world

Lawmakers want Trump to explain giving intelligence to Russia

100 Comments

U.S. President Donald Trump came under pressure on Tuesday from U.S. lawmakers, including some of his fellow Republicans, to give a fuller explanation of why he revealed highly sensitive intelligence information to senior Russian officials at a White House meeting last week.

U.S. officials said Trump discussed intelligence about Islamic State with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak at last Wednesday's talks in the Oval Office.

The information had been supplied by a U.S. ally in the fight against the militant group, the officials said. The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and CNN identified the ally as Israel but two U.S. national security sources said they doubted that. Israeli officials declined to comment.

The disclosure of Trump's discussion rocked the administration as it struggled to move past the backlash over Trump's abrupt firing on May 9 of FBI Director James Comey, whose agency is investigating potential ties between Russia and Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

Trump said on Twitter on Tuesday he had an "absolute right" to share facts with Russia, adding he wanted Moscow to be more active in fighting Islamic State militants.

The Senate Intelligence Committee has asked the White House for more information about reports that Trump gave intelligence information to the Russians, a spokeswoman for the panel said.

Congressional investigators are expected to seek copies of any notes taken during the meeting, a congressional source said.

Trump's main guest at last week's meeting was Lavrov, the leading promoter of Russian foreign policies that are often sharply at odds with U.S. aims in Syria and Europe.

While not unprecedented, it is rare for a foreign minister to be granted bilateral talks in the inner sanctum of the White House with a U.S. president as Lavrov was.

Trump repeatedly called during his campaign for improved U.S. relations with Russia, damaged by years of disagreement over Russia's role in Ukraine and its backing for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

But his ties with Russia have clouded the early months of his presidency. Along with the FBI probe, congressional committees are investigating alleged Russian meddling in the election and whether there was any collusion by the Trump campaign.

A U.S. president has the authority to disclose even the most highly classified information at will, but U.S. and allied officials said that by giving information to Russia, Trump had endangered cooperation from an ally that has intelligence on Islamic State.

U.S. Representative Barbara Comstock, a Republican, called for immediate classified briefings for lawmakers "so that Congress can at least know as much as Russian leaders."

"Anything you give the Russians, you have to assume the worst, not the best," Republican Senator Lindsey Graham told Fox News. "So clearly the president didn't do anything illegal. But my advice to the president would be if you're going to talk to the Russians about anything sensitive, run it through the system first."

Trump took to Twitter on Tuesday to defend his actions.

"As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining to terrorism and airline flight safety," Trump tweeted. "Humanitarian reasons, plus I want Russia to greatly step up their fight against ISIS & terrorism."

Islamic State, or ISIS, holds territory in Iraq and Syria and is a common foe of Moscow and Washington.

National security adviser H.R. McMaster said Trump did not know the source of the information he disclosed to the Russians so could not have compromised the U.S. ally.

"What the president shared was wholly appropriate," he said.

The two top Republicans in Congress, House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, were muted in their response to Trump giving information to Russia. Ryan's office said he hoped for a full explanation.

Asked if he had concerns about Trump's handling of classified information, McConnell answered, "No."

The top Democrat in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, called on the White House to make transcripts of the Oval Office meeting with the Russians available.

Representative Elijah Cummings, the senior Democrat on the House of Representatives Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said Trump's disclosure only reinforced Democrats' call for an independent investigation into alleged ties with Russia.

"I would hope that at some point the Republicans will join with the Democrats and say, 'Look, we've got to address this.' This is indefensible," Cummings told MSNBC.

Turmoil in the White House in recent weeks has overshadowed legislative priorities such as healthcare and tax reform eyed by Trump and his fellow Republicans who control Congress.

The euro surged more than 1 percent against a broadly weaker dollar on Tuesday, rising to its highest since Trump was elected president in November. Weaker-than-expected U.S. housing data also dampened the dollar.

Controversy over Russia has also laid bare sharp divisions between the White House and U.S. intelligence agencies, which concluded in January that Russia had tried to influence the election in Trump's favor. Moscow denies that.

During the presidential campaign Trump repeatedly assailed his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, for her handling of classified information by email while she was secretary of state. The FBI concluded after an investigation last year that there were no grounds to pursue any charges against Clinton.

Trump departs on Friday for his first overseas trip as president, traveling to Saudi Arabia, Israel, Italy and Belgium on visits that will test his foreign policy skills.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2017.

  • Sort by
  • Oldest
  • Latest
  • Popular

100 Comments
Login to comment

"his foreign policy skills"

Can't help but smile

14 ( +14 / -0 )

Not fit for the office of POTUS.

15 ( +16 / -1 )

A U.S. president has the authority to disclose even the most highly classified information at will

End of discussion.

-22 ( +2 / -24 )

Based on the content of his tweets, Trump doesn't appear to comprehend the significance of his his behavior. Reports have indicated that Trump shared data that was not gathered by US Intelligence, but rather an American ally... and by sharing that intel, Trump has now exposed that ally's intelligence network to a foreign (and often hostile) power. 

 

This isn't about Trump sharing intel with a partner in the war against ISIS. This isn't about Trump sharing classified material with Russia. This is about Trump disrespecting an ally and exposing that ally's intelligence network to a foreign power. 

 

Trump is defending himself without even grasping the significance of what he's done. Pitiful.

13 ( +14 / -1 )

""As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining to terrorism and airline flight safety,"

But he won't share his past tax returns with the people who voted him in and whom he represents.

"A U.S. president has the authority to disclose even the most highly classified information at will"

Which is why it's imperative to have an intelligent trustworthy individual in office. Obviously we don't.

20 ( +21 / -1 )

@brBush End of discussion.

'End of discussion' - in an autocracy, perhaps.

I disagree; the discussion must continue. I prefer the US system of checks and balances, one that doesn't give overarching power to the executive. The US is not North Korea, Turkey, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia or any of the other nations run by an authoritarian and the oligarchs enriched by supporting him.

15 ( +16 / -1 )

CrazyJoe Today  07:00 am JST

Based on the content of his tweets, Trump doesn't appear to comprehend the significance of his his behavior. 

Of course he doesn't comprehend it. His justification is literally, "I wanted to do it. I'm allowed to do it. So I did it." No thought, no planning, not weighing of costs. He just acted on an impulse.

This precious snowflake has spent so long sheltered from anyone ever disagreeing with him in a safe space that he doesn't even grasp the most basic elements of explaining himself to others. He wants to be a dictator, and has spent so long surrounding himself with yes-men that he thinks he already is one.

I guess it's lucky for him he has so many sycophants on the Internet willing to defend his every mouth-breathing word.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

Lawmakers want Trump to explain giving intelligence to Russia

Well, he's an idiot. Was there something else to discuss?

why he revealed highly sensitive intelligence information to senior Russian officials at a White House meeting last week.

Yet another chance for Trump fans to stand up for themselves and ask why. Or they can continue to bend over. Trump before country?

A U.S. president has the authority to disclose even the most highly classified information at will

Which is where Trump fans will want this story to begin and end. Distractions to begin in 3...2...1...

but U.S. and allied officials said that by giving information to Russia, Trump had endangered cooperation from an ally that has intelligence on Islamic State.

And this is what the rest of us will talk about. Plus his incompetence, horrible decision-making skills, his brown-nosing Russia again, etc.

14 ( +14 / -0 )

"It wasn't illegal" is a very weak defense from Trump's supporters. Poor Lt. Gen. McMasters - drafted to defend his buffoon boss and then hung out to dry a scant few hours later.

NYT has a good description of the panic enveloping the White House as professional staffers increasingly realize how unhinged the president is: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/us/white-house-staff.html?_r=0

13 ( +13 / -0 )

I know 10 year olds with better self control and social awareness than Trump.... many of them also know when to admit they made a mistake...

12 ( +12 / -0 )

End of discussion? That would be a relief to get a day off from the usual bassackwardness.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Even if his most devoted followers agree with the entirety of his ever-shifting agenda, you have to be drinking some seriously spiked Trump punch to argue that he's going about things the right way. Absolute chaos, alienating everyone from his own staff to the intelligence community to virtually every major legitimate media organization. Being competent and disciplined is how you get things done in DC. This lesson seems fundamentally lost on a spoiled 3 year old jonesing for a pat on the head and his bottle.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

Bookies already taking odds as to whether President Pence will give Trump a pardon....

What an embarrassment. Sad to see the US in decline so quickly, get him out of office before he makes bigger blunders, the amateur hour needs to come to an end. Sanity must be restored .

10 ( +11 / -1 )

alienating everyone from his own staff to the intelligence community to virtually every major legitimate media organization

If you recall discussions during the election campaign, Trump supporters were clamoring for Trump to tear down the system. They pleaded daily for destroying it, though none had the first clue what to replace it with. In the words of the great Scot David Byrne: Watch out, you might get what you're after. Burning Down the House (and the country with it)

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Remember that time when they announced Trump had leaked top secret information to the Russians, and the Trumpets went on and on about how it was fake news?

I think we can now see very clearly that they have no idea what fake news is.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

What happened to all those JT posters who were stamping their tiny feet yesterday, pretending that the Dumpster didn't leak classified info to the Russians? What is the current position, given that the bozo has admitted it? And as for the credibility of the WH's denial that Trump asked Comey to stop looking into Flynn? Well, they don't got it.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

In an interview with Time magazine, Trump addressed leaks in the early days of his presidency, saying: "Classified. That's classified. You go to prison when you release stuff like that. And who would release that?"

7 ( +7 / -0 )

A U.S. president has the authority to disclose even the most highly classified information at will

End of discussion.

I might be inclined to agree with you if he did it knowingly. But by all accounts, he let it slip while showing off how much he knows, which is completely in character with the bragging and boasting he does in every interview to cover up his inadequacies.

I feel more and more like he didn't knowingly collude with Russia either. He's either just too dumb to realize that the people he surrounded himself with did, or they all got played by Putin in their greed. Either way, Trump is unfit for the job, so not end of discussion.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

I think it's increasingly unlikely that Trump will still be president by the end of the year. I expect "health problems" will appear before long that will allow him to step down before his idiocy lands him in jail.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Time's up, Mr Fake President! You can go back to being a pretend businessman now. If your Russian pals will still fund you.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Are we to believe that Trump actually has any intelligence to share with anyone? I suspect fake news

5 ( +6 / -1 )

@scrote I think it's increasingly unlikely that Trump will still be president by the end of the year. I expect "health problems" will appear before long that will allow him to step down before his idiocy lands him in jail....

Then he will go claim to be the best president that ever sat office...the guy is such a twat..

8 ( +8 / -0 )

First Trump and the White House deny he gave any secret or confidential information to the Russians. Now they are saying the president has the right to give whatever information he wants. The sacked FBI Director Comey, back in Feb wrote a memo stating Trump asked him to stop the investigation of Flynn.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Based on the content of his tweets, Trump doesn't appear to comprehend the significance of his his behavior.

Why? What did he do?

Reports have indicated that Trump shared data that was not gathered by US Intelligence, but rather an American ally... and by sharing that intel, Trump has now exposed that ally's intelligence network to a foreign (and often hostile) power. 

So far, the significance of these allegations don't prove anything TOO serious, meaning to the point that it would amount to an impeachable offense.

