WASHINGTON POST LIES ABOUT TRUMP DISCLOSING THE LITHIUM ION BATTERY PLOT TO RUSSIANS

The “trump leaked highly classified info to Russian diplomats” story and why it’s complete and total bullshit from WaPo (politics)

submitted 58 minutes ago by Martel-Sobieski

Its impossible because once the president does it is no longer classified. He’s at the top of the classification hierarchy

The New York Times and WaPo are trying to mislead their readers by implying trump revealed highly classified info to a Russia diplomat. here is the archived article

It’s bullshit though. It’s nothing out of the ordinary for that to happen. The president is allowed to do this. The issue with Hillary Clinton was she’s not the president and she doesn’t have the authority to do it

The president has the right to know all and declassify whatever he likes. This is affarimed in Department of Navy v. Egan, 484 US 518 (1988)

He is the head of the military. If the head of the military doesn’t have full intelligence authority then what is the point

The president also has the authority to discuss classified information with foreign diplomats

Let’s look at the Cuban missile crisis. The whole thing was sparked by the US placing missiles in turkey that could hit Moscow. This left the Russians at a disadvantage because we could wipe them out before they could respond and hit us. So in response they placed missiles in Cuba. The whole thing was deescalated by an agreement that we move our missiles out of turkey and they move theirs out of Cuba. The US public didn’t know this though and many still don’t. Those missiles and their capabilities were classified. Still, in order to even have the discussion JFK would’ve had to have discussed highly classified material with Nikita Kruschev

It is normal for a president to do this. Almost every single one has done it. They have to do it many times when talking with other countries.

The NYT and WaPo are being deliberately dishonest here when they write a story like this and the only reason they’re doing it is to imply that trump is using his position to give the Russians US secrets. That isn’t true but they can sure imply it. This is done to mislead their readers and cause faux outrage in people who are ignorant of the thing they’re pissed off about to begin with

Let’s not even get into the fact that they’re writing the article based on “anonymous White House source” which means “my ass” to them.

The details of the presidents private conversations with other state representatives are classified though so if this was a private meeting and someone leaked that to wapo then THAT would be illegally leaking classified information.

 
 

 

 

[–] Reddit_is_shitty 5 points (+6|-1) 49 minutes ago 

The MSM is a fucking joke and a disgrace.

They’re handing Trump a 2020 victory on a silver platter.

Sane, intelligent, hard-working people are sick of the MSM bullshit lies and constant leftwing propaganda from 99% of all of our media.

MSM, you’re securing Conservatism in the United States for an entire generation. The exact thing you don’t want to happen, you stupid fuckwits.

 

 

[–] archvile7 0 points (+0|-0) 21 minutes ago 

You’d think they would have learned something from the utter disgrace that was reporting on the 2016 election. It’s like the MSM can’t just admit defeat and regroup, try other tactics – they double down on the bullshit which will only sway even more people over to the other side. It’s pretty amazing, really. Unprecedented in our history for this to be happening on this scale.

 

 

[–] golgotham 4 points (+4|-0) 55 minutes ago  (edited 53 minutes ago)

Yeah, but you’re obviously forgetting the two scoops. #ScoopGate

 

 

[–] Titus-of-Voat 3 points (+3|-0) 25 minutes ago 

The lack of real sources makes it BS. If you don’t have people on the record it’s tabloid trash.

 

 

[–] wallstreets 2 points (+2|-0) 20 minutes ago 

Also McMaster claims it’s just false, so we have a respected, on the record source vs an anonymous source… http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/05/15/mcmaster-wapo-classified-info-story-is-false-i-was-in-the-room-it-didnt-happen/

 

 

[–] Apathy 2 points (+2|-0) 22 minutes ago 

It sounds like they were talking about tackling ISIS and somehow the media found out about this and lost their shit.

 

 

[–] gazillions 1 points (+1|-0) 11 minutes ago 

The last kick of a dying empire. A bunch of crazy obsessed bolshevicks obsessively trying to set up a global communist state they rule over and they see it slipping away.

My only curiosity is in if we’re going to see their opposition – the real people – kill the elites at the helm or not. They keep coming back and seem to be having a real problem taking no for an answer. Will they give up in the next 3 years or come back with a different more fatal plan?

 

 

[–] RicardoCabesa 1 points (+1|-0) 15 minutes ago 

The article accuses him of going off script. Mother fuckers why do you believe the PotUS should be dancing to CIA/FBI/NSA”s tune? The several presidents who did this in recent decades are why our foreign policy is so fucking retarded and screws us over to benifit Israel.

 

 

[–] xobodox 0 points (+0|-0) 1 minute ago  (edited 6 seconds ago)

The hurricane force spin and hyperbole from the libtards has reached the pinnacle of insanity..

One piece of context they left out… “in a information sharing agreement”

Jeeeezaaaws! These people are frothing so hard that they are making themselves look silly. Trump should take the gloves off and stop playing nice with these ass clowns!

PS.. But, it’s OK to for an “anonymous” source to leak the info to the WaPo idiots.. /s

 

 

[–] rspix000 0 points (+0|-0) 2 minutes ago 

Dept of Navy v. Egan isn’t quite as straight forward as you state.

A 1988 U.S. Supreme Court decision known as Department of the Navy v. Egan has often been interpreted to support broad presidential authority over national security generally and over access to classified information in particular. Along with United States v. Reynolds, Curtiss-Wright, and a few other cases, Egan is regularly cited in support of strong, even unchecked executive authority and judicial deference to executive claims. It has become a cornerstone of national security law as practiced today.

But the case has often been misunderstood and misrepresented, according to a new study (pdf) by Louis Fisher of the Law Library of Congress, who reviewed the development and interpretation of Egan in more than 180 judicial decisions.

The Egan decision was prompted by a narrow statutory dispute: Did the Merit Systems Protection Board (an executive branch body) have the authority to review the revocation of a security clearance by the Navy (another executive branch body)? The court concluded that Congress had not intended to permit such review.

But in reaching that straightforward conclusion, “various passages in Egan strayed from this central issue and created confusion and misconceptions” about the scope of executive authority and the role of the courts, wrote Dr. Fisher. Among such passages was a discussion of the President’s constitutional powers culminating in the statement that “Unless Congress specifically has provided otherwise, courts traditionally have been reluctant to intrude upon the authority of the Executive in military and national security affairs.”

Over time, Egan came to signify the notion that courts should grant the “utmost deference” — or even absolute deference — to the executive on issues of national security. Citing Egan, one court in 1993 held that “the presumption of reviewability is entirely inapplicable in matters concerning national security.” This is an extreme view that would exclude the courts altogether from national security affairs. “Egan does not support that interpretation,” wrote Fisher. But there it is.

In a 2002 report on leaks of classified information, Attorney General John Ashcroft cited Egan in support of the proposition that “The President has the power under the Constitution to protect national security secrets from unauthorized disclosure. This extends to defining what information constitutes a national security secret and to determining who may have access to that secret.” These statements are true except for the implication that such authority is exclusively the province of the executive. The Attorney General conspicuously neglected to note the qualification in Egan which stated “Unless Congress has specifically provided otherwise….”

Recently, observed Fisher, some courts have presented a more nuanced reading of Egan. In proceedings such as Al-Haramain and Horn v. Huddle, courts have rebuffed executive arguments for complete deference in cases where Congress has legislated its intent into statute.

Fundamentally, Fisher concludes, “Nothing in Egan recognizes a plenary or exclusive power on the part of the President over classified information.” See “Judicial Interpretations of Egan“ by Louis Fisher, Law Library of Congress, November 13, 2009.

https://fas.org/blogs/secrecy/2009/11/navy_v_egan/

Now, I’m not saying that Trump can’t decide to “declassify” whatever he wants, just that there are limits to Egan, and potentially political consequences to revealing those secrets to Russia, especially so shortly following the Comey firing. It feels like there is a deep state war against Trump going on that is not receiving enough attention in the mind of the public.

 

 

[–] CirdanValen 0 points (+0|-0) 5 minutes ago 

“H.R. McMaster Says Washington Post Report on Russia Meeting Is False” http://heavy.com/news/2017/05/mcmaster-statement-trump-russia-classified-info-video-live-stream-full-replay/

 

 

[–] EarlPoncho 0 points (+0|-0) 16 minutes ago 

hillary literally said in a debate how long the US’s reaction time would be to a nuclear strike effectively giving all of our enemies where they need to launch nukes from to ensure that we can’t intercept them. and the libs care about this bullshit and not that

Advertisements

Submit A News Story Or Link:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s