Picking The Carcass

Regarding some of the recent Trump events the Wall Street Journal says, "The intelligence relates to what is known as a special access program, or SAP, which covers some of the most classified information and is protected with unique access and security protocols. And the extent of the breach could be even worse than what's already been made public!

(Analysis)  This is inflammatory language saying the alleged classified information "relates to," but is not part of therefore:  "So what?" and the last sentence is ridiculous.

Wall Street Journal: "Two US officials who were briefed on Trump’s disclosures last week confirmed to BuzzFeed News the veracity of the Washington Post report, with one noting that "it's far worse than what has already been reported." The official was referring to the extent of the classified intelligence information Trump disclosed to the Russian ambassador and foreign minister."

(Analysis) When the Wall Street Journal quotes "Buzzfeed News" to confirm veracity, something is wrong.  The report included nothing solid.

CNN; "It's so mind-boggling, I don't even know what to say," said Eric Edelman, a former undersecretary of defense during the George W. Bush administration. "I'm completely gobsmacked. It's jeopardizing a human source. It's the one thing you're trained to never do."

(Analysis)  When old guard Republicans make such statements we should be concerned that our "swamp" needs a whole lot more draining than we ever imagined. 

Washington Post: "One adviser who often speaks to the president said the conversation was likely freewheeling in the Oval Office, and he probably wanted to impress the officials.  He doesn't really know any boundaries. He doesn't think in those terms," this adviser said. "He doesn't sometimes realize the implications of what he's saying. I don't think it was his intention in any way to share any classified information. He wouldn't want to do that."

(Analysis)  The President has no boundaries in these matters.  He can quote anything classified to anybody without consequence.  That is a logical alternative for a chief executive, the man who can skirt a normally ponderous, slow-moving, politically conflicted government for the security of the nation. 

Politico: "Trump's Staff Quickly Moved To Contain The Damage From The Disclosure:"  It was only after the meeting, when notes on the discussion were circulated among National Security Council officials, that it was flagged as too sensitive to be shared, even among many American officials, the former official said.

(Analysis)  The President has no such boundaries.  It does appear Mr. Trump informed the Russian officials of information we had received from Israeli intelligence about the nature of ISIS lethal laptops.  While that information would be "Classified Secret" it would be given to our allies for mutual advantage.  To not do this would be a serious breach of protocol and stupid.

New York Times: "After Trump's disclosure of the information, which one of the officials described as spontaneous, officials immediately called the CIA and the National Security Agency, both of which have agreements with a number of allied intelligence services around the world, and informed them what had happened."

(Analysis)  "Officials?  Who, what, when, where and why?  Why did the New York Times violate the founding tenet of journalism?  Doubtful, uncited, unsubstantiated, unbelieveable.

Reuters: "One of the assistant to the president for homeland security and counter-terrorism's subordinates also called for the problematic portion of Trump's discussion to be stricken from internal memos and for the full transcript to be limited to a small circle of recipients, efforts to prevent sensitive details from being disseminated further or leaked."

(Analysis)  Instead of accusing, "one of the assistant(s) to the President..." why not identify the person and include the verification required by real journalism.  Again, the material may be secret, but must be given to our allies.

This incident has been manufactured by the journalist community that are enemies to the elected Administration.  They are very much out-of-line for many reasons.  Liberalism is popular with unsophisticated and young people because it promises "free stuff."  The concept has so permeated our culture advertising no longer offers "...what you want and need."  It presents "...what you deserve!"  The difference is profound.

The Woodchuck in the woodpile is Jeff Bezos, the multi-billionare owner of Amazon.com who is mowing down retailing with the internet.  Jeff is usually ahead of the curve and can see that his concept could well make him the Emperor of the American economy as he may well own retailing within the decade and get more enemies than Donald J. Trump!  If that should become the case government will see him as an enemy as they want to be the only real power on the plain.  If Jeff can buy three more newspapers he can tell America what to think without having to play Walter Cronkite, under several pounds of makeup and putty plus a ton of voice and acting coaching.  It is time for Mr. Trump to meet with Mr. Bezos on the tarmack of a western airport.  That's where all such skullduggery is committed.

Adrian Vance