 

This isn't about Trump sharing intel with a partner in the war against ISIS. This isn't about Trump sharing classified material with Russia. This is about Trump disrespecting an ally and exposing that ally's intelligence network to a foreign power. 

Oh, please, the last president walked all over our closest allies, shunned Israel, the Ukrainians, don't give me that crap!

 

Trump is defending himself without even grasping the significance of what he's done. Pitiful.

He should, especially with this bogus witch hunt to circumvent and delegitimize the man, the Dems and even some on far Washington establishment right would rather keep the current status quo and keep their pockets lined than rather worry about the people or the country.

-14 ( +1 / -15 )

Another 42 months left.

I wonder how America will look in 2021.

If it's still left that is.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

this bogus witch hunt to circumvent and delegitimize the man

What do you mean by 'circumvent'? As for delegitimizing, Trump is doing that by himself. Intelligence agencies work on the basis of professionalism. If they screw up, they're out. Why would they just make up some allegations about Trump? On the other hand, Trump works on the basis of what he feels at the moment. This is what his supporters like. Unfortunately, that characteristic is extremely dangerous in matters of national security and international relations.

would rather keep the current status quo and keep their pockets lined than rather worry about the people or the country.

Meaningless nonsense. Anyway, what does that have to do with Trump going off script to boast about the secrets he knows in front of the Russian foreign minister and ambassador? One of the basic job requirements of being president is knowing when to keep your mouth shut. Trump doesn't have that skill. His ego dominates all his decisions.

This just in: Trump asked Comey in February to stop investigating Flynn. The White House of course says this is false. Comey's memo from that day says otherwise. I know who I believe.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

We survived the last 8 years under worse circumstances, I think we'll all be just fine.

No you didn't.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

@Haaa

We're still here, right?

What do you mean by 'circumvent'? As for delegitimizing, Trump is doing that by himself.

To a very small point, but the MSM is on a warpath to destroy the Trump presidency, pure and simple.

Intelligence agencies work on the basis of professionalism. If they screw up, they're out.

Don't give me that garbage! Under Comey, the man was anything but professional and that's coming mostly from within his agency, not including the mess he made on both sides of the political fence.

Why would they just make up some allegations about Trump? On the other hand, Trump works on the basis of what he feels at the moment. This is what his supporters like. Unfortunately, that characteristic is extremely dangerous in matters of national security and international relations.

Not making anything up, but the MSM is blowing this so out of proportion, it's almost funny.

Meaningless nonsense. Anyway, what does that have to do with Trump going off script to boast about the secrets he knows in front of the Russian foreign minister and ambassador?

Is it a crime?

One of the basic job requirements of being president is knowing when to keep your mouth shut. Trump doesn't have that skill. His ego dominates all his decisions.

Most of us don't want him to keep his mouth shut a d follow the typical Washington establishment traditions, that's not why he was elected.

This just in: Trump asked Comey in February to stop investigating Flynn. The White House of course says this is false. Comey's memo from that day says otherwise. I know who I believe.

I don't. I'll keep an open mind.

-16 ( +0 / -16 )

We're still here, right?

Not after worse circumstances.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

MSM is on a warpath to destroy the Trump presidency, pure and simple.

Trump's incompetence is laying the path to destroy his presidency. The so-called MSM can only use Trump's own actions against him.

For now, forget about the intelligence leak, Trump has "(h)yuge" problems.

Let's see the Comey memo where he notes how Trump committed obstruction of justice and then start the impeachment proceedings. Trump has no way out of this one.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Not after worse circumstances.

I think differently.

Trump's incompetence is laying the path to destroy his presidency. The so-called MSM can only use Trump's own actions against him.

I personally think it's the other way around, without a doubt.

For now, forget about the intelligence leak, Trump has "(h)yuge" problems.

I really don't think it's that huge, because as long as his supporters don't see anything wrong with it, he's in good standing. As far as the establishment freaking out, who cares?

Let's see the Comey memo where he notes how Trump committed obstruction of justice and then start the impeachment proceedings. Trump has no way out of this one.

Hes not going to get impeached, I was out there in Washington during the last impeachment and that didn't go so well, so Dems really need to be careful on this, because even if they could get Trump out of office, we would have Pence and even Pelosi would rather have Trump over Pence.

I'm loving this!

-14 ( +0 / -14 )

I think differently.

Oh I think we all know that.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

@brBush Another 42 months left.

I wonder how America will look in 2021.

If it's still left that is.

As one of Trump'ss biggest cheerleaders during the election campaign and as someone cheering for him to tear the US system down, you and the others who wanted the same thing must feel good watching Trump continue to fill his self-made swamp with toxic waste while the country swirls down the drain, i.e. the outcome the anyone-but-Trump crowd predicted. You won; you own it.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

He never said he gave them classified information, he said he has the absolute right to share facts with the Russians as a way to get them to support the fight against ISIS and other things he wants. McMaster also said that he did nothing wrong over and over again in his press conference.

Guess no one will want to talk about Obama actually giving classified info to the Russians last year? No one seemed upset then...because he was the President...and he can decide it. Guess who is the President now? Oh right, if Obama did something that doesnt mean Trump can, even though both have the same power under the law as President.

All that said, how unusual is this sort of thing, really? It is a good question that Steve Hayward raises at Power Line — along with a Washington Post report reminding us that, less than a year ago, the Obama administration was offering to share with Russia intelligence about ISIS operations in Syria . . . which sounds an awful lot like what Trump was doing.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447682/trump-shared-classified-information-russia-obama-iran-hillary-clinton-email

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

Let's see the Comey memo where he notes how Trump committed obstruction of justice and then start the impeachment proceedings. Trump has no way out of this one.

