{"id":72095,"date":"2017-05-16T11:22:48","date_gmt":"2017-05-16T15:22:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/valorguardians.com\/blog\/?p=72095"},"modified":"2017-05-16T11:28:17","modified_gmt":"2017-05-16T15:28:17","slug":"trump-and-his-intel-reveal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/?p=72095","title":{"rendered":"Trump and his intel reveal"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Washington Post<\/a> caused quite a stir last night when they put out their story entitled “Trump revealed highly classified information to Russian foreign minister and ambassador”. Apparently, the president discussed some intelligence about ISIS that had been gathered by a third party nation with the Russians.<\/p>\n

The information the president 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.<\/p>\n

The partner had not given the United States permission to share the material with Russia, and officials said Trump\u2019s decision to do so endangers cooperation from an ally that has access to the inner workings of the Islamic State. After Trump\u2019s meeting, senior White House officials took steps to contain the damage, placing calls to the CIA and the National Security Agency.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is code-word information,\u201d 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 \u201crevealed more information to the Russian ambassador than we have shared with our own allies.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

You’ll notice that the Post doesn’t name their sources on this story, probably because they admit that they depend more on “unnamed sources” than on legitimate folks who don’t mind going on the record. Margaret Sullivan, the Post’s media critic admits as much just this past weekend<\/a>;<\/p>\n

The newspaper’s media critic, Margaret Sullivan, says she’s no fan of unnamed sources because of the lack of accountability and scrutiny they provide, but she defends the use of them in the Post’s current White House coverage.<\/p>\n

“There is no way to get at the story through talking to the White House press secretary or listening to the spin that is offered by officials who are willing to go on the record,” she says.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In short, the only way to get the story that they want is to use anonymous sources. You, know even if those sources are only in the reporters’ heads.<\/p>\n

For the uninitiated, the President decides what information is classified and to what degree it’s supposed to be protected from prying eyes – so really, even if Trump did tell the Russians something sensitive, he did nothing illegal. However, HR McMaster, the National Security Advisor to this President says that he was at that particular meeting with the President and what the Washington Post reported “it didn’t happen”.<\/p>\n

\n

MORE: "I was in the room," H.R. McMaster says, responding to WaPo Russia report. "It didn't happen." https:\/\/t.co\/Okz2bwUl4f<\/a> pic.twitter.com\/PDv9nMIJrc<\/a><\/p>\n

— CBS News (@CBSNews) May 15, 2017<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n