THIS is what treason looks like

[apdst]

Your opinion. I disagree.

You don't agree that leaking a private meeting and the classified information discussed in that meeting was stupid?

 

[Vern]

I thought this was old news, and if I remember correct it came out after israel had no real issue with trump sharing the intel,

no you remember incorrectly.

Now I feel like I am treading same waters of stupidity that I did all those months ago.

surprisingly you are correct, you are in the same waters of stupidity.

 

[Somerville]

You don't agree that leaking a private meeting and the classified information discussed in that meeting was stupid?

You do know that the only media allowed into this meeting was Russian, don't you?

Every day it becomes more apparent that the Russians wanted Trump to be President because their interactions with him over twenty plus years told them that the man was freakin' stupid along with being an egomaniac.

So now, they can be the ones 'leaking' information about him, simply in order to weaken America's position in international relations. They helped the stupid guy win the Oval Office and now they are using his Presidency as a non-violent, less costly way to harm American interests and to build up Russian power.

 

[apdst]

You do know that the only media allowed into this meeting was Russian, don't you?

Every day it becomes more apparent that the Russians wanted Trump to be President because their interactions with him over twenty plus years told them that the man was freakin' stupid along with being an egomaniac.

So now, they can be the ones 'leaking' information about him, simply in order to weaken America's position in international relations. They helped the stupid guy win the Oval Office and now they are using his Presidency as a non-violent, less costly way to harm American interests and to build up Russian power.

Are you saying that the Rudsian media leaked the story?

If so, provide a link.

 

[Somerville]

Are you saying that the Rudsian media leaked the story?

If so, provide a link.

Who else was in the Oval Office that day?

 

[apdst]

Who else was in the Oval Office that day?

You can't support your claim. Got it!

 

[Somerville]

You can't support your claim. Got it!

I can't support my claim!!??!! A simple question, "Who was in the Oval Office that day?" and you have no response other than "Uh Uh, I don't believe you." A 12 year old would do better.

 

[apdst]

I can't support my claim!!??!! A simple question, "Who was in the Oval Office that day?" and you have no response other than "Uh Uh, I don't believe you." A 12 year old would do better.

A 12 y/o would admit he can't support his claim.

 

[Somerville]

A 12 y/o would admit he can't support his claim.

Some 12-year-olds are more willing to acknowledge reality than some adults.

May 10 Trump Bars U.S. Press, but Not Russia’s, at Meeting With Russian Officials

May 10 Kremlin tweets during closed-door Oval Office meeting with Trump

May 11

White House furious after being trolled with Russia Oval Office photos

"They tricked us," an angry White House official said.
"That's the problem with the Russians -- they lie," the official added.
The Russians used the photos to troll the White House in its social media posts Wednesday. The Russian Foreign Ministry posted a photo of a smiling US President shaking hands with Lavrov on Twitter, adding strange and ironic optics to the questions already swirling around the White House over Comey's firing.

May 16

Inside the Oval Office with Trump and the Russians: Broad smiles and loose lips

The two photographers took pictures at the start of the meeting and then left the room. White House aides said they were under the impression that the Russian photographer in attendance was on Lavrov’s staff, and were angry when they later saw the photos published online by Tass, the state-owned Russian news agency.

[Presence of Russian photographer in Oval Office raises security concerns]

The Tass photographer’s presence also raised security alarms with former U.S. intelligence officials, who cited the possibility that a hidden listening device or other surveillance equipment could have been brought into the Oval Office. Administration officials played down the danger and said the photographer and his equipment were subjected to a security screening before entering the White House.

Still, U.S. officials acknowledge that they were outmaneuvered by their Russian counterparts, at least on the photographers, and “got rolled,” in the words of one.

 

[apdst]

Some 12-year-olds are more willing to acknowledge reality than some adults.

May 10 Trump Bars U.S. Press, but Not Russia’s, at Meeting With Russian Officials

May 10 Kremlin tweets during closed-door Oval Office meeting with Trump

May 11

May 16

Is this you saying that Russian journalists are the anonymous sources that leaked details of the meeting?

 

[Oborosen]

no you remember incorrectly.



surprisingly you are correct, you are in the same waters of stupidity.

Hey, nice to see you again and I'm not surprised that you again failed to cite something that proves me wrong.

Par for the course with you as usual.

 

[beerftw]

no you remember incorrectly.



surprisingly you are correct, you are in the same waters of stupidity.

Considering it occured much earlier this year, I believe I remembered it correctly, throwing a new label over expired milk does not make it fresh milk no matter how hard you wish it to be.

