Trump revealed classified information to Russian foreign minister and ambassador

[Beet]

I do love how neo-con bush republicans are now heroes on this board are worthy of being retweeted on here.

sure they are.

frum, podhoretz, kristol and co never drank the trump kool-aid.

partisanship is the worst drug of them all.

They did much worse. They crafted policy that made the middle east far worse and are responsible for the second most unpopular war in our nation's history.

The ironic thing is, when people like me opposed the Iraq war, we were accused of being unpatriotic. Now that we oppose giving state secrets to the foreign ministers of rival powers, we are accused of being in bed with neocons.

[Beet]

I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if the WH deliberately fed false stories to the press, only to retract it later, as a means to damaging the latter's credibility. Remember when Trump said he was going offer to amnesty before his SOTU address? Remember, he is the ultimate troll and very dishonest.

[Beet]

He literally gave a two minute press conference, reading off of a note card, and took no questions. I do not believe one word that came out of McMaster's mouth.

Why blindly trust wapo, a left-leaning newspaper, but automatically refuse to respect the word of perhaps the most respected person in the trump admin?

HR mcmaster's hire was lauded by almost everybody.

I trust them not to make something up just because they hate Trump. Someone within the WH told them, and it wasn't one person. The motive behind the story, and its veracity, are the question.

[Beet]

He literally gave a two minute press conference, reading off of a note card, and took no questions. I do not believe one word that came out of McMaster's mouth.

Why blindly trust wapo, a left-leaning newspaper, but automatically refuse to respect the word of perhaps the most respected person in the trump admin?

HR mcmaster's hire was lauded by almost everybody.

All media outlets that report on stories you people don't like are left leaning and biased in your view.

deflection! I'm not saying you shouldn't think it is credible, but wapo has been wrong in the past. The "comey asked for more money before firing" was a lie, as was the story that vermont't utility system was hacked by russia.

You think a respected and honorable military guy like mcmaster is going to destroy his image like that?

It's not just the Washington post which has reported on and confirmed this story. Get your head out of your ass.

Yes, I do believe that people associated with this garbage administration including McMaster are willing to jeopardize their public image in a vein attempt to stay in Trump's ear.

Why should we automatically value the "statements" of leakers in the intel community, both current and retired, who likely hate the fact that trump is in office? Don't you think it is at least partly the case that trump's "anti-establishment" and total political outsider status irks these people to their core ,and they will go to the papers and fling anything to the wall to hope it sticks. What do you have to lose? You can't be punished for leaking fake stuff.

Sure you can... the people you're leaking to will stop trusting you, so if you have something real to leak, it may not be believed. There's no motive for leaking fake stuff.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We don't know if the intel community is going all out against Trump. We just don't know. ShadowBrokers has gigabytes of their data, and may be blackmailing them to keep Trump in office.

[Beet]

Is it unacceptable to acknowledge that the U.S. has distinct interests from Russia now? Is there no such thing as nonpartisan concern for U.S. national security any more?

[Beet]

Look, this shouldn't be about calling people names. This isn't about foreign policy. The allegation was that a piece of foreign policy information was shared without he permission of the allied source, that came from an ally that threatened to pull cooperation if it was shared without their permission. This is detrimental to US interests because it means the potential loss of a future source of information. It's the value of the Russians having this information versus the US having this source in the future.

[Beet]

I mean, the leftists here do like to throw out insults and act intemperately, but then so do some rightists (like ghostmonkey and Bannon's Brigade). As I've said many times, I'd like to see more engagement and debate, rather than opinion stating, snark, and empty quoting.

On the board where I mod, I tried for a few weeks to raise the level of debate, but the forum just wasn't having it.

[Beet]

Why is it that every single new thing that comes up about Trump and/or his administration is immediately dismissed by his supporters?  Is it just them trying to save face, or are they legitimately deranged?

If Hillary had won, and then all of these revelations started coming out of possible Russian collusion and her giving classified info (reportedly more info than even our allies have on the matter), then she would lose my support.  At some point, something has got to give with these people.

if you truly think this board would be as outraged over russia colluding to help hillary win and all other russia stuff being connected to her, then you are crazy.

Uh yes, liberals would never criticize Clinton. Have you heard of a poster called jfern? Also, here is my initial reaction to the OIG report:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=237431.msg5084488#msg5084488

[Beet]

I had to leave for a while after page 11; anything happen since then?

just disgusting personal attacks