way, if his approval stays that low that's always been a prelude to a party losing a large number of seats in the midterms.
Perhaps more worrying for the president — and for Republican members of Congress ahead of the 2018 midterm elections — is a declining strength in support among the voters who elected him. While 84 percent of Trump voters still say they approve of the president’s work, the share of those voters who strongly approve of him is down to 42 percent, another new low. In the previous poll, 49 percent of Trump voters strongly approved of him.
Vladimir Putin has said he is willing to provide a transcript of Donald Trump's meeting with senior Russian officials, insisting the US President did not share classified intelligence.
This defense doesn't hold muster either as Israel seems unconcerned with Trump's leak as well, at least to the press.
You're assuming something with no basis for one side and the opposite for another with no basis
Forgive me if I've misinterpreted you, but according to this article, former Israel spies are might pissed at trump. I think they might have some insight into how the Israeli administration is thinking.
Haha - I, for one, trust the forthcoming Russian transcript's version of events unequivocally. No way there's some dude writing it up in the Kremlin right now is there?
I trust it more than the White House version, aint it a time we live in?