 

[beerftw]

Actually, it was in May, and yes, Israel did have objections..

I tried finding israeli objections, the most I could find were stories about anonymous informants who talked to a guy who knew a guy etc. In terms of an israeli response I can not find one, even on the wiki page on this subject there is no mention of an official israeli response.

Further add to that the world did not know it was israel until leakers gave the intel to the media and the media blasted it from every corner, so in reality if anyone put spies in harms way, it was the media in a ruthless attempt to undermine trump by any means, not a leader sharing intel to another leader.

 

[beerftw]

According to all our intelligence agencies America was attacked by hacking into both the DNC AND THE RNC and by attempting to affect the results of our election. It is further agreed by those intllegence agencies that is was Russian governmental actors who launched the attack and may have colluded with Americans. Yes we do share intel with the Russian government for our mutual national/s safety. Trump got nothing out of his revealing that Israeli infiltrators, infiltrated Isis. He didn't get anything because he didn't ask for anything. He just wanted to show how important he is to the two Russian agents and he also thought the U.S. media could never find out. But he did compromise the mission and endangered the lives of the infiltrators and furthermore made it less likely our allies will share highly classified intelligence with us in the further knowing that we have a child president. But you are absolutely right that a president has the authority to share intelligence even highly classified intelligence with whom ever he chooses and for what ever reason he chooses. Even if it's just to impress our enemies with how important the great Donald Trump is.

Wait are you still spouting the claim that was debunked a million times? for one no all our agencies did not agree, 3 did, and those three have never seen the evidence, only what a third party forensic team told them as a conclusion. Further that the claim fancy bear is a russian govt entity because they use outdated ukrainian malware freely available to the world to download and use just shows lazy forensics, hell the supposed russian hack program wasn't russian to begin with.

 

[Somerville]

Wait are you still spouting the claim that was debunked a million times? for one no all our agencies did not agree, 3 did, and those three have never seen the evidence, only what a third party forensic team told them as a conclusion. Further that the claim fancy bear is a russian govt entity because they use outdated ukrainian malware freely available to the world to download and use just shows lazy forensics, hell the supposed russian hack program wasn't russian to begin with.

Why are you spouting the same claims as the president* claims as the 'truth'? The Director of National Intelligence might know more about the situation than you or I or Donald J Trump.

Intelligence Director Says Agencies Agree on Russian Meddling

ASPEN, Colorado — Daniel Coats, the director of national intelligence, said Friday (July 21) there is no dissent inside U.S. intelligence agencies about the conclusion that Russia used hacking and fake news to interfere in the 2016 presidential election — despite comments by his boss, President Donald Trump, that have seemed to cast some doubt about the unanimity.

In an interview with NBC Nightly News anchor Lester Holt at the Aspen Security Forum, Coats said that the reason only four of 17 intelligence agencies signed onto the January assessment describing the Russian effort is that the other agencies were not involved in gathering and analyzing the intelligence.

So there were four, not three agencies, that actually were out in the real world "gathering . . . the intelligence", but for some reason the guy with the nuclear codes says he disagrees with the groups working to protect American interests.

 

[beerftw]

Why are you spouting the same claims as the president* claims as the 'truth'? The Director of National Intelligence might know more about the situation than you or I or Donald J Trump.



So there were four, not three agencies, that actually were out in the real world "gathering . . . the intelligence", but for some reason the guy with the nuclear codes says he disagrees with the groups working to protect American interests.

I only spout what is said and not what is spun, btw who was the 4th org to agree? because the dni does not count as an intel agency as far as I see. Also the dni got it's information from crowdstrike as did the fbi and cia, as the dnc refused to let actual intel agencies do forensics on their server.

add to that the prior dni james clapper lied under oath and even admitted that his job was to lie to the a amrican people, so we must take the word of the dni that has already admitted that positions job is to lie to the people, the cia which has a near 100% track record for lying, and it has been well documented from all the foia releases, and the fbi which said not seeing it and taking their word for it is good enough for me.

Add to this cozy bear and grizzly steppe both use the same malware, as does 99% of all hackers, malware that originated from various parts of the world, so this immediatly drags into question the credibility of intel agencies to deem something as a state actor based off malware anyone in the world can download. It would be on par to saying the mexican govt personally grew all the weed coming to america because weed growing is so sophisticated it must be a state actor. Add to this further the russian govt does not do amatuer mistakes like shown by our intelligence, they are masters at what they do, what our intelligence shown was amateur hacking against a poorly guarded server.

