Russia Story Shows How the Media Killed Journalism

In the heels of a particularly contentious week in politics, the president has fired his quixotic FBI Director, James Comey. He explains that it’s because Comey was a terrible leader of the FBI (he was), but the media insists that it was because Comey was closing in on the “truth” of Trump’s collusion with Russia to steal the election from poor old Hillary. For their part, the Democratic Party seems content to perpetuate this narrative, since it exonerates the DNC of having been mostly responsible for its own defeat (they could have had the candidate that their base wanted, but the DNC leadership chose to rig the election in favor of the oligarchy’s choice, Hillary).

Meanwhile, the Democrats rushed to the defense of James Comey, a man they had condemned as being a profligate Trump puppet just two weeks prior to the firing. In fact, several prominent Democrats were angrily calling for Comey’s dismissal and for him to be brought to testify on Capitol Hill for pre-election shenanigans. Now the Democrats wish Comey was still FBI Director!

After Comey’s dismissal, the president and his senior national security aides met with a Russian delegation led by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and the Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak. Smarting over the way the media was misrepresenting both Trump (and his election win as the product of a Russian dezinformatsiya operation), the president disinvited Western media sources from covering the event. Instead, the Trump Administration allowed for only Russian news services to cover the meeting with the Russians. While this was an understandable rebuke to the partisan legacy media, it was a mistake on the part of the Trump Administration. The image of Russian state-owned media having access to the White House, the president, and senior national security officials only played into the media narrative about Trump’s illicit Russian connections….continue reading

 

McMaster and Commander 

Trump’s national security adviser takes on the Washington Post’s anonymous sources.

Former government officials have been demanding anonymity from the Washington Post in order to discuss a meeting they did not attend at the White House. President Trump’s National Security Adviser, Gen. H.R. McMaster, who did attend the meeting, has been going on the record this week along with other attendees to knock down the resulting story. Yet much of the press still seems to credit the Post’s unnamed non-attendees.

Here’s the lede from the Post:

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.

On Monday evening Gen. McMaster said in response:

The story that came out tonight as reported is false. The President and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation. At no time, at no time, were intelligence sources or methods discussed. And the president did not disclose any military operations that were not already publicly known. Two other senior officials who were present, including the Secretary of State, remember the meeting the same way and have said so. Their on-the-record accounts should outweigh those of anonymous sources. And I was in the room. It didn’t happen.

On Tuesday the national security adviser elaborated on his remarks and took questions from reporters. At his Tuesday appearance in the White House briefing room, Gen. McMaster called Mr. Trump’s discussion “wholly appropriate” and consistent with the normal sharing of information on terror threats that occurs in high-level meetings with representatives of foreign nations. He said he was not concerned by Mr. Trump’s disclosures and had not contacted any foreign governments about them….continue reading

 

BUSTED: Sources Confirm NatSec Advisor H. R. McMaster & His Deputy Dina Powell Are Leaking To The Anti-Trump Media

Two separate National Security Council sources have confirmed that National Security Advisor H. R. McMaster and Deputy National Security Advisor Dina Powell have been leaking negative material about President Donald J. Trump to their allies in the anti-Trump media, GotNews can exclusively report.

“It’s very hard when your boss, the President, and your boss, the NSC advisor, see the world so differently,” says one staffer, who opposes regime change in Syria.

Staffers on the National Security Council describe a culture of intimidation, especially for those who didn’t come in under McMaster and support the Trump campaign’s commitment to put America First.

“It’s like the Bush years never ended,” notes one staffer who didn’t come in under McMaster. “I didn’t sign up for this shit and the American people didn’t vote for it.”

The staffer also doubts that Democrats are to blame for withholding security clearances, especially for those with ties to General Michael Flynn. The Pentagon under Secretary Mattis has been working with Senator John McCain to deny security clearances over the fictitious Russia investigation….continue reading

THE REAL SCANDAL=>WaPo Source Leaked Classified Info That President Trump Wasn’t Even Briefed On

Yesterday, Wapo came out with a hit piece claiming that Trump shared classified Intel with the Russians last week in a meeting that was closed off to the U.S. press. The real scandal is that WaPo claimed in their article that President Trump disclosed the city of where the intelligence was gathered to the Russians but the President was never even briefed on this information.

Someone high up in the intelligence community leaked this information to WaPo and WaPo overplayed their hand by reporting on too much information, narrowing down who the source of the leak is….continue reading

Trump Shared Classified Information? Remember Obama & Clinton

Trump’s reported blunder with the Russians is no worse than the record of the Obama administration in such matters.

For Democrats, there is nothing like having the media and the intelligence bureaucracy on the team.

We don’t know all the details, but let’s stipulate that if President Trump disclosed to Russian diplomats secret information that was shared with the U.S. by a foreign intelligence service, as the Washington Post alleges, that could have been a reckless thing to do. General H. R. McMaster, the president’s national-security adviser, claims the Post’s story is not true; but there has been pushback from critics who say that McMaster’s denial was lawyerly.

The matter boils down to whether Trump disclosed a city in Islamic State territory from which an allied intelligence service (perhaps through a source who infiltrated ISIS, or through a collection method that enabled intelligence to penetrate ISIS operations) discovered a threat to civil aviation (reportedly involving explosives hidden in laptop computers). In asserting that the report is “false,” McMaster insisted that Trump had not “disclosed” any “intelligence sources or methods” or “military operations that were not already publicly known.” That denial, however, arguably sidesteps what the Post actually reports. The paper claims not that Trump provided the identity of the source or the nature of the intelligence method involved but that the president mentioned a city that is the locus of the information. By saying Trump did not “disclose” the source, is McMaster saying there’s no way that what was revealed could compromise the source?

It is reasonably argued that this tip could enable to Russians to figure out which ISIS cell has been infiltrated, thereby endangering the mole or other penetration method. It is also reasonably argued, though, that the Post’s own reporting of what McMaster describes as a standard diplomatic exchange of sensitive intelligence has given the Islamic State valuable information it would not otherwise have learned….continue reading

FLASHBACK: Obama’s CIA Director Leaked Top Secret Intel To Hollywood

When the Obama administration leaked classified information about military maneuvers and secret cyber attacks, media was silent.

In an anonymously sourced article published Monday afternoon, The Washington Post claimed that Donald Trump leaked classified information during a meeting with Russian officials earlier this month.

Top intelligence officials have since debunked the story. Just after the story was published, National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster said it was “false.” Dina Powell, a deputy national security advisor for strategy who attended the meeting in question, and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson have both confirmed that Trump did not share anything with Russian officials that would threaten national security.

Yet that hasn’t stopped news outlets from doubling down on WaPo’s claims. They seem to have all forgotten about all the times the Obama administration shared classified information and national security secrets throughout his tenure in the White House….continue reading

Deep State Illegally Leaks Classified Info To Media To Demonize Trump For Legally Disclosing Classified Info

In the latest act of open deep state sabotage to undermine the Trump administration, deep state operatives leaked classified information divulged by Trump in a private White House meeting to The Washington Post and The New York Times.

The meeting involved Russian foreign minister Sergey V. Lavrov, Russian ambassador Sergey I. Kislyak, Lieutenant General H. R. McMaster, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and other unnamed “Americans.”

From The New York Times:

The intelligence disclosed by Mr. Trump … was about an Islamic State plot, according to the officials. A Middle Eastern ally that closely guards its own secrets provided the information, which was considered so sensitive that American officials did not share it widely within the United States government or pass it on to other allies.

Mr. Trump’s disclosure does not appear to have been illegal — the president has the power to declassify almost anything. But sharing the information without the express permission of the ally who provided it was a major breach of espionage etiquette, and could jeopardize a crucial intelligence-sharing relationship.

In fact, the ally has repeatedly warned American officials that it would cut off access to such sensitive information if it were shared too widely, the former official said. In this case, the fear is that Russia will be able to determine exactly how the information was collected and could disrupt the ally’s espionage efforts.

Saying “Mr. Trump’s disclosure does not appear to have been illegal” means: “it was not illegal, but we’re going to word it in a way that makes it seem like it could be.”….continue reading

%d bloggers like this: