• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump team's push to stop leaks quickly leaks to press

jmotivator said:
No, I am saying that if the supporters of the previous president are allowed to continue leaking information then expect the same treatment by these agencies when a Democrat is in office.

And hey, I though you guys were pushing the narrative that it was Russian hacks, not leaks....
Click to expand...

Thought you guys didn't like assumptions. Where is the proof the leaks are from supporters of the previous president?
 
jmotivator said:
No, I am saying that if the supporters of the previous president are allowed to continue leaking information then expect the same treatment by these agencies when a Democrat is in office.

And hey, I though you guys were pushing the narrative that it was Russian hacks, not leaks....
Click to expand...

Hey, it seems rather obvious they buy all the news created for them, ignoring the strings that come attached....

marionette.jpg
 
Praxas said:
Thought you guys didn't like assumptions. Where is the proof the leaks are from supporters of the previous president?
Click to expand...

We don't like assumptions, sure, but you seem OK with it so we are just trying to speak your language.
 
jmotivator said:
We don't like assumptions, sure, but you seem OK with it so we are just trying to speak your language.
Click to expand...

Well just following your sides lead from Obama isn't a US citizen birther **** that your dear leader spouted for years. I'll have to ask a Trumpbot what's it's like to have their head so far up Trump's ass that they are tasting his dinner from last night.
 
I'm just curious with the idea of Obama placing members throughout the government that not only inform him, but well, leak.
 
sookster said:
I'm just curious with the idea of Obama placing members throughout the government that not only inform him, but well, leak.
Click to expand...

when you have actual proof of that BS, let us know. All the other Trumpbots have run scared with providing that proof.
 
Praxas said:
Well just following your sides lead from Obama isn't a US citizen birther **** that your dear leader spouted for years. I'll have to ask a Trumpbot what's it's like to have their head so far up Trump's ass that they are tasting his dinner from last night.
Click to expand...

Nice try, but I wasn't a birther, and they aren't "My side", and Trump wasn't who I would have chosen for President. The left has gone bonkers, however since losing the unloseable election and I must admit that does fill me with some amount of glee.

But what some in the IC and DOJ are doing to the Trump presidency is immensely dangerous and they should be rooted out and put behind bars. I also warn those finding amusement in this that their day is coming, and all they are doing is whistling past the graveyard.
 
jmotivator said:
Nice try, but I wasn't a birther, and they aren't "My side", and Trump wasn't who I would have chosen for President. The left has gone bonkers, however since losing the unloseable election and I must admit that does fill me with some amount of glee.
Click to expand...

Nope Trump is all yours and you defend him everyday. You guys support a birther and that is on YOU. Own it.

But what some in the IC and DOJ are doing to the Trump presidency is immensely dangerous and they should be rooted out and put behind bars. I also warn those finding amusement in this that their day is coming, and all they are doing is whistling past the graveyard.
Click to expand...

I agree they should be behind bars, however, it is amusing how Trump and his supporters LOVED the leaks when it was going against Clinton and Obama but all of a sudden they change their tune when it's Trump getting leaked on lol.
 
jmotivator said:
No, I am saying that if the supporters of the previous president are allowed to continue leaking information then expect the same treatment by these agencies when a Democrat is in office.

And hey, I though you guys were pushing the narrative that it was Russian hacks, not leaks....
Click to expand...

What a goofy post. In your need to be combative you're not even trying to be coherent. Slow down, think through what you'd like to communicate, and try again.
 
Cardinal said:
What a goofy post. In your need to be combative you're not even trying to be coherent. Slow down, think through what you'd like to communicate, and try again.
Click to expand...

What a goofy post. In your drive to be combative you aren't even trying to make a point.

My point still stands, the amount of heat and illegality from the sieve that is the IC and DOJ since Trump took office has resulted all the chaos that the left has wanted visited on this president, but as always, the dull-as-a-bag-of-hammers left has again failed to view the big picture in all of this and grasped that what they visit on Trump will be visited on them if they ever manage to right their own ship.

"Undisclosed" and liberal Hillary supporters, like Harry Reid, fail to grasp what they bring on themselves when they try and change the power centers of government. Never take power onto yourself that you wouldn't trust in the hands of your political opponents, I say... but then that is a recipe for small government, and the left can't have that.

Back to my original point, however, about the revolt by Obama holdovers in the IC and DOJ, it's like you guys have been living under a rock being spoon fed the filtered news from DailyKos, or something....

Atlantic story about White House staffer "only lasting 8 days", and the WaPo story about the CIA official "never thinking he'd quit" forgot to mention that the subjects of the two stories we the two admin assistants to Ben Rhodes...

The New York times reported that in the final days of the Obama administration "some White House officials scrambled to spread information about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election — and about possible contacts between associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump and Russians — across the government." ... which was preceded by officials seeding Intelligence briefings with questions to be archived, and a declassification push to get the reports in as many hands as possible.

Moreover, Obama changed the order of succession at the DOJ so that he could force who would inherit any investigations into Russian ties, oddly cutting Dana Boente, a 33 year career DOJ prosecutor with specialization in government corruption out from the list all together when he was first in line before Obama's EO, and pushing an Obama and Holder lackey, Channing Philips, to the front of the line. Trump reversed that EO after taking office, though.

There is more evidence that Obama holdovers are the source of the leaks, and that the leaks were a specific goal of the Obama administration before he left office, then there is that Trump worked with the Russians.
 
jmotivator said:
What a goofy post. In your drive to be combative you aren't even trying to make a point.

My point still stands, the amount of heat and illegality from the sieve that is the IC and DOJ since Trump took office has resulted all the chaos that the left has wanted visited on this president, but as always, the dull-as-a-bag-of-hammers left has again failed to view the big picture in all of this and grasped that what they visit on Trump will be visited on them if they ever manage to right their own ship.

"Undisclosed" and liberal Hillary supporters, like Harry Reid, fail to grasp what they bring on themselves when they try and change the power centers of government. Never take power onto yourself that you wouldn't trust in the hands of your political opponents, I say... but then that is a recipe for small government, and the left can't have that.

Back to my original point, however, about the revolt by Obama holdovers in the IC and DOJ, it's like you guys have been living under a rock being spoon fed the filtered news from DailyKos, or something....

Atlantic story about White House staffer "only lasting 8 days", and the WaPo story about the CIA official "never thinking he'd quit" forgot to mention that the subjects of the two stories we the two admin assistants to Ben Rhodes...

The New York times reported that in the final days of the Obama administration "some White House officials scrambled to spread information about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election — and about possible contacts between associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump and Russians — across the government." ... which was preceded by officials seeding Intelligence briefings with questions to be archived, and a declassification push to get the reports in as many hands as possible.

Moreover, Obama changed the order of succession at the DOJ so that he could force who would inherit any investigations into Russian ties, oddly cutting Dana Boente, a 33 year career DOJ prosecutor with specialization in government corruption out from the list all together when he was first in line before Obama's EO, and pushing an Obama and Holder lackey, Channing Philips, to the front of the line. Trump reversed that EO after taking office, though.

There is more evidence that Obama holdovers are the source of the leaks, and that the leaks were a specific goal of the Obama administration before he left office, then there is that Trump worked with the Russians.
Click to expand...

You talk of consequences, but what you fail to grasp is that the whole reason Trump has zero moral authority to complain about the leaks is specifically because trump happily profited from hacks and leaks in 2016 and even publicly asked Russia to hack Clinton's emails on his behalf. So all you're threatening is that since Trump has no moral authority now, he will continue to have no moral authority later.

And to that, I'd say that I expect nothing less from him because he's a deviant ****heel with no ideology but to himself.
 
Praxas said:
Nope Trump is all yours and you defend him everyday. You guys support a birther and that is on YOU. Own it.
Click to expand...

I call out the silly left on their absurdisms every day. Lately they all seem to revolve around Trump, though.

I agree they should be behind bars, however, it is amusing how Trump and his supporters LOVED the leaks when it was going against Clinton and Obama but all of a sudden they change their tune when it's Trump getting leaked on lol.
Click to expand...

Again, who said that the Hillary revelations were from leaks?

According to the established narrative Podesta's email was hacked by a whaling expedition, Hillary's private server was discovered from email headers in Podesta's private emails...

The DCCC was hacked by Russians...

Where is the internal leak here?

The Democrats heartache during the 2016 campaign with regard to emails were all from hacks to PRIVATE email servers and accounts.

Podesta's email: Gmail
Hillary's server: Private
DCCC server: Private

Try to understand the history of what we are discussing here before trying to assign motivations and beliefs to your opponent. You will avoid looking ignorant in the future.
 
Cardinal said:
You talk of consequences, but what you fail to grasp is that the whole reason Trump has zero moral authority to complain about the leaks is specifically because trump happily profited from hacks and leaks in 2016 and even publicly asked Russia to hack Clinton's emails on his behalf. So all you're threatening is that since Trump has no moral authority now, he will continue to have no moral authority later.

And to that, I'd say that I expect nothing less from him because he's a deviant ****heel with no ideology but to himself.
Click to expand...

LOL!! No, there were no leaks in the Hillary email fracas. If you want to sell the Russian hacks of Podesta and the DCCC you can't then claim they were leaks. :roll:

The reason it is different is that I would expect foreign groups that aren't friendly to the US to try to root out and push damning information about the US. They don't like us and will do things they feel will harm us. They tried the same thing with the RNC but the hack attempts failed.

What we are encountering with the current leaks are US citizens acting in ways detrimental to US security, and by the Democrat friendly NYT accounts, the efforts to disseminate the information being leaks was a purposeful act by the previous administration.
 
Last edited:
jmotivator said:
LOL!! No, there were no leaks in the Hillary email fracas. If you want to sell the Russian hacks of Podesta and the DCCC you can't then claim they were leaks. :roll:

The reason it is different is that I would expect foreign groups that aren't friendly to the US to try to root out and push damning information about the US. They don't like us and will do things they feel will harm us. What we are encountering with the Trump leaks are US citizens acting in ways detrimental to US security.
Click to expand...

Again, in your need to be combative you're abandoning all attempts to be coherent. Slow down, think about what you'd like to communicate, and try again.
 
Napoleon said:
With all of the information coming out and recently video of a meeting filmed outside an Oval Office window - I'm starting to wonder if the leaks are coming from the Secret Service.
Click to expand...
I sometimes wonder if the tweeting phone has been compromised to allow remote access to the microphone and camera.
 
Cardinal said:
Again, in your need to be combative you're abandoning all attempts to be coherent. Slow down, think about what you'd like to communicate, and try again.
Click to expand...

Hahah! I think most people will realize that you are avoiding addressing the clear statements by playing dumb. :lol:

I edited my pervious statement to provide information you have missed while under your rock, though, so maybe you will try and respond to it?

jmotivator said:
LOL!! No, there were no leaks in the Hillary email fracas. If you want to sell the Russian hacks of Podesta and the DCCC you can't then claim they were leaks. :roll:

The reason it is different is that I would expect foreign groups that aren't friendly to the US to try to root out and push damning information about the US. They don't like us and will do things they feel will harm us. They tried the same thing with the RNC but the hack attempts failed.

What we are encountering with the current leaks are US citizens acting in ways detrimental to US security, and by the Democrat friendly NYT accounts, the efforts to disseminate the information being leaks was a purposeful act by the previous administration.
Click to expand...

So again, this is clear, you can try to address my statements or you can try and play dumb.

Can you admit, at the very least, that you were wrong and that Hillary's email troubles were not caused by a leak?
 
Cardinal said:
Not technically the most important thing going on, but it's certainly good for a chuckle. At least it is until you remember that leakers within the various government departments are the only people standing between Trump and the complete realization of his will, such as it is.
Trump team's push to stop leaks quickly leaks to press | TheHill
Click to expand...

I'm glad that they decided to limit access to classified computer systems.

Limiting access to classified computer systems sounds like something that would be a SOP rather than a special, reactionary measure.

But, SOP or a newly discovered tactic, I'm glad that they are limiting access to classified computer systems.

[Especially since we have learned that "Trump associates" are the subject of a FISA warrant iow foreign intelligence agents]
 
Simon W. Moon said:
I'm glad that they decided to limit access to classified computer systems.

Limiting access to classified computer systems sounds like something that would be a SOP rather than a special, reactionary measure.

But, SOP or a newly discovered tactic, I'm glad that they are limiting access to classified computer systems.

[Especially since we have learned that "Trump associates" are the subject of a FISA warrant iow foreign intelligence agents]
Click to expand...
I am curious, just what you make of this? Was access to "classified computers" readily available for anyone at any time and just now they wake up or are security clearances revoked so some people can no longer access them and if that is the case why would they not be fired or prosecuted even if something warrants security clearance revocation?
 
Simon W. Moon said:
I'm glad that they decided to limit access to classified computer systems.

Limiting access to classified computer systems sounds like something that would be a SOP rather than a special, reactionary measure.

But, SOP or a newly discovered tactic, I'm glad that they are limiting access to classified computer systems.

[Especially since we have learned that "Trump associates" are the subject of a FISA warrant iow foreign intelligence agents]
Click to expand...

It's something, but considering that the leaks appear to be coming from everywhere, it doesn't seem to be especially effective.
 
prometeus said:
I am curious, just what you make of this? Was access to "classified computers" readily available for anyone at any time and just now they wake up or are security clearances revoked so some people can no longer access them and if that is the case why would they not be fired or prosecuted even if something warrants security clearance revocation?
Click to expand...
My only info on the subject comes from that particular sentence in that particular article.

So my speculation could be colorful and inventive, but it's unlikely to be useful or accurate.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
My only info on the subject comes from that particular sentence in that particular article.

So my speculation could be colorful and inventive, but it's unlikely to be useful or accurate.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I just can't imagine what they meant by that or if it is just another misdirection.
 
prometeus said:
Fair enough. I just can't imagine what they meant by that or if it is just another misdirection.
Click to expand...

I found the comment notable as well.
It just sounds like the kind of thing one would do as a matter of course, a standard operating procedure for workplaces which handle sensitive information.

While I'm glad that they're taking this step, I wish they had been motivated to restrict access to classified computer systems out of a healthy regard for information security.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
My only info on the subject comes from that particular sentence in that particular article.

So my speculation could be colorful and inventive, but it's unlikely to be useful or accurate.
Click to expand...

I think it relates back to the news story posted by the NYT earlier that detailed the efforts by the Obama administration to "protect" the Russian investigation by lowering the clearance level on data to ensure as many people as possible in the DOJ had access to it. Like the Trump EO that reinstated Dana Boente as first in line after Sessions, rather than Obama's handpicked successor who was chosen as part of the emergency reorg in January, it appears that Trump's administration is trying to chose the door of classified data that was opened by the Obama administration.
 
fmw said:
It sure is. It is the core difference between conservatives and liberals.
Click to expand...
Sadly, in terms of the current labels of 'conservative' and 'liberal', there might be some truth here.

But I remember a time when 'liberal' was seen as derived from 'liberty', and that desire for liberty extend to 'liberty from excessive government intervention'. Somehow liberalism seems to have gotten sidetracked a bit, or perhaps the term has become corrupted.
 
Chomsky said:
Sadly, in terms of the current labels of 'conservative' and 'liberal', there might be some truth here.

But I remember a time when 'liberal' was seen as derived from 'liberty', and that desire for liberty extend to 'liberty from excessive government intervention'. Somehow liberalism seems to have gotten sidetracked a bit, or perhaps the term has become corrupted.
Click to expand...

Most of the differences between conservative and liberal are just details related to the attitude about the power of government. Reactions to issues are easy to predict because of it. Not only is there some truth to it but it is the main, basic, core difference. I don't apply my point to political parties. That is a different issue entirely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom