Trump 17: James Comey and the Goblin of "You're Fired"

[CTRLZero]

2 hours ago, fraurosena said:

I don’t feel an iota of sympathy for Pence. He was among a perfidious group of political opportunists who pushed Trump’s candidacy while having to know that he was intellectually, temperamentally and morally unfit for the presidency. They stuck with him as he mocked the disabled, belittled women, insulted Hispanics, libeled Mexicans and promiscuously promised the impossible and ridiculous — all that “Day One” nonsense like how the wall would be built and Mexico would pay for it.

This is one of those articles that should be required reading for every American. 

[GreyhoundFan]

They need to stop talking and start acting: "Lawmakers express shock and concern about Trump disclosure of classified information"

Spoiler

Lawmakers expressed shock and concern after learning that President Trump had revealed highly classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador during a meeting in the Oval Office last week, according to current and former U.S. officials.

“Obviously, they are in a downward spiral right now and have got to figure out a way to come to grips with all that’s happening,” Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said of the Trump administration.

“The chaos that is being created by the lack of discipline is creating an environment that I think makes — it creates a worrisome environment,” he said.

Trump’s disclosures jeopardized a critical source of intelligence on the Islamic State, according to the officials. The information Trump relayed, officials said, 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.

The news created a sensation as it spread through Washington and up to Capitol Hill on Monday, where senators were returning for evening votes.

“If the report is true, it is very disturbing,” Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement. “Revealing classified information at this level is extremely dangerous and puts at risk the lives of Americans and those who gather intelligence for our country. The President owes the intelligence community, the American people, and Congress a full explanation.”

A spokesman for House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) emphasized the importance of safeguarding sensitive intelligence.

“We have no way to know what was said, but protecting our nation’s secrets is paramount. The speaker hopes for a full explanation of the facts from the administration,” Ryan spokesman Doug Andres said in a statement.

The revelation came at a sensitive time for the president, who less than a week ago cited “this Russia thing with Trump” in explaining why he fired FBI Director James B. Comey, who was leading an investigation into Russia’s interference with the 2016 election. Investigators are already probing possible coordination between Trump’s campaign and the Russian government, and the president has struggled to shake the issue as he tries to advance his legislative agenda.

The news is likely to raise questions on Capitol Hill about Trump’s handling of classified information. It could also increase pressure on investigators looking into Trump’s possible ties to the Kremlin.

And it could pull attention away from Republicans’ policy priorities this week. The Senate GOP is working to hammer out the details of a health-care plan, and the House is returning from a one-week break.

The top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee called the news a “slap in the face to the intel community.”

“Risking sources and methods is inexcusable, particularly with the Russians,” Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-Va.) tweeted around 6 p.m.

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a member of the panel, said the report was of the “gravest possible concern.”

“This kind of disclosure could harm national security by jeopardizing important sources of information needed to disrupt terrorist attacks,” Wyden said in a statement.

In Moscow, a Russian Foreign Minister spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, posted a statement on Facebook denying that classified information was provided by Trump, calling the reports “yet another fake.” But denials by Moscow were expected to avoid being pressed for further details.

As senators gathered for their first vote of the week, Republicans and Democrats said they were worried about the developing story. The House was not in session Monday evening.

“Pretty terrifying,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). “If true, it is astonishing, appalling and should be investigated. It was astonishing and absolutely surprising. I would never have imagined the chief executive of our great nation would undertake that kind of disclosure.”

Sen. John Thune (S.D.), chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, said, “I would be concerned anytime we’re discussing sensitive subjects with the Russians.” Thune reacted after an initial briefing on the news report and said he had not reviewed details.

Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.), a member of the Intelligence Committee, said he’d only heard the basics of the report but called them “very serious.” He noted that fewer than 25 senators are ever given access to the nation’s most sensitive secrets and he learns things he “can’t even talk about with other senators.”

If the reports are true, “it’s very damning, very damaging,” Manchin said, adding that such disclosures “would be extremely dangerous and concerning to all.”

Sen. Christopher A. Coons (D-Del.) said had he just read The Post story and, “if true, that would be genuinely shocking.”

“It’s disturbing if true,” Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) said.

Several senators said they did not know the details of The Post report but called the news troubling nonetheless.

“This is not the appropriate move on his part, and I just think it’s part of a pattern of recklessness that we’ve got to get a handle on,” said Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.).

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said, “We certainly don’t want any president to leak classified information, but the president does have the right to do that … I think any president needs to be careful.”

About a dozen reporters continued to stake out a bipartisan health-care meeting around 7 p.m., intent on asking questions about Trump. The scene was reminiscent of the prior week, when Capitol Hill was consumed by news of Comey’s firing.

McCain, clearly flustered by reporters pressing for answers, walked off the Senate floor and said he hadn’t read the reports, adding, “I can’t comment on every breaking news story.”

Later, he said: “That’s why it’s classified. They have a reason to classify it, okay? And when they say it’s classified, if it was public knowledge, then it could hurt the national security of the United States. That’s why we classify.” He said the news would be “disturbing” if true.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was silent as he walked from his office to the Senate floor. Asked how concerned he was about Trump sharing information with Russian officials, he looked straight ahead, offering no reaction.

Sen. John Cornyn (Tex.), the Republican whip and a candidate to replace Comey as FBI director, said he didn’t have “any information about that at all.”

“I’m just not going to answer a hypothetical question,” he told reporters.

 

[47of74]

19 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

They need to stop talking and start acting: "Lawmakers express shock and concern about Trump disclosure of classified information"

  Hide contents

Lawmakers expressed shock and concern after learning that President Trump had revealed highly classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador during a meeting in the Oval Office last week, according to current and former U.S. officials.

“Obviously, they are in a downward spiral right now and have got to figure out a way to come to grips with all that’s happening,” Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said of the Trump administration.

“The chaos that is being created by the lack of discipline is creating an environment that I think makes — it creates a worrisome environment,” he said.

Trump’s disclosures jeopardized a critical source of intelligence on the Islamic State, according to the officials. The information Trump relayed, officials said, 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.

The news created a sensation as it spread through Washington and up to Capitol Hill on Monday, where senators were returning for evening votes.

“If the report is true, it is very disturbing,” Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement. “Revealing classified information at this level is extremely dangerous and puts at risk the lives of Americans and those who gather intelligence for our country. The President owes the intelligence community, the American people, and Congress a full explanation.”

A spokesman for House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) emphasized the importance of safeguarding sensitive intelligence.

“We have no way to know what was said, but protecting our nation’s secrets is paramount. The speaker hopes for a full explanation of the facts from the administration,” Ryan spokesman Doug Andres said in a statement.

The revelation came at a sensitive time for the president, who less than a week ago cited “this Russia thing with Trump” in explaining why he fired FBI Director James B. Comey, who was leading an investigation into Russia’s interference with the 2016 election. Investigators are already probing possible coordination between Trump’s campaign and the Russian government, and the president has struggled to shake the issue as he tries to advance his legislative agenda.

The news is likely to raise questions on Capitol Hill about Trump’s handling of classified information. It could also increase pressure on investigators looking into Trump’s possible ties to the Kremlin.

And it could pull attention away from Republicans’ policy priorities this week. The Senate GOP is working to hammer out the details of a health-care plan, and the House is returning from a one-week break.

The top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee called the news a “slap in the face to the intel community.”

“Risking sources and methods is inexcusable, particularly with the Russians,” Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-Va.) tweeted around 6 p.m.

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a member of the panel, said the report was of the “gravest possible concern.”

“This kind of disclosure could harm national security by jeopardizing important sources of information needed to disrupt terrorist attacks,” Wyden said in a statement.

In Moscow, a Russian Foreign Minister spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, posted a statement on Facebook denying that classified information was provided by Trump, calling the reports “yet another fake.” But denials by Moscow were expected to avoid being pressed for further details.

As senators gathered for their first vote of the week, Republicans and Democrats said they were worried about the developing story. The House was not in session Monday evening.

“Pretty terrifying,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). “If true, it is astonishing, appalling and should be investigated. It was astonishing and absolutely surprising. I would never have imagined the chief executive of our great nation would undertake that kind of disclosure.”

Sen. John Thune (S.D.), chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, said, “I would be concerned anytime we’re discussing sensitive subjects with the Russians.” Thune reacted after an initial briefing on the news report and said he had not reviewed details.

Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.), a member of the Intelligence Committee, said he’d only heard the basics of the report but called them “very serious.” He noted that fewer than 25 senators are ever given access to the nation’s most sensitive secrets and he learns things he “can’t even talk about with other senators.”

If the reports are true, “it’s very damning, very damaging,” Manchin said, adding that such disclosures “would be extremely dangerous and concerning to all.”

Sen. Christopher A. Coons (D-Del.) said had he just read The Post story and, “if true, that would be genuinely shocking.”

“It’s disturbing if true,” Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) said.

Several senators said they did not know the details of The Post report but called the news troubling nonetheless.

“This is not the appropriate move on his part, and I just think it’s part of a pattern of recklessness that we’ve got to get a handle on,” said Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.).

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said, “We certainly don’t want any president to leak classified information, but the president does have the right to do that … I think any president needs to be careful.”

About a dozen reporters continued to stake out a bipartisan health-care meeting around 7 p.m., intent on asking questions about Trump. The scene was reminiscent of the prior week, when Capitol Hill was consumed by news of Comey’s firing.

McCain, clearly flustered by reporters pressing for answers, walked off the Senate floor and said he hadn’t read the reports, adding, “I can’t comment on every breaking news story.”

Later, he said: “That’s why it’s classified. They have a reason to classify it, okay? And when they say it’s classified, if it was public knowledge, then it could hurt the national security of the United States. That’s why we classify.” He said the news would be “disturbing” if true.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was silent as he walked from his office to the Senate floor. Asked how concerned he was about Trump sharing information with Russian officials, he looked straight ahead, offering no reaction.

Sen. John Cornyn (Tex.), the Republican whip and a candidate to replace Comey as FBI director, said he didn’t have “any information about that at all.”

“I’m just not going to answer a hypothetical question,” he told reporters.

 

Bitch McFuckstick and Paul Lying would have done a hell of a lot more if Mrs. Clinton had done something even remotely similar.  They probably would have impeached her by now and got the Senate trial started.  Of course Mrs. Clinton would never had been so irresponsible with Putin's  "diplomats" around.

Fuck anyone who complains about Mrs. Clinton's emails.

[sawasdee]

A beautiful analysis of the child that is tRump.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/opinion/trump-classified-data.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region&_r=0

Quote

 

 

 

 

When the World Is Led by a Child

 

At certain times Donald Trump has seemed like a budding authoritarian, a corrupt Nixon, a rabble-rousing populist or a big business corporatist.

But as Trump has settled into his White House role, he has given a series of long interviews, and when you study the transcripts it becomes clear that fundamentally he is none of these things.

At base, Trump is an infantalist. There are three tasks that most mature adults have sort of figured out by the time they hit 25. Trump has mastered none of them. Immaturity is becoming the dominant note of his presidency, lack of self-control his leitmotif.

First, most adults have learned to sit still. But mentally, Trump is still a 7-year-old boy who is bouncing around the classroom. Trump’s answers in these interviews are not very long — 200 words at the high end — but he will typically flit through four or five topics before ending up with how unfair the press is to him.

 

 

His inability to focus his attention makes it hard for him to learn and master facts. He is ill informed about his own policies and tramples his own talking points. It makes it hard to control his mouth. On an impulse, he will promise a tax reform when his staff has done little of the actual work.

Second, most people of drinking age have achieved some accurate sense of themselves, some internal criteria to measure their own merits and demerits. But Trump seems to need perpetual outside approval to stabilize his sense of self, so he is perpetually desperate for approval, telling heroic fabulist tales about himself.

“In a short period of time I understood everything there was to know about health care,” he told Time. “A lot of the people have said that, some people said it was the single best speech ever made in that chamber,” he told The Associated Press, referring to his joint session speech.

By Trump’s own account, he knows more about aircraft carrier technology than the Navy. According to his interview with The Economist, he invented the phrase “priming the pump” (even though it was famous by 1933). Trump is not only trying to deceive others. His falsehoods are attempts to build a world in which he can feel good for an instant and comfortably deceive himself.

 

He is thus the all-time record-holder of the Dunning-Kruger effect, the phenomenon in which the incompetent person is too incompetent to understand his own incompetence. Trump thought he’d be celebrated for firing James Comey. He thought his press coverage would grow wildly positive once he won the nomination. He is perpetually surprised because reality does not comport with his fantasies.

Third, by adulthood most people can perceive how others are thinking. For example, they learn subtle arts such as false modesty so they won’t be perceived as obnoxious.

But Trump seems to have not yet developed a theory of mind. Other people are black boxes that supply either affirmation or disapproval. As a result, he is weirdly transparent. He wants people to love him, so he is constantly telling interviewers that he is widely loved. In Trump’s telling, every meeting was scheduled for 15 minutes but his guests stayed two hours because they liked him so much.

Which brings us to the reports that Trump betrayed an intelligence source and leaked secrets to his Russian visitors. From all we know so far, Trump didn’t do it because he is a Russian agent, or for 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.

The Russian leak story reveals one other thing, the dangerousness of a hollow man.

Our institutions depend on people who have enough engraved character traits to fulfill their assigned duties. But there is perpetually less to Trump than it appears. When we analyze a president’s utterances we tend to assume that there is some substantive process behind the words, that it’s part of some strategic intent.

But Trump’s statements don’t necessarily come from anywhere, lead anywhere or have a permanent reality beyond his wish to be liked at any given instant.

We’ve got this perverse situation in which the vast analytic powers of the entire world are being spent trying to understand a guy whose thoughts are often just six fireflies beeping randomly in a jar.

“We badly want to understand Trump, to grasp him,” David Roberts writes in Vox. “It might give us some sense of control, or at least an ability to predict what he will do next. But what if there’s nothing to understand? What if there is no there there?”

And out of that void comes a carelessness that quite possibly betrayed an intelligence source, and endangered a country.

Spoiler

 

 

 

[AuntK]

33 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

They need to stop talking and start acting: "Lawmakers express shock and concern about Trump disclosure of classified information"

  Reveal hidden contents

Lawmakers expressed shock and concern after learning that President Trump had revealed highly classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador during a meeting in the Oval Office last week, according to current and former U.S. officials.

“Obviously, they are in a downward spiral right now and have got to figure out a way to come to grips with all that’s happening,” Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said of the Trump administration.

“The chaos that is being created by the lack of discipline is creating an environment that I think makes — it creates a worrisome environment,” he said.

Trump’s disclosures jeopardized a critical source of intelligence on the Islamic State, according to the officials. The information Trump relayed, officials said, 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.

The news created a sensation as it spread through Washington and up to Capitol Hill on Monday, where senators were returning for evening votes.

“If the report is true, it is very disturbing,” Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement. “Revealing classified information at this level is extremely dangerous and puts at risk the lives of Americans and those who gather intelligence for our country. The President owes the intelligence community, the American people, and Congress a full explanation.”

A spokesman for House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) emphasized the importance of safeguarding sensitive intelligence.

“We have no way to know what was said, but protecting our nation’s secrets is paramount. The speaker hopes for a full explanation of the facts from the administration,” Ryan spokesman Doug Andres said in a statement.

The revelation came at a sensitive time for the president, who less than a week ago cited “this Russia thing with Trump” in explaining why he fired FBI Director James B. Comey, who was leading an investigation into Russia’s interference with the 2016 election. Investigators are already probing possible coordination between Trump’s campaign and the Russian government, and the president has struggled to shake the issue as he tries to advance his legislative agenda.

The news is likely to raise questions on Capitol Hill about Trump’s handling of classified information. It could also increase pressure on investigators looking into Trump’s possible ties to the Kremlin.

And it could pull attention away from Republicans’ policy priorities this week. The Senate GOP is working to hammer out the details of a health-care plan, and the House is returning from a one-week break.

The top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee called the news a “slap in the face to the intel community.”

“Risking sources and methods is inexcusable, particularly with the Russians,” Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-Va.) tweeted around 6 p.m.

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a member of the panel, said the report was of the “gravest possible concern.”

“This kind of disclosure could harm national security by jeopardizing important sources of information needed to disrupt terrorist attacks,” Wyden said in a statement.

In Moscow, a Russian Foreign Minister spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, posted a statement on Facebook denying that classified information was provided by Trump, calling the reports “yet another fake.” But denials by Moscow were expected to avoid being pressed for further details.

As senators gathered for their first vote of the week, Republicans and Democrats said they were worried about the developing story. The House was not in session Monday evening.

“Pretty terrifying,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). “If true, it is astonishing, appalling and should be investigated. It was astonishing and absolutely surprising. I would never have imagined the chief executive of our great nation would undertake that kind of disclosure.”

Sen. John Thune (S.D.), chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, said, “I would be concerned anytime we’re discussing sensitive subjects with the Russians.” Thune reacted after an initial briefing on the news report and said he had not reviewed details.

Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.), a member of the Intelligence Committee, said he’d only heard the basics of the report but called them “very serious.” He noted that fewer than 25 senators are ever given access to the nation’s most sensitive secrets and he learns things he “can’t even talk about with other senators.”

If the reports are true, “it’s very damning, very damaging,” Manchin said, adding that such disclosures “would be extremely dangerous and concerning to all.”

Sen. Christopher A. Coons (D-Del.) said had he just read The Post story and, “if true, that would be genuinely shocking.”

“It’s disturbing if true,” Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) said.

Several senators said they did not know the details of The Post report but called the news troubling nonetheless.

“This is not the appropriate move on his part, and I just think it’s part of a pattern of recklessness that we’ve got to get a handle on,” said Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.).

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said, “We certainly don’t want any president to leak classified information, but the president does have the right to do that … I think any president needs to be careful.”

About a dozen reporters continued to stake out a bipartisan health-care meeting around 7 p.m., intent on asking questions about Trump. The scene was reminiscent of the prior week, when Capitol Hill was consumed by news of Comey’s firing.

McCain, clearly flustered by reporters pressing for answers, walked off the Senate floor and said he hadn’t read the reports, adding, “I can’t comment on every breaking news story.”

Later, he said: “That’s why it’s classified. They have a reason to classify it, okay? And when they say it’s classified, if it was public knowledge, then it could hurt the national security of the United States. That’s why we classify.” He said the news would be “disturbing” if true.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was silent as he walked from his office to the Senate floor. Asked how concerned he was about Trump sharing information with Russian officials, he looked straight ahead, offering no reaction.

Sen. John Cornyn (Tex.), the Republican whip and a candidate to replace Comey as FBI director, said he didn’t have “any information about that at all.”

“I’m just not going to answer a hypothetical question,” he told reporters.