Another note is crowdstrike are the ones claiming grizzly steppe and cozy bear are russian state actors, despite never being able to prove their claim and having only medium confidence off the flimsiest of evidence. Russian state hackers are top notch, on par with the best hackers the us govt has, what they shown was amateurs, in which russia ukraine etc has no shortage of, as russia is to spear fushing and trojans as nigeria is to the nigerian prince scam.

 

[Tangmo]

It's nothing different that presidents have been doing since WW2. Nothing was abused. You people are just pissed off because he won and Ckinton lost, so you all are dreaming up every chicken**** excuse to claim President Trump broke the law.

The sad part, is that y'all aren't even smart enough to just claim that it was a stupid thing to do and then tell us why it's a stupid idea.

Links to Potus as in plural "since WW2" plse thx.

You don't know nothing was abused. We do know that Americans including the media were not invited to the meeting and did not attend. We also know only Russian media were in the meeting and reported their take on it.

A major problem I have with Trump is that he never criticizes two people only: Putin and Flynn. If Trump met you I'd be sure he'd say only good things about you.

 

[Fledermaus]

Links to Potus as in plural "since WW2" plse thx.

You don't know nothing was abused. We do know that Americans including the media were not invited to the meeting and did not attend. We also know only Russian media were in the meeting and reported their take on it.

A major problem I have with Trump is that he never criticizes two people only: Putin and Flynn. If Trump met you I'd be sure he'd say only good things about you.

Can you say "MOVING GOALPOSTS"?

 

[Tangmo]

Trump and the senior commanders of the armed forces agree on precious little.

General Joseph Dunford the chairman of JCS has already testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee that, "Mr. Chairman, I think sharing intelligence with the Russians would not be a good idea." Maybe General Kelly thinks it might be a fine idea, same as the LTG retired Michael Flynn of "lock her up" notoriety thinks it's such a great idea he did it for for cash bucks from Russia.


56 Retired U.S. Generals And Admirals Blast Trump’s Military Trans Ban

“[It] would cause significant disruptions, deprive the military of mission-critical talent, and compromise the integrity of transgender troops.”


Fifty-six retired U.S. generals and admirals slammed President Donald Trump’s ban against transgender individuals serving in the military on Tuesday.

“This proposed ban, if implemented, would cause significant disruptions, deprive the military of mission-critical talent, and compromise the integrity of transgender troops who would be forced to live a lie, as well as non-transgender peers who would be forced to choose between reporting their comrades or disobeying policy,” the letter, also sent to HuffPost, reads. "Patriotic transgender Americans who are serving— and who want to serve—must not be dismissed, deprived of medically necessary health care, or forced to compromise their integrity or hide their identity.”

The letter also notes that “transgender troops have been serving honorably and openly for the past year, and have been widely praised by commanders” and that 18 other nations allow trans troops “and none has reported any detriment to readiness.”

Commandant Paul Zukunft, the head of the U.S. Coastguard, also weighed in on the ban on Tuesday. He told the Center for Strategic and International Studies forum, “I told [a transgender military member] I will not turn my back... We have made an investment in you and you have made an investment in the Coast Guard, and I will not break faith.”


A partial list of the signees of the letter appears below:

General John R. Allen, USMC (Retired)
General Robert W. Sennewald, USA (Retired)
Vice Admiral Donald Arthur, USN (Retired)
Lieutenant General Robert Gard, USA (Retired)
Lieutenant General Walter Gaskin, USMC (Retired)
Vice Admiral Kevin P. Green, USN (Retired)
Lieutenant General Arlen D. Jameson, USAF (Retired)
Lieutenant General Claudia Kennedy, USA (Retired)
Lieutenant General Willie Williams, USMC (Retired)

Major General Juan G. Ayala, USMC (Retired)
Major General Donna Barbisch, USA (Retired)
Rear Admiral Chris Cole, USN (Retired)
Major General Vance Coleman, USA (Retired)
Major General J. Gary Cooper, USMC (Retired)
Major General Paul Eaton, USA (Retired)
Major General Mari K. Eder, USA (Retired)
Rear Admiral F. Stephen Glass, USN (Retired)
Major General Richard S. Haddad, USAF (Retired)
Major General Irv Halter, USAF (Retired)

Rear Admiral Jan Hamby, USN (Retired)
Major General Marcelite J. Harris, USAF (Retired)
Rear Admiral John Hutson, JAGC, USN (Retired)

