Author Topic: Intel Matters  (Read 321844 times)



ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19776
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #552 on: May 15, 2017, 04:18:09 AM »
"The House and Senate Intelligence Committees therefore should add investigations of whether this ICA was politicized to their investigations of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. "

Like bloviator in chief Schumer said, “Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you,”



 

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19462
    • View Profile
Re: More indications Intel Assessment of Russian Interference was rigged
« Reply #553 on: May 15, 2017, 09:51:08 AM »
quote author=G M
"Still 100% evidence free!"
-----------------
Senator Warner was all charged up about the investigation on Fox News Sunday yesterday.

After all the bloviating, Wallace asked him:

WALLACE: At various points, top officials, including former Director of National Intelligence Clapper have said that at that point, they had seen no evidence of collusion between the Kremlin and what I will call Trump-world. Have you seen any evidence of collusion?

WARNER: We are still relatively early in our investigation. [No we haven't.] ... We’re going to follow that intelligence wherever it leads.
http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2017/05/14/sens-mark-warner-and-mike-lee-on-replacing-james-comey-at-fbi.html


Sen. Feinstein said the same thing recently:

Do you have evidence that there was in fact collusion between Trump associates and Russia during the campaign?” asked CNN’s Wolf Blizter.

“Not at this time,” replied Feinstein.
https://youtu.be/0BS5amEq7Fc

The point being that these people are on the committees and had classified briefings - for going on a year of looking.  No evidence "YET".

We need to investigate further because we don't have evidence - yet.  There is a cover up but no underlying crime.  A cover up of WHAT?  We need impeachment too, we just don't have the underlying crime yet for that either.

Meanwhile, we have plenty of evidence of Clinton collusion, Hillary from inside the State department and Bill from the Foundation, of collusion and pay, quid pro quo, over the State department approval of the Russian purchase of American Uranium assets.  Is there not a law against this?  Makes the Louisiana Congressman's $100,000 in the freezer look like peanuts.  He didn't sign off on a strategic asset.  The Russians didn't hack one voting machine, but millions of illegals voted at perhaps a 13% rate.  Ho hum.

Another shiny damn object that has nothing to do with reforming healthcare or growing the economy.  Twice in the hour above they interrupted collusion talk with Sen Mike Lee for a question 'about your day job', meaning the passing of legislation in the Senate.  Nothing there.  And Pres. Trump keeps feeding into this instead of either ignoring them or calling them out on it.

Strange times.  Double standard.  Shiny object.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2017, 09:55:08 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile
I can picture him being this kind of stupid
« Reply #554 on: May 15, 2017, 02:27:32 PM »
Dubious sources, but I can picture him being this kind of stupid:

 By Greg Miller and Greg Jaffe May 15 at 5:01 PM

President Trump revealed highly classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in a White House meeting last week, according to current and former U.S. officials, who said that Trump’s disclosures jeopardized a critical source of intelligence on the Islamic State.

The information Trump relayed had been provided by a U.S. partner through an intelligence-sharing arrangement considered so sensitive that details have been withheld from allies and tightly restricted even within the U.S. government, officials said.

The partner had not given the United States permission to share the material with Russia, and officials said that Trump’s decision to do so risks cooperation from an ally that has access to the inner workings of the Islamic State. After Trump’s meeting, senior White House officials took steps to contain the damage, placing calls to the CIA and National Security Agency.
ADVERTISING

“This is code-word information,” said a U.S. official familiar with the matter, using terminology that refers to one of the highest classification levels used by American spy agencies. Trump “revealed more information to the Russian ambassador than we have shared with our own allies.”

The revelation comes as Trump faces rising legal and political pressure on multiple Russia-related fronts. Last week, he fired FBI Director James B. Comey in the midst of a bureau investigation into links between the Trump campaign and Moscow. Trump’s subsequent admission that his decision was driven by “this Russia thing” was seen by critics as attempted obstruction of justice.
Team Trump’s ties to Russian interests View Graphic

[Political chaos in Washington is a return on investment in Moscow]

One day after dismissing Comey, Trump welcomed Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Ambassador Sergey Kislyak — a key figure in earlier Russia controversies — into the Oval Office. It was during that meeting, officials said, that Trump went off script and began describing details about an Islamic State terrorist threat related to the use of laptop computers on aircraft.

For most anyone in government discussing such matters with an adversary would be illegal. As president, Trump has broad authority to declassify government secrets, making it unlikely that his disclosures broke the law.

“The president and the foreign minister reviewed common threats from terrorist organizations to include threats to aviation,” said H.R. McMaster, the national security adviser, who participated in the meeting. “At no time were any intelligence sources or methods discussed and no military operations were disclosed that were not already known publicly.”

The CIA declined to comment and the National Security Agency did not respond to requests for comment.

But officials expressed concern with Trump’s handling of sensitive information as well as his grasp of the potential consequences. Exposure of an intelligence stream that has provided critical insight into the Islamic State, they said, could hinder the United States’ and its allies’ ability to detect future threats.

“It is all kind of shocking,” said a former senior U.S. official close to current administration officials. “Trump seems to be very reckless, and doesn’t grasp the gravity of the things he’s dealing with, especially when it comes to intelligence and national security. And it’s all clouded because of this problem he has with Russia.”
Here’s what happened after Trump fired Comey
Play Video3:53
Democrats expressed outrage, Trump issued defiant tweets. (Video: Bastien Inzaurralde, Jayne Orenstein, Alice Li, Libby Casey, Priya Mathew/Photo: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

In his meeting with Lavrov, Trump seemed to be boasting about his inside knowledge of the looming threat. “I get great intel. I have people brief me on great intel every day,” Trump said, according to an official with knowledge of the exchange.

Trump went on to discuss aspects of the threat that the United States only learned through the espionage capabilities of a key partner. He did not reveal the specific intelligence gathering method, but described how the Islamic State was pursuing elements of a specific plot and how much harm such an attack could cause under varying circumstances. Most alarmingly, officials said, Trump revealed the city in the Islamic State’s territory where the U.S. intelligence partner detected the threat.

The Washington Post is withholding most plot details, including the name of the city, at the urging of officials who warned that revealing them would jeopardize important intelligence capabilities.

“Everyone knows this stream is very sensitive and the idea of sharing it at this level of granularity with the Russians is troubling,” said a former senior U.S. counterterrorism official who also worked closely with members of the Trump national security team. He and others spoke on condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the subject.

The identification of the location was seen as particularly problematic, officials said, because Russia could use that detail to help identify the U.S. ally or intelligence capability involved. Officials said that the capability could be useful for other purposes, possibly providing intelligence on Russia’s presence in Syria. Moscow and would be keenly interested in identifying that source and possibly disrupting it.

Russia and the United States both regard the Islamic State as an enemy and share limited information about terrorist threats. But the two nations have competing agendas in Syria, where Moscow has deployed military assets and personnel to support Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

“Russia could identify our sources or techniques,” the senior U.S. official said. A former intelligence official who handled high-level intelligence on Russia said that given the clues Trump provided, “I don’t think that it would be that hard [for Russian spy services] to figure this out.”

At a more fundamental level, the information wasn’t the United States’ to provide to others. Under the rules of espionage, governments — and even individual agencies — are given significant control over whether and how the information they gather is disseminated even after it has been shared. Violating that practice undercuts trust considered essential to sharing secrets.

The officials declined to identify the ally, but said it is one that has previously voiced frustration with Washington’s inability to safeguard sensitive information related to Iraq and Syria.

