THE ERA OF TRUMP

[kybkh]

Well allow me to retort...

Mike Morell has been a pet project of mine since 2014 when I first saw him on Charlie Rose calling for war with Syria while employed as a CBS News national security analyst. I thought it odd an ex-CIA Acting Director would be employed by a "real" news network. I even posted a thread with his name in the title on the old board...

Michael Morell Says It's Time To Get It On!

So to answer this concern of yours "...please tell now just how the other intelligence services hopped on to tell the same "FABRICATED" story? Did this Morell guy work or worked in the NSA? Did this guy work in the DHS?"

He worked at the CIA and the people heading those other agencies are probably loyal to Obama. MM wrote this op-ed for the NYT

I Ran the C.I.A. Now I’m Endorsing Hillary Clinton.

By MICHAEL J. MORELLAUG. 5, 2016

During a 33-year career at the Central Intelligence Agency, I served presidents of both parties — three Republicans and three Democrats. I was at President George W. Bush’s side when we were attacked on Sept. 11; as deputy director of the agency, I was with President Obama when we killed Osama bin Laden in 2011.

I am neither a registered Democrat nor a registered Republican. In my 40 years of voting, I have pulled the lever for candidates of both parties. As a government official, I have always been silent about my preference for president.

No longer. On Nov. 8, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Between now and then, I will do everything I can to ensure that she is elected as our 45th president.

Two strongly held beliefs have brought me to this decision. First, Mrs. Clinton is highly qualified to be commander in chief. I trust she will deliver on the most important duty of a president — keeping our nation safe. Second, Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/opini ... .html?_r=0

Morell left the CIA in 2013 to join Beacon Global Strategies, which is a consulting firm founded by longtime Clinton State Department aide Philippe Reines. Reines isn't a paid campaign official, but he played Republican nominee Donald Trump during Clinton's debate prep.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/01/politics/ ... on-emails/

So the guy was connected to the Clinton campaign, projected to be a serious candidate for her cabinet and certainly dislikes DJT. McCain and Graham are on their own little island when it comes to FoPo. I am surprised you are unaware of their relationship and hawkishness.

You also seemed to be missing a key part of original statement...You said "You do understand that the CIA will have a new boss and that this boss will likely be in charge of the people there. The whole idea that the CIA would fabricate something and continue with it a few weeks to go to the new administration getting to power is simply illogical. "

3. Imagine if the "CIA" really only consist of Mike Morrell and his network of friends.

This concern you have with why the CIA would burn a bridge out of the gate does not apply because it is not "The CIA". It is anonymous sources with-in the CIA. AKA Friends of Mike, soon to be station chiefs in Iceland.

[ssu]

So, an ex-CIA official that hopped on the Clinton train. OK.

That still doesn't at all answer the NSA, DHS, DIA and yes even FBI stance on subject.

What really has the Department of Homeland Security have to do with CIA and Morell?

For Immediate Release
DHS Press Office
Contact: 202-282-8010

The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.

And above all, try to look at the broader picture. It's not only the hacking, it's the fake news, and even more...

For instance like things that Putin HIMSELF has said during the election. Though naturally denying any involvement (just like with the war in Ukraine), he then goes to mention that people should look at the content of the hacks, in other words the emails hacked are damning evidence against Hillary. Sure, yet there Putin is taking a side in an election of another country.


Hence the idea that Russia had here nothing to do, didn't care at all about the US elections and that the whole idea is a total fabrication is simply false.

And here Trump is doing a stupid thing with denial. He could simply say, that Putin seems to have hated Hillary, but these kind of things Russia does, spreads confusion and disinformation. That Russia has taken sides in a lot of elections, like the Scottish Referendum and Brexit. Did that make British/Scottish politicians puppets?

That kind of reply would ease the problem. But no, deny that all of the intelligence services are wrong. That nothing happened, it's only a lie that the democrats say (which it false again). That's the problem. And then making this conspiracy theory that nothing happened, Russia didn't do anything and everything is about evil Hillary and her cronies...

[kybkh]

The recent leaks published by the NYT and the Washington post both cited CIA sources.

What I am discussing has nothing to do with that statement.

The worst possible thing Trump could do is admit the election was tainted.

[Okeefenokee]

As I said, can possibly be the most corrupt administration ever, which can tarnish even those sides that are genuinely good at their jobs. Hope it won't, but could happen. It could be seen already in the picks Trump had during the election that the administration would have a lot of rich people working in it.

Point out any administration ever that had Joe the plumber in charge of anything.

[TheReal_ND]

Well allow me to retort...

Mike Morell has been a pet project of mine since 2014 when I first saw him on Charlie Rose calling for war with Syria while employed as a CBS News national security analyst. I thought it odd an ex-CIA Acting Director would be employed by a "real" news network. I even posted a thread with his name in the title on the old board...

Michael Morell Says It's Time To Get It On!

So to answer this concern of yours "...please tell now just how the other intelligence services hopped on to tell the same "FABRICATED" story? Did this Morell guy work or worked in the NSA? Did this guy work in the DHS?"

He worked at the CIA and the people heading those other agencies are probably loyal to Obama. MM wrote this op-ed for the NYT

I Ran the C.I.A. Now I’m Endorsing Hillary Clinton.

By MICHAEL J. MORELLAUG. 5, 2016

During a 33-year career at the Central Intelligence Agency, I served presidents of both parties — three Republicans and three Democrats. I was at President George W. Bush’s side when we were attacked on Sept. 11; as deputy director of the agency, I was with President Obama when we killed Osama bin Laden in 2011.

I am neither a registered Democrat nor a registered Republican. In my 40 years of voting, I have pulled the lever for candidates of both parties. As a government official, I have always been silent about my preference for president.

No longer. On Nov. 8, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Between now and then, I will do everything I can to ensure that she is elected as our 45th president.

Two strongly held beliefs have brought me to this decision. First, Mrs. Clinton is highly qualified to be commander in chief. I trust she will deliver on the most important duty of a president — keeping our nation safe. Second, Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/opini ... .html?_r=0

Morell left the CIA in 2013 to join Beacon Global Strategies, which is a consulting firm founded by longtime Clinton State Department aide Philippe Reines. Reines isn't a paid campaign official, but he played Republican nominee Donald Trump during Clinton's debate prep.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/01/politics/ ... on-emails/

So the guy was connected to the Clinton campaign, projected to be a serious candidate for her cabinet and certainly dislikes DJT. McCain and Graham are on their own little island when it comes to FoPo. I am surprised you are unaware of their relationship and hawkishness.

You also seemed to be missing a key part of original statement...You said "You do understand that the CIA will have a new boss and that this boss will likely be in charge of the people there. The whole idea that the CIA would fabricate something and continue with it a few weeks to go to the new administration getting to power is simply illogical. "

3. Imagine if the "CIA" really only consist of Mike Morrell and his network of friends.

This concern you have with why the CIA would burn a bridge out of the gate does not apply because it is not "The CIA". It is anonymous sources with-in the CIA. AKA Friends of Mike, soon to be station chiefs in Iceland.

[Penner]

A secret U.S. military investigation in 2010 determined that Michael T. Flynn, the retired Army general tapped to serve as national security adviser in the Trump White House, “inappropriately shared” classified information with foreign military officers in Afghanistan, newly released documents show.

Although Flynn lacked authorization to share the classified material, he was not disciplined or reprimanded after the investigation concluded that he did not act “knowingly” and that “there was no actual or potential damage to national security as a result,” according to Army records obtained by The Washington Post under the Freedom of Information Act.

[Read the military investigation into Michael Flynn in 2010]

Flynn has previously acknowledged that he was investigated while serving as the U.S. military intelligence chief in Afghanistan for sharing secrets with British and Australian allies there. But he has dismissed the case as insignificant and has given few details.

The Army documents provide the first official account of the case, but they are limited in scope because the investigation itself remains classified. Former U.S. officials familiar with the matter said that Flynn was accused of telling allies about the activities of other agencies in Afghanistan, including the CIA.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... d50724d4c8

[TheReal_ND]

That's sexist.

[Okeefenokee]

That's sexist.

True.

[TheReal_ND]

That's sexist.

True.

We're the liberal media naow.

[Okeefenokee]

Hillary shares classified information with her nanny, but that's okay. Flynn shares classified information with colleagues in the Afghan Army, and it's bad.

Sexist.

Personally, rules are rules, and rules on classified information are the utmost rules. I don't make exceptions on this. It was my job. If Flynn was playing it fast and loose with the rules on classified information, I'm not for him. Same with Petraeus.