Trump is just Russia's useful idiot

Recent Forum Topics Forums The Public House Trump is just Russia's useful idiot

This topic contains 18 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by zn zn 4 days, 19 hours ago.

Viewing 19 posts - 1 through 19 (of 19 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #68864
    nittany ram
    nittany ram
    Moderator
    #68866
    TSRF
    TSRF
    Participant

    I donno…

    President Trump revealed highly classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in a White House meeting last week, according to current and former U.S. officials, who said Trump’s disclosures jeopardized a critical source of intelligence on the Islamic State.

    How would “former US officials” know what was said there, unless they were Russian?

    Hard for me to believe even Trump could do this, but his is such a narcissistic braggard that I can’t put anything part him.

    #68867
    wv
    wv
    Participant

    ==================
    As president, Trump has broad authority to declassify government secrets, making it unlikely that his disclosures broke the law.

    White House officials involved in the meeting said Trump discussed only shared concerns about terrorism.
    ===================

    Well, i assumed a President can say whatever he wants to an ambassador of another nation. (I’m not saying it was good judgment (or bad), I’m just saying its not illegal. Is it? )

    Trump has just totally pissed off the spy-part of the deep-state. There’s a part of me that smiles about it. I wish it was Bernie doing it. But its Trump. Which means its like Saluman pissing off Sauron. Thats how i see it. I know others see it totally differently. But i have ZERO respect for the fucking CIA/NSA/deep-state of America. Zero. I consider them as big an enemy of freedom as Isis.

    w
    v

    #68868
    Zooey
    Zooey
    Participant

    It’s not illegal if the president does it.

    This time it happens to be true. He didn’t do anything illegal. It was just totally brainless, and is going to make the deep-state even more cautious about what they tell him, I would think.

    As for Putin, I think he just wants to undermine confidence in America both domestically and internationally.

    #68869
    zn
    zn
    Moderator

    I donno…

    President Trump revealed highly classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in a White House meeting last week, according to current and former U.S. officials, who said Trump’s disclosures jeopardized a critical source of intelligence on the Islamic State.

    How would “former US officials” know what was said there, unless they were Russian?

    Hard for me to believe even Trump could do this, but his is such a narcissistic braggard that I can’t put anything part him.

    The former officials did not reveal the disclosure, they discussed how sensitive it was. That would be after being contacted by the Post, presumably.

    Even the Post is not going to make a mistake THAT obvious.

    And other American officials would be present in such a discussion. Trump doesn’t meet them alone.

    CURRENT officials revealed Trump’s leak: After Trump’s meeting, senior White House officials took steps to contain the damage, placing calls to the CIA and the National Security Agency.

    So it was known about, initially, on the inside.

    Officials not at the meeting could learn about it by the damage control effort described in my quotation.
    .

    #68870
    zn
    zn
    Moderator

    . There’s a part of me that smiles about it. I wish it was Bernie doing it. But its Trump. Which means its like Saluman pissing off Sauron.

    I’m afraid it’s not that simple.

    First, in the run-up to the Iraq war, on this very board, or its earlier incarnation, we came up with a ton of info questioning the president’s interpretation of things. Many of those sources were active or former members of the intel community, who were appalled at what was happening.

    2nd, when challenged about sources, I kept reiterating—the mainstream media as an entire whole, from top to bottom, is not complicit. If you know how to you can sift through it and spot useful info.

    This is why I never get into slogan-ized simple sides taking. Being on the left has taught me not to be categorical that way.

    For example, american resistance to ISIS is unquestionably a GOOD thing and we are better with it than without it, as are millions of others who live in the region.

    At the same time yes, you have to sort through and point to the actually damaging policy ideas and actions. But that’s not this unified entity acting, it’s a huge self-divided thing.

    An oligarchy is just not going to be as sealed and uniform and airtight as a straight-up dictatorship.

    It doesn’t lend itself to simple slogan ideas. IMO one has to be more nimble than that.

    .

    #68877
    wv
    wv
    Participant

    . There’s a part of me that smiles about it. I wish it was Bernie doing it. But its Trump. Which means its like Saluman pissing off Sauron.

    I’m afraid it’s not that simple.

    First, in the run-up to the Iraq war, on this very board, or its earlier incarnation, we came up with a ton of info questioning the president’s interpretation of things. Many of those sources were active or former members of the intel community, who were appalled at what was happening.