 

Exactly. Trump's lack of discipline, incompetence, unpreparedess, ignorance, (pick one or more), are rapidly sending this country to a point of  no return.  Congress needs to step up NOW, and put a stop to this shitstorm. This country, the world, and future generations are at risk.

[onekidanddone]

Driving down the road on Friday evening I noticed the flags were at half mast.  Here is the conversation I had with my husband

Me: Hey look the flags are at half mast.

Hubby: Who died?

Me: The Constitution 

Sigh. The United States of America. July 4, 1776 - January 20, 2017

[GreyhoundFan]

Amen: "The experts were right: Trump isn’t fit to be president"

Spoiler

We live in an age that denigrates knowledge, dislikes expertise and demonizes experts. But now we have proof that experts are sometimes right.

Look at where we are: Last week, President Trump impulsively fired his FBI director, apparently on the grounds that he didn’t like the FBI’s investigation into his election campaign’s possible collaboration with Russia and apparently unaware that this might constitute obstruction of justice. The following day, he agreed to meet the Russian foreign minister in the Oval Office, a major concession to the Russian president, though he and his staff don’t appear to have been aware that this was the case. He and his staff also allowed Russian journalists carrying cameras into the Oval Office, although the U.S. press was barred. They apparently did not think about whether the cameras might contain recording devices and were surprised when the Russian state news agency published photographs afterward.

None of those disastrous decisions was part of a deliberate plan. Each one was made because of the president’s willful ignorance, impulsiveness and inexperience. It is not at all surprising to learn that — during a conversation that shouldn’t have been happening, one that was photographed by a Russian journalist who shouldn’t have been there — the president revealed details of an ongoing intelligence operation. Once again, this was not part of a deliberate plan. Instead, it happened because the president is a braggart who wanted to show off his access to “great intel” and to impress his important guests.

All of this was not only predictable — it was also predicted. Read, again, the statement issued by 50 prominent Republican national security experts issued last August. Note that it was not “pro-Clinton” or left-wing, or even ideological at all. It simply pointed out that Trump — a man who would not, under normal circumstances, ever be given a high-level security clearance — was unfit to be president. Here is the central section:

In our experience, a President must be willing to listen to his advisers and department heads; must encourage consideration of conflicting views; and must acknowledge errors and learn from them. A President must be disciplined, control emotions, and act only after reflection and careful deliberation. A President must maintain cordial relationships with leaders of countries of different backgrounds and must have their respect and trust. In our judgment, Mr. Trump has none of these critical qualities. He is unable or unwilling to separate truth from falsehood. He does not encourage conflicting views. He lacks self-control and acts impetuously. He cannot tolerate personal criticism. He has alarmed our closest allies with his erratic behavior. All of these are dangerous qualities in an individual who aspires to be President and Commander in-Chief, with command of the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

At the time, Trump dismissed this letter as “nothing more than the failed Washington elite looking to hold onto their power.” But the “elites” were right. The experts were right.  Next time maybe more people will heed them.

 

[47of74]

4 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Amen: "The experts were right: Trump isn’t fit to be president"

  Hide contents

We live in an age that denigrates knowledge, dislikes expertise and demonizes experts. But now we have proof that experts are sometimes right.

Look at where we are: Last week, President Trump impulsively fired his FBI director, apparently on the grounds that he didn’t like the FBI’s investigation into his election campaign’s possible collaboration with Russia and apparently unaware that this might constitute obstruction of justice. The following day, he agreed to meet the Russian foreign minister in the Oval Office, a major concession to the Russian president, though he and his staff don’t appear to have been aware that this was the case. He and his staff also allowed Russian journalists carrying cameras into the Oval Office, although the U.S. press was barred. They apparently did not think about whether the cameras might contain recording devices and were surprised when the Russian state news agency published photographs afterward.

None of those disastrous decisions was part of a deliberate plan. Each one was made because of the president’s willful ignorance, impulsiveness and inexperience. It is not at all surprising to learn that — during a conversation that shouldn’t have been happening, one that was photographed by a Russian journalist who shouldn’t have been there — the president revealed details of an ongoing intelligence operation. Once again, this was not part of a deliberate plan. Instead, it happened because the president is a braggart who wanted to show off his access to “great intel” and to impress his important guests.

All of this was not only predictable — it was also predicted. Read, again, the statement issued by 50 prominent Republican national security experts issued last August. Note that it was not “pro-Clinton” or left-wing, or even ideological at all. It simply pointed out that Trump — a man who would not, under normal circumstances, ever be given a high-level security clearance — was unfit to be president. Here is the central section:

In our experience, a President must be willing to listen to his advisers and department heads; must encourage consideration of conflicting views; and must acknowledge errors and learn from them. A President must be disciplined, control emotions, and act only after reflection and careful deliberation. A President must maintain cordial relationships with leaders of countries of different backgrounds and must have their respect and trust. In our judgment, Mr. Trump has none of these critical qualities. He is unable or unwilling to separate truth from falsehood. He does not encourage conflicting views. He lacks self-control and acts impetuously. He cannot tolerate personal criticism. He has alarmed our closest allies with his erratic behavior. All of these are dangerous qualities in an individual who aspires to be President and Commander in-Chief, with command of the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

At the time, Trump dismissed this letter as “nothing more than the failed Washington elite looking to hold onto their power.” But the “elites” were right. The experts were right.  Next time maybe more people will heed them.

 

Nah, the Branch Trumpvidians won't listen next time either.  All the next person has to do is to make the correct noises about abortion and share their hatred of anyone different than them and they'll fall over each other to vote for that person.  Even if that person is the anti-Christ.

[fraurosena]

‘Crisis of Credibility’: Schumer Comes Out Swinging

Quote

In a seven-minute speech on the Senate floor, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer demanded the release of transcripts of Trump's meeting with the Russian foreign minister. 

A few choice quotes.  

“If this report is in indeed true, it would mean that the president may have badly damaged our national security, nothing less, and in several ways."

“If the reporting is accurate, in one fell swoop, the president could have unsettled our allies, emboldened our adversaries, endangered our military and intelligence officers world over and exposed our nation to greater risk.” 

“Following so closely after Mr. Comey's firing which was rationalized to the press and the American public in several different ways over the course of a week, this administration now faces a crisis of credibility.”

“The truth as it were, sits atop shifting sands in this administration,”

The link contains the video of the whole speech.

All of the quoted points above would lead to a "vote of no confidence" in my country. Do you have something like that in America?