“If that partner learned we’d given this to Russia without their knowledge or asking first that is a blow to that relationship,” the U.S. official said.

Trump also described measures that the United States has taken or is contemplating to counter the threat, including military operations in Iraq and Syria as well as other steps to tighten security, officials said.

The officials would not discuss details of those measures, but the Department of Homeland Security recently disclosed that it is considering banning laptops and other large electronic devices from carry-on bags on flights between Europe and the United States. The United States and Britain imposed a similar ban in March affecting travelers passing through airports in 10 Muslim-majority countries.

Trump cast the countermeasures in wistful terms. “Can you believe the world we live in today?” he said, according to one official. “Isn’t it crazy.”

Lavrov and Kislyak were also accompanied by aides.

A Russian photographer took photos of part of the session that were released by the Russian state-owned Tass news agency. No U.S. news organization was allowed to attend any part of the meeting.

Senior White House officials appeared to recognize quickly that Trump had overstepped and moved to contain the potential fallout.

Thomas P. Bossert, assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism, placed calls to the directors of the CIA and the NSA, services most directly involved in the intelligence-sharing arrangement with the partner.

One of Bossert’s subordinates also called for the problematic portion of Trump’s discussion to be stricken from internal memos and for the full transcript to be limited to a small circle of recipients, efforts to prevent sensitive details from being disseminated further or leaked.

Trump has repeatedly gone off-script in his dealings with high-ranking foreign officials, most notably in his contentious introductory conversation with the Australian Prime Minister earlier this year. He has also faced criticism for lax attention to security at his Florida retreat Mar-a-Lago, where he appeared to field preliminary reports of a North Korea missile launch in full view of casual diners.

U.S. officials said that the National Security Council continues to prepare multi-page briefings for Trump to guide him through conversations with foreign leaders but that he has insisted that the guidance be distilled to a single page of bullet points, and often ignores those.

“He seems to get in the room or on the phone and just goes with it — and that has big downsides,” the second former official said. “Does he understand what’s classified and what’s not? That’s what worries me.”

Lavrov’s reaction to the Trump disclosures was muted, officials said, calling for the United States to work more closely with Moscow on fighting terrorism.

Kislyak has figured prominently in damaging stories about the Trump administration’s ties to Russia. Trump’s initial national security adviser, Michael Flynn, was forced to resign just 24 days into the job over his contacts with Kislyak and misleading statements about them. U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions was forced to recuse himself from matters related to the FBI’s Russia investigation after it was revealed that he had met and spoke with Kislyak despite denying any contact with Russian officials during his confirmation hearing.

Checkpoint newsletter

Military, defense and security at home and abroad.

“I’m sure Kislyak was able to fire off a good cable back to the Kremlin with all the details” he gleaned from Trump, said the former U.S. official who handled intelligence on Russia.

The White House readout of the meeting with Lavrov and Kislyak made no mention of the discussion of a terrorist threat.

“Trump emphasized the need to work together to end the conflict in Syria,” the summary said. Trump also “raised Ukraine” and “emphasized his desire to build a better relationship between the United States and Russia.”

Julie Tate and Ellen Nakashima contributed to this report.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #555 on: May 15, 2017, 05:47:46 PM »
"Dubious sources, but I can picture him being this kind of stupid"

Me too. Of course, if he put the information on an unsecured email server, that's totally cool with the dems.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile
Loose lips have consequences
« Reply #556 on: May 16, 2017, 06:32:49 AM »
Here is my take at this moment on fast moving story:

In his meeting with the Russians, who lost an airplane full of their people over Sinai, it is quite logical and natural that they would be curious about why on flights from that region (and now expanding to flights from Europe?) we have begun requiring lap tops  be checked.

It appears that our gregarious and loquacious President (whose low awareness of security protocols we have noted previously) as part of his ongoing efforts to establish productive interactions with the Russians (whom he is trying to bring on board against the Norks btw) may have flapped his gums a bit and inadvertently given away something really important.

To the detriment of friendly intel services, America has a long history of being really bad at keeping secrets; it appears that President Trump has just added to it.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19776
    • View Profile
Update on slain DNC staffer
« Reply #557 on: May 16, 2017, 07:09:51 AM »
The FBI sat on this ???    :x  What say you Comey homey?

and the DC police look like they covered it up???     :x

We have posted here that this was suspicious and did not trust those law enforcement looking into this that this was just a "botched robbery".

So who killed Seth Rich?   This appears to have been announced from a PI hired by his family.  Good for them not to trust DC.  

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/16/slain-dnc-staffer-had-contact-with-wikileaks-investigator-says.html
« Last Edit: May 16, 2017, 07:19:14 AM by Crafty_Dog »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #558 on: May 16, 2017, 07:18:16 AM »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19776
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #559 on: May 16, 2017, 07:22:09 AM »
This , if true, completely debunks the whole Russia did conspiracy theory.  It was not the Russians.  It was , again if true , a DNC staffer that leaked. 

What say mccain - you disappointed you prick - sorry but I am sick of him. 

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #560 on: May 16, 2017, 09:30:42 AM »
If memory serves, Obama flapped his gums quite a few times e.g. regarding what was found in the OBL hit, giving data on Brit nukes to the Russians, and more.  Let's see if we can dig up some citations.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
http://legalinsurrection.com/2017/05/live-mcmaster-speaks-to-press-about-trump-russia/

McMaster: “The president in no way compromised any sources or methods.”

 
 
 
Posted by Mary Chastain      Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 11:33am
McMaster described the discussion with the Russians as “wholly appropriate.”

Yesterday, The Washington Post caused mass hysteria when it released a report that President Donald Trump provided highly classified information to the Russian Foreign Minister and Ambassador. Of course the publication used anonymous sources.

Now, National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster will address the media over this story. He denied the story twice yesterday, stating “I was in the room. It didn’t happen.”




McMaster starts the conference by saying that Trump will speak to leaders of Muslim countries to confront radical Islam. He continues to describe his visit to Israel.

McMaster stands by his denial of the WaPo story and the premise of the article is false. Our national security is at risk when those violate confidentiality. Trump did not say anything inappropriate or violate our national security.

He again tells the press that the discussion was “wholly appropriate” and was standard info discussed with heads of states working together. He is also not concerned that others will start withholding information from us.

McMaster reminds the press that Tillerson and Powell were in the room as well and no one thought the information was inappropriate. He also said that it’s “wholly appropriate for the president to share whatever information necessary to advance the security” of our country.

The information he talked about was about operations already going on and known to the public.

The president in NO WAY compromised sources or methods during the conversation with the Russians.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #562 on: May 16, 2017, 09:33:57 AM »
If memory serves, Obama flapped his gums quite a few times e.g. regarding what was found in the OBL hit, giving data on Brit nukes to the Russians, and more.  Let's see if we can dig up some citations.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8304654/WikiLeaks-cables-US-agrees-to-tell-Russia-Britains-nuclear-secrets.html

Good thing we haven't had a malignant narcissistic incompetent buffoon who discloses sensitive information to the Russians as president before.
 rolleyes

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19462
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #563 on: May 16, 2017, 09:40:30 AM »
In case there is any additional info in this article:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/murdered-dnc-staffer-seth-rich-had-sent-44000-internal-emails-to-wikileaks-report/article/2623186

http://www.fox5dc.com/news/local-news/254852337-story
Now, questions have been raised on why D.C. police, the lead agency on this murder investigation for the past ten months, have insisted this was a robbery gone bad when there appears to be no evidence to suggest that.

Wheeler, a former D.C. police homicide detective, is running a parallel investigation into Rich’s murder. He said he believes there is a cover-up and the police department has been told to back down from the investigation.

   -Tell the police to back down from a DC murder investigation - under Comey and Obama?  Imagine that happening under Trump.


ccp:  "This , if true, completely debunks the whole Russia conspiracy theory.  It was not the Russians."

Wikileaks has said all along it was not the Russian government.  Strange that they have more credibility than most of Washington.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Obama 'Put a Target on Their Backs', SEAL Team 6 Family Members Say
« Reply #564 on: May 16, 2017, 09:45:56 AM »
https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/05/09/obama-put-a-target-on-their-backs-seal-team-6-family-members-say

Obama 'Put a Target on Their Backs', SEAL Team 6 Family Members Say
Family members question SEAL Team 6's most deadly incident.

By Paul D. Shinkman, Senior National Security Writer | May 9, 2013, at 2:22 p.m.
MORE
 
Obama 'Put a Target on Their Backs', SEAL Team 6 Family Members Say
      

(AP PHOTOS)
The families of some of the 17 SEAL Team 6 commandos who were killed in an ambush in Afghanistan during a helicopter flight to help Army Rangers pinned down by Taliban gunmen accused the Obama administration of deliberately endangering their loved ones for political ends.

[PHOTOS: America's Elite Navy SEALs]

During a press conference on Washington Thursday, family and advocates for the fallen troops called into question the rules of engagement that they say prohibited their sons from being able to return fire, and the White House's decision to announce shortly after the killing of Osama bin Laden that SEAL Team 6 was responsible for the raid.

"In releasing their identity, they put a target on their backs," said Doug Hamburger, whose son, Army Staff Sgt. Patrick Hamburger, served among the helicopter's crew.

The event was organized by Freedom Watch, a conservative advocacy group, at the National Press Club. One by one, fathers and mothers of the victims of the crash spoke about what they see as gaping holes or inconsistencies in the review of what U.S. Special Operations considers its most deadly incident.

In all, 17 members of the SEAL Team 6 counterterrorist force were on board the CH-47 Chinook transport helicopter, along with its Army National Guard aircrew, several support personnel and seven Afghan commandos. In all 38 troops died after the helicopter was shot down by what a review determined to be a Taliban RPG over Wardak Province, Afghanistan, on Aug. 6, 2011.


 

The team was responding to an Army Ranger unit that was engaged in a protracted firefight with Taliban fighters and needed reinforcements.

The families hope to raise awareness of the incident, which they say the government has largely forgotten since the official report was released in October 2011.

Some congressional lawmakers demonstrated their support for the group, including former Florida Republican Rep. Allan West -- an Iraq war vet -- and Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.

[PHOTOS: Killing Osama bin Laden]

While the press conference was long on speculation and short on concrete evidence, the family members and their supporters didn't pull any punches.

Retired Army Lt. Gen. William Boykin, who served as deputy undersecretary of defense for Intelligence and was a commander in the Army's super-secret "Delta Force," denounced politicized rules of engagement as a "deliberate plot" within the American armed forces that he says puts political correctness above the safety of the troops.

"We've allowed politics to become more important than the lives and safety of those men and women," he says.

Petty Officer 1st Class Aaron Vaughn was one of the SEAL Team 6 operators who died in the crash. His father Billy Vaughn recounted Thursday a phone call from his son following the White House decision to credit the highly secretive military unit for the bin Laden raid.

"He said, 'Mom, there's chatter. My life is in danger. Your life is in danger. Get everything off your social media. Our families are in danger,' " Vaughn recalled.

[PHOTOS: Fighting in Afghanistan Continues]

Aaron Vaughn's mother, Karen, also demanded an explanation for why her son and his team were not using a special operations aircraft, such as the Chinooks flown by special operations pilots, which have specialized defenses designed to fly commandos deep behind enemy lines. The CH-47D that embarked on the mission that day had been built in the 1960s, she said, and last retrofitted in the 1985.

It is not uncommon for commandos to fly some of their missions aboard such aircraft in the war zone, however.

She also said the team was hindered by rules of engagement that prohibited their firing on potential targets unless they could see a weapon. Military officials told her operating outside of these rules "damages our efforts to win the hearts and minds of our enemies."

"The hearts and minds of our enemy are more valuable to our government than my son's blood," she said. "We have an ideology problem with this war, and we need to address it."
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/5/obama-stonewalls-seal-team-6-extortion-17-helicopt/

Obama stonewalls SEAL Team 6 helicopter crash probe, watchdog says

Petty Officer First Class Ian Regnier (above left) carries the remains of Petty Officer 1st Class Michael Joseph Strange, a cryptology technician, killed alongside members of SEAL Team 6 when their helicopter was shot down by a rocket-propelled grenade in Afghanistan in 2011 (bottom). The families of Strange and the other victims are demanding the White House release documents relevant to the incident. (Associated Press)

By Rowan Scarborough - The Washington Times - Wednesday, August 5, 2015

The Obama administration is violating a judge’s order to turn over documents in the Aug. 6, 2011, shootdown of a U.S. helicopter — call sign Extortion 17 — that killed members of SEAL Team 6 in Afghanistan, a watchdog group is charging.
On the fourth anniversary of the worst one-day loss of military life in the war on terror, families of the dead say they are aghast that the government will not honor basic requests under the Freedom of Information Act.
“It has now been four years since Extortion 17 was shot down,” said Doug Hamburger, whose Army air crew son, Patrick, was one of the 30 Americans killed. “I find it quite disturbing that the government is not willing to give us the answers we deserve. I find it very irritating that we will not question the Afghans about their knowledge of what took place that night.”
U.S. Central Command’s official investigation concluded that a rocket-launched grenade from a Taliban fighter standing near the landing zone clipped a rotary wing, sending the Ch-47 Chinook into a violent downward spin. It was the worst day for fatalities in the history of naval special warfare.
The tragedy took some of the glow off SEAL Team 6’s grand achievement just three months earlier: A team penetrated Pakistan airspace, infiltrated a compound in Abbottabad and killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.
The families accept the fact that a single shot brought down the helicopter. But some say the official report, which contained no direct criticism of decision-makers that day, did not delve deeply enough.
 