Major General James R. Klugh, Sr., USA (Retired)
Major General Dennis Laich, USA (Retired)
Major General Randy Manner, USA (Retired)
Major General Dee Ann McWilliams, USA (Retired)
Major General John Phillips, USAF (Retired)
Major General Dana J.H. Pittard, USA (Retired)
Major General Gale Pollock, CRNA, FACHE, FAAN, USA (Retired)
Rear Admiral Harold Robinson, USN (Retired)
Major General Patricia Rose, USAF (Retired)

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...rans-military-ban_us_5980abb2e4b00bb8ff39fced



Trump is indeed causing chaos and disorder in the armed forces. There is not much of the divisions among the large number of top senior commanders active duty or retired, however, who are consistently critical of Trump. The question remains whether Trump jeopardized or endangered U.S. armed forces globally by his secret gift to Putin of U.S. classified intelligence information and data.

Active duty commanders are particularly vocal and direct about Trump in general as we have seen from Charlottesville to Trump's nuclear bombs madness. The Trump-Putin Fanboyz are sticking by Trump regardless.

 

[Fledermaus]

56 Retired U.S. Generals And Admirals Blast Trump’s Military Trans Ban

“[It] would cause significant disruptions, deprive the military of mission-critical talent, and compromise the integrity of transgender troops.”



Fifty-six retired U.S. generals and admirals slammed President Donald Trump’s ban against transgender individuals serving in the military on Tuesday... <Snipped.C&P that has nothing to do with the subject>

Relevance to treason?

None.

But keep editing over and over....

 

[Tangmo]

It is in the popular, people's view of treason that Trump is most vulnerable. It is what the public opinion on the whole thinks of treason that matters.

The Constitution and the statute are of course valid and they are dispository in legal terms. Public opinion is however the final determining judgement. Indeed, the timeline of treason as developed by the facts over a defined period of time condemns Trump to the gallows of popular public opinion....


A Trump Treason Timeline

Josh Marshall put together a timeline of Trump’s candidacy at TPM a few weeks ago, while Nick Wing gathered a much longer view for Huffington Post. Steven Harper’s excellent interactive timeline at BillMoyers.com got mentions on every non-Fox news channel when it was published two weeks ago.

They all make valuable reading.

“The sheer volume of information in this one thread of the Trump campaign conspiracy with Russia is so overwhelming,” Keith Olbermann says of Donald Trump, Jr’s June 2016 meeting with Russians in a recent video, “that only when viewed chronologically does it make any sense or does it become clear that it is, in short, a timeline of treason.”

We should use that word lightly: whereas the constitutional definition of criminal treason has a very specific legal threshold, “treason” in popular usage simply means betrayal of the United States to a hostile power.

Even if the president is only ever charged with obstruction and other crimes, or no crime at all, the timelines look like treason when viewed together.

A Trump Treason Timeline Shows He Sucked Up To Putin, Lied About Why | DeepStateNation


We might do well not to expect formal charges of treason against Trump. This would also be true of the Putin-Trump operators, such as Manafort, Flynn, Don Jr., Kushner, Kelly and the whole lot of 'em. So we can expect something less than formal charges of treason.

The first indictments of the investigation are for instance against Manafort and his corrupt business partner, and they are, specifically in legal terms, "Conspiracy Against The United States." This will do just fine thx. Under a conviction of "Conspiracy Against The United States," Manafort and his business partner are looking at more than 100 years in federal prison.

No problem. 'Treason' has its readily and easily understood meaning to almost everyone in the USA. There is therefore no need to pursue formal legal or Constitutional charges of treason. "Conspiracy Against The United States," will do us just fine and then some thx. Cause it is six of one and a half dozen of the other.

 

[Fledermaus]

It is in the popular, people's view of treason that Trump is most vulnerable. It is what the public opinion on the whole thinks of treason that matters.

The Constitution and the statute are of course valid and they are dispository in legal terms. Public opinion is however the final determining judgement. Indeed, the timeline of treason as developed by the facts over a defined period of time condemns Trump to the gallows of popular public opinion....


A Trump Treason Timeline

Josh Marshall put together a timeline of Trump’s candidacy at TPM a few weeks ago, while Nick Wing gathered a much longer view for Huffington Post. Steven Harper’s excellent interactive timeline at BillMoyers.com got mentions on every non-Fox news channel when it was published two weeks ago.

They all make valuable reading.

“The sheer volume of information in this one thread of the Trump campaign conspiracy with Russia is so overwhelming,” Keith Olbermann says of Donald Trump, Jr’s June 2016 meeting with Russians in a recent video, “that only when viewed chronologically does it make any sense or does it become clear that it is, in short, a timeline of treason.”