[47of74]

CNN host Ana Navarro has called out the GOP;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ana-navarro-calls-out-gop-youd-impeach-hillary-clinton-over-this_us_591aa4d5e4b05dd15f0ac332?ncid=engmodushpmg00000003

Quote

CNN political commentator Ana Navarro responded with contempt for her own party after The Washington Post reported that President Donald Trump had allegedly revealed “highly classified” information to Russian officials.

Navarro, a Republican strategist who has been a vocal opponent of Trump’s rise in the conservative movement, summed up Congressional Republicans’ subdued reaction to the report with two tweets:

 

 

 

 

[Mela99]

One of DH's friends is a Trumper. I wondered what he would say about all this - he's attempting to blow up FB with the fact that DT turned the whitehouse lights on for police officers. 

He supports them, so he can do no wrong. 

[fraurosena]

Well... McFuckster just jumped in whole-heartedly with the "LEAKERS" league.

 

"We should focus more on those breaching confidentiality and those releasing information to the press..." 

     

 

[GreyhoundFan]

Fuck you, McTurtle: "McConnell Seeks ‘a Little Less Drama’ From the White House"

Spoiler

WASHINGTON — The Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, who has been largely silent on President’s Trump’s increasing troubles concerning Russia, carefully pleaded with the administration to stop impeding the Republican agenda Tuesday morning as Democrats prepared to use their limited powers to pressure the White House to reveal more detail about the president’s meeting with Russian officials.

“I think we could do with a little less drama from the White House on a lot of things so that we can focus on our agenda,” Mr. McConnell said in an interview on Bloomberg Television on Tuesday morning, reflecting an increasingly frustrated Republican majority over the near standstill of any policy agenda in the wake of Mr. Trump’s many contentious statements. As if to emphasize that point, when he took the Senate floor on Tuesday, Mr. McConnell again criticized the Affordable Care Act.

The inscrutable Mr. McConnell did not go as far as Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine who serves on the Senate Intelligence Committee, who on Tuesday suggested in a statement that the information discussed by Mr. Trump with the Russians may have endangered allies.

“The disclosure of highly classified information has the potential to jeopardize sources and to discourage our allies from sharing future information vital to our security,” Ms. Collins said in her statement.

“Although the president has the legal authority to disclose classified information, it would be very troubling if he did share such sensitive reporting with the Russians,” she added. “The Senate Intelligence Committee should be briefed on this important issue immediately.”

Her comments followed remarks made to reporters Monday night by Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee and chairman of the committee, who said that the White House was in “a downward spiral right now and have got to figure out a way to come to grips with all that’s happening.”

A spokeswoman for Senator Richard M. Burr, Republican of North Carolina and the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in an email on Tuesday that the committee had requested “additional information on recent reports about alleged dissemination of intelligence information” from the White House.

Over all, Republicans were tempered in their criticism of Mr. Trump, with many arguing that the president was acting within his authority to declassify information.

Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, also took the Senate floor Tuesday morning, demanding that the Intelligence Committee be given access to the transcripts between Mr. Trump and the Russians.

“We rely on our intelligence from our allies to keep us safe,” Mr. Schumer said. “If our allies abroad can’t trust us to keep sensitive information close to the vest, they may no longer share it with us.”

“Given the gravity of the matter, we need to be able to quickly assess whether or not this report is true and what exactly was said,” Mr. Schumer said, calling on the White House to “make the transcript of the meeting available to congressional intelligence committees as soon as possible.”

Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, called reports of Mr. Trump discussing highly classified information with Russian officials “deeply disturbing.”

“The administration and intelligence community must immediately and fully brief the House Intelligence Committee on what, if anything, was shared with Russian officials, and whether it could impact either our sensitive sources and methods, or our intelligence-sharing relationships,” he said in a statement.

Other Republicans seemed to give the White House the benefit of the doubt as they called for more information. “I suspect the administration will brief the Congress more fully on exactly what transpired,” Senator Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas and a former Army captain, said on Tuesday during an interview on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show. “But I have much greater confidence in the word of H. R. McMaster on the record, in front of cameras, than I do anonymous sources in the media.”

McTurtle should be renamed McOstrich. He just wants to hide his head in the sand and dream of cutting taxes for the rich and taking healthcare away from the citizens of our country. Cotton is also on drugs if he things that congress will be briefed with any actual information.

[GreyhoundFan]

Yeah, not going to happen: "Lawmakers to Trump: Turn over transcript of meeting with Russians"

Spoiler

A growing number of Republican and Democratic lawmakers are calling on President Trump to hand over the transcript of the White House meeting last week in which he revealed highly classified information to Russia’s foreign minister and ambassador, according to current and former U.S. officials.

Members of Congress — primarily Democrats — have spent several days demanding that Trump turn over tapes of White House meetings after he suggested, while defending his decision to fire FBI Director James B. Comey, that he records his conversations.

But the calls intensified Tuesday morning after Trump seemed to acknowledge on Twitter that he had shared sensitive information during his meeting with the Russians.

“We want to know what took place in that meeting, and my understanding is there may be recordings or transcript,” Sen. Mark Warner (Va.), the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said Tuesday on Capitol Hill. “Obviously, we’d like to see that with appropriate redactions.”

...

A former Marine intelligence officer now serving in the House said transparency demands the release of the transcript, if it exists.

“As an intelligence officer by training, I know firsthand the life and death implications of safeguarding classified information,” Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.), a freshman lawmaker, tweeted Tuesday.

“Our allies and partners must have the utmost confidence that sensitive information they share with us will not be disclosed,” he wrote.

The requests for more information portend a difficult week for the White House on Capitol Hill, where Republicans are seeking to maintain focus on their legislative agenda, including the negotiation of a Senate health-care bill.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who on Monday declined to comment on Trump’s disclosures, said Tuesday that he wished the White House would produce “less drama.”

“I think it would be helpful if the president spent more time on things we’re trying to accomplish and less time on other things,” McConnell said in an interview with Bloomberg News.

He continued to dodge questions about the story, first reported by The Washington Post, that Trump shared highly classified intelligence with Russia.

“I’ve heard the allegation. I’ve heard the response. I don’t think I have anything to add to what I’ve read in terms of the impact of this in the future,” he told Bloomberg.

Lawmakers expressed shock and concern Monday night at the news of Trump’s disclosures, which jeopardized a critical source of intelligence on the Islamic State, according to current and former U.S. officials.

