Russia bounty on US troops

[NCFisher]

There was sufficient enough corroborating evidence which surfaced in these intercepts of financial data to merit a threat briefing... and it simply doesn't pass muster that Trump didn't know about it. This wasn't some insignificant detail in just any other presidential daily brief. This was an adversary paying bounties to a terrorist network to kill our troops. There is no good way for the White House to spin this story after a year. Even if you want to believe that Trump wasn't aware of this intelligence (and I don't) - he should have been aware. And what has been done about this in the last year? Not much, it seems... except that Trump has continued to lobby for Russia to be allowed back into the G 7.

(in bold) - no, it is an intel rumor at this point. Logically it cannot be terming 'intelligence'.

I don't that's correct; a PDB and threat briefing are different animals. Reportedly, Trump is advised by a CIA career officer every day. In the event the info is corroborated, NSC has ready options for the president. That it is not, and non-actionable is judged to not be something rising to the level of threat that the CIA official would put on a hot-burner.

Not much? What is he supposed to do, investigate it himself? I've already linked you to a statement that it HAS REMAINED under investigation, and intel allies briefed, which means we and our pals are attempting to corroborate. That's as good as it gets, whether the left likes it or not.

 

[NCFisher]

The major difference as I see it, is that the people in positions that have the power and responsibility to maintain order are sympathetic to the factions that are being disruptive and do little or nothing to curtail this behavior, which, in turn, leads to even more and bolder actions by those radical groups. That is, until they march on that person's house, who is responsible for the maintenance of order in her city.

It's all fun and games, until it's your ox that is being gored.

Exactly, and I expect those officials to both remain in power and be re-elected. We've passed at least a couple of generations through an educational system which has established contrary speech as hate speech, that speech as crime or deserving the designation, and for decades censored and outright prohibited that speech. Fledged university, they expect to overlay that coercion onto society outside the campus and ruin businesses and lives to do it. It is fascism and it has momentum.

I'm typically of the view that rationale and "we're all just people, after all" will win out over political machination, but much less optimistic over this past decade, and four years.

 

[FLVOL_79]

(in bold) - no, it is an intel rumor at this point. Logically it cannot be terming 'intelligence'.

I don't that's correct; a PDB and threat briefing are different animals. Reportedly, Trump is advised by a CIA career officer every day. In the event the info is corroborated, NSC has ready options for the president. That it is not, and non-actionable is judged to not be something rising to the level of threat that the CIA official would put on a hot-burner.

Not much? What is he supposed to do, investigate it himself? I've already linked you to a statement that it HAS REMAINED under investigation, and intel allies briefed, which means we and our pals are attempting to corroborate. That's as good as it gets, whether the left likes it or not.

The left wingers here hate that Trump hasn't nuked Russia because of non confirmed intel..they also would hate Trump if he did nuke Russia. Its just bird cage chest pounding and virtue signaling at its worst.

 

[clarksvol00]

I didn’t even see you responded. Darn. You just love putting words in other people’s mouths and making assumptions. I find it humorous how you try to bait someone into the response you want and then you move on when you don’t get the response you expect. And yes you can call the Clinton impeachment what you like. That doesn’t make it accurate.

You're correct, I can call it the BJ impeachment and that was not the actual charge. You're correct the charge was lying about it. I find it absurd that it became the focus of the Whitewater investigation.

 

[hUTch2002]

You're correct, I can call it the BJ impeachment and that was not the actual charge. You're correct the charge was lying about it. I find it absurd that it became the focus of the Whitewater investigation.

I don’t disagree that it really should’ve been between Bill and Hillary and not something on display for the country but Dems can’t condemn Trump as someone of low morals or someone that doesn’t act “Presidential” and then ignore or make excuses for Clinton. I’m not saying you are doing that but I’ve seen it from some.

 

[Sandman 423]

But there is evidence which should be investigated. Per The New York Times reports: American officials intercepted electronic data showing large financial transfers from a bank account controlled by Russia's military intelligence agency to a Taliban-linked account, evidence that supported their conclusion that Russia covertly offered bounties for killing U.S. and coalition troops in Afghanistan, according to three officials who were privy to the intelligence (again, this is per The New York Times).

Also, per The New York Times, the three officials said that investigators had also identified by name numerous Afghans in a network linked to the suspected Russian operation, including a man believed to have served as an intermediary for distributing some of the funds, and who is now believed to be in Russia.

It doesn't appear as though the Trump Administration even cared whether any of this was true or not. There is nothing to indicate, that after a year, anything has been investigated.

Does it ever give an amount? all I can find is "large".

 

[BowlBrother85]

(in bold) - no, it is an intel rumor at this point. Logically it cannot be terming 'intelligence'.

I don't that's correct; a PDB and threat briefing are different animals. Reportedly, Trump is advised by a CIA career officer every day. In the event the info is corroborated, NSC has ready options for the president. That it is not, and non-actionable is judged to not be something rising to the level of threat that the CIA official would put on a hot-burner.

Not much? What is he supposed to do, investigate it himself? I've already linked you to a statement that it HAS REMAINED under investigation, and intel allies briefed, which means we and our pals are attempting to corroborate. That's as good as it gets, whether the left likes it or not.

There isn't a strong enough word to describe how utterly ridiculous your use of the word "rumor" is in this context. This is intelligence. Former CIA Director, Secretary of Defense and White House Chief of Staff, Leon Panetta, just called it intelligence on MSNBC and even expressed disbelief that Trump wasn't briefed. There is corroborating evidence in support of it with the financial data intercepts.

You frequently try to convey an erudition, which you simply don't have. You are ignorant and a Trump fanboy.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Does it ever give an amount? all I can find is "large".

That is all I have seen too. It just says "large amount".

 

[hUTch2002]

Why are criminal leaks of classified information so widely accepted by the Trump haters?

Why won’t the left / never-Trump crowd publicly denounce criminal leaks?

3-1/2 years of these types of conveniently negative leaks drives mistrust and doubt of the credibility of the information.

That’s what I truly don’t understand. I don’t care who’s sitting in the Oval Office, some of the private conversations and intelligence information that have been leaked are unacceptable, not to mention secret recording of the President. Who the fk things this stuff is ok?

 

[Sandman 423]

That’s what I truly don’t understand. I don’t care who’s sitting in the Oval Office, some of the private conversations and intelligence information that have been leaked are unacceptable, not to mention secret recording of the President. Who the fk things this stuff is ok?

When was the last time anyone was prosecuted for it? If there continues to be no consequences, why wouldn't you leak if it benefited your interests.

 

[NCFisher]

The left wingers here hate that Trump hasn't nuked Russia because of non confirmed intel..they also would hate Trump if he did nuke Russia. Its just bird cage chest pounding and virtue signaling at its worst.

"Russia has committed an act of WAR! by focking around with a tiny % of Americans using patently over-the-top social media ads! We demand action! (from everyone but the guy who watched the WAR! act occur)"

"He's Hitler...no - Stalin...Stalitler! - and he's causing WWIII with NK...no, no...with Iran! and - no, no....China! and ....he just declared on MI and WI governors with proxy war by armed white nationalists!"

I don't know how these people get food to their mouth without losing an eye.

 

[titansvolsfaninga]

 

[BowlBrother85]

That’s what I truly don’t understand. I don’t care who’s sitting in the Oval Office, some of the private conversations and intelligence information that have been leaked are unacceptable, not to mention secret recording of the President. Who the fk things this stuff is ok?

Just about all of the Republicans/conservatives commenting on this right now, seem much more concerned with discovering the identity of the source behind the leaks, than they are with the veracity of the intelligence being leaked. That is very telling about where their allegiances truly rest. It's party over country.

 

[NCFisher]

There isn't a strong enough word to describe how utterly ridiculous your use of the word "rumor" is in this context. This is intelligence. Former CIA Director, Secretary of Defense and White House Chief of Staff, Leon Panetta, just called it intelligence on MSNBC and even expressed disbelief that Trump wasn't briefed. There is corroborating evidence in support of it with the financial data intercepts.

You frequently try to convey an erudition, which you simply don't have. You are ignorant and a Trump fanboy.

And you're a monkey who with clockwork precision, gets frustrated and resorts to flinging poo. Maybe you should stay in the tree until you learn to argue like an adult.

It is intel rumor, heresay, until verified. Here's an example of what intelligence isn't "Trump is a traitor" then "Well, I must have gotten bad information" J. Brennan
See? Rumor, not intelligence or intelligent. Non-actionable vs. actionable.

You really like your new word, eh? Good for you!

 

[ajvol01]

And you believe this propaganda

 

[ajvol01]

Just about all of the Republicans/conservatives commenting on this right now, seem much more concerned with discovering the identity of the source behind the leaks, than they are with the veracity of the intelligence being leaked. That is very telling about where their allegiances truly rest. It's party over country.

You’re serious?

I’m tired of criminals in our government selling out this country for political gain.

The criminal leakers are criminals.

 

[hUTch2002]

Just about all of the Republicans/conservatives commenting on this right now, seem much more concerned with discovering the identity of the source behind the leaks, than they are with the veracity of the intelligence being leaked. That is very telling about where their allegiances truly rest. It's party over country.

You are speaking in generalities so you may not be assigning those words to me but I’ve been saying this same thing for a while now, long before this issue came up, so my stance on the leaks isn’t because of this issue. I haven’t seen anyone saying they don’t want to find out the truth. I’ve seen people saying that the info hasn’t been verified yet, not that they don’t want it to be verified. I certainly would like to know what’s going on and, if true, we should absolutely respond in some fashion. However, doesn’t leaking this info make that job more difficult? We have no idea what might be going on behind the scenes and there are some things we shouldn’t know because it might jeopardize an operation. Also, we are given a very small piece of information. The President and others member of Congress and the military have way more information on the bigger picture. There could be more to this story even if it is true and we just aren’t privy to the whole situation. One thing I do know is that the NYT has very low credibility when it comes to attacking this administration so that is at least partly why this story is met with criticism from some.

 

[NCFisher]

Just about all of the Republicans/conservatives commenting on this right now, seem much more concerned with discovering the identity of the source behind the leaks, than they are with the veracity of the intelligence being leaked. That is very telling about where their allegiances truly rest. It's party over country.

Why would I overtly concern myself with something the intel community said is not credible and unverified? If I were a hand-wringing TDSer, I guess because it's my life-blood and sustains me daily.

The rest of us will wait for it to be verified, if it can be, and not gnash our teeth because we want SOMEthing to be done. About a problem that may not exist.

And we can want bureaucratic-state leakers to be prosecuted because they damage our security, and all at the same time!!

My Garsh!

 

[BowlBrother85]

You’re serious?

I’m tired of criminals in our government selling out this country for political gain.

The criminal leakers are criminals.

You are ascribing motives to an unknown origin. It is entirely possible that these "leakers" are just concerned citizens, who believe that sufficient evidence exists to act upon this intelligence, and they are troubled because that isn't happening. There doesn't have to be a political agenda behind leaking. Who is the most famous leaker in modern history? Daniel Ellsberg, right? He did what was right and needed to be done. He was a patriot.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Why would I overtly concern myself with something the intel community said is not credible and unverified? If I were a hand-wringing TDSer, I guess because it's my life-blood and sustains me daily.

The rest of us will wait for it to be verified, if it can be, and not gnash our teeth because we want SOMEthing to be done. About a problem that may not exist.

And we can want bureaucratic-state leakers to be prosecuted because they damage our security, and all at the same time!!

My Garsh!

The intelligence community did not say that the intel wasn't credible. Trump said that, and his White House Press Secretary has repeated it. There was a disagreement over whether or not the intel was verifiable, but that was cleared up with the intercepts showing Russian financial data being transferred into Taliban-linked accounts.

 

[Sandman 423]

Just about all of the Republicans/conservatives commenting on this right now, seem much more concerned with discovering the identity of the source behind the leaks, than they are with the veracity of the intelligence being leaked. That is very telling about where their allegiances truly rest. It's party over country.

Is russia playing by the same rules we are?

This information is only a surprise to ignorant people. I guarantee russia is doing much worse than this. Lets clean up our own house before we start casting stones. It amazes me that you don't care that we have a leaking problem.

Where was your outrage when President Obama was in office?

 

[Sandman 423]

"Russia has committed an act of WAR! by focking around with a tiny % of Americans using patently over-the-top social media ads! We demand action! (from everyone but the guy who watched the WAR! act occur)"

"He's Hitler...no - Stalin...Stalitler! - and he's causing WWIII with NK...no, no...with Iran! and - no, no....China! and ....he just declared on MI and WI governors with proxy war by armed white nationalists!"

I don't know how these people get food to their mouth without losing an eye.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Is russia playing by the same rules we are?

This information is only a surprise to ignorant people. I guarantee russia is doing much worse than this. Lets clean up our own house before we start casting stones. It amazes me that you don't care that we have a leaking problem.

Where was your outrage when President Obama was in office?

I had no problem with Edward Snowden and said so at the time. Were his motives entirely selfless? Probably not. Did he do the country a great service? Absolutely.

 

[NCFisher]

The intelligence community did not say that the intel wasn't credible. Trump said that, and his White House Press Secretary has repeated it. There was a disagreement over whether or not the intel was verifiable, but that was cleared up with the intercepts showing Russian financial data being transferred into Taliban-linked accounts.

Since we're both not military intel, you're disagreeing semantically; it's not important.

If you're saying that clears up any doubt or dispute that Russia is paying bounties, I'd respond it does not. As Pompeo noted, we've been aware of Russia equipping Taliban for a decade; members of congress are also aware of this.

 

[Sandman 423]

I had no problem with Edward Snowden and said so at the time. Were his motives entirely selfless? Probably not. Did he do the country a great service? Absolutely.

I wasn't talking about Snowden. I was talking about his relationship with russia and how putin thought so little of his leadership that he expanded his empire.