They believe SEAL Team 6 had a target on its back and that persons inside the Afghan National Security Forces may have tipped off the Taliban that night in Tangi Valley. That is why, they say, a fighter just happened to be stationed in a turret within 150 yards of a landing zone that had never been used before.
A Defense Department special operations official told a House subcommittee last year that there is no indication the mission was compromised by the Afghans.
Family members are hoping Freedom Watch, a watchdog legal group led by Larry Klayman, can force new disclosures using the power of the FOIA process.
Since filing a lawsuit, Mr. Klayman says, he has been “stonewalled” by the Justice Department, the Defense Department, the CIA and the National Security Agency.
U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon in February signed an order requiring the Obama administration to release documents on a continual basis through the spring and summer. The Justice Department said at least 50 documents in the Pentagon have been identified as relevant, but only one has been turned over. And Justice unilaterally set a new deadline for the release and then ignored it, Mr. Klayman said. Throughout, he said, Justice lawyers have refused to take his phone calls.
“They don’t even produce under their own self-imposed deadline,” Mr. Klayman told The Washington Times. “We’re pleading with the judge to do something, and he’s just sitting on it.”
In one of his motions, Mr. Klayman stated: “As this Court must be aware, this is not an ordinary Freedom of Information Act case, it involves obtaining records concerning the deaths of Navy SEAL Team 6 and other special operations forces on a mission with the call sign Extortion 17. The families of these deceased heroes have been stonewalled by the Obama Department of Defense and the Obama National Security Agency in disrespect over their sons’ unexplained tragic deaths. Many of these family members are undergoing psychological care over what has become a double tragedy: the deaths of their sons and the cover-up for which these family members feel betrayed by their own government.”
Mr. Klayman said the NSA has agreed to provide some information. Since the agency’s main task is to eavesdrop on phone and Internet messages, it may have recorded communications related to the attack.
A Justice Department spokeswoman said there would be no comment beyond its court filings. Its lawyers have told the judge that the process of locating relevant documents and removing classified information takes time.
The mission
It was exactly four years ago, at 2:22 a.m., that a rebuilt conventional CH-47 Chinook helicopter took off from a forward operating base, carrying some of the most skilled and advanced warriors ever molded by U.S. special operations.
Onboard were 17 members of SEAL Team 6; five naval special warfare operators, including one to intercept communications and another to handle Bart the war dog; five Army flight crewmen, including a National Guard and an Army Reserve pilot; and three Air Force personnel. The force included seven Afghan soldiers and an Afghan interpreter.
The mission itself has proven controversial to some family members. The immediate reaction force (IRF) was assembled hastily for insertion into Tangi Valley to help Army Rangers capture fleeing Taliban.
The Rangers were not in need of rescue. Military officers interviewed by investigators said they could not recall an IRF ever being sent for such a mission.
The Chinook was descending on a noisy battlefield where Apache helicopters and a C-130 gunship had been buzzing overhead for three hours, alerting Taliban fighters. Planners selected a landing zone that had never been used before. The Chinook had no Apache escort, as did the Ranger team that enjoyed the element of surprise when it touched down hours earlier.
The two Apaches, Gun 1 and Gun 2, on scene were never emphatically told to move near the landing zone to scan for threats. They stayed fixed on enemy “squirters,” or runners, until just a few minutes before landing.
“Honestly, sir, I don’t think anybody had really looked at the LZ,” said the pilot of Gun 1. “I mean, at any time if we would have found these squirters, or they would have found weapons, we were — the way I was understanding it, we were going to be clear to engage due to the fact that they had weapons, but we had to [positively identify] them first.”
He added: “So we hadn’t started looking at the LZ yet, just due to there was so much more of a threat to the east with the squirters. I would say that on the three-minute call is when Gun 2 started looking at the LZ, giving an LZ brief op. I would say that was the first time that we really had eyes on the LZ.”
No one saw two Taliban armed with grenade launchers standing on a mud-brick turret well within range of the descending chopper.
The navigator on the AC-130 gunship said there was simply too much gun and engine noise to think that the Chinook could make an undetected entrance.
“One of the other things that we did talk about — kind of what you’re hitting on, sir, is about the fact that, you know, for three hours we had been burning holes in the sky,” the officer told investigators. “You’ve got [Apaches] flying around, so there’s a lot of noise going on and, basically, this entire valley knows that there’s something happening in this area. So, to do an infil on the X or Y, you know, having that element of surprise in the beginning of an operation is good, but by the time we’ve been there for three hours, and the party’s up, bringing in another aircraft like that, you know, may not be the most tactically sound decision.”
Today, some family members are not just disappointed in the investigation and the FOIA process, but also in how the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on national security conducted a brief hearing in Feb. 2014.
No family members were allowed to testify. The Pentagon’s witness stuck to a theme that no mistakes were made that night, though the investigative file contained testimony from a number of witnesses saying the mission was riddled with missteps.
“The hearing as it took place was meant to honor the heroes of Extortion 17 instead of to answer our questions,” Mr. Hamburger said.
“During the last several years it is evident that our government has spent a lot of time and resources covering up the truth on many things from both our allies and the American public,” Mr. Hamburger added. “Things like Benghazi and the NSA. I am afraid that with this FOIA case that the government is purposely delaying turning over documents because they need the time to redact and to delete things they do not want the American public to become aware of.”
Charlie Strange, whose Navy cryptologist son, Michael, was on Extortion 17, told The Times last year that it was too much of a coincidence for Taliban to be standing so near the landing zone.
“Somebody was leaking to the Taliban,” said Mr. Strange. “They knew. Somebody tipped them off. There were guys in a tower. Guys on the bush line. They were sitting there, waiting. And they sent our guys right into the middle.”

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19462
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #565 on: May 16, 2017, 09:58:13 AM »
A different offense, but here is James Clapper (of Muslim Brotherhood is secular fame) lying under oath to the Senate Committee, March 12, 2013:

Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, asked Clapper for a yes or no answer to the following question: “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?”

“No, sir,” Clapper replied.

Wyden, who appeared taken aback by the answer, tried again: “It does not?”

“Not wittingly,” Clapper responded. “There are cases where they could inadvertently, perhaps, collect, but not wittingly.”

Three months later, on June 5, 2013, The Guardian newspaper began publishing a series of reports about the NSA based on documents stolen from the agency by Edward Snowden that proved Clapper had perjured himself.

Days after The Guardian’s bombshell report, Clapper told NBC’s Andrea Mitchell that he had responded in “what I thought was the most truthful, or least untruthful, manner.”

Three weeks later, under increasing pressure, Clapper wrote a letter to the senators on the committee, apologizing for providing a “clearly erroneous” answer. He also changed his story, jettisoning the excuse he had tried to answer in the “least untruthful” manner, and instead claimed the reason he had misled Congress is that he had “forgotten” about Section 215 of the Patriot Act, which covered the NSA’s bulk collection of metadata.

Needless to say, members of Congress were not amused. Yet despite calls for his ouster and for criminal charges to be brought against him for perjury, Clapper suffered no consequences for lying to members of the Senate and remained in his position as director of DNI through the end of President Obama’s term.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3d-re0dtKA
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/james-clappers-least-untruthful-statement-to-the-senate/2013/06/11/e50677a8-d2d8-11e2-a73e-826d299ff459_blog.html?utm_term=.1d63cf59b8f5
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2017/05/16/james_clappers_assault_on_democracy_133897.html#2

"The fault was with the Senator, for asking the question."
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2014/mar/11/james-clappers-testimony-one-year-later/

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile
Israel did it?
« Reply #566 on: May 16, 2017, 10:56:17 AM »
We're looking for intel leaks right now, not just fibbing.

================
 :-o :-o :-o
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/world/middleeast/israel-trump-classified-intelligence-russia.html?emc=edit_na_20170516&nl=breaking-news&nlid=49641193&ref=cta&_r=0

Either this is a spectacular case of people not being able to keep their mouths shut, or the Israeli's are saving Donald's ass/covering for some Arab agency.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Israel did it?
« Reply #567 on: May 16, 2017, 11:03:41 AM »
We're looking for intel leaks right now, not just fibbing.

================
 :-o :-o :-o
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/world/middleeast/israel-trump-classified-intelligence-russia.html?emc=edit_na_20170516&nl=breaking-news&nlid=49641193&ref=cta&_r=0

Either this is a spectacular case of people not being able to keep their mouths shut, or the Israeli's are saving Donald's ass/covering for some Arab agency.