I was surprised this wasnt the headline today, maybe they are saving it for tomorrow to try to get one more day out of this other nonsense. So its not a memo, its the personal notes from February of a person who reported no obstruction of justice at the time the conversation took place. The headlines make it sound like Trump sent Comey a memo in writing telling him all of this, but that is misleading.

Only after Comey is fired an 'associate' of the person reads parts of his notes over the phone to a reporter and this is evidence? No other reporting is done, who is this person, how did they get Comey's notes, did he authorize them to leak it to the newspaper, etc. Most importantly, did he report it to the Department of Justice as he is required to by law?

Under the law, Comey is required to immediately inform the Department of Justice of any attempt to obstruct justice by any person, even the President of the United States. Failure to do so would result in criminal charges against Comey. (18 USC 4 and 28 USC 1361) He would also, upon sufficient proof, lose his license to practice law. 

Having an unnamed associate leak this verbally without providing a paper copy will allow the damage to be done while allowing Comey to still have a way out of why he didnt report it later. But its just easier to not ask any questions and swallow the narrative of the day. Doesnt make Trump guilty though.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

So the WH can release a transcript of the meeting with the Ruskies

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Just since this morning when I woke up, the narrative has shifted from Dems seeking tapes from the Trump administration to members of his own party subpoenaing Comey's written records of their meetings. Life moves pretty fast when you're a moron. But not to worry, DT should be fine. After all, he's worked really hard to show respect for the rank and file of his own party. Why wouldn't they be willing to go to bat for him now?

Start practicing this phrase "Do you, Mike Pence, solemnly swear ..."

4 ( +4 / -0 )

members of his own party subpoenaing Comey's written records of their meetings. 

How else do you make people actually provide evidence that what they are saying is true. You make the person who has the document provide it instead of taking the word of a 'associate' reading someone else's notes over the phone. A subpoena is definitely required in this case, as is sworn testimony in a public hearing for Comey. Then if he does the 'I cant answer in a public hearing' trick you take him to a private one.

This is how I feel about this issue (from Fox News, but whatever)

But by writing a memo, Comey has put himself in a box. If he now accuses the President of obstruction, he places himself in legal jeopardy for failing to promptly and properly report it. If he says it was merely an uncomfortable conversation, he clears the president of wrongdoing and sullies his own image as a guy who attempted to smear the man who fired him.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

@Blacklabel

He never said he gave them classified information, he said he has the absolute right to share facts with the Russians as a way to get them to support the fight against ISIS and other things he wants.

When someone vehemently asserts their absolute right to share facts without denying they shared facts, the reasonable assumption is that they shared facts. Trump's basically saying "So what if I did?"

McMaster also said that he did nothing wrong over and over again in his press conference.

Yes, the president has the right to share any information, so he technically did nothing wrong. But, the rest of McMaster's response was carefully worded to avoid admitting that Trump actually gave up classified information.

Guess no one will want to talk about Obama actually giving classified info to the Russians last year?

The problem lies in whether Trump intended to share the information. The fact that McMaster tried to cover it up, tells me it wasn't intentional.

If nothing else, Obama is calculated and careful with his words. If he shared information with the Russians, that's exactly what he intended to do. Watch any Trump interview, and tell me if Trump is careful with his words. Be honest. He regularly makes claims and says things seemingly in the heat of the moment to make himself look smarter and more capable than he is. 

So its not a memo, its the personal notes from February of a person who reported no obstruction of justice at the time the conversation took place.

It's been reported that Comey took the memos after meeting with Trump and shared them with colleagues in an effort to start a paper trail. In other words, he was probably just starting to build a case before he was abruptly fired.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

It's been reported that Comey took the memos after meeting with Trump and shared them with colleagues in an effort to start a paper trail. In other words, he was probably just starting to build a case before he was abruptly fired.

So it took him 3 months to NOT let the Department of Justice know that he felt Trump obstructed justice in February? By the way, the law doesnt say share with your colleagues, it says report to Department of Justice through official channels. Just another example of Comey's incompetence and lack of following procedure. Why did the interim FBI Director testify no effort to impede the investigation to date.? Did he not even share this information with his Deputy?

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

My, things are heating up. Had Nixon not resigned, he might have been convicted in the Senate on one (or more) of three charges: obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and/or defiance of subpoenas. Looks like Trump is going for the trifecta - though my guess is he'll resign before impeachment for "health" reasons (and that wouldn't be unreasonable).

5 ( +5 / -0 )

I'm loving this!

He's assumed the position.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Looks like even GOP members are moving towards subpoenaing the Comey memos. Trump will have hell to pay for once those are released and he will have to go on trial for treason after he is impeached and his supporters purged

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The FBI concluded after an investigation last year that there were no grounds to pursue any charges against Clinton.

And this is one reason why this is fake news.

Comey “was wrong to usurp the Attorney General’s authority on July 5, 2016” when he chose to announce his legal opinion that the case against Clinton should not be prosecuted.

Second, notwithstanding Loretta Lynch’s conflict of interest due to improperly meeting with Bill Clinton, “The FBI Director is never empowered to supplant federal prosecutors and assume command of the Justice Department.”

Third, when such a conflict does require “recusal” of the Attorney General: “There is a well-established process for other officials to step in.” Instead Comey “announced his own conclusions … without the authorization of duly appointed Justice Department leaders.” In other words, since Lynch did and had to recuse herself from Servergate matters she was not empowered to authorize Comey’s unusual usurpation of authority from the senior lawyers in DoJ who are lawfully empowered to take over command in such circumstances.

I forget, what was this story about? Oh, that's right...SQUIRREL!!

