Jul 31: Trump has shady undisclosed call with Putin about "forest fires." (It was about "normalizing" relations.)
Aug 7: Huntsman resigns as Ambassador to Russia
Aug 8: Coats and Gordon out at DNI
Aug 12: Maguire in at DNI
Also Aug 12: Whistleblower complains to ICIG
Sept 9: CNN breaks first story about exfiltrated Russian spy in U.S.
Also Sept 9: IC IG transmits the fact of the complaint to Schiff
Sept 10: Bolton resigns
Sept 13: Schiff goes public
I think Bolton leaving was about the feud they had over hosting the taliban at camp david, and also his mustache because Trump is a baby and hated Bolton's mustache.
But I think you are right when you suggested this might be centered around that spy that we had right next to Putin because what's missing from your timeline here is Trump publicly bitching about how we can't trust foreign intelligence sources because they are "selling out their country".
I think that Trump promised Putin that he'd hand that spy back over to him.
My money is on Trump offering Putin the spy as well.
If that is what it is and we find out, I’m gonna love the sycophant defense on that one. You could probably reverse time with the energy from that spin.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Jul 31: Trump has shady undisclosed call with Putin about "forest fires." (It was about "normalizing" relations.)
Aug 7: Huntsman resigns as Ambassador to Russia
Aug 8: Coats and Gordon out at DNI
Aug 12: Maguire in at DNI
Also Aug 12: Whistleblower complains to ICIG
Sept 9: CNN breaks first story about exfiltrated Russian spy in U.S.
Also Sept 9: IC IG transmits the fact of the complaint to Schiff
Sept 10: Bolton resigns
Sept 13: Schiff goes public
I think Bolton leaving was about the feud they had over hosting the taliban at camp david, and also his mustache because Trump is a baby and hated Bolton's mustache.
But I think you are right when you suggested this might be centered around that spy that we had right next to Putin because what's missing from your timeline here is Trump publicly bitching about how we can't trust foreign intelligence sources because they are "selling out their country".
I think that Trump promised Putin that he'd hand that spy back over to him.
You'd really have to be more specific, because that's been fairly regular since before he took office. Even that specific gripe has been made publically and on background at least twice this summer.
But I don't think it's material beyond giving context to why members of the IC may find reason to not trust his instincts or intentions when he promises ________ to __________ in exchange for ____________.
Just for a fun reminder about Trump-time compression: Can you remember all the way back to the G7 meeting? The complaint was filed a week before that. For no reason that I can find, people seem to be offering a 5 week period prior to that as a possible window for the call itself.
A lot of shit has gone down in that time (like being appalled that the CIA was spying on Kim).
My money is on Trump offering Putin the spy as well.
If that is what it is and we find out, I’m gonna love the sycophant defense on that one. You could probably reverse time with the energy from that spin.
Putin being the guy really is Trump's razor here.
He just got out from under an investigation into, essentially, the time he boasted to his sketchy Russian friends about how he tanked an investigation into his relationship with sketchy Russians.
What better time to reboot his relationship with his favorite sketchy Russian; and maybe boast about tanking the investigation while he's at it?
I really don't want it to be, though. All the other eligible despots are jumped up rich kids with no particular skills. Putin knows how to work people.
Another Fake News story out there - It never ends! Virtually anytime I speak on the phone to a foreign leader, I understand that there may be many people listening from various U.S. agencies, not to mention those from hte other country itself. No problem!
...Knowing all of this, is anybody dumb enough to believe that I would say something inappropriate with a foreign leader while on such a potentially "heavily populated" call. I would only do what is right anyway, and only do good for the USA!
The answer is 100% yes, right?
Again, copy the Tweet text to the post for those of us that can't read Twitter please.
"Even if I did do it, it was for the USA because USA, USA, USA!"
Tweeter: Rando
Video: The President getting an impromptu lesson in opsec after asking a general to explain the undisclosed security features of the new fence.
How is the US going to deal with this once he's out of office? Like, I doubt he's going to shut the hell up about the things he's unfortunately had to be told while in office. I suppose I would enjoy seeing him spend the rest of his life in jail for violating NDAs.
+5
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Another Fake News story out there - It never ends! Virtually anytime I speak on the phone to a foreign leader, I understand that there may be many people listening from various U.S. agencies, not to mention those from the other country itself. No problem!
....Knowing all of this, is anybody dumb enough to believe that I would say something inappropriate with a foreign leader while on such a potentially “heavily populated” call. I would only do what is right anyway, and only do good for the USA!