The NYT and unnamed sources have the same credibility as Prisonplanet.com IMHO.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #568 on: May 16, 2017, 02:37:35 PM »
This from Caroline Glick:

"Oh, and to all the people attacking Trump about Russia, just one word: Stuxnet.  The top secret information Obama transferred to Iran was mountainous, the transfers were repeated acts, not one offs and their effects were ruinous to US allies and to the US itself."

MARC:  I would add revealing the Isreali landing deal with Azerbijian.

Also, wasn't there the matter of revealing that we had captured OBLs' computer?



G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Guests Remind NBC, CNN: Obama Gave Classified Intel to Russia
« Reply #571 on: May 17, 2017, 06:12:46 AM »
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/kyle-drennen/2017/05/16/guests-remind-nbc-cnn-obama-gave-classified-intel-russia

Guests Remind NBC, CNN: Obama Gave Classified Intel to Russia
By Kyle Drennen | May 16, 2017 | 12:39 PM EDT

 
While NBC and CNN joined the rest of the media in rushing to condemn the Trump White House over an unconfirmed Washington Post report that the President inadvertently shared classified information with Russian officials, guests on both networks provided important context that the Obama administration intentionally shared classified intelligence with Russia less than a year ago.

Appearing on Friday’s NBC Today, security analyst Juan Zarate warned: “The problem is the Russians aren’t trustworthy. The Russians have proven that when we’ve provided information in the past, they’ve used it against us.” He then proceeded to explain how former President Obama gave the Russians classified information just months ago:


Back in the summer of 2016, the Obama administration provided some information to the Russians about some of the things happening on the ground. Guess what happened? The Russians then attacked some of those sites of our allies, our proxies that we were working with. And that’s a problem.


Meanwhile, over on CNN’s New Day, political analyst Jeffrey Lord provided some “perspective” to anchor Chris Cuomo:

The only thing I would say here, Chris is perspective. Perspective is all. I'm holding two headlines from the Washington Post, one of May 25th, 2014, “White House mistakenly identifies CIA chief in Afghanistan.” The Obama administration put the name of the CIA on the press release, exposed him and endangered his life. The second one, June 30, 2016, “U.S. Offers to share Syrian intelligence on terrorist with Russia,” which is to say the Obama administration wanted to give their intelligence to the Russians. All I'm saying here is there’s perspective. We need to find out the facts and let’s have perspective.

Incidentally, notice that the 2014 story was from the same Post reporter, Greg Miller, who wrote Monday's article.

In sharp contrast to the wall-to-wall media coverage of the Trump story, Obama offering to share intel with Russia was greeted with yawns from the press.

Here are excerpts of the May 16 exchanges on NBC and CNN:

Today
7:10 AM ET

(...)

MATT LAUER: Can you just clarify something? This concerns an ISIS plot. The Russians are supposed to be our partners in fighting ISIS. So explain why sharing of information with them is so dangerous.

JUAN ZARATE: Well, two reasons. First of all, I think the President may think that he’s trying to create some degree of trust, maybe trying to create some cooperation on the ground. That may be in the back of his mind. The problem is the Russians aren’t trustworthy. The Russians have proven that when we’ve provided information in the past, they’ve used it against us.

Back in the summer of 2016, the Obama administration provided some information to the Russians about some of the things happening on the ground. Guess what happened? The Russians then attacked some of those sites of our allies, our proxies that we were working with. And that’s a problem.

And I think part of the challenge here is, how much can we trust the Russians? What you’re seeing here is a deficit of trust, a deficit of discipline, I think, on the part of the President.

(...)


New Day
6:34 AM ET

CHRIS CUOMO: All right. This latest self-imposed and perhaps most egregious error by the president is sparking all kinds of questions about competence, was his inability to protect highly classified information with Russian diplomats a sign that he's not up to the job. There's a New York Times op-ed you should read for your self from David Brooks. The headline is this, when the world is led by a child. It says, quote, “From all we know so far, Trump didn't do it,” talking about the classified information, “because he's a Russian agent or from any malevolent intent. He did it because he is sloppy, because he lacks all impulse control, and above all because he is a 7-year-old boy desperate for the approval of those he admires.” Let’s discuss Jeffrey Lord, former commentator and White House official and David from senior editor at the Atlantic. Jeffrey, I'm sure you have a robust defense for why this is a nor his criticism of the president is unwarranted so give it to us.

JEFFERY LORD: Okay. The only thing I would say here, Chris is perspective. Perspective is all. I'm holding two headlines from the Washington Post, one of May 25th, 2014, “White House mistakenly identifies CIA chief in Afghanistan.” The Obama administration put the name of the CIA on the press release, exposed him and endangered his life. The second one, June 30, 2016, "U.S. Offers to share Syrian intelligence on terrorist with Russia," which is to say the Obama administration wanted to give their intelligence to the Russians. All I'm saying here is there's perspective. We need to find out the facts and let's have perspective. With all respect to David Brooks he's a never-Trumper. That's fine. But from that perspective, Donald Trump isn't going to do anything David Brooks likes. As I remember famously with David Brooks, he was certain Senator Obama would be a great president because of the crease in his slacks. I mean, with all due respect --

CUOMO: That was a rhetorical flourish from Brooks but let's put that to the side, you've made your point.

(...)                   

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile
Pravda on the Beach on Trump and the Intel Community
« Reply #572 on: May 17, 2017, 08:00:31 AM »
Obama wanting to give intel is not on point-- he ran it by intel community first.  The accusation here is that Trump did not. Nor is the fuk-up of underlings on point.
======================

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-pol-trump-intel-war-20170516-story.html

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19776
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #573 on: May 19, 2017, 05:51:22 PM »
Maybe i am wrong but i think people are being offered rewards for the information.   Money, cash, jobs , shares, something is going  on .  This is disgusting. 
Why can't we find out who are doing this and prosecute them?

https://news.grabien.com/story-networks-these-white-house-leaks-are-aimed-undermining-presi

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19776
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #574 on: May 20, 2017, 09:06:40 AM »
I agree with Brennan about the leaks being the big national security problem.  But why can't the leaks be stopped? 

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2017/05/19/dems-media-intel-folks-fall-into-no-evidence-column-on-trump-campaign-collusion-with-russia/

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile
POTH: Chinese killing and imprisoning US CIA agents
« Reply #575 on: May 20, 2017, 10:53:37 AM »
WASHINGTON — The Chinese government systematically dismantled C.I.A. spying operations in the country starting in 2010, killing or imprisoning more than a dozen sources over two years and crippling intelligence gathering there for years afterward.

Current and former American officials described the intelligence breach as one of the worst in decades. It set off a scramble in Washington’s intelligence and law enforcement agencies to contain the fallout, but investigators were bitterly divided over the cause. Some were convinced that a mole within the C.I.A. had betrayed the United States. Others believed that the Chinese had hacked the covert system the C.I.A. used to communicate with its foreign sources. Years later, that debate remains unresolved.

But there was no disagreement about the damage. From the final weeks of 2010 through the end of 2012, according to former American officials, the Chinese killed at least a dozen of the C.I.A.’s sources. According to three of the officials, one was shot in front of his colleagues in the courtyard of a government building — a message to others who might have been working for the C.I.A.

Still others were put in jail. All told, the Chinese killed or imprisoned 18 to 20 of the C.I.A.’s sources in China, according to two former senior American officials, effectively unraveling a network that had taken years to build.

Assessing the fallout from an exposed spy operation can be difficult, but the episode was considered particularly damaging. The number of American assets lost in China, officials said, rivaled those lost in the Soviet Union and Russia during the betrayals of both Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen, formerly of the C.I.A. and the F.B.I., who divulged intelligence operations to Moscow for years.