C'mon! Donald. Stop playing around with these deep state globalist con-men. Bring the hammer down!

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

As one of Trump'ss biggest cheerleaders during the election campaign and as someone cheering for him to tear the US system down,

No, I voted for him to undo the damage that had occurred from the previous admin. I want my country to succeed. But apparently, the left could care less, just as long as we can impeach him.

you and the others who wanted the same thing must feel good watching Trump continue to fill his self-made swamp with toxic waste while the country swirls down the drain, i.e. the outcome the anyone-but-Trump crowd predicted. You won; you own it.

Maybe if the media would do their job properly instead of desperately looking for smoke, we might get ahead, but I'm so used to dealing with the unhinged left, I wake up, read the news and don't even flinch, I expect it from them

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

So Hillary had unsecured internet connections, and Trump has unsecure lips. Give 'em boxing gloves and let 'em duke it out. Give us a break.

In the meantime, can someone please grab hold of the reins of state!

2 ( +2 / -0 )

So it's Israel's spy put inside ISIS

Russia may share what they find out about Israel's spy capabilities in Syria to Syria and Iran, both Israel enemies

Israel must be elated by loose lips

8 ( +8 / -0 )

@Bass:

Under Comey, the man was anything but professional and that's coming mostly from within his agency

Not according to the FBI Agents Association. But you probably know better than that association how FBI agents feel.

I really don't think it's that huge, because as long as his supporters don't see anything wrong with it, he's in good standing.

And never mind what is best for the country as long as Trump supporters are okay. True patriots.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

You two lost all credibility and displayed your utter lack of integrity after you constantly claimed Trump didn't share classified info with the Russians.

But that doesn't mean that there was any collusion going on or anything the Farias or anything that is considerable of impeaching the president.

There were a number of us who repeatedly demonstrated the errors of your claims in the comments to the original story breaking this news.

Likewise.

Your tactic at rebutting that evidence was to shift to this thread and continue to spew your nonsense. Brilliant rebuttals.

There are no names, no witnesses that were brought forth, there's no limo, it's Coney's word against the president's, do a bunch of White House staffers that settings app opposite of what the former FBI director was stating. So basically, the dog is chasing its tail, once again.

You two would do well to gointo the hot air business as you are chalk full of the requisite gas to keep them aloft.

Right back at you buddy.

Reporting facts about unbelievable incompetence is not being on the warpath to destroy anything. It's called responsible and professional journalism.

Which the mainstream media hasn't shown in over 12 years and it seems it's getting worse.

A witch hunt, by definition, is bogus.

Actually, it's not.

Additionally, it means attempting to find fault with someone that had not made a mistake. Here, people and the media are simply highlighting the reckless incompetence of Trump.

Hmmm..... last year's biggest scams of the former Democratic candidate the media tried to sweep everything under the rug as much as They could and now they try to pull out all cards and take everything out of the proportion.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

"Congressional investigators are expected to seek copies of any notes taken during the meeting, a congressional source said."

They better ask Russia, then. As with the private show and meeting the Russians received in the WH while the US was barred, and they later showed us everything via Russian news, since Trump will deny the existence of any materials related to the meeting we can just ask Russia.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

@Mr Bum:

When someone vehemently asserts their absolute right to share facts without denying they shared facts, the reasonable assumption is that they shared facts. Trump's basically saying "So what if I did?"

Spot on, except that the person shared facts is not only a reasonable assumption, it a logical inference. The logical part is what keeps tripping up the conservatives. You see, next to their allergy to facts, their allergy to logic is their biggest shortcoming.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

bass4funk: "There are no names, no witnesses that were brought forth, there's no limo, it's Coney's word against the president's"

Except the president admitted it... or do you think it's Trump's word against the President's, too?

"Likewise."

Likewise, what? Your errors were pointed out -- that being that he did not do it when he did. Ergo, there were no errors by those that said he did it. Boy, the 180s you're doing have got you doing 360s! But since you did just say dog chasing tail, you certainly would know! :)

5 ( +6 / -1 )

@Bass:

But that doesn't mean that there was any collusion going on or anything the Farias or anything that is considerable of impeaching the president.

Which is definitively not what I was talking about.

There are no names, no witnesses that were brought forth, there's no limo, it's Coney's word against the president's, do a bunch of White House staffers that settings app opposite of what the former FBI director was stating. So basically, the dog is chasing its tail, once again.

Again, not what I was addressing.

In regards to you asserting I'm full of hot air, everything I have posted has been backed up by cites to reputable news outlets. To be sure, just because you disagree with the source does not mean the source lacks credibility

4 ( +5 / -1 )

@Smith:

Thanks for the assist. I'm doing all this on my iPhone so it's taking time to defend against the irrational.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Except the president admitted it... or do you think it's Trump's word against the President's, too? 

The president did not give specific names of any operative in the field.

Likewise, what? Your errors were pointed out -- that being that he did not do it when he did.

What errors? The left far loons in the media and the Dems again have nothing. No names, No nothing, just a hunch. Good luck with that.

Ergo, there were no errors by those that said he did it. Boy, the 180s you're doing have got you doing 360s! But since you did just say dog chasing tail, you certainly would know! :)

Not really. I don't make a living slinging accusations and carry pitch forks or torches with me, but nice try as usual.

In regards to you asserting I'm full of hot air, everything I have posted has been backed up by cites to reputable news outlets. To be sure, just because you disagree with the source does not mean the source lacks credibility.

I saw them, not one of them were anywhere close to the middle. I know how this game is played, been doing it for almost 30 years.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

I know how this game is played, been doing it for almost 30 years.

Maybe time to switch teams and get rid of that losing streak.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

bass4funk: "I know how this game is played, been doing it for almost 30 years."