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
And he tweeted out a spy satellite photo just last week, wasn't it?
But yeah, sure, benefit of a doubt, I'm sure he only talks about the more murdery stuff when he's totes sure nobody is listening. Unless they want to join in? No? Oh uh. Totally no murder talk then.
How is the US going to deal with this once he's out of office? Like, I doubt he's going to shut the hell up about the things he's unfortunately had to be told while in office. I suppose I would enjoy seeing him spend the rest of his life in jail for violating NDAs.
The US isn't going to do anything about him living in Russia and being drained dry of every bit of information possible.
Another Fake News story out there - It never ends! Virtually anytime I speak on the phone to a foreign leader, I understand that there may be many people listening from various U.S. agencies, not to mention those from the other country itself. No problem!
....Knowing all of this, is anybody dumb enough to believe that I would say something inappropriate with a foreign leader while on such a potentially “heavily populated” call. I would only do what is right anyway, and only do good for the USA!
“I would NEVER say something inappropriate with a foreign leader where others could hear me! And Russia, if you’re listening...”
JALALABAD (Reuters) - A U.S. drone strike intended to hit an Islamic State (IS) hideout in Afghanistan killed at least 30 civilians resting after a day's labor in the fields, officials said on Thursday.
If I had to bet, it would be Putin, and readmission to the G7 without consideration of Crimea.
That would be a policy disagreement and would not qualify as an "Urgent Concern." It had to be more.
Urgent Concerns
Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA) of 1998 provides a secure means for employees to report to Congress allegations regarding classified information. The ICWPA is a statute that provides a process by which employees, or contractor employees, of IC elements can report matters of "urgent concern" to the intelligence committees of Congress.
An "urgent concern" is defined as:
-A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinion concerning public policy matters.
-A false statement to Congress, or a willful withholding from Congress, on an issue of material fact relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity.
-An action constituting reprisal or threat of reprisal in response to an employee reporting an urgent concern.
If you have information which meets any of the above three criteria, contact the ICIG or DoD IG regarding how to file an ICWPA disclosure.
If I had to bet, it would be Putin, and readmission to the G7 without consideration of Crimea.
It has to be more than that.
Russia in the G7 isn’t nothing, but doesn’t scream IG whistle blower to me either.
I’m leaning towards turning over a Russian spy, but it could be anything ranging from helping Saudi Arabia getting nuclear weapons technology to interference in Netanyahu’s election in his favor to something with North Korea.
My bet is always Putin though cause, ya know, it’s Putin and Trump is Trump.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
John Bolton, President Donald Trump’s fired national security adviser, harshly criticized Trump’s foreign policy on Wednesday at a private lunch, saying that inviting the Taliban to Camp David sent a “terrible signal” and that it was “disrespectful” to the victims of 9/11 because the Taliban had harbored al Qaeda.
Bolton also said that any negotiations with North Korea and Iran were “doomed to failure,” according to two attendees.
All the North Koreans and Iranians want to do is negotiate for relief from sanctions to support their economies, said Bolton, who was speaking before guests invited by the Gatestone Institute, a conservative think tank.
After the attack in June, Trump was poised to launch a military response against the Iranians — strongly urged by Bolton — but pulled back after Fox News host Tucker Carlson and others warned him that it was a bad idea.
During Wednesday’s luncheon, Bolton said the planned response had gone through the full process and everybody in the White House had agreed on the retaliatory strike.
But “a high authority, at the very last minute," without telling anyone, decided not to do it, Bolton complained.
On Wednesday afternoon, Trump pushed back strongly.
“Well, I was critical of John Bolton for getting us involved with a lot of other people in the Middle East,” he told reporters during a visit to the U.S.-Mexico border south of San Diego. “We’ve spent $7.5 trillion in the Middle East and you ought to ask a lot of people about that.“
“John was not able to work with anybody, and a lot of people disagreed with his ideas,” Trump added. “A lot of people were very critical that I brought him on in the first place because of the fact that he was so in favor of going into the Middle East, and he got stuck in quicksand and we became policemen for the Middle East. It’s ridiculous.“
Thanks Tucker Carlson for getting Trump to not start a war with Iran? This is nuts.
+15
Options
KoopahTroopahThe koopas, the troopas.Philadelphia, PARegistered Userregular
JALALABAD (Reuters) - A U.S. drone strike intended to hit an Islamic State (IS) hideout in Afghanistan killed at least 30 civilians resting after a day's labor in the fields, officials said on Thursday.