The previously unreported episode shows how successful the Chinese were in disrupting American spying efforts and stealing secrets years before a well-publicized breach in 2015 gave Beijing access to thousands of government personnel records, including intelligence contractors. The C.I.A. considers spying in China one of its top priorities, but the country’s extensive security apparatus makes it exceptionally hard for Western spy services to develop sources there.

At a time when the C.I.A. is trying to figure out how some of its most sensitive documents were leaked onto the internet two months ago by WikiLeaks, and the F.B.I. investigates possible ties between President Trump’s campaign and Russia, the unsettled nature of the China investigation demonstrates the difficulty of conducting counterespionage investigations into sophisticated spy services like those in Russia and China.

The C.I.A. and the F.B.I. both declined to comment.

Details about the investigation have been tightly held. Ten current and former American officials described the investigation on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to be identified discussing the information.
Photo
Investigators still disagree how it happened, but the unsettled nature of the China investigation demonstrates the difficulty of conducting counterespionage investigations into sophisticated spy services. Credit Carolyn Kaster/Associated Press..

The first signs of trouble emerged in 2010. At the time, the quality of the C.I.A.’s information about the inner workings of the Chinese government was the best it had been for years, the result of recruiting sources deep inside the bureaucracy in Beijing, four former officials said. Some were Chinese nationals who the C.I.A. believed had become disillusioned with the Chinese government’s corruption.

But by the end of the year, the flow of information began to dry up. By early 2011, senior agency officers realized they had a problem: Assets in China, one of their most precious resources, were disappearing.

The F.B.I. and the C.I.A. opened a joint investigation run by top counterintelligence officials at both agencies. Working out of a secret office in Northern Virginia, they began analyzing every operation being run in Beijing. One former senior American official said the investigation had been code-named Honey Badger.

As more and more sources vanished, the operation took on increased urgency. Nearly every employee at the American Embassy was scrutinized, no matter how high ranking. Some investigators believed the Chinese had cracked the encrypted method that the C.I.A. used to communicate with its assets. Others suspected a traitor in the C.I.A., a theory that agency officials were at first reluctant to embrace — and that some in both agencies still do not believe.

Their debates were punctuated with macabre phone calls — “We lost another one” — and urgent questions from the Obama administration wondering why intelligence about the Chinese had slowed.

The mole hunt eventually zeroed in on a former agency operative who had worked in the C.I.A.’s division overseeing China, believing he was most likely responsible for the crippling disclosures. But efforts to gather enough evidence to arrest him failed, and he is now living in another Asian country, current and former officials said.

There was good reason to suspect an insider, some former officials say. Around that time, Chinese spies compromised National Security Agency surveillance in Taiwan — an island Beijing claims is part of China — by infiltrating Taiwanese intelligence, an American partner, according to two former officials. And the C.I.A. had discovered Chinese operatives in the agency’s hiring pipeline, according to officials and court documents.

But the C.I.A.’s top spy hunter, Mark Kelton, resisted the mole theory, at least initially, former officials say. Mr. Kelton had been close friends with Brian J. Kelley, a C.I.A. officer who in the 1990s was wrongly suspected by the F.B.I. of being a Russian spy. The real traitor, it turned out, was Mr. Hanssen. Mr. Kelton often mentioned Mr. Kelley’s mistreatment in meetings during the China episode, former colleagues say, and said he would not accuse someone without ironclad evidence.

Those who rejected the mole theory attributed the losses to sloppy American tradecraft at a time when the Chinese were becoming better at monitoring American espionage activities in the country. Some F.B.I. agents became convinced that C.I.A. handlers in Beijing too often traveled the same routes to the same meeting points, which would have helped China’s vast surveillance network identify the spies in its midst.


Some officers met their sources at a restaurant where Chinese agents had planted listening devices, former officials said, and even the waiters worked for Chinese intelligence.

This carelessness, coupled with the possibility that the Chinese had hacked the covert communications channel, would explain many, if not all, of the disappearances and deaths, some former officials said. Some in the agency, particularly those who had helped build the spy network, resisted this theory and believed they had been caught in the middle of a turf war within the C.I.A.

Still, the Chinese picked off more and more of the agency’s spies, continuing through 2011 and into 2012. As investigators narrowed the list of suspects with access to the information, they started focusing on a Chinese-American who had left the C.I.A. shortly before the intelligence losses began. Some investigators believed he had become disgruntled and had begun spying for China. One official said the man had access to the identities of C.I.A. informants and fit all the indicators on a matrix used to identify espionage threats.

After leaving the C.I.A., the man decided to remain in Asia with his family and pursue a business opportunity, which some officials suspect that Chinese intelligence agents had arranged.

Officials said the F.B.I. and the C.I.A. lured the man back to the United States around 2012 with a ruse about a possible contract with the agency, an arrangement common among former officers. Agents questioned the man, asking why he had decided to stay in Asia, concerned that he possessed a number of secrets that would be valuable to the Chinese. It’s not clear whether agents confronted the man about whether he had spied for China.

The man defended his reasons for living in Asia and did not admit any wrongdoing, an official said. He then returned to Asia.

By 2013, the F.B.I. and the C.I.A. concluded that China’s success in identifying C.I.A. agents had been blunted — it is not clear how — but the damage had been done.

The C.I.A. has tried to rebuild its network of spies in China, officials said, an expensive and time-consuming effort led at one time by the former chief of the East Asia Division. A former intelligence official said the former chief was particularly bitter because he had worked with the suspected mole and recruited some of the spies in China who were ultimately executed.

China has been particularly aggressive in its espionage in recent years, beyond the breach of the Office of Personnel Management records in 2015, American officials said. Last year, an F.B.I. employee pleaded guilty to acting as a Chinese agent for years, passing sensitive technology information to Beijing in exchange for cash, lavish hotel rooms during foreign travel and prostitutes.

In March, prosecutors announced the arrest of a longtime State Department employee, Candace Marie Claiborne, accused of lying to investigators about her contacts with Chinese officials. According to to the criminal complaint against Ms. Claiborne, who pleaded not guilty, Chinese agents wired cash into her bank account and showered her with gifts that included an iPhone, a laptop and tuition at a Chinese fashion school. In addition, according to the complaint, she received a fully furnished apartment and a stipend.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19776
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #576 on: May 20, 2017, 06:38:24 PM »
" prosecutors announced the arrest of a longtime State Department employee, Candace Marie Claiborne, accused of lying to investigators about her contacts with Chinese officials. According to to the criminal complaint against Ms. Claiborne, who pleaded not guilty, Chinese agents wired cash into her bank account and showered her with gifts that included an iPhone, a laptop and tuition at a Chinese fashion school. In addition, according to the complaint, she received a fully furnished apartment and a stipend."

So why would anyone think the Times or Post or CNN is simply not paying off moles inside the White House?

It would seem to be infinitely easier to find out who are responsible for the leaks here.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #577 on: May 21, 2017, 09:11:32 AM »
"So why would anyone think the Times or Post or CNN is simply not paying off moles inside the White House?"

Because they know better than anyone that secrets are not kept.  The blow back would blow them the fk up and the know it.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #578 on: May 21, 2017, 09:46:30 AM »
"So why would anyone think the Times or Post or CNN is simply not paying off moles inside the White House?"