Same game in which you called Trump a lunatic a month before you started bowing at his feet?

6 ( +6 / -0 )

@Bass:

The president did not give specific names of any operative in the field

That was t the issue being debated. That Trump divulged highly classified intelligence was. He did. You are trying to obfuscate.

What errors? The left far loons in the media and the Dems again have nothing. No names, No nothing, just a hunch. Good luck with that.

The error of repeatedly claiming Trump did not disclose classified intelligence. The "far left looms in the media and the Dems" have the facts that Trump disclosed classified intelligence to the Russians.

I saw them, not one of them were anywhere close to the middle. I know how this game is played, been doing it for almost 30 years.

So, now you are claiming that only media "close to the middle" can be credible? Again, I never mentioned whether the sources were left, right, middle, up, or down. This is another feeble attempt at obfuscation. Since you seem to be the expert and deny that the media that GOT THE FACTS CORRECT is not credible, what media do you consider credible?

If you really do work in the media, I feel for the people that consume it given your penchant for denial, confusing/not recognizing facts, and utter lack of integrity and honesty.

Lastly, time in service does not necessarily make one an expert, or even competent. There is a perfect example of this on these comment boards.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@Bass:

Maybe if the media would do their job properly instead of desperately looking for smoke, we might get ahead, but I'm so used to dealing with the unhinged left, I wake up, read the news and don't even flinch, I expect it from them

When the media correctly reports the fact that Trump disclosed classified info., it is doing its job. We will get ahead because of this as it will cause Trump to be impeached or the Republicans to lose in the midterms.

Notice how I'm not bringing in extraneous information? It's called substantive rebuttals.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Same game in which you called Trump a lunatic a month before you started bowing at his feet?

Yes, I used to hate carrots too, but now I don't...

That was t the issue being debated. That Trump divulged highly classified intelligence was. He did. You are trying to obfuscate.

No, but what and who are the sources? Names please.

The error of repeatedly claiming Trump did not disclose classified intelligence. The "far left looms in the media and the Dems" have the facts that Trump disclosed classified intelligence to the Russians.

So last year when Hillary did the same, were you also outraged.

So, now you are claiming that only media "close to the middle" can be credible? Again, I never mentioned whether the sources were left, right, middle, up, or down. This is another feeble attempt at obfuscation.

No, I'm just saying, what proof do you have? Not accusatory statements or possibly variables, but concrete facts.

Since you seem to be the expert and deny that the media that GOT THE FACTS CORRECT is not credible, what media do you consider credible?

I'm not, but I do believe in the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

If you really do work in the media, I feel for the people that consume it given your penchant for denial, confusing/not recognizing facts, and utter lack of integrity and honesty.

Never had that problem.

Lastly, time in service does not necessarily make one an expert, or even competent. There is a perfect example of this on these comment boards.

Then you should have some reservations about the MSM, good to know.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

That this clown is the commander and chief of the most powerful military in the world is truly frightening, and even more so, that so many Americans voted for him.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

@Bass:

No, but what and who are the sources? Names please.

They were anonymous sources that we're in the Oval Office when Trump opened his mouth (I addressed this on the other article's thread.) and whose information was not directly refuted by McMaster or Trump. Trump actually confirmed their information indirectly. Why would either of the two not directly refute the information?

Do you remember the name of your second grade math teacher? If the answer is no, that doesn't mean you didn't study math in second grade. Keep moving the criterion for accuracy if it makes you feel better, which it clearly does.

So last year when Hillary did the same, were you also outraged

I have never once mentioned Hillary in this exchange. Another attempt to confuse the issue. However, you just conceded the Trump did disclose classified intelligence. Also, Hillary never did, that she did is pure speculation on the part of conservatives on a witch hunt.

No, I'm just saying, what proof do you have? Not accusatory statements or possibly variables, but concrete facts.

To begin, adults don't say "proof," we say "evidence." Again, I provided cites to the sources of my facts on the other thread. Since I've spoon fed you once, I'll not do it again. I have only presented facts, never accusatory statements or possible variables. That is your strategy.

I'm not, but I do believe in the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

Unless it is in relation to liberals such as Clinton and Obama. That aside, we have not been debating whether a crime was committed, which one wasn't, we have been debating whether your baby in the WH disclosed classified intelligence, so the presumption of innocence is inapplicable. Another attempt to obfuscate. (I am getting tired of using "obfuscate," but you continue to do it.)

Never had that problem.

Glad to know you limit your dishonesty to these comment boards. However, that is a dubious claim at best.

Then you should have some reservations about the MSM, good to know.

No because it's not the sources time in service I rely upon, it's their track record of being correct. Another failed attempt to obfuscate.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Same game in which you called Trump a lunatic a month before you started bowing at his feet?

Yes, I used to hate carrots too, but now I don't...

So I suppose Trumps just needs to get the opposition to eat more carrots.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

@Bass:

Same game in which you called Trump a lunatic a month before you started bowing at his feet?

Yes, I used to hate carrots too, but now I don't...

Did it only take you one month to go from hating carrots to not hating carrots? I'm sure it did, which makes your analogy accurate.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Heh, heh. The Russians are having a grand old time with this. Putin's offering to provide a transcript of the talks in the Oval Office. Next he'll be offering to whack some WaPo journalists.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The hole Trump is digging will be big enough for him and quite a few others! Everyone has their limits as to how much she or he puts up with and this is true for politicians too. It won't take much more for many to abandon him. The saddest part is that Trumps's pathetic performance was all so predictable to so many. It seems that quite a few Americans did vote for Trump in a kind of 'What if?' kind of mentality but now they know.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

They were anonymous sources that we're in the Oval Office when Trump opened his mouth

Anonymous and from the Oval Office. Looks like there's too much leaking going on and Trump needs to fire anyone that's left over from the last administration.

I have never once mentioned Hillary in this exchange. 

It's a simple "yes or no" question.

Hillary never did, that she did is pure speculation on the part of conservatives on a witch hunt.

The Wikileaks were a scandal? Yeah, sure.

I have only presented facts, never accusatory statements or possible variables. 

Facts? Ok, so one-sided. I want to see the other side as well.

Unless it is in relation to liberals such as Clinton and Obama. That aside, we have not been debating whether a crime was committed, which one wasn't, 

Thank you.

Glad to know you limit your dishonesty to these comment boards. However, that is a dubious claim at best.

I'm dishonest? I don't lie, never do and never would.

No because it's not the sources time in service I rely upon.

Ahhhhh, that's the problem.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

God, I am SO enjoying this!! The comprehensive failure of the "businessman" and DC-outsider as President. That experiment is now well and truly OVER. You can see why he has so many bankruptcies on his record. A businessman could never abide by democratic procedures.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

We've successful placed Trump fans in a position where nonsense is their only defense. Mission accomplished.

Moving on.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Is anyone watching the Idiot in Chief at the Coast Guard Commencement ceremony? What a moron, he turned a commencement ceremony into a campaign stop. But hey, Bass et. al are loving this. America is finally great again. lololol

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Looks like there's too much leaking going on and Trump needs to fire anyone that's left over from the last administration.

Trump still hasn't been able to fill 85% of the vacancies.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

What a moron, he turned a commencement ceremony into a campaign stop. But hey, Bass et. al are loving this. America is finally great again. lololol

Good on him. Go Trump!

But hey, Bass et. al are loving this. America is finally great again. lololol

I always thought America was great, I just didn't like the policies of his predecessor

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

@Bass:

Anonymous and from the Oval Office. Looks like there's too much leaking going on and Trump needs to fire anyone that's left over from the last administration.

This was never part of our debate. Every time I put you in a corner, this is what you, which is to say that you introduce unrelated points in a weak attempt to (that word again!) obfuscate. And, the sources were from Trump's administration, so it looks like it's time to get rid of his administration.

It's a simple "yes or no" question.

Which was completely unrelated to our debate so not worth answering. What your doing here is trying to legitimize your obfuscation.

The Wikileaks were a scandal? Yeah, sure.

How is this related to the fact that Hillary never divulged classified intelligence? Oh yeah, it isn't. You clearly never tire of trying to muddle the issue.

Facts? Ok, so one-sided. I want to see the other side as well.

Yes, facts. You know, things that are true. No, you don't want to see the other side because you aren't willing to accept the facts. And, another attempt to obscure the issue.

I'm dishonest? I don't lie, never do and never would.

Denying that something which has been repeatedly established to have happened and deliberately attempting to defend your position by constantly attempting to deflect is a form of dishonesty.

Ahhhhh, that's the problem.

Relying on credibility instead of time in service is a problem? Certainly even you can see the inanity in that comment on your own.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

As my honorable collegue from the rational world SuperLib said,

We've successful placed Trump fans in a position where nonsense is their only defense. Mission accomplished. 

Moving on.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"No politician in history has been treated worst " Trump response to his Tenure. Well what can one say .Well Putin has. Putin is cracking jokes about the inert Trumpet'"The Trumpet that can't Blow " and as offer the transcripts of the meeting That is a very good description of Trump. Like Russia spend billions on gathering info, Now they just have to talk to Trump and get all the info they need. The Russian don't even have to ask. They know that the Trumpet that can't blow will blurt out a very good turn instead.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

This was never part of our debate. Every time I put you in a corner

I get out of it.

so it looks like it's time to get rid of his administration.

That's not going to happen, even if you could get rid of Trump, Pence would be next in line and libs don't want that because he's even more conservative, more shrewd and a very skilled professional politician compared to Trump. Even Pelosi knows that, that's why she's not rushing to impeach Trump. Either way, the Dems would be trading a populist for a staunch conservative, I'm cool with that as well. The agenda continues.....

What your doing here is trying to legitimize your obfuscation.

You still didn't answer my question, which was a legitimate question.

How is this related to the fact that Hillary never divulged classified intelligence? Oh yeah, it isn't. You clearly never tire of trying to muddle the issue.

She lied under oath and about her emails and server to a grand jury. Bottom line, we have one set of rules for Democrats and one set of rules for Republicans, Hypocrisy all the way. That's the overall point.

No, you don't want to see the other side because you aren't willing to accept the facts. And, another attempt to obscure the issue.

I do. see them, one rule for conservatives and one rule for liberals, I accept it, but I vehemently oppose it.

Denying that something which has been repeatedly established to have happened and deliberately attempting to defend your position by constantly attempting to deflect is a form of dishonesty.

But it still doesn't amount to an impeachable offense.

Certainly even you can see the inanity in that comment on your own.

No, I just the left once again chasing rabbits down holes.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Why did he give highly classified information to the people who have given him over $100 million?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/house-majority-leader-to-colleagues-in-2016-i-think-putin-pays-trump/2017/05/17/515f6f8a-3aff-11e7-8854-21f359183e8c_story.html?utm_term=.a5e415970747

Before Chump even got the GOP nomination, top Republicans were discussing the problem that Putin was financing Chump's campaign, and his failing real estate business. When a Washington Post reporter recently interviewed Paul Ryan and McCarthy about the conversation, they both vehemently denied that it ever took place. When the the Washington Post reporter then offered to play a recording of their discussion from last summer, they laughed and said they were just kidding about it never having happened.