    2nd, when challenged about sources, I kept reiterating—the mainstream media as an entire whole, from top to bottom, is not complicit. If you know how to you can sift through it and spot useful info.

    This is why I never get into slogan-ized simple sides taking. Being on the left has taught me not to be categorical that way.

    For example, american resistance to ISIS is unquestionably a GOOD thing and we are better with it than without it, as are millions of others who live in the region.

    At the same time yes, you have to sort through and point to the actually damaging policy ideas and actions. But that’s not this unified entity acting, it’s a huge self-divided thing.

    An oligarchy is just not going to be as sealed and uniform and airtight as a straight-up dictatorship.

    It doesn’t lend itself to simple slogan ideas. IMO one has to be more nimble than that.

    .

    ===============

    Yeah, fighting Isis is a good thing. But on the whole, I think the biggest threat to all humanity and the biosphere is not Isis. I think its the deep-state. The corporotacracy. And the CIA/NSA is the dagger of the corporotacracy.

    I dont think it has anything to do with ‘nimbleness’ or lack of nimbleness. Overall i think the CIA/NSA is about as evil as it gets. The subsystem. Not the people. Not the individuals. I’m sure ‘they’ all think they are patriots of the highest order, and all that.

    I know we disagree on this. I’ve only come to this particular view in the last year or so. I have no ‘heat’ here. Not trying to convince anyone of anything. Just sharing.

    w
    v

    #68879
    zn
    zn
    Moderator

    Overall i think the CIA/NSA is about as evil as it gets. The subsystem. Not the people. Not the individuals. I’m sure ‘they’ all think they are patriots of the highest order, and all that.

    I don’t find either thing to be THAT uniform or homogenous.

    And I don’t think “deep state” (which only means regular longterm employees, really) and corporate interests are uniformly aligned either.

    I think those things cause of where evidence trails take me. It’s an old habit.

    Of course putting it like that makes me sound as categorically “I’m just right” as any sloganista.

    So let me just say, lots to sort out.

    ….

    #68916
    zn
    zn
    Moderator

    Trump’s disclosure endangered spy placed inside ISIS by Israel, officials say

    http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/trumps-disclosure-endangered-spy-inside-isis-israel-officials/story?id=47449304&cid=share_facebook_widget

    The life of a spy placed by Israel inside ISIS is at risk tonight, according to current and former U.S. officials, after President Donald Trump reportedly disclosed classified information in a meeting with Russian officials last week.

    The spy provided intelligence involving an active ISIS plot to bring down a passenger jet en route to the United States, with a bomb hidden in a laptop that U.S. officials believe can get through airport screening machines undetected. The information was reliable enough that the U.S. is considering a ban on laptops on all flights from Europe to the United States.

    The sensitive intelligence was shared with the United States, officials say, on the condition that the source remain confidential.

    “The real risk is not just this source,” said Matt Olsen, the former Director of the National Counterterrorism Center and an ABC News contributor, “but future sources of information about plots against us.”

    ISIS has already taken credit for blowing up a Russian airliner two years ago, killing more than 200 people, claiming the bomb was hidden in a soft drink can. The White House National Security Adviser says that justifies President Trump’s disclosures to the Russians.

    “And so this was the context of the conversation in which it was wholly appropriate to share what the threat was as a basis for common action and coordination,” said General H.R. McMasters on Tuesday.

    When pressed by ABC News’ Jonathan Karl, McMaster would not say if Trump disclosed classified information. Trump said in a pair of tweets Tuesday he had the “absolute right” to share “facts” with the Russians.

    But many in the counter-terrorism community say what the President did was a mistake.

    “Russia is not part of the ISIS coalition,” Olsen said. “They are not our partner.”

    Dan Shapiro, the former U.S. ambassador to Israel, now a senior visiting fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, agreed. In an interview with ABC News, he called the president and his team “careless,” saying that the reported disclosures demonstrate a “poor understanding of how to guard sensitive information.”

    Shapiro was most concerned, however, that the president’s move could make Israel think twice about sharing intelligence with the United States, warning that it will “inevitably cause elements of Israel’s intelligence service to demonstrate more caution.”

    The reaction in Congress appeared to diverge along partisan lines. Asked if he had concerns about the president’s handling of classified information, the Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell let out a small laugh and before replying simply, “No.”