Because they know better than anyone that secrets are not kept.  The blow back would blow them the fk up and the know it.

https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/top-5-biggest-lies-liberal-media-journalists/

They don't need sources to just make sh#t up.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile
Caroline Glick on the Intel Communities dis-intel campaign against Trump
« Reply #579 on: May 22, 2017, 12:26:10 PM »
Trump and Israel: Enemies of the System

May 22, 2017     Caroline Glick

The United States is sailing in uncharted waters today as the intelligence-security community wages an all-but-declared rebellion against President Donald Trump.

Deputy Attorney-General Rod Rosenstein’s decision on Wednesday to appoint former FBI director Robert Mueller to serve as a special counsel charged with investigating allegations of “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump,” is the latest and so far most significant development in this grave saga.

Who are the people seeking to unseat Trump? This week we learned that the powers at play are deeply familiar. Trump’s nameless opponents are some of Israel’s greatest antagonists in the US security establishment.

This reality was exposed this week with intelligence leaks related to Trump’s meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. To understand what happened, let’s start with the facts that are undisputed about that meeting.

The main thing that is not in dispute is that during his meeting with Lavrov, Trump discussed Islamic State’s plan to blow up passenger flights with bombs hidden in laptop computers.

It’s hard to find fault with Trump’s actions. First of all, the ISIS plot has been public knowledge for several weeks.

Second, the Russians are enemies of ISIS. Moreover, Russia has a specific interest in diminishing ISIS’s capacity to harm civilian air traffic. In October 2015, ISIS terrorists in Egypt downed a Moscow-bound jetliner, killing all 254 people on board with a bomb smuggled on board in a soda can.

And now on to the issues that are in dispute.

Hours after the Trump-Lavrov meeting, The Washington Post reported that in sharing information about ISIS’s plans, Trump exposed intelligence sources and methods to Russia and in so doing, he imperiled ongoing intelligence operations carried out by a foreign government.

The next day, The New York Times reported that the sources and methods involved were Israeli. In sharing information about the ISIS plot with Lavrov, the media reported, Trump endangered Israel.

There are two problems with this narrative.

First, Trump’s National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster insisted that there was no way that Trump could have exposed sources and methods, because he didn’t know where the information on the ISIS plot that he discussed with Lavrov originated.

Second, if McMaster’s version is true – and it’s hard to imagine that McMaster would effectively say that his boss is an ignoramus if it weren’t true – then the people who harmed Israel’s security were the leakers, not Trump.

Now who are these leakers? According to the Washington Post, the leakers are members of the US intelligence community and former members of the US intelligence community, (the latter, presumably were political appointees in senior intelligence positions during the Obama administration who resigned when Trump came into office).

Israel is no stranger to this sort of operation. Throughout the Obama administration, US officials illegally leaked top secret information about Israeli operations to the media.

In 2010, a senior defense source exposed the Stuxnet computer worm to the New York Times. Stuxnet was reportedly a cyber weapon developed jointly by the US and Israel. It was infiltrated into the computer system at Iran’s Bushehr nuclear reactor. It reportedly sabotaged a large quantity of centrifuges at the installation.

The revelation of Stuxnet’s existence and purpose ended the operation. Moreover, much of Iran’s significant cyber capabilities were reportedly developed by reverse engineering the Stuxnet.

Obama made his support for the leak clear three days before he left office. On January 17, 2017, Obama pardoned Marine Gen. James Cartwright for his role in illegally divulging the Stuxnet program to the Times.

In 2012, US officials told the media that Israel had struck targets in Syria. The leak, which was repeated several times in subsequent years, made it more dangerous for Israel to operate against Iranian and Hezbollah forces in Syria.

Also in 2012, ahead of the presidential election, US officials informed journalists that Israel was operating in air bases in Azerbaijan with the purpose of attacking Iran’s nuclear sites in air strikes originating from those bases.

Israel’s alleged plan to attack Iran was abruptly canceled.

In all of these cases, the goal of the leak was to harm Israel.

In contrast, the goal of this week’s leaks was to harm Trump. Israel was collateral damage.

The key point is that the leaks are coming from the same places in both cases.

All of them are members of the US intelligence community with exceedingly high security clearances. And all of them willingly committed felony offenses when they shared top secret information with reporters.

That is, all of them believe that it is perfectly all right to make political use of intelligence to advance a political goal. In the case of the anti-Israel leaks under Obama, their purpose was to prevent Israel from degrading Iran’s nuclear capacity and military power at a time that Obama was working to empower Iran at Israel’s expense.

In the case of the Trump-Lavrov leak, the purpose was to undermine Israel’s security as a means of harming Trump politically.

What happened to the US intelligence community? How did its members come to believe that they have the right to abuse the knowledge they gained as intelligence officers in order to advance a partisan agenda? As former CIA station chief Scott Uehlinger explained in an article published in March in The Hill, the Obama administration oversaw a program of deliberate politicization of the US intelligence community.

The first major step toward this end was initiated by then-US attorney general Eric Holder in August 2009.

Holder announced then that he intended to appoint a special counsel to investigate claims that CIA officers tortured terrorists while interrogating them.

The purpose of Holder’s announcement wasn’t to secure indictments. The points was to transform the CIA politically and culturally.

And it worked.

Shortly after Holder’s announcement, an exodus began of the CIA’s best operations officers. Men and women with years of experience operating in enemy territory resigned.

Uehlinger’s article related that during the Obama years, intelligence officers were required to abide by strict rules of political correctness.

In his words, “In this PC world, all diversity is embraced – except diversity of thought. Federal workers have been partisan for years, but combined with the rigid Obama PC mindset, it has created a Frankenstein of politicization that has never been seen before.”

Over the years, US intelligence officers at all levels have come to view themselves as soldiers in an army with its own agenda – which largely overlapped Obama’s.

Trump’s agenda on the other hand is viewed as anathema by members of this powerful group. Likewise, the notion of a strong Israel capable of defending its interests without American help and permission is more dangerous than the notion of Iran armed with nuclear weapons.

Given these convictions, it is no surprise that unnamed intelligence sources are leaking a tsunami of selective and deceptive intelligence against Trump and his advisers.

The sense of entitlement that prevails in the intelligence community was on prominent display in an astounding interview that Evelyn Farkas, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense, gave to MSNBS in early March.

Farkas, who resigned her position in late 2015 to work on Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, admitted to her interviewer that the intelligence community was spying on Trump and his associates and that ahead of Obama’s departure from office, they were transferring massive amounts of intelligence information about Trump and his associates to Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill in order to ensure that those Democratic politicians would use the information gathered to harm Trump.

In her words, “The Trump folks, if they found out how we knew what we knew about the Trump staff’s dealings with Russians… would try to compromise those sources and methods, meaning we would no longer have access to that information.”

Farkas then explained that the constant leaks of Trump’s actions to the media were part of the initiative that she had urged her counterparts to undertake.

And Farkas was proud of what her colleagues had done and were doing.

Two days after Farkas’s interview, Trump published his tweet accusing former president Barack Obama of spying on him.

Although the media and the intelligence community angrily and contemptuously denied Trump’s assertion, the fact is that both Farkas’s statement and information that became public both before and since Trump’s inauguration lends credence to his claim.

In the days ahead of the inauguration we learned that in the summer of 2016, Obama’s Justice Department conducted a criminal probe into suspicions that Trump’s senior aides had committed crimes in their dealings with Russian banks. Those suspicions, upon investigation, were dismissed. In other words, the criminal probe led nowhere.

