Jump to content
IkeBana

Russia secretly offered Afghan militants bounties to kill US troops intelligence says

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, maineman said:

so....you agree that President TRE45ON knew about the bounty and didn't do anything about it?

So....You agree it was treason for the leakers of this unverified intelligence and they should be charged, right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Str8tEdge said:

1. The bounties aren't even verified to begin with dumbfuck.

 

2. You retards who leaked the story likely compromised the verification process.

 

3. Officials are on record that Trump wasn't told because it was NOT VERIFIED. 

 

4. Why would you THINK if the bounties existed they would be done ONLY UNDER TRUMP? 🥴 The guy you claim is in bed with Trump. 🤣

1.  Multiple sources say that there is a lot of evidence to say they  were.

2.  "Compromised the verification process"?  Did Hannity toss you that line that you mindlessly regurgitated?  If the money trail is there, it's there... reporting on it won't make it go away.

3.  And other former officials say that such information - even if not verified as totally accurate - would have UNDOUBTEDLY been a part of the PDB... which we know the clown doesn't read, because he can't read.

4.  Because of the deaths of multiple Russian mercenaries in Syria in 2018 in an attack launched by the US at the clown's direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Str8tEdge said:

So....You agree it was treason for the leakers of this unverified intelligence and they should be charged, right? 

absolutely not.  I am saying that, if it can be shown that the clown knew about the bounties - or should have known because they were mentioned in the PDB - that HE should be charged with treason for continuing to kiss Vlad's ass even after he knew that Vlad had paid money to kill Americans..... and after he is defeated in November, I am ALL FOR putting him on trial for TRE45ON and executing him upon his conviction.  I would TIVO the execution and watch it every morning with my coffee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

‘Stupefyingly Stupid’: Lawyers React to Report That White House Withheld Evidence of Russian Bounties from Republicans

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/stupefyingly-stupid-lawyers-react-to-report-that-white-house-withheld-evidence-of-russian-bounties-from-republicans/

 

It turns out there was signals intelligence that corroborated the report and the White House withheld it from the Republican legislators.

 

 

They are floundering

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Str8tEdge said:

1. The bounties aren't even verified to begin with dumbfuck.

 

2. You retards who leaked the story likely compromised the verification process.

 

3. Officials are on record that Trump wasn't told because it was NOT VERIFIED. 

 

4. Why would you THINK if the bounties existed they would be done ONLY UNDER TRUMP? 🥴 The guy you claim is in bed with Trump. 🤣

The claim that Trump wasn't informed because the intelligence wasn't verified does not hold water. an occurrence like this would have been brought to Trump's attention regardless of the confidence factor, with a promise to get to the bottom of it. It was in the presidential daily brief. Somebody compiles that document. That somebody would surely have informed the president.

Trump doesn't give a damn about our troops. He cares more for Putin's good opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, maineman said:

1.  Multiple sources say that there is a lot of evidence to say they  were.

2.  "Compromised the verification process"?  Did Hannity toss you that line that you mindlessly regurgitated?  If the money trail is there, it's there... reporting on it won't make it go away.

3.  And other former officials say that such information - even if not verified as totally accurate - would have UNDOUBTEDLY been a part of the PDB... which we know the clown doesn't read, because he can't read.

4.  Because of the deaths of multiple Russian mercenaries in Syria in 2018 in an attack launched by the US at the clown's direction.

Oh ya, lots of unverified evidence from unknown sources...😁

 

It's clear this is the lefts new made up constitutional crisis to try and deflect from their FAILING war on police and ICE. 🥴

 

You're dismissed clown. Keep drinking that kool-aid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, maineman said:

absolutely not.  I am saying that, if it can be shown that the clown knew about the bounties - or should have known because they were mentioned in the PDB - that HE should be charged with treason for continuing to kiss Vlad's ass even after he knew that Vlad had paid money to kill Americans..... and after he is defeated in November, I am ALL FOR putting him on trial for TRE45ON and executing him upon his conviction.  I would TIVO the execution and watch it every morning with my coffee.

You're a fucking easily manipulated traitor to America. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, slideman said:

The claim that Trump wasn't informed because the intelligence wasn't verified does not hold water. an occurrence like this would have been brought to Trump's attention regardless of the confidence factor, with a promise to get to the bottom of it. It was in the presidential daily brief. Somebody compiles that document. That somebody would surely have informed the president.

Trump doesn't give a damn about our troops. He cares more for Putin's good opinion.

You don't have any proof to begin with so shut your fucking mouth about WHAT holds water. 🤣

 

Someone blew their wad and leaked a story before the intelligence community could verify. 

 

Another democrat FAIL. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Str8tEdge said:

You're a fucking easily manipulated traitor to America. 

^^^ sez the coward to the patriot.

 

funny shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Str8tEdge said:

You don't have any proof to begin with so shut your fucking mouth about WHAT holds water. 🤣

 

Someone blew their wad and leaked a story before the intelligence community could verify. 

 

Another democrat FAIL. 

Let me ask you this:  If it can be proven that the Russian bounty on Americans was EVER part of the clown's PDB, would you endorse his impeachment, and would you promise to vote against him in November?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, maineman said:

Let me ask you this:  If it can be proven that the Russian bounty on Americans was EVER part of the clown's PDB, would you endorse his impeachment, and would you promise to vote against him in November?

 

Hell no. It wouldn't surprise me if Russia had been supporting the Taliban for decades. Why is this impeachable? Certainly won't change my vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, maineman said:

^^^ sez the coward to the patriot.

 

funny shit.

You're not a patriot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, maineman said:

Let me ask you this:  If it can be proven that the Russian bounty on Americans was EVER part of the clown's PDB, would you endorse his impeachment, and would you promise to vote against him in November?

 

I'm likely not voting for Trump anyway but would it change my vote? 

 

No. We KNOW China and Russia are doing anything they can to erode America. They got you tied around their finger too. 😆

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/27/2020 at 12:51 PM, Whitemajikman said:

 

Why do you allow yourself to be manipulated by bullshit?

The NY Times article has no citation by anyone in the intelligence community and actually states this.....

"Spokespeople at the National Security Council, the Pentagon, the State Department and the C.I.A. declined to comment."

 

Which makes this article nothing but another piece of anti-trump propaganda that has no basis in reality .....

 

 

It is possible that they did not inform Trump of this because they were concerned that Trump would call his pal Putin and their intel would be compromised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, XavierOnassis said:

It is possible that they did not inform Trump of this because they were concerned that Trump would call his pal Putin and their intel would be compromised.

Still waiting on you liberal cowards to provide proof...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Str8tEdge said:

You're not a patriot. 

^^^sez the coward who never served.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, maineman said:

^^^sez the coward who never served.  

💤

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Duck615 said:

Still waiting on you liberal cowards to provide proof...

This story is failing faster than Biden trying to remember where he is. 😆

 

Apparently the intel came from Afghan prisoners? 
 

Afghans deny it, Russia denies it, our own intelligence said its found it to be incredible. 😂

 

Looks like @slideman and @maineman fell for another fucking lie their media fed them. 
 

Hey @slideman. Any comment on another murder in your peaceful CHAZ zone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/trump-never-briefed-russian-bounty-unvetted-intel-because-nsa-strongly-dissented?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+(zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero)

 

Trump Never Briefed On Unvetted Russian Bounty Intel Because NSA "Strongly Dissented"  

Profile picture for user Tyler Durden
Tue, 06/30/2020 - 19:05

On Tuesday, the same day that Joe Biden finally emerged to hold his first press conference in 89 days in order to lash out at what he called Trump's "dereliction of duty" over the NY Times Russian bounties for Taliban militants to kill American troops in Afghanistan story, The Wall Street Journal issued this bombshell:

The National Security Agency strongly dissented from other intelligence agencies’ assessment that Russia paid bounties for the killing of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan, according to people familiar with the matter.

The disclosure of the dissent by the NSA, which specializes in electronic eavesdropping, comes as the White House has played down the revelations, saying that the information wasn’t verified and that intelligence officials didn’t agree on it.

nsafilehq.jpg NSA headquarters in Maryland, file image.

As we noted before, it appears a return this week to mainstream media's prior years of near daily breathless Russiagate reporting, with "anonymous intelligence sources" issuing new leaks of unvetted raw intel to the press.

The WSJ points out that it was primarily the NSA's firm dissent that kept the Russian bounties allegation out of the president's daily briefing  which both further confirms the White House's denials of the initial Friday Timesreporting, as well as contradicts the NYT "revelation" itself. 

"Because of that [NSA dissent], President Trump was never personally briefed on the threat, the White House said, although a key lawmaker said the information apparently was included in written intelligence materials prepared for Mr. Trump," WSJ underscores.

No details were given as to precisely how the NSA differed in its assessment of the Russian bounty allegations. For those keeping score, this marks the third major formal distancing from the substance of the NYT reporting by US intelligence agencies and intel community leadership.

Also recall this isn't the first instance of significant NSA pushback concerning explosive charges aimed at Russia: 

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

On Saturday Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe said in a statement that he had "confirmed that neither the President nor the Vice President were ever briefed on any intelligence alleged by the New York Times in its reporting." 

CIA Director Gina Haspel also appeared to vindicate the White House's assertion of lack of credible intelligence behind it in a Monday statement. Essentially the CIA director seemed to reference the danger of "cherry-picking" from lower level unvetted raw information."When developing intelligence assessments, initial tactical reports often require additional collection and validation," Haspel said.

"Leaks compromise and disrupt the critical interagency work to collect, assess, and ascribe culpability," she added, strongly suggesting that indeed there was not enough to go on concerning the Russian bounty allegations for it to rise to the level of the commander-in-chief. In actually this was further a CIA condemnation of the "anonymous" leakers out of which the whole narrative was spun. 

 

@maineman @slideman YOU FUCKING MORONS.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, IkeBana said:

 

The prob is how remarkable it is that the management of this shithole has decided that their preferred method of responding to topical posts is moronic personal insults.

 

Members will get sent to siberia for petty violations of petty forum guidelines, but what gets asshole personal attack rats canned on pretty much every decent current events forum on the internet is applauded in this joint. 

 

But it's mildly entertaining in a sick fucking sorta way...so here I am.

 

Clean it up, man.

I have very little emotional connection to these boards anymore.

Some folks are completely immersed in double standards and can't be convinced of that.

Like arguing with a black out drunk. Useless.

 

So I am here for entertainment in a morbid curiosity sort of way.

You seem to like to poke the corpse with a stick, too.

 

If kfools wants to run things his way, what's the problem?

Something seems unfair? boo hoo...

 

What was so good about it before? Answer: nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/27/2020 at 1:28 PM, Whitemajikman said:

You will believe just about anything that is fed to you as long as it is Anti-trump ....

In fact we have literally hundreds of examples of your TDS compelling you to accept blatant lies as Truth.

Your track record speaks for itself....

 

 

@slideman has a long history here of being a true believer of all things anti Trump, he still believes in the first Russia Hoax.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, EltonJohnson said:

 

 

@slideman has a long history here of being a true believer of all things anti Trump, he still believes in the first Russia Hoax.

 

 

😂 PROOF pot causes stupidity. For @maineman it's likely wet brain. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, slideman said:

The claim that Trump wasn't informed because the intelligence wasn't verified does not hold water. an occurrence like this would have been brought to Trump's attention regardless of the confidence factor, with a promise to get to the bottom of it. It was in the presidential daily brief. Somebody compiles that document. That somebody would surely have informed the president.

Trump doesn't give a damn about our troops. He cares more for Putin's good opinion.

According to whom?

The President is never briefed on unverified intelligence because if he were... every minute of every day would occupy his valuable time listening to briefings that may or may not contain elements of truth.

That is left up to the analysts ...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, maineman said:

1.  Multiple sources say that there is a lot of evidence to say they  were.

2.  "Compromised the verification process"?  Did Hannity toss you that line that you mindlessly regurgitated?  If the money trail is there, it's there... reporting on it won't make it go away.

3.  And other former officials say that such information - even if not verified as totally accurate - would have UNDOUBTEDLY been a part of the PDB... which we know the clown doesn't read, because he can't read.

4.  Because of the deaths of multiple Russian mercenaries in Syria in 2018 in an attack launched by the US at the clown's 

1) unreliable sources that are all anti-trump ....oops.

2) yes, compromised the verification process .....

Obviously you have no idea how a covert investigation works ....

3) Those other former officials you speak of  have never hidden their anti-trump bias which makes their opinions skewed in the first place....

4) another baseless claim that can never be truly verified....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, NeoConvict said:

Hell no. It wouldn't surprise me if Russia had been supporting the Taliban for decades. Why is this impeachable? Certainly won't change my vote.

yeah, what is wrong with letting the Russians plink away at our troops in Afghanistan?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


No holds barred chat

  • Hey kfools.. does this help? 


  • By Vegas

    Liberals are going to hell.


  • grgle



  • Where’s at @slideman?


  • Hola


  • I know this one, this new chat thing. I've seen it called the "shoutbox" among other things in my past. Very hard to hide from the chat box. The question is asked, there's no time to go search what other folks think, this is real time. Only seconds should be between chat box replies. This one is made for me. In the chat box one has to be quick on their feet with stuff at the ready. This chat box is the worst nightmare of anyone trying to deal with ol' teach. 


  • By pmurT

    hey @teacher that sounds like too much work for me LOL I need that useless thing called *time* in order to authenticate facts and truths which get posted by deceitful Dems


  • What does the red number refer to? currently, on my screen it says 2

     


  • Where does it say 2?


  • So. In the chat....if you tag a member the text afterwards should be a private message. 


  • How do? I'm teacher. If I'm online and the powers that be can figure out how to make it immediately apparent to me that whatever I've said here has been replied to I'm gonna show up right quick and kick some teeth in. It's the chat box, all this is new and scary. I know this gig. This starts now. 



  • Hey kfools, did you lose your securtiy cert? On my browser it is saying your site is not secure?


  • Mine too. I'm looking into it.


  • Mine too. 


  • I thought it was my location.. 


  • Just gave to renew the security cert. No big deal I'll do it tonight


  • OK thanks

     



  • Happy Anniversary, America... on your Civil Union.


  • By teacher

    All lives matter.


  • By teacher

    Double post deleted.


  • By teacher

    Scroll the other way for a while and you'll see me saying that these days the chat box ain't gonna work as one has to be quick on one's feet. The question is posed, there ain't no stinkin time for ya'll to refer to your betters for the answer, ya'll don't understand these things, this political debate, ya'll don't have the answer at hand, ya'll haven't thought this through, ya'll ain't ready for the next question I'll ask,  ya'll can't handle the pace that a bloke such as I can bring it in the chat box, ya'll can't handle this format.

     

    This one is made for me. 


You don't have permission to chat in this chatroom
×
×
  • Create New...