    But Democrats disagree. Shortly after McConnell’s comments, Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer reiterated his call for the White House to release full, unedited transcripts of Trump’s meeting with the Russian officials.

    “This is not normal behavior. This is not how a White House should operate,” Schumer said. “Firing an FBI director who is investigating the president’s campaign, disclosing classified information to a country that wishes us harm and just finished undermining the integrity of our elections. We need our Republican colleagues to join us in standing up, to put country over party.”

    #68917
    Zooey
    Zooey
    Participant

    I see this whole episode as just being a very bad deal. Our allies’ confidence is shaken, and you would think that they will screen some of their intelligence. The USA is no less reliable. You have to think that our domestic intelligence agencies feel the same way, and may withhold information from Trump.

    In any event, Putin is getting what he wanted: a shaking of faith in democracy as a form of government, and a shaking of faith in the USA as a world leader.

    #68920
    zn
    zn
    Moderator

    Trump’s Russia Leak Is ‘Far Worse’ Than Reported
    The conservative pundit says he knows who leaked the news about the president giving confidential intel to Russia.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/erick-erickson-trump-russia-source-true_us_591b1785e4b07d5f6ba65db5

    Conservative pundit Erick Erickson is vouching for the reliability of a least one source who revealed to Washington Post reporters that President Donald Trump disclosed “highly classified information” while meeting with Russian officials last week.

    Erickson knows one of the sources and supports their decision to go to the media, he wrote Tuesday in a blog post for his website, The Resurgent.

    “This is a real problem and I treat this story very seriously because I know just how credible, competent, and serious — as well as seriously pro-Trump, at least one of the sources is,” Erickson wrote.

    “You can call these sources disloyal, traitors, or whatever you want,” he added. “But please ask yourself a question — if the President, through inexperience and ignorance, is jeopardizing our national security and will not take advice or corrective action, what other means are available to get the President to listen and recognize the error of his ways?”

    Writes Erickson:

    The President does not seem to realize or appreciate that his bragging can undermine relationships with our allies and with human intelligence sources.

    Erickson states that people close to the president find him too insecure to take constructive criticism as anything other than a personal attack. So sources have gone to the media in the hopes that “the intense blowback” may force Trump to recognize his errors.

    And in this instance, where Trump’s careless boasting has put at risk both U.S. national security and an ally’s intelligence asset, there’s simply too much at stake not to speak out.

    “I am told that what the President did is actually far worse than what is being reported,” Erickson said. “The President does not seem to realize or appreciate that his bragging can undermine relationships with our allies and with human intelligence sources. He also does not seem to appreciate that his loose lips can get valuable assets in the field killed.”

    #68922
    wv
    wv
    Participant

    I see this whole episode as just being a very bad deal. Our allies’ confidence is shaken, and you would think that they will screen some of their intelligence. The USA is no less reliable. You have to think that our domestic intelligence agencies feel the same way, and may withhold information from Trump.

    In any event, Putin is getting what he wanted: a shaking of faith in democracy as a form of government, and a shaking of faith in the USA as a world leader.

    ================

    Well is that what Putin really wants? A ‘shaking of faith in democracy‘ ?

    I’m not sure what he wants.

    My own wild-guess though, is, he sees the USA as an imperialist-global power that continually spreads, and he wants to curb that a bit…so that Russia can either breathe or spread out more, as well. I dunno though.

    w
    v

    • This reply was modified 5 days, 4 hours ago by wv wv.
    #68933
    Zooey
    Zooey
    Participant

    I don’t have access to Putin’s head, but I have read that “Democracy is weak and ineffectual and vulnerable and undesirable” is a pretty constant theme on Russian television. Which I do not watch myself.

    But just as we had decades of “communism is evil” as a major theme in our media, it isn’t surprising that Putin would be dishing out something like this.

    And of course the real goal is to undermine rival powers, and enhance his own. That’s the way this works.

    #68935
    zn
    zn
    Moderator

    And of course the real goal is to undermine rival powers, and enhance his own. That’s the way this works.

    I think in addition to that, he wants to establish connections with right-wing oligarchs to smooth business all the way around.

    So convert enemies to friends.

    Meanwhile part of Putin’s paranoia stems from the fact that there are real tensions between Russia and NATO, tensions he confronts with an especially hysterical version of anti-detente.

    #68944
    wv
    wv
    Participant

    I don’t have access to Putin’s head, but I have read that “Democracy is weak and ineffectual and vulnerable and undesirable” is a pretty constant theme on Russian television. Which I do not watch myself.