There is a lot going on behind the scenes, and it is mostly very damaging to both our democracy, and to the body politic of the free world. We are now putting our hopes for a democracy in the hands of just one person, a special prosecutor. It is obvious that most of the Republicans in Congress are not interested in protecting our country. Here's hoping the special prosecutor is up to the job.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

She lied under oath and about her emails and server to a grand jury.

Heh, Bass is trying to rewrite history to pretend his own party didn't exonerate her.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I always thought America was great

Yes, yes but what does that actually mean?

Pence would be next in line and libs don't want that because he's even more conservative, more shrewd and a very skilled professional politician compared to Trump.

You can't blame them. The man stepped right out of the dark ages.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Heh, Bass is trying to rewrite history to pretend his own party didn't exonerate her.

Never the party, but the now jobless FBI director.

Yes, yes but what does that actually mean?

To bring it out of the financial, and social abyss, to revitalize the economy, make a stronger military and empower the private sector, lower taxes to allow more hiring and create more spending in the economy.

You can't blame them. The man stepped right out of the dark ages.

Thats ok, as long as he's a conservative, I don't care.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Strangerland: "Heh, Bass is trying to rewrite history to pretend his own party didn't exonerate her."

Come on! be fair! He's not trying to rewrite history, he's just a firm believer in the creation of and adherence to alternative facts. To such people, actual history ceases to be. Trump actually DID have the largest inaugeration attendance in history; he actually DID coin the phrase "prime the pump"; he actually did NOT say the things he is recorded on tape saying -- that's all a lie!; the WH lied about the Russia leaks, not Trump, who contradicted them; Obama DID wiretap Trump and no evidence whatsoever is needed, it's just a fact; Hilary was never found innocent... seven times... for emailing on the wrong computer! and Trump's actual treason? it's no big deal!

2 ( +2 / -0 )

the WH lied about the Russia leaks, not Trump, who contradicted them; Obama DID wiretap Trump and no evidence whatsoever is needed, it's just a fact; Hilary was never found innocent... seven times... for emailing on the wrong computer! and Trump's actual treason? it's no big deal!

He didn't find her innocent, he just didn't want to do the job of the DOJ, which Lynch also bungled, but it was good after all, that and that press conference made us dodge a bullet, so I'm happy.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

He didn't find her innocent, he just didn't want to do the job of the DOJ

No, he found her innocent, and expressly stated so. It's all over the internet. A finding of absolute innocence.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

No, he found her innocent, and expressly stated so. It's all over the internet. A finding of absolute innocence.

He never found her innocent, he didn't believe in bringing up charges and.....wait....hold on...it doesn't matter. She's thankfully NOT president and Comey is out. Life is good.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

He never found her innocent, he didn't believe in bringing up charges

Nope. He put out a declaration of absolute and unending innocence with no possibility of guilt.

Don't you read the news?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

He never made no such determination. But it's ok, she's not in office, whatever the results leading up, she's not in th WH, that's the only thing that matters, everything else I can deal with.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

He never made no such determination.

Sure he did, but hey, I know you like to deny reality in a firm display of Dear Leader partisanship support

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Ok, that's fine, I'm just happy his bombshell helped put out the flames of her candidacy and spared the country of further turmoil.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Great! I'm glad you finally accept that she is innocent and perfect.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

@Bass:

From Comey's statement regarding the FBI's investigation into Clinton:

"As a result, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case."

If no charges are appropriate, no crime was committed. If no crime was committed, the suspect is innocent.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Trump was bragging to his Russian friends but it wasn't his information to disclose. It was Israel's. And Trump is heading to Israel in the coming weeks too! I'm sure they'll be overjoyed that Trump has Russian friends, the same ones who support Iran who wants to destroy Israel.

They'll be unlikely to disclose anything important in future, which compromises the security of the USA.

Congrats I guess

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@Swift

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2016/10/12/source-no-one-investigating-hillary-clintons-emails-agreed-with-comeys-decision-to-not-press-charges-n2231522

Yeah..well, I'll go by what the Bureau thinks and the feelings of the agents. At the same time, Comey did redeem himself when he dropped that bombshell on her the last few days of the campaign. It's all good, that's the only thing that matters.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@Bass:

You are using Townhall as a source?! It is only second to the Herald Sun in being MSM that spews fake news. Everyone knows this!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

You are using Townhall as a source?! It is only second to the Herald Sun in being MSM that spews fake news. Everyone knows this!

Actually, that's not even remotely true, they cover both sides and have the least amount of retractions. But there are other sources if you want them. Anyway, we really don't need to talk about this, thank God Trump got rid of Comey, he should have done it back in January.

I know Hillary must be happy.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@Bass:

Actually, that's not even remotely true, they cover both sides and have the least amount of retractions

Prove it! What's your evidence?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

She's NOT in the White House. LOL

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

After reading the Washington Post report that Ryan and McCarthy knew that Trump was on Russia's payroll even before he got the Republican nomination, and decided to cover it up, I am left wondering if Republicans in Congress are really all of that upset about Trump's treason, or if they are more upset that they aren't getting any of the big bucks from Comrade Putin.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/house-majority-leader-to-colleagues-in-2016-i-think-putin-pays-trump/2017/05/17/515f6f8a-3aff-11e7-8854-21f359183e8c_story.html?utm_term=.982508c30f4c

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Fake news. The laptop story has been out for months. Leftists in the media just can't accept their defeat.

The people rejected a secretary of state that sold influence, and kept a secret and unsecured mail server.

The media wants to abolish democracy in favor of Kenyan dictators in league with crony capitalists.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The real question on the minds of Congressional Republicans?

"How can I get my hands on some of that Russian money?"

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Headline should read, "Lawmakers want Trump to explain EVERYTHING!"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites