Pentagon Keeps Trump in the Dark About its Cyber Attacks on Russia

[ocean515]

This is a story which one hopes isn't true, but fears it is ... and understands.

One question is why, after choosing to keep the president in the dark, people in the know would then be leaked in a way which would be sure to set the president off on the kind of downward spiraling tirade which is part of why so much of our government (including his own staff) and so much of the rest of the western world feels a need to keep this dangerous person in the dark.

Was the need for secrecy over because the cyber mission had been completed? Why leak it now?

How about the story is BS and just another dog whistle/click bait bit the liberal media is trying to profit from?

 

[Simon W. Moon]

We should absolutely be concerned that there is a rogue element within the Pentagon.

I knew it!
Wicked Hussein Obama's Deep State™ has thus far infected

• the US intelligence Community,
• the US Diplomatic Corp,
• the US Department of Justice,
• more than half of all Americans,
• and now, the US military

Wicked Hussein Obama sure has organized a powerful community.

 

[apdst]

I knew it!
Wicked Hussein Obama's Deep State™ has thus far infected

• the US intelligence Community,
• the US Diplomatic Corp,
• the US Department of Justice,
• more than half of all Americans,
• and now, the US military

Wicked Hussein Obama sure has organized a powerful community.

Of course you don't see a problem, because you hate Trump. But, how are you going to feel when it's a president that you do like?

 

[apdst]

So it's probably a bad idea for the military to tell the president about these programs but it's wholly appropriate to leak the program to the media and have the media tell everyone, including the president, about the program.

Personally, I don't think that makes much sense but I'm just a poor, uneducated white guy who voted for Trump because I like red hats so...

There's nothing wrong with leaking a top secret operation, if it hurts Trump.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Of course you don't see a problem, because you hate Trump. But, how are you going to feel when it's a president that you do like?

I'd be EXTREMELY concerned that the USIC and the DOD and DOJ and the USDoS, and more than half of Americans think the guy's untrustworthy.

I'd be so concerned that I'd become deeply suspicious of that politician and his intentions.

How are you handling it?
By deciding everyone is in on a giant conspiracy against a politician?

 

[Amelia]

How about the story is BS and just another dog whistle/click bait bit the liberal media is trying to profit from?

I supposed that's a possibility. However, the NYT does still have a good track record for fact-based reporting in spite of Trump's accusations about them being an enemy of the people.

 

[ElChupacabra]

Some argue that a silent coup has taken place by the Pentagon against Trump. I find that argument most plausible.

If this NYT article is true, that makes it even more plausible.

The more interesting aspect for me is that the military considers him a security risk in leaking information inadvertently. Trump does have a tendency to speak off the cuff, and if there was a feeling this could compromise the work they were doing, then this is more about their risk assessment than anything else. If their concern is potentially leaked information, do you think they should take that risk?

 

[apdst]

I'd be EXTREMELY concerned that the USIC and the DOD and DOJ and the USDoS, and more than half of Americans think the guy's untrustworthy.

I'd be so concerned that I'd become deeply suspicious of that politician and his intentions.

How are you handling it?
By deciding everyone is in on a giant conspiracy against a politician?

That's not a decision any of those people can make. This is a government of the people, by the people and of the people. Trump is the legitimately elected president. This isn't a government of the bureaucracy.

 

[ocean515]

I supposed that's a possibility. However, the NYT does still have a good track record for fact-based reporting in spite of Trump's accusations about them being an enemy of the people.

The NYT is an enemy of the people. Their objectives and fake news has been soundly exposed. Don't get me wrong, they have every right to print anything they chose.

My hope is that one day the libel laws will get changed so outfits like WaPo, and the NYT can't hide behind the public figure excuse, and they can be financially hammered back into the business they pretend to be in.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Of course you don't see a problem, because you hate Trump. But, how are you going to feel when it's a president that you do like?

The rogue element is occupying the White House, secrets get tweeted. Or told to Russians in the Oval office, threatening Israeli lives.

 

[Amelia]

The NYT is an enemy of the people. Their objectives and fake news has been soundly exposed. Don't get me wrong, they have every right to print anything they chose.

My hope is that one day the libel laws will get changed so outfits like WaPo, and the NYT can't hide behind the public figure excuse, and they can be financially hammered back into the business they pretend to be in.

LOL. I know you need to believe that, because facing the truth would be too painful at this point.

But LOL.

You do what you gotta do. And so will the people in the country whose duty it is to protect us from Trump. That includes the press and the Pentagon.

 

[Airyaman]

Operating independently, outside of the chain of command is considered to be insubordination. Keeping the commander in chief out of the loop is mutiny.

What did they do that was "acting independently"?

 

[marke]

If I were involved in intelligence, for damned sure I wouldn't brief anyone in the Trump administration, especially if the information would put my assets at risk - unless there was good reason to expect they'd keep quiet about whatever they were briefed on - which Trump is incapable of doing.

Not to mention the sieve-like nature of his staff.

Someone seems to be making damned sure Trump is kept outside the loop of those who are informed of the secret Pentagon decisions while at the same time making damned sure the New York Times is kept informed of those same decisions.

 

[apdst]

What did they do that was "acting independently"?

Launching an operation against another country without telling the president, or getting his authorization.

 

[Airyaman]

Launching an operation against another country without telling the president, or getting his authorization.

Why should they have to tell him?

 

[apdst]

The rogue element is occupying the White House, secrets get tweeted. Or told to Russians in the Oval office, threatening Israeli lives.

Mmmm, yeah, no that isn't how it works...lol.

President Trump is The President of The United States. It's literally impossible for him to be a "rogue element". :lamo

 

[3leftsdoo]

Not that I don't trust the Rolling Stone not to be completely wrong about pitching a politically explosive story, but.....


I don't trust the Rolling Stone not to be completely wrong about pitching a politically explosive story.




I also don't doubt that

A) Implants aren't generally briefed to the President unless there is an immediate need for him to understand access in order to make a decision that only the President can make, and
B) It's nonetheless entirely possible that this sentiment exists in the Pentagon, which, while understandable, is nonetheless wrong. The President gets to decide foreign policy and classify or declassify information as he see's fit. Not bureaucrats.

/Thread

 

[Manc Skipper]

Mmmm, yeah, no that isn't how it works...lol.

President Trump is The President of The United States. It's literally impossible for him to be a "rogue element". :lamo

A rogue element who brays secrets to the Russian ambassador, endangering Israeli field agents. No ally dare trust the USA with secret information, it can cost lives.

 

[apdst]

A rogue element who brays secrets to the Russian ambassador, endangering Israeli field agents. No ally dare trust the USA with secret information, it can cost lives.

He's the president. He has that authority.

Funny how you aren't equally poutraged about the NYT outting an agent.

New York Times defends decision to identify undercover CIA agent

I bet this is where you run away.

 

[The Mark]

But you would brief the Rolling Stone?

No, why would that be a thing?

 

[CMPancake]

It is alarming, thst we have people in the Pentagon that prove the existance of the deep state.

Pentagon employees treating the President with the respect he commands isn't a sign of a deep state. Super sorry you support a loose lipped moron.

I bet they're sho-nuff pissed off that their little secret got leaked to the public. Or, it's bull**** and the Pentagon really isn't keeping the president in the dark and the media created this story to try and embarress the president. Either way, they're sorry esxcuses for Americans.

Or quite possibly, the stories are absolutely true because they collaborate with literally every story about Trump being a dull brained dummy

 

[Renae]

Pentagon Keeps Trump in the Dark About its Cyber Attacks on Russia – Rolling Stone

He can't be trusted.

The Rolling Stone Magazine, notoriously wrong...

 

[ocean515]

LOL. I know you need to believe that, because facing the truth would be too painful at this point.

But LOL.

You do what you gotta do. And so will the people in the country whose duty it is to protect us from Trump. That includes the press and the Pentagon.

Protect you from Trump? LOL

And who trained you to believe you need it?

Try thinking for yourself some day. I know that's against the law in the Progressive world....

 

[Lovebug]

Pentagon Keeps Trump in the Dark About its Cyber Attacks on Russia – Rolling Stone

He can't be trusted.

So you are saying the are keeping it from Trump, but are leaking it to the NYT, and are therefor warning Vlad that an attack is coming.
Does that make sense to anyone?

 

[cpwill]

Both sides of the argument are valid. It's probably appropriate to keep the President out if the loop given his past indiscretions with military secrets, but it's probably bad that he can be legally sidelined. These are interesting times.

As a pretty regular Trump critic, I'd say it's still completely inappropriate. Trump got elected President, and so deliberately leaving him less informed than he should be is an abandonment of one's duties within the Intelligence Community - it is literally contrary to the exact reason why they exist (to inform decisionmakers). If Trump wants to declassify every secret the United States has, well, that would be a disastrously stupid thing to do - and it's his complete right to do it. As a Pentagon bureaucrat, you don't get to make that policy - the President does.