The information Trump relayed, officials said, was 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.

Lawmakers’ requests are likely to be complicated by the sensitivity of the information that Trump shared. One White House aide 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.

White House aides have neither confirmed nor denied the possibility that Trump records his conversations at the White House. But lawmakers continued to seize on it as the day went on.

“Clearly if there is some kind of a readout from that meeting and a transcript, that means there’s probably a tape. We need to get a hold of that,” Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said at an event hosted by the liberal Center for American Progress.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who on Monday called the notion of Trump sharing classified information with Russia “appalling,” suggested that it is important to obtain any tapes in case the Trump administration tries to get rid of them.

“All potential Trump tapes should be subpoenaed to uncover truth and preserve evidence — both Comey and meeting with Russians,” he tweeted.

The developing story is expected to consume Congress’s attention, particularly as House members return later Tuesday from a week-long recess. On Tuesday, lawmakers were mobbed by reporters in the hallways asking questions about Trump’s disclosure.

...

Several Republicans, including Sen. Susan Collins (Maine), called for an immediate briefing from the Trump administration.

“Although the President has the legal authority to disclose classified information, it would be very troubling if he did share such sensitive reporting with the Russians,” Collins said in a statement Tuesday.

Several members of the GOP suggested that transcripts of Trump’s meeting with Russian officials ought to be revealed to lawmakers, if they exist.

“The administration should promptly share with Congress, in a classified setting, the precise details of the president’s meeting,” Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.), a libertarian-leaning iconoclast who frequently breaks with his party, wrote Tuesday on Twitter.

Republicans from both swing and conservative districts called for more information from the White House.

“We need to have immediate classified briefings on what occurred at this meeting so that Congress can at least know as much as Russian leaders,” stated Rep. Barbara Comstock (R-Va.), whose moderate Northern Virginia district went for Hillary Clinton in November.

Both Gallagher and Rep. Frank A. LoBiondo (R-N.J.) — a member of the House Intelligence Committee who expressed concerns about Trump’s disclosure — represent districts that swung strongly toward Trump.

“Classified intelligence is classified for a reason and must be respected and protected as such at all levels of government,” he wrote on Twitter. “Media reports are deeply concerning & I will raise issue surrounding disclosure of classified info in [the Intelligence Committee] when we meet this week.”

I'm not surprised Constock is saying something, she's in peril of being voted out. Frankly, I don't believe anything she says. I do like when others, like Susan Collins and Mike Gallagher come out publicly on the side of the American public.

[Local Gorilla]

LOL. Anybody else watching this live press conference? ...Trump is no longer orange, he is RED AF!

He must be mad, not unlike a child. I'm liking this latest development, he is being straight-up humiliated.

You cant go golfing now, mother-f*cker! Get ready for an international tour, straight outta Hell!

[onekidanddone]

22 minutes ago, Local Gorilla said:

LOL. Anybody else watching this live press conference? ...Trump is no longer orange, he is RED AF!

He must be mad, not unlike a child. I'm liking this latest development, he is being straight-up humiliated.

You cant go golfing now, mother-f*cker! Get ready for an international tour, straight outta Hell!

Did't see orange shit stain's speech, but looked a tiny clip of McMaster's.  My lunch started to come back up so I had to stop.  

Be ready for something new in 5....4...3...2...1. The narrative keeps chaining. Last week it was Comey.  This week it was I've got a secret and I'll blab it to the Russians. What is next?

[RoseWilder]

Louise Mensch and Claude Taylor have done another joint story: 

https://patribotics.blog/2017/05/16/exclusive-u-s-marshals-readying-plan-approved-by-justice-dept-official/

Quote

The U.S. Marshals Service presented a plan to a senior Justice Department official yesterday for the service of warrants in the Trump-Russia inquiry, separate sources with links to the intelligence and law enforcement communities report.

The extensive plan was approved yesterday by a senior Justice Department official who is closely involved in prosecuting the case.

Sources say that the extensive plan, multiple pages in length, covered not only the serving of warrants, but logistical arrangements such as the closure of streets, if necessary.

They further report that while timing is uncertain, such plans are normally only presented and approved when arrests are imminent.

I hope this turns out to be true. 

[fraurosena]

18 minutes ago, Local Gorilla said:

LOL. Anybody else watching this live press conference? ...Trump is no longer orange, he is RED AF!

He must be mad, not unlike a child. I'm liking this latest development, he is being straight-up humiliated.

You cant go golfing now, mother-f*cker! Get ready for an international tour, straight outta Hell!

I saw a part of it. I can't stand to watch him speak for long. RED is a very apt color though, isn't it?

 

I found this interesting article from the Atlantic. 

When Trump Called Divulging Secrets to Russia Treason

Quote

President Trump, who reportedly disclosed highly classified information to top Russian officials last week, has long used other people’s indiscretions with secrets against them. He’s demanded investigations into the “leakers” he thinks are undermining his presidency. He wielded Clinton’s private email server scandal like a sledgehammer against her during the presidential campaign, at one point insisting he would “lock her up” if elected. (He hasn’t yet.) But even amidst all that, Trump once took an even harder line on disclosing classified information to foreign adversaries.

In the summer of 2013, former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden leaked a massive trove of classified U.S. information to British and American journalists. The documents revealed secret mass-surveillance programs run by the U.S. government and allied countries, sparking widespread political debate and investigations throughout the West. Their disclosure also made Snowden a fugitive from a wrathful U.S. government. Shortly after leaking the information, Snowden fled first to Hong Kong and then to Moscow, when he resides to this day under temporary asylum protections.

Trump, a private citizen at the time, frequently commented on the news of the day on Twitter. The NSA disclosures were no exception. At first, Trump used the episode to express his ire towards the Obama administration embarrassing the U.S. on the world stage. But after Snowden’s flight to Russia, his anger on Twitter turned towards the former NSA contractor he described as a “traitor.”

In case the underlying message of those tweets was too subtle, Trump made his demands explicit: Snowden should be executed if he returns to the United States because he had, according to Trump, “disclosed serious information” to Russia and China.

[...]

The article includes all the toddler's tantrum tweets at the time.

This is how Snowdon reacted to the presidunces latest scandal:

Think of Snowdon what you will, but he's right on the mark there.

[GreyhoundFan]

MSNBC just confirmed that Israel was the source of the info the TT leaked. Way to go, just what we need, more instability in the Middle East.