Rather than drop the matter, Obama’s Justice Department decided to continue the probe but transform it into a national security investigation.

After a failed attempt in July 2016, in October 2016, a FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) court approved a Justice Department request to monitor the communications of Trump’s senior advisers. Since the subjects of the probe were working from Trump’s office and communicating with him by phone and email, the warrant requested – which the FISA court granted – also subjected Trump’s direct communications to incidental collection.

So from at least October 2016 through Trump’s inauguration, the US intelligence community was spying on Trump and his advisers, despite the fact that they were not suspected of committing any crimes.

This brings us back to this week’s Russia story which together with the media hysteria following Trump’s firing of FBI director James Comey, precipitated Rosenstein’s decision to appoint Mueller to serve as a special counsel charged with investigating the allegations that Trump and or his advisers acted unlawfully or in a manner that endangered the US in their dealings with Russia.

It is too early to judge how Mueller will conduct his investigation. But if the past is any guide, he is liable to keep the investigation going indefinitely, paralyzing Trump’s ability to conduct foreign policy in relation to Russia and a host of other issues.

This then brings us to Trump and Israel – the twin targets of the US intelligence community’s felonious and injurious leaks.

The fact that Trump will be coming to Israel next week may be a bit of fortuitous timing. Given the stakes involved for Trump, for Israel and for US national security, perhaps Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu can develop a method of fighting this cabal of faceless, lawless foes together.

How such a fight would look and what it would involve is not immediately apparent and anyways should never be openly discussed. But the fact is that working together, Israel and Trump may accomplish more than either can accomplish on their own. And with so much hanging in the balance, it makes sense to at least try.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile
Trump tells Duterte about subs
« Reply #581 on: May 25, 2017, 12:06:27 PM »
https://www.buzzfeed.com/nancyyoussef/the-pentagon-is-facepalming-hard-over-trumps-disclosure-of?utm_term=.dsPxA1zWj#.sdEAR7ye1

Maybe a naive question, but if you were trying to get Duterte back on board against the Norks and backing away from the Chinese, letting him know who the strong horse is seems to have a logic, yes?



bigdog

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2321
    • View Profile
IC too big?
« Reply #584 on: June 01, 2017, 01:43:32 PM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #585 on: June 01, 2017, 02:30:26 PM »
I'm willing to entertain that argument , , ,

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: IC too big?
« Reply #586 on: June 01, 2017, 06:53:52 PM »
https://fas.org/blogs/secrecy/2013/09/nctc-nolan/

In dire need of major cuts. For a multitude of reasons, most importantly, it's threat to American freedom.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19462
    • View Profile
Re: IC too big?
« Reply #587 on: June 02, 2017, 07:05:41 AM »
https://fas.org/blogs/secrecy/2013/09/nctc-nolan/
In dire need of major cuts. For a multitude of reasons, most importantly, it's threat to American freedom.

There is something misguided about having 17 agencies in charge of something, which leads to no one being in charge and people assuming someone else is handling what is most important.  It leads to leaks and it makes the leaks exponentially harder to track down.   Decisions tend to get made by consensus instead of knowledge and wisdom.

I supported collecting NSA metadata for connecting foreign threats to domestic contacts back when we could say there are no examples of its abuse.  That is no longer true.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #588 on: June 03, 2017, 10:01:48 AM »
", , , when we could say there are no examples of its abuse.  That is no longer true."

EXACTLY SO.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile
Gowdy vs. Comey
« Reply #589 on: June 03, 2017, 10:14:56 AM »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19776
    • View Profile
Lets get our military electronics from a Chinese company
« Reply #590 on: June 04, 2017, 05:03:54 PM »
That weasels its' way in the door through a subcontractor:


http://freebeacon.com/national-security/chinese-telecom-zte-subcontracting-pentagon-dhs/

 :-o

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Lets get our military electronics from a Chinese company
« Reply #591 on: June 04, 2017, 07:24:00 PM »
That weasels its' way in the door through a subcontractor:


http://freebeacon.com/national-security/chinese-telecom-zte-subcontracting-pentagon-dhs/

 :-o

Wow. We are in the best of hands.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile
WSJ: Samantha Power unmasked
« Reply #592 on: June 04, 2017, 10:16:52 PM »
 Barack Obama in 2014 made a large to-do about his reforms of U.S. surveillance programs to “protect the privacy” of Americans. We may soon learn how that squares with his Administration’s unmasking of political opponents.

The House Intelligence Committee Wednesday issued seven subpoenas as part of its Russia probe. But the three most notable demanded that the National Security Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation turn over records related to the Obama Administration’s “unmasking” of Trump transition members.

We know that U.S. intelligence agencies routinely eavesdropped on foreign officials who were talking about or meeting with Trump aides. Much less routine is for political appointees to override privacy protections to “unmask,” or learn the identity of, U.S. citizens listed in a resulting intelligence report.

The new subpoenas seek details of all unmasking requests in 2016 by three people: former National Security Adviser Susan Rice, former CIA Director John Brennan, and former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power. Democrats claim Ms. Rice needed to unmask names to do her job, though this is questionable given that she wasn’t running counterintelligence investigations. They have a better claim with Mr. Brennan.

But Ms. Power’s job was diplomacy. Unmaskings are supposed to be rare, and if the mere ambassador to the U.N. could demand them, what privacy protection was the Obama White House really offering U.S. citizens? The House subpoenas should provide fascinating details about how often Ms. Power and her mates requested unmaskings, on which Trump officials, and with what justification. The public deserves to know given that unmasked details have been leaked to the press in violation of the law and privacy.

Meantime, we learned from Circa News last week of a declassified document from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which excoriated the National Security Agency for an “institutional lack of candor.” The court explained that Obama officials had often violated U.S. privacy protections while looking at foreign intelligence but did not disclose these incidents until the waning days of Mr. Obama’s tenure.

“The Oct. 26, 2016 notice [by the Obama Administration] informed the Court that NSA analysts had been conducting [queries that identified U.S. citizens] in violation of [prohibitions] with much greater frequency than had been previously disclosed to the Court,” read the unsealed document, dated April 26, 2017.

All of this matters because Congress will be asked by the end of this year to reauthorize programs such as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which allows for spying on bad guys and is a vital terror-fighting tool. Even Mr. Obama endorsed 702’s necessity. Congress needs to keep the program going, but it has every right to know first if Team Obama eavesdropped on political opponents.

Appeared in the June 1, 2017, print edition.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72330
    • View Profile


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19776
    • View Profile
here is the recipient of the lead
« Reply #597 on: June 06, 2017, 04:13:59 AM »
And the leaker they say is an airforce veteran!!!  And her family is claiming they still don't know what she did. 
Like driving 60 in a 25 mile hr zone and the police officer pulls a person over and the person asks, "what for?"

https://theintercept.com/

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: here is the recipient of the lead
« Reply #598 on: June 06, 2017, 06:33:36 AM »
And the leaker they say is an airforce veteran!!!  And her family is claiming they still don't know what she did. 
Like driving 60 in a 25 mile hr zone and the police officer pulls a person over and the person asks, "what for?"

https://theintercept.com/

The left's long march through America's institutions is bearing fruit.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19776
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #599 on: June 06, 2017, 06:46:22 AM »
"The left's long march through America's institutions is bearing fruit."

they need to make an example out of her.

The LEFT MSM will have their parade of defenders coming on making excused for her.  like 1 st amendment etc
I also want to know if there is anyway that the media can be found complicit.  They need to be held accountable.