We should use that word lightly: whereas the constitutional definition of criminal treason has a very specific legal threshold, “treason” in popular usage simply means betrayal of the United States to a hostile power.

Even if the president is only ever charged with obstruction and other crimes, or no crime at all, the timelines look like treason when viewed together.

A Trump Treason Timeline Shows He Sucked Up To Putin, Lied About Why | DeepStateNation


We might do well not to expect formal charges of treason against Trump. This would also be true of the Putin-Trump operators, such as Manafort, Flynn, Don Jr., Kushner, Kelly and the whole lot of 'em. So we can expect something less than formal charges of treason.

The first indictments of the investigation are for instance against Manafort and his corrupt business partner, and they are, specifically in legal terms, "Conspiracy Against The United States." This will do just fine thx. Under a conviction of "Conspiracy Against The United States," Manafort and his business partner are looking at more than 100 years in federal prison.

No problem. 'Treason' has its readily and easily understood meaning to almost everyone in the USA. There is therefore no need to pursue formal legal or Constitutional charges of treason. "Conspiracy Against The United States," will do us just fine and then some thx. Cause it is six of one and a half dozen of the other.

What is the definition of TREASON?

Oh, that's right.... The real definition no longer matters to some.

And "Conspiracy against the United States" covers a wide range of offenses.

If it ain't TREASON it ain't TREASON......

 

[Manc Skipper]

FIFTY-ONE meetings between the Trump Team and Russians.

That's not counting his meeting with Putin in 2014 when he announced his candidacy a year and a half before he told America.

 

[Tangmo]

Interactive Timeline: Everything We Know About Russia and President Trump

Explore our updated, comprehensive Trump-Russia Timeline — or select one of the central players in the Trump-Russia saga to see what we know about them.

BY STEVEN HARPER | NOVEMBER 27, 2017

A Timeline: Russia and President Trump

When it comes to Donald Trump, his campaign and their dealings with Russia past and present, sometimes it’s hard to keep track of all the players without a scorecard. We have one of sorts — a deeply comprehensive timeline detailing what actually happened and what’s still happening in the ever-changing story of the president, his inner circle and a web of Russian oligarchs, hackers and government officials.

Since first launched in February 2017, the Trump-Russia Timeline has grown to more than 600 entries — and we will continue to add updates regularly.

What have reporters and investigators already uncovered and made public? What are the connections and patterns? Review the timeline to see.

Interactive Timeline: Everything We Know About Russia and President Trump


Fire up your coffee pot and be prepared to order pizza cause the timeline of Trump's popular understanding of Treason is documented in a dozen investigative articles with the details, i.e., dates, names, money invested and exchanged etc right up to the current month beginning in 1979.

Documented: Trump, Russia, Putin on the road to the White House.

"Conspiracy Against The United States."

Like it or not, if the overwhelming popular opinion, belief and anger is about treason, then treason it is.

 

[Fledermaus]

Interactive Timeline: Everything We Know About Russia and President Trump

Explore our updated, comprehensive Trump-Russia Timeline — or select one of the central players in the Trump-Russia saga to see what we know about them.

BY STEVEN HARPER | NOVEMBER 27, 2017

A Timeline: Russia and President Trump

When it comes to Donald Trump, his campaign and their dealings with Russia past and present, sometimes it’s hard to keep track of all the players without a scorecard. We have one of sorts — a deeply comprehensive timeline detailing what actually happened and what’s still happening in the ever-changing story of the president, his inner circle and a web of Russian oligarchs, hackers and government officials.

Since first launched in February 2017, the Trump-Russia Timeline has grown to more than 600 entries — and we will continue to add updates regularly.

What have reporters and investigators already uncovered and made public? What are the connections and patterns? Review the timeline to see.

Interactive Timeline: Everything We Know About Russia and President Trump


Fire up your coffee pot and be prepared to order pizza cause the timeline of Trump's popular understanding of Treason is documented in a dozen investigative articles with the details, i.e., dates, names, money invested and exchanged etc right up to the current month beginning in 1979.

Documented: Trump, Russia, Putin on the road to the White House.

"Conspiracy Against The United States."

Like it or not, if the overwhelming popular opinion, belief and anger is about treason, then treason it is.

Look up the definition...

IF IT AIN'T TREASON, IT AIN'T TREASON.

It really is as simple as that.

Too bad there are people who refuse to understand the meaning.