Donnie Dumptruck says Mar-A-Lago's been searched by the FBI

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jeez. I had read about the fact that we had more informants than usual being compromised. Do you really think it’s connected to Trump? If so, no wonder even the cautious Garland had to act.

What are republican (members of congress) saying now? I know they were all “FBI overreach” at the beginning but haven’t heard anything recently.

Here is the NY Times article: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/05/us/politics/cia-informants-killed-captured.html

I realize this is the new fun parlor game right not, but I find the total speculation clickbait irritating. It would be incredibly helpful if someone that had worked extensively in the IC and in or with the White House would come out and talk about the types of information that would routinely be provided to the President, because a list of CIA assets ain't it.

That doesn't mean the President COULDN'T obtain that information, but a request like that would be highly scrutinized and even pushed back on. There's this perception that because the President has classification authority and is cleared to see pretty much all intelligence based on the office that he or she can go fire up a computer and spit out every sensitive piece of information the IC has. That's just not true.

You are way behind on the news if you are asking these questions. the Times article is from October 2021. The names of the people compromised are known to our Intel community. It won't take long to match them up with the files from Mar-A-Lago.

The implication is that Trump had these names, passed them to foreign government(s) and that's how these assets were lost, and then CIA sent a worldwide message to its workforce but didn't know Trump burned the assets. That doesn't make any sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jeez. I had read about the fact that we had more informants than usual being compromised. Do you really think it’s connected to Trump? If so, no wonder even the cautious Garland had to act.

What are republican (members of congress) saying now? I know they were all “FBI overreach” at the beginning but haven’t heard anything recently.

Here is the NY Times article: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/05/us/politics/cia-informants-killed-captured.html

I realize this is the new fun parlor game right not, but I find the total speculation clickbait irritating. It would be incredibly helpful if someone that had worked extensively in the IC and in or with the White House would come out and talk about the types of information that would routinely be provided to the President, because a list of CIA assets ain't it.

That doesn't mean the President COULDN'T obtain that information, but a request like that would be highly scrutinized and even pushed back on. There's this perception that because the President has classification authority and is cleared to see pretty much all intelligence based on the office that he or she can go fire up a computer and spit out every sensitive piece of information the IC has. That's just not true.

You are way behind on the news if you are asking these questions. the Times article is from October 2021. The names of the people compromised are known to our Intel community. It won't take long to match them up with the files from Mar-A-Lago.

The implication is that Trump had these names, passed them to foreign government(s) and that's how these assets were lost, and then CIA sent a worldwide message to its workforce but didn't know Trump burned the assets. That doesn't make any sense.

Are yllou suggesting anything about the Trump presidency and post-presidency makes sense?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You think 21 CIA officers (who are all American citizens) were killed by foreign governments and all you've heard about it is a story in the New York Times?

No one is saying CIA officers died. The allegation is Donnie might have given up the names of CIA informants (i.e. the people who give intelligence to the CIA). And, no, I wouldn't expect to hear about something like that in the usual course. We rarely do.

The main intelligence breach I recall hearing about that led to the death of a bunch of informants was a few years ago and involved China.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jeez. I had read about the fact that we had more informants than usual being compromised. Do you really think it’s connected to Trump? If so, no wonder even the cautious Garland had to act.

What are republican (members of congress) saying now? I know they were all “FBI overreach” at the beginning but haven’t heard anything recently.

Here is the NY Times article: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/05/us/politics/cia-informants-killed-captured.html

I realize this is the new fun parlor game right not, but I find the total speculation clickbait irritating. It would be incredibly helpful if someone that had worked extensively in the IC and in or with the White House would come out and talk about the types of information that would routinely be provided to the President, because a list of CIA assets ain't it.

That doesn't mean the President COULDN'T obtain that information, but a request like that would be highly scrutinized and even pushed back on. There's this perception that because the President has classification authority and is cleared to see pretty much all intelligence based on the office that he or she can go fire up a computer and spit out every sensitive piece of information the IC has. That's just not true.

You are way behind on the news if you are asking these questions. the Times article is from October 2021. The names of the people compromised are known to our Intel community. It won't take long to match them up with the files from Mar-A-Lago.

The implication is that Trump had these names, passed them to foreign government(s) and that's how these assets were lost, and then CIA sent a worldwide message to its workforce but didn't know Trump burned the assets. That doesn't make any sense.

Why not? Who would think a POTUS or FPOTUS would be a traitorous spy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jeez. I had read about the fact that we had more informants than usual being compromised. Do you really think it’s connected to Trump? If so, no wonder even the cautious Garland had to act.

What are republican (members of congress) saying now? I know they were all “FBI overreach” at the beginning but haven’t heard anything recently.

Here is the NY Times article: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/05/us/politics/cia-informants-killed-captured.html

Very sad, but how could Trump be linked to these issues, given the confidential nature of the topic?

Are you serious with this question?