 

 

As usual, George T makes so much sense:

[onekidanddone]

Somebody please wake me up and tell all this has been one long nightmare since the the 2016 started presidential campaign.  

[GreyhoundFan]

I don't thing this one has been posted yet -- from the WaPo Editorial Board: "Trump can’t be trusted with sensitive information — and now the world knows"

Spoiler

PRESIDENT TRUMP’S disclosure of highly classified information to senior Russian officials was the most disturbing demonstration yet that he is dangerously unprepared to handle sensitive national security matters. On Tuesday, Mr. Trump essentially confirmed a Post report that he provided details of the Islamic State’s plotting of airline attacks to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in an Oval Office meeting last week. The Post reported that the information could allow Moscow to identify the source of the intelligence, which came through a foreign government with which U.S. spy agencies have a fragile relationship.

The consequences of the president’s lapse could be far-reaching. In addition to disrupting a vital flow of intelligence and possibly endangering agents on the ground, Mr. Trump has let the world know that he and his administration cannot be trusted with sensitive information. Governments that share their secrets with the CIA, from Britain to Israel to Australia, may feel compelled to recalibrate their cooperation. Those that don’t have a cooperative relationship, such as Russia and China, will try to use their access to Mr. Trump to extract more indiscretions.

The administration’s attempts to defend the leak only underlined the continuing chaos in the White House. When the Post article first appeared Monday, senior administration officials issued denials: National security adviser H.R. McMaster and deputy adviser Dina Powell both called it “false.” Mr. Trump then undercut them by confirming on Twitter that he provided the Russians with “facts pertaining . . . to terrorism and airline flight safety,” which, he said, “I have the absolute right to do.” By midday Tuesday, Mr. McMaster found himself simultaneously arguing that he was right to call the article false and spinning the president’s leak as “appropriate.”

In fact, everything about Mr. Trump’s engagement with the Russian officials reflected the gross inadequacy of his knowledge of foreign affairs as well as the weakness of the staff and processes he has put in place to aid him. His decision to meet with the chronically dishonest Mr. Lavrov and with Mr. Kislyak, who already had several questionable contacts with senior administration officials, itself reflected poor judgement; the Obama administration had refused to give Mr. Lavrov an Oval Office meeting since 2013. As the meeting began, U.S. journalists were banned from the room, while a Russian news-agency photographer was invited in, producing embarrassing photos and raising the possibility of a security breach.

Mr. Trump’s subsequent disclosures appeared to flow from two of his deepest flaws, vanity and an obtuseness about the regime of Vladi­mir Putin. As The Post reported it, he appeared childishly boastful about his “great intel.” And as the president subsequently described it, he was hoping the Russians would respond to the leak with greater cooperation with U.S. operations against the Islamic State, as opposed to using it to undermine them.

That was a naive and dangerous conclusion, as any CIA briefer would have told the president. Unfortunately, Mr. Trump doesn’t pay much heed to intelligence professionals, even as he misuses their materials, endangers their operations and impugns their professionalism. The processes in place to ready the president for interactions with foreign leaders are shockingly attenuated: A lot of the spade work is done by his inexperienced son-in-law, Jared Kushner, while key positions at the National Security Council and State Department remain unfilled. As the president prepares for his first trip abroad later this week, including meetings with key Middle Eastern and European allies, the potential for further gaffes — and damage to key U.S. alliances — is alarmingly high.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) aptly described Mr. Trump’s presidency on Monday as “in a downward spiral.” Arresting the fall would require a thorough revamping of White House staffing and function, one that replaces disorder and ignorance with discipline and competence. That, in turn, would require corrective action by Mr. Trump — for which the nation can only hope.

 

Spicey's daily briefing is on. They aren't allowing video, but MSNBC has audio. He is tap-dancing like mad.

[fraurosena]

MoJo's take on McFuckster's tapdancing.

The White House Won’t Deny the Facts of Latest Russia Scandal But Say It's False Anyway

Quote

[...]

On Monday evening, White House national security adviser H.R. McMaster read a confusing statement to the press that appeared to deny the Post's report. "The story that came out tonight, as reported, is false," he said, adding that "at no time—at no time—were intelligence sources or methods discussed." Multiple news outlets soon pointed out that McMaster's verbal gymnastics seemed to be a classic "non-denial denial." That is, McMaster appeared to be denying information that wasn't actually reported by the Post in the first place. The Post had not claimed that "intelligence sources or methods" were discussed; the paper had simply reported that the information discussed could be used to discern intelligence sources or methods.

Trump, for his part, appeared to muddy the waters further Tuesday morning when he took to Twitter to defend his actions. Unlike McMaster, Trump didn't even purport to dispute the Post's reporting [...]

Later Tuesday, McMaster appeared before the press yet again in an attempt to clear up the situation. Asked about his Monday claim that the Post story was "false," McMaster said, "I stand by my statement that I made yesterday." But he then went on to suggest that he wasn't actually claiming the facts in the story were wrong. Rather, he said it was the "premise" of the article that was false. According to McMaster, "What I'm saying is really the premise of that article is false—that in any way the president had a conversation that was inappropriate or that resulted in any kind of lapse in national security."

In other words, McMaster wasn't disputing any of the details in the Post's report; he was simply saying that the president's actions were somehow appropriate. McMaster refused to say whether or not the information the president shared with Lavrov and Kislyak was classified. But he repeated several times that Trump's decision to share the material was "wholly appropriate."

And why does McMaster think Trump's statements to the Russians were appropriate? Because, McMaster seemed to imply, the president can decide to share whatever he wants. "As you know," he said, "it is wholly appropriate for the president to share whatever information he thinks is necessary to advance the security of the American people. That's what he did…He made the decision in the context of the conversation, which was wholly appropriate."

McMaster added that Trump wasn't even aware that the information apparently came from a sensitive intelligence source. [...]

So there you have it: The Post story is "false" because Trump's statement's were "appropriate," and Trump's statement's were "appropriate" because he's the president.

[fraurosena]

WaPo has some wishful thinking for the presidunce's upcoming international trip.

The upcoming international trip is an opportunity for Trump and his staff

Quote

When things are going bad in Washington, it is almost always a good idea to get out of town. As the Trump administration knows all too well, when you have a lot of staff talking to reporters, a president whose tweets cannot be contained, and a press with an insatiable need to pounce on and criticize the president, it creates a fragile environment and the result is often nothing less than chaos. But presidential trips oversees can leave some problems behind and begin a reset even if relief is only temporary.