Ugh. This is gross too. Can we just demolish the entire government and start over? We have no idea how to deal with foreign policy.
How is the US going to deal with this once he's out of office? Like, I doubt he's going to shut the hell up about the things he's unfortunately had to be told while in office. I suppose I would enjoy seeing him spend the rest of his life in jail for violating NDAs.
The US isn't going to do anything about him living in Russia and being drained dry of every bit of information possible.
Trump withering away in a russian black site, still not understanding that putin was not his friend as he's made to answer questions about America's secrets by people who don't give a shit who he is does certainly have some appeal to it.
JALALABAD (Reuters) - A U.S. drone strike intended to hit an Islamic State (IS) hideout in Afghanistan killed at least 30 civilians resting after a day's labor in the fields, officials said on Thursday.
Ugh. This is gross too. Can we just demolish the entire government and start over? We have no idea how to deal with foreign policy.
A massive reduction in our military and actual accountability for the use of force would be a good start at least. Hundreds of thousands of civilians dead for nothing and nobody will ever be held accountable for it.
It seems to be a week for foreign policy stories. Rex Tillerson has just come out with an account of Netanyahu using “misinformation” to manipulate Trump, which he and others then had to convince Trump wasn’t actually true.
It’s pretty much confirmation of what we all knew anyway - that unscrupulous foreign leaders know Trump is easily fooled and are using that fact to their advantage.
+26
Options
BlackDragon480Bluster KerfuffleMaster of Windy ImportRegistered Userregular
It seems to be a week for foreign policy stories. Rex Tillerson has just come out with an account of Netanyahu using “misinformation” to manipulate Trump, which he and others then had to convince Trump wasn’t actually true.
It’s pretty much confirmation of what we all knew anyway - that unscrupulous foreign leaders know Trump is easily fooled and are using that fact to their advantage.
This kinda surprises me, actually.
Not that Trump got played. Not that Netanyahu played him.
But that after being made clear by several people (Tillerson uses "we") that Bibi had played Trump, Trump didn't go into his petty bullshit, and has continued to support Bibi.
It's that irrational spiteful petty anger that is what scares me about North Korea. While I understand Trump will put off recognizing that NK has played him (and will NEVER admit it publicly), if it becomes incontrovertible even to the Administration that NK has been acting in bad faith, I'm concerned about what the overreaction will be. His inability to control himself when he feels slighted, is well documented.
I mean, remember, he did this with China. President Xi, good friends, chocolate cake, etc etc, wait, they're playing me? TRAAAAAAADE WAR ARGLEBARGLE!
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
How is the US going to deal with this once he's out of office? Like, I doubt he's going to shut the hell up about the things he's unfortunately had to be told while in office. I suppose I would enjoy seeing him spend the rest of his life in jail for violating NDAs.
Most ex-presidents get some form of the PDB. I am guessing Trump will not. (Of course, he doesn't take it now, but still)
"Trump has recently put a hold on $250B in security assistance for Ukraine."- Sam Vinograd, CNN NatSec Reporter.
"But released the money a week ago right after the ICIG informed the House Intelligence Committee about the whistleblower complaint and the Committee demanded its production." - George Conway, conservative Never-Trumper, with a wife with a weird job.
I've seen some discussion of the phone call being Trump promising to return the spy to Russia. It also explains the leak of information relating to the spy - it makes it impossible for Trump to return them and keep it under the radar.
It seems to be a week for foreign policy stories. Rex Tillerson has just come out with an account of Netanyahu using “misinformation” to manipulate Trump, which he and others then had to convince Trump wasn’t actually true.
It’s pretty much confirmation of what we all knew anyway - that unscrupulous foreign leaders know Trump is easily fooled and are using that fact to their advantage.
I would put money on "you've been played" is why Trump fired Tillerson.
Not that Trump got played. Not that Netanyahu played him.
But that after being made clear by several people (Tillerson uses "we") that Bibi had played Trump, Trump didn't go into his petty bullshit, and has continued to support Bibi.
Trump is perfect so any information that implies he was played it simply evidence that the people supplying the information are untrustworthy. I don't think he backs away from NK et all "once he realizes he was played" because he is incapable of realizing he has been played.
This is one reason why its so fucking easy for foreign leaders to play him.
I've seen some discussion of the phone call being Trump promising to return the spy to Russia. It also explains the leak of information relating to the spy - it makes it impossible for Trump to return them and keep it under the radar.
Maybe. I saw (on LGM, I think) a theory that it was Trump withholding aid to Ukraine in exchange for their help investigating his enemies.
JALALABAD (Reuters) - A U.S. drone strike intended to hit an Islamic State (IS) hideout in Afghanistan killed at least 30 civilians resting after a day's labor in the fields, officials said on Thursday.
Over the past year or so, US/Afghan gov have been killing more civilians in Afghanistan than the Taliban have. This is in contrast to previous years since the drawdown, when more civilian casualties were reported at Taliban hands. I think a lot of this is due to the huge increase in US air strikes over the past few years (the article you link is a case in point).
A surge in civilian casualties is what happens when the candidate who campaigned on wanting to commit war crimes wins the election.
Maybe. The Trump admin did escalate bombing in Afghanistan and in Iraq and Syria during the ending phases of the ISIS war, IIRC.
But in Afghanistan, air strikes had sharply risen during Obama's final year as well, so the trend started under the previous administration. This was a result of the situation gradually spiraling out of control after the US withdrew the vast majority of its ground forces, as the Taliban rapidly regained territory and escalated its assaults. The US reached (probably surpassed?) the levels of bombing they had previously exhibited at the height of the war effort, when 100,000 troops were deployed during Obama's first term. So we have a reluctance to commit to ground forces and a reluctance to allow further Taliban gains, which combine to result in the heavy reliance on bombing campaigns we've seen over the past several years.
In other words, I think it has more to do with the general trend of the Afghanistan War and US involvement there than in a particular penchant for violence on the part of the Trump administration, though it's possible that loosened restrictions on bombing have also played a role.
Whether we're murdering more or less people than the taliban seems pretty irrelevant to me
Personally I think it's a condemnation of our approach to warfare that we're killing more civilians than the guys who rely on suicide truck bomb attacks in crowded cities
My guess would be giving Bibi the green light to annex the West Bank of he wins the election. Though admittedly something with Putin seems the most likely for obvious reasons.
Posts
I think Bolton leaving was about the feud they had over hosting the taliban at camp david, and also his mustache because Trump is a baby and hated Bolton's mustache.
But I think you are right when you suggested this might be centered around that spy that we had right next to Putin because what's missing from your timeline here is Trump publicly bitching about how we can't trust foreign intelligence sources because they are "selling out their country".
I think that Trump promised Putin that he'd hand that spy back over to him.
If that is what it is and we find out, I’m gonna love the sycophant defense on that one. You could probably reverse time with the energy from that spin.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
You'd really have to be more specific, because that's been fairly regular since before he took office. Even that specific gripe has been made publically and on background at least twice this summer.
But I don't think it's material beyond giving context to why members of the IC may find reason to not trust his instincts or intentions when he promises ________ to __________ in exchange for ____________.
Just for a fun reminder about Trump-time compression: Can you remember all the way back to the G7 meeting? The complaint was filed a week before that. For no reason that I can find, people seem to be offering a 5 week period prior to that as a possible window for the call itself.
A lot of shit has gone down in that time (like being appalled that the CIA was spying on Kim).
Putin being the guy really is Trump's razor here.
He just got out from under an investigation into, essentially, the time he boasted to his sketchy Russian friends about how he tanked an investigation into his relationship with sketchy Russians.
What better time to reboot his relationship with his favorite sketchy Russian; and maybe boast about tanking the investigation while he's at it?
I really don't want it to be, though. All the other eligible despots are jumped up rich kids with no particular skills. Putin knows how to work people.
The answer is 100% yes, right?
"Even if I did do it, it was for the USA because USA, USA, USA!"
Fuck this guy.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
Law and Order ≠ Justice
ACNH Island Isla Cero: DA-3082-2045-4142
Captain of the SES Comptroller of the State
Tweeter: Rando
Video: The President getting an impromptu lesson in opsec after asking a general to explain the undisclosed security features of the new fence.
Another Fake News story out there - It never ends! Virtually anytime I speak on the phone to a foreign leader, I understand that there may be many people listening from various U.S. agencies, not to mention those from the other country itself. No problem!
....Knowing all of this, is anybody dumb enough to believe that I would say something inappropriate with a foreign leader while on such a potentially “heavily populated” call. I would only do what is right anyway, and only do good for the USA!
But yeah, sure, benefit of a doubt, I'm sure he only talks about the more murdery stuff when he's totes sure nobody is listening. Unless they want to join in? No? Oh uh. Totally no murder talk then.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
The US isn't going to do anything about him living in Russia and being drained dry of every bit of information possible.
“I would NEVER say something inappropriate with a foreign leader where others could hear me! And Russia, if you’re listening...”
https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1W40NW?__twitter_impression=true
That would be a policy disagreement and would not qualify as an "Urgent Concern." It had to be more.
https://www.dni.gov/ICIG-Whistleblower/process-when.html
(DNI website for whistleblowers, easier to read that the raw statute)
It has to be more than that.
Russia in the G7 isn’t nothing, but doesn’t scream IG whistle blower to me either.
I’m leaning towards turning over a Russian spy, but it could be anything ranging from helping Saudi Arabia getting nuclear weapons technology to interference in Netanyahu’s election in his favor to something with North Korea.
My bet is always Putin though cause, ya know, it’s Putin and Trump is Trump.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Thanks Tucker Carlson for getting Trump to not start a war with Iran? This is nuts.
Ugh. This is gross too. Can we just demolish the entire government and start over? We have no idea how to deal with foreign policy.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
Now there's your 1938 moment
Trump withering away in a russian black site, still not understanding that putin was not his friend as he's made to answer questions about America's secrets by people who don't give a shit who he is does certainly have some appeal to it.
A massive reduction in our military and actual accountability for the use of force would be a good start at least. Hundreds of thousands of civilians dead for nothing and nobody will ever be held accountable for it.
Keith is with CNN.
It’s pretty much confirmation of what we all knew anyway - that unscrupulous foreign leaders know Trump is easily fooled and are using that fact to their advantage.
Needs more splitting up of Poland to really get the Molotov-Ribbentrop flavor.
~ Buckaroo Banzai
This kinda surprises me, actually.
Not that Trump got played. Not that Netanyahu played him.
But that after being made clear by several people (Tillerson uses "we") that Bibi had played Trump, Trump didn't go into his petty bullshit, and has continued to support Bibi.
It's that irrational spiteful petty anger that is what scares me about North Korea. While I understand Trump will put off recognizing that NK has played him (and will NEVER admit it publicly), if it becomes incontrovertible even to the Administration that NK has been acting in bad faith, I'm concerned about what the overreaction will be. His inability to control himself when he feels slighted, is well documented.
I mean, remember, he did this with China. President Xi, good friends, chocolate cake, etc etc, wait, they're playing me? TRAAAAAAADE WAR ARGLEBARGLE!
Most ex-presidents get some form of the PDB. I am guessing Trump will not. (Of course, he doesn't take it now, but still)
So, there's speculation that the issue might relate to the Ukranians, with it being that shit that Rudy got caught up in a while back.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-ukraine-joe-biden-military-aid-zelensky-kiev-a9111106.html
That if the Ukranian President wanted to improve relations with the US, that it needed to reopen the Biden investigation.
And that there was apparently money withheld to "encourage" such cooperation.
"Trump has recently put a hold on $250B in security assistance for Ukraine."- Sam Vinograd, CNN NatSec Reporter.
"But released the money a week ago right after the ICIG informed the House Intelligence Committee about the whistleblower complaint and the Committee demanded its production." - George Conway, conservative Never-Trumper, with a wife with a weird job.
I would put money on "you've been played" is why Trump fired Tillerson.
Trump is perfect so any information that implies he was played it simply evidence that the people supplying the information are untrustworthy. I don't think he backs away from NK et all "once he realizes he was played" because he is incapable of realizing he has been played.
This is one reason why its so fucking easy for foreign leaders to play him.
Maybe. I saw (on LGM, I think) a theory that it was Trump withholding aid to Ukraine in exchange for their help investigating his enemies.
But in Afghanistan, air strikes had sharply risen during Obama's final year as well, so the trend started under the previous administration. This was a result of the situation gradually spiraling out of control after the US withdrew the vast majority of its ground forces, as the Taliban rapidly regained territory and escalated its assaults. The US reached (probably surpassed?) the levels of bombing they had previously exhibited at the height of the war effort, when 100,000 troops were deployed during Obama's first term. So we have a reluctance to commit to ground forces and a reluctance to allow further Taliban gains, which combine to result in the heavy reliance on bombing campaigns we've seen over the past several years.
In other words, I think it has more to do with the general trend of the Afghanistan War and US involvement there than in a particular penchant for violence on the part of the Trump administration, though it's possible that loosened restrictions on bombing have also played a role.
Either way, it is indeed a distressing situation.