Well if you're going to lay deaths of agents working on behalf of the US - hopefully American citizens, since foreign agents won't generate the same sympathy from the right-wing you're targeting - at the door of the former President, then you'd better have something better than "he may have leaked secrets to foreign leaders and agents all throughout his 4 years as President and beyond!" and "CIA reports spike in agent deaths and imprisonment in 2021!".

You've got to put yourself in their shoes and think like them. Right now all they'll say is: "Darn, that CIA is incompetent. No, Trump keeping docs has nothing to do with this. He's a brilliant man. Of course he would never endanger any our agents. Hey, how many of our agents are actually Muslim and double agents, BTW?"

You know how their lonely little neuron works.

You think 21 CIA officers (who are all American citizens) were killed by foreign governments and all you've heard about it is a story in the New York Times?

PP you replied to. My exact question. Revealing that type of failures in intelligence is so incredibly secret and sensitive that I fear we will never know enough details to pin the blame on Trump, if indeed he is the person who named names to foreign agents or leaders, or left papers at the mercy of staff who did, or let papers be seen by foreign agents at Mar-a-Lago.

So 45 could be walking around scot free, under the adulation of many, when in reality he might be responsible for the deaths, imprisonment and torture of people loyal to the USA.

I irks me that I might never know. Not that I respect him in any way. I loathe him. But I want to know which crimes he is guilty of, to have the appropriate amount of loathing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jeez. I had read about the fact that we had more informants than usual being compromised. Do you really think it’s connected to Trump? If so, no wonder even the cautious Garland had to act.

What are republican (members of congress) saying now? I know they were all “FBI overreach” at the beginning but haven’t heard anything recently.

Here is the NY Times article: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/05/us/politics/cia-informants-killed-captured.html

I realize this is the new fun parlor game right not, but I find the total speculation clickbait irritating. It would be incredibly helpful if someone that had worked extensively in the IC and in or with the White House would come out and talk about the types of information that would routinely be provided to the President, because a list of CIA assets ain't it.

That doesn't mean the President COULDN'T obtain that information, but a request like that would be highly scrutinized and even pushed back on. There's this perception that because the President has classification authority and is cleared to see pretty much all intelligence based on the office that he or she can go fire up a computer and spit out every sensitive piece of information the IC has. That's just not true.

He didn't need a "list of CIA assets" -- their names are embedded in the documents he kept about specific operations.

"Oh look, we got some intel on Putin -- I bet he'd like to know that. And the name of the guy inside his circle who provided it."

Please explain how you came to this conclusion.

[Anonymous]

Remember when he had that private meeting with Putin, when they both walked into the press conference, Putlin looking calm amd confident, Trump looking downcast and defeated? I wonder if Putin told him to give up names of informants during that meeting, and Trump reluctantly agreed to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You think 21 CIA officers (who are all American citizens) were killed by foreign governments and all you've heard about it is a story in the New York Times?

No one is saying CIA officers died. The allegation is Donnie might have given up the names of CIA informants (i.e. the people who give intelligence to the CIA). And, no, I wouldn't expect to hear about something like that in the usual course. We rarely do.

The main intelligence breach I recall hearing about that led to the death of a bunch of informants was a few years ago and involved China.

Here's what the PP said:

Well if you're going to lay deaths of agents working on behalf of the US - hopefully American citizens, since foreign agents won't generate the same sympathy from the right-wing you're targeting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You think 21 CIA officers (who are all American citizens) were killed by foreign governments and all you've heard about it is a story in the New York Times?

No one is saying CIA officers died. The allegation is Donnie might have given up the names of CIA informants (i.e. the people who give intelligence to the CIA). And, no, I wouldn't expect to hear about something like that in the usual course. We rarely do.

The main intelligence breach I recall hearing about that led to the death of a bunch of informants was a few years ago and involved China.

Here's what the PP said:

Well if you're going to lay deaths of agents working on behalf of the US - hopefully American citizens, since foreign agents won't generate the same sympathy from the right-wing you're targeting

Agents =/= officers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jeez. I had read about the fact that we had more informants than usual being compromised. Do you really think it’s connected to Trump? If so, no wonder even the cautious Garland had to act.

What are republican (members of congress) saying now? I know they were all “FBI overreach” at the beginning but haven’t heard anything recently.

Here is the NY Times article: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/05/us/politics/cia-informants-killed-captured.html

I realize this is the new fun parlor game right not, but I find the total speculation clickbait irritating. It would be incredibly helpful if someone that had worked extensively in the IC and in or with the White House would come out and talk about the types of information that would routinely be provided to the President, because a list of CIA assets ain't it.

That doesn't mean the President COULDN'T obtain that information, but a request like that would be highly scrutinized and even pushed back on. There's this perception that because the President has classification authority and is cleared to see pretty much all intelligence based on the office that he or she can go fire up a computer and spit out every sensitive piece of information the IC has. That's just not true.

You are way behind on the news if you are asking these questions. the Times article is from October 2021. The names of the people compromised are known to our Intel community. It won't take long to match them up with the files from Mar-A-Lago.

The implication is that Trump had these names, passed them to foreign government(s) and that's how these assets were lost, and then CIA sent a worldwide message to its workforce but didn't know Trump burned the assets. That doesn't make any sense.

Trump is stupid. In 2017 when he met with Lavrov he bragged about how we knew about the threat of laptop bombs on planes. He gave enough information for the Russians to figure out we got intel from Israel and when and where the Israelis got it. That’s the threat. He’s much too stupid and reckless to have documents that reveal who, what, when, where, how we got intel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Remember when he had that private meeting with Putin, when they both walked into the press conference, Putlin looking calm amd confident, Trump looking downcast and defeated? I wonder if Putin told him to give up names of informants during that meeting, and Trump reluctantly agreed to.

Just as likely that TFG or Jared were running their mouths in front of the likes of MBS or MBZ. Netanyahu is also a snake that wouldn’t hesitate for a second to trade US intel for personal or political gain. And his knows what Trump said in his love letters to Kim.

[Anonymous]

We're all less safe now because of Trump. Let that sink in. Even you, MAGA Trumpers. He threw you under the bus, too.

[Anonymous]

Roger Stone has been running backchannel to the Russians for awhile through Wikileaks. Pyrenees there’s Manafort and his Russian handler. Tom Barrack. Carter Page. Pspadopoulos. A who’s who of scumbags and hustlers and wannabes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jeez. I had read about the fact that we had more informants than usual being compromised. Do you really think it’s connected to Trump? If so, no wonder even the cautious Garland had to act.

What are republican (members of congress) saying now? I know they were all “FBI overreach” at the beginning but haven’t heard anything recently.

Here is the NY Times article: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/05/us/politics/cia-informants-killed-captured.html

I realize this is the new fun parlor game right not, but I find the total speculation clickbait irritating. It would be incredibly helpful if someone that had worked extensively in the IC and in or with the White House would come out and talk about the types of information that would routinely be provided to the President, because a list of CIA assets ain't it.

That doesn't mean the President COULDN'T obtain that information, but a request like that would be highly scrutinized and even pushed back on. There's this perception that because the President has classification authority and is cleared to see pretty much all intelligence based on the office that he or she can go fire up a computer and spit out every sensitive piece of information the IC has. That's just not true.

You are way behind on the news if you are asking these questions. the Times article is from October 2021. The names of the people compromised are known to our Intel community. It won't take long to match them up with the files from Mar-A-Lago.

The implication is that Trump had these names, passed them to foreign government(s) and that's how these assets were lost, and then CIA sent a worldwide message to its workforce but didn't know Trump burned the assets. That doesn't make any sense.

That is not the implication.

What we do know: there has been an uptick in the number of intel assets identified in the last few years. There were documents that Trump illegally kept that were marked as HCS - which indicates that the document was classified to protect sources.

What we don’t know: were any of Trump’s documents related to any spies who have been compromised? were any of those documents sold/given to a foreign power? Were any of these documents stolen by foreign govts because of Trump’s carelessness?

So we do not know that there is any connection between Trump and the uptick in damage to our spy network. But given what we do know, it is not an unreasonable question to ask.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jeez. I had read about the fact that we had more informants than usual being compromised. Do you really think it’s connected to Trump? If so, no wonder even the cautious Garland had to act.

What are republican (members of congress) saying now? I know they were all “FBI overreach” at the beginning but haven’t heard anything recently.

Here is the NY Times article: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/05/us/politics/cia-informants-killed-captured.html

I realize this is the new fun parlor game right not, but I find the total speculation clickbait irritating. It would be incredibly helpful if someone that had worked extensively in the IC and in or with the White House would come out and talk about the types of information that would routinely be provided to the President, because a list of CIA assets ain't it.

That doesn't mean the President COULDN'T obtain that information, but a request like that would be highly scrutinized and even pushed back on. There's this perception that because the President has classification authority and is cleared to see pretty much all intelligence based on the office that he or she can go fire up a computer and spit out every sensitive piece of information the IC has. That's just not true.

You are way behind on the news if you are asking these questions. the Times article is from October 2021. The names of the people compromised are known to our Intel community. It won't take long to match them up with the files from Mar-A-Lago.

The implication is that Trump had these names, passed them to foreign government(s) and that's how these assets were lost, and then CIA sent a worldwide message to its workforce but didn't know Trump burned the assets. That doesn't make any sense.

That is not the implication.

What we do know: there has been an uptick in the number of intel assets identified in the last few years. There were documents that Trump illegally kept that were marked as HCS - which indicates that the document was classified to protect sources.

What we don’t know: were any of Trump’s documents related to any spies who have been compromised? were any of those documents sold/given to a foreign power? Were any of these documents stolen by foreign govts because of Trump’s carelessness?

So we do not know that there is any connection between Trump and the uptick in damage to our spy network. But given what we do know, it is not an unreasonable question to ask.

Nor is it illogical to assume. Unless you know of someone else who's been illegally keeping HCS documents that could be sharing that information. I don't.