Ahhhh, so that's why he's off golfing all the time!

Quote

When President Trump departs Washington on Friday for a nine-day trip to Saudi Arabia, Israel, the Vatican, Brussels and Italy most of his staff will be left behind and the traveling press corp will be more tightly managed by the foreign host. International visits also limit opportunities for the president to stray off-message. Considering the host country has a vested interest in everything going smoothly, they try to script nearly every aspect of the American delegation’s trip. And from the White House’s perspective, Trump’s remarks will have been prepared days, if not weeks, ahead of time. That means it will be easier for the administration’s communication strategy to be coordinated and executed in unison.

I am sure Trump’s staff will find comfort and some confidence in knowing that his nonstop travel will be filled with plenty of photo-ops, pleasantries and hand shakes to dilute the stories plaguing the administration at home. U.S. and foreign reporters will ask for comment on the stressful, topical issues, but it is up to the president to remain on message, surefooted, poised and in control of his words. 

Bwahahaha... nope, not gonna happen.

Quote

In general, the American public responds positively to seeing their president meeting with world leaders, reassuring them of our leadership abroad, and coming to agreements on matters of global importance. Trump’s meetings in Saudi Arabia, Israel and the Vatican are opportune settings for this administration to make a bold statement to the world that the United States is stronger and more committed than ever to leading. And in Brussels and Italy, where Trump will meet with world leaders at the NATO and Group of 7 summits, the administration can reaffirm the notion, as national security adviser H.R. McMaster argued last week, that “President Trump understands that America First does not mean America alone.”

No, it means "Trump alone".

Quote

Republicans’ shoulders are slumping a little right now. Monday, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) asked reporters, “Can we have a crisis-free day?” A solid, drama-free and serious overseas trip is just what the doctor ordered. Good luck.

Hands up if you think that trip will be drama and crisis free... 

What? No hands? Sheesh!

[AnywhereButHere]

Everyone around the orange emperor needs to take lessons from Billy Flynn (from the show Chicago). God knows they'll need the help!

Spoiler

 

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"The electoral college gave Trump top-secret security clearance. Here’s how it works for everyone else."

Spoiler

When Donald Trump won the Republican nomination for the presidency last year, a number of his political opponents expressed concern about his being granted access to classified information in the standard candidate briefings. At the time, I spoke with Lanhee Chen, who, as chief policy adviser to Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign, was familiar with the briefing process. He made an important point about why Trump was automatically given clearance to hear top secret information without undergoing the standard review process.

“The assumption is that a certain amount of sensitive information can be shared with the nominee because the nominee has been publicly vetted,” Chen said. He also noted another qualification that might help ease those concerns: the briefing itself wasn’t at the level that would be given to an actual president.

With Trump’s election, of course, he became privy to any and all top-secret information that he might desire. In light of The Washington Post’s report that Trump revealed some of that information in a meeting with Russia’s foreign minister, it seems appropriate to explain how the levels of clearance work — and how non-presidents are screened to gain them.

Laura K. Donohue is a professor at Georgetown Law who directs the school’s Center on National Security and the Law and runs Georgetown’s annual security clearance workshop (necessitated by the number of graduates who go into government service). She walked me through the process in a phone call Tuesday.

It’s important to first understand that system. There are three levels of clearance: confidential, secret and top secret. You can think of these being sort of like access badges allowing you into different buildings full of secrets. The access itself doesn’t drop secrets into your lap, it just clears you for the possibility of viewing particular materials.

A 2016 report from the Congressional Research Service detailed how many people hold clearance at each level. As of October 2015, about 2.9 million people held confidential or secret clearance, and an additional 1.4 million held top secret clearance. During that fiscal year, 639,000 more clearances were approved.

The process for doing so, Donohue said, is expensive and often time-consuming.

“Typically, you would apply for a job at an agency and then that agency, if you have to have access to classified material in the course of your job, they would be the ones to sponsor you and foot the bill,” she said. At that point, the FBI — or, often, contractors — will begin their investigation. The overarching process is handled by the Office of Personnel Management, now through the department’s National Background Investigations Bureau.

Gaining clearance at the top secret level took as little as 134 days at the National Security Agency and as long as 395 at the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, according to the CRS report. Of course, that process can be expedited, such as when a president needs to staff up his administration. “If it needs to be done quickly, they can do it quickly,” Donohue said.

What they’re looking for varies.

“If you’re handling info, for instance, that has a very high foreign intelligence component to it,” she said, “they might be looking more carefully at your international connections. All of them require a background check, but some of them they might run down more leads. You might have to turn over your financial information.” There’s a standard form; you can see it here. It’s more than 100 pages long.

The whole purpose is to determine whether the person can be trusted with information, Donohue said, in multiple senses.

“From themselves, in the sense that, are they going to break the law or disregard it? Or are they high on drugs and not careful with information? These types of things,” she said. “Or can they be compromised or put into a compromised position by others.” If, for example, someone has a gambling problem or a lot of outstanding debt, or a secret that they would not want to have revealed.

What’s more, “they look at questions of integrity and honesty and if you hold others’ confidences,” she added. If not, that won’t speak well to the question at hand. Incidentally, if you are rejected for clearance, you can appeal the decision.

Using the metaphor above, the clearance means you are allowed in the building, but someone still has to determine that you should be let in the door. The guiding principle is whether the person being given access to classified information needs to know it; if not, there’s no reason to give them access.

Once clearance is granted, there are categories of classified information to which you might have access, if you’re cleared for top secret information. Those additional categories are sensitive compartmented information (SCI), and special access programs (SAPs). The former includes information about the sources and methods of obtaining the information. The latter compartmentalizes particularly sensitive information.

When the media mentions “code-word information,” that’s a reference to the use of code words to identify particular compartmentalized information, as former Homeland Security deputy chief of staff Jonathan Lee explained in a blog post at Just Security. In other words, that information is at the highest levels of clearance.

Donohue notes that the rules governing security clearance are set by the president. (The current guidelines are set under Executive Order 13467.) As we’ve learned over the past day, it’s also the case that the president gets to determine whether classified information is then declassified. Which puts Trump into the rarefied position of both gaining access to classified information without undergoing the screening process and then being able to determine when and how that information can be shared with whomever he deems appropriate.

His clearance needs to be revoked immediately. Preferably as he exits the West Wing in handcuffs.