    =================
    Interesting. I have never read anything like that. The ‘undesirable’ part I mean. I shall have to google a bit and see what i can find. I know that on RT that is certainly not what the message is — the message is America’s ‘democracy’ has been wiped out by a corporotacracy.’ At least thats the message “I” see constantly on RT. I mean Chris Hedges regularly appears on RT.

    w
    v

    #68945
    wv
    wv
    Participant

    I think in addition to that, he wants to establish connections with right-wing oligarchs to smooth business all the way around.

    ——————-

    Do you think that has often been the same goal with American Presidents ?

    w
    v

    #68949
    zn
    zn
    Moderator

    I think in addition to that, he wants to establish connections with right-wing oligarchs to smooth business all the way around.

    ——————-

    Do you think that has often been the same goal with American Presidents ?

    w
    v

    No. Though it would be irrelevant either way since the point here was to analyze Putin. Why deflect from that? I mean it’s not as if american presidents get a free ride around here.

    Historically american presidents have had a number of complex motives driven by all sorts of things, including the paranoias first induced by the cold war and then 9/11. They didn;t invade Iraq to further connections with Russian oligarchs. During Vietnam there were no Russian oligarchs.

    As you know I don’t like slogan-like “one cause” reductions.

    None of which has anything to do with analyzing Putin.

    .

    .

    #68955
    wv
    wv
    Participant

    I think in addition to that, he wants to establish connections with right-wing oligarchs to smooth business all the way around.

    ——————-

    Do you think that has often been the same goal with American Presidents ?

    w
    v

    No. Though it would be irrelevant either way since the point here was to analyze Putin. Why deflect from that? I mean it’s not as if american presidents get a free ride around here.

    Historically american presidents have had a number of complex motives driven by all sorts of things, including the paranoias first induced by the cold war and then 9/11. They didn;t invade Iraq to further connections with Russian oligarchs. During Vietnam there were no Russian oligarchs.

    As you know I don’t like slogan-like “one cause” reductions.

    None of which has anything to do with analyzing Putin.

    .

    .

    ===============
    I wasnt ‘deflecting’. Thats just ‘you’ mindreading or something. I was expanding the discussion. I wasn’t leaving the Putin thing behind. One post at a time is all i can do though.

    AND, i disagree with you about American Presidents. I think they do ‘exactly’ what Putin is doing.

    w
    v

    #68957
    zn
    zn
    Moderator

    I think in addition to that, he wants to establish connections with right-wing oligarchs to smooth business all the way around.

    ——————-

    Do you think that has often been the same goal with American Presidents ?

    w
    v

    No. Though it would be irrelevant either way since the point here was to analyze Putin. Why deflect from that? I mean it’s not as if american presidents get a free ride around here.

    Historically american presidents have had a number of complex motives driven by all sorts of things, including the paranoias first induced by the cold war and then 9/11. They didn;t invade Iraq to further connections with Russian oligarchs. During Vietnam there were no Russian oligarchs.

    As you know I don’t like slogan-like “one cause” reductions.

    None of which has anything to do with analyzing Putin.

    .

    .

    ===============
    I wasnt ‘deflecting’. Thats just ‘you’ mindreading or something. I was expanding the discussion. I wasn’t leaving the Putin thing behind. One post at a time is all i can do though.

    AND, i disagree with you about American Presidents. I think they do ‘exactly’ what Putin is doing.

    w
    v

    Putin is an actual autocrat who rules a basically “democratic in name only” society, and he is looking to bolster like-minded people around the west.

    I don’t see any american president, even the worst ones, equalling him in any of that. They’re a few steps behind him.

    And even if I bought that they were alike, to me it’s a non-point. If you say “yeah but what about the USA,” I just go well add Putin to your list then of people we condemn and let’s discuss him for a while. I mean we’ve had years worth of bringing it to american presidents…that isn’t going away. One doesn’t diminish the other. I mean I might get the point of saying that to a rightie. But leftists know about the USA.

    When I say something is a deflection it is aimed at the argument. The words that are stated. To me it’s aimed at what I perceive to be a form of argumentational illogic.

    I have regularly condemned the worst of american policies, and IMO it doesn’t detract from that to aim the same kinds of things at Putin.

Viewing 19 posts - 1 through 19 (of 19 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.