Another candidacy ending story for any other politician.

CIA clamps down on flow of Russia intelligence to White House

The CIA has made it harder for intelligence about Russia to reach the White House, stoking fears among current and former officials that information is being suppressed to please a president known to erupt in anger whenever he is confronted with bad news about Moscow.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/23/cia-russia-intelligence-white-house-420351

A story like this, the POTUS not wanting to hear about Russian interference (because he knows who they are interfering for) would normally be the end of that POTUS' candidacy.

Take a moment. Think about it. The CIA is afraid to report intel on foreign interference in the election because it will upset the POTUS. It's surreal right? Nope. It's Wednesday.

Trumpleton's............do...........not..............care.

Why? How have they come to be unmoved by this devastating report?

I know. The ultimate defense mechanism. The fake news meme.

 

Really Lee, you need to start actually reading the articles you post. They contradicted your hyperventilating in like th 8th Para of the article. Obviously you didn't get that far as the click bait title was all you really needed to take off on...

But sure, you're still a part of the "orangeman bad" cabal. And this likely allows you to keep going to the meetings.... LOL

 

Try getting beyond the headline and the first paragraph and you'll get to this:

"
“Scrutinizing intelligence product and process is exactly what is expected of Director Haspel not only because it’s her job, it’s her life’s work — developing sources, vetting information, and checking assumptions — it’s in her blood,” said CIA press secretary Timothy Barrett. “She rightfully asks difficult questions and ensures intelligence is corroborated, double-checked, and then run through the wringer once more. Any suggestion of a political motive for how she leads this agency is misguided.”

After this story was published, Barrett added: “The notion that the General Counsel or anyone else in senior leadership impedes analysis is laughable. Everyone who works here knows that analytic objectivity is beyond reproach.”

Dems are going back to the Russian hoax again.....they are clearly desperate

 

So - just for the record - the CIA are now to be trusted?

 

I have no reason not to trust them...John Brennen was trustable until he joined the Obamagate gang, and went along with the Russian Conspiracy hoax, knowing full well there was no evidence to support it.

 

Sometimes the rush to post another negative turns out badly for the poster. This is one of those times. Best to let it go and go back to searching Media Matters for something else.

 

So while in previous administrations the CIA prevented intelligence from getting out of the WH, in this one they are preventing it from coming in.

The fact is that the CIA has had to reduce the amount of intelligence because this President doesn't have the brains, the attention span or the interest in hearing it, to grasp it.

This, in fact, would have ended the Presidency of any other President. This one just counts on flooding us with incompetence, so nobody pays any attention to any one specific issue.

But this is dangerous for the Republic. And it's sad that many people would put love for a politician above love for their own country. Sad indeed!

 

Feel free to be specific.

 

The story essentially corroborates what has been reported earlier. Trump does not want to hear anything to do with intel on Russian interference, past or present. The truth upsets him, especially this particular truth.

 

Yes. Intelligence topics for Trump can be classified in three groups. Information he can't understand, information he's not interested in because it doesn't benefit him personally, and information that makes him angry. In this final group is information about Russia and about the Pandemic. The two major attacks he should be defending our country from (but is not) right now.

There used to be a fourth group with information he wants to hear and was positive. So he could take credit for it despite not deserving credit. But that one seems to have dried out after all the lousy decisions he has made.

 

Actually this story debunks anything reported earlier......did you not even read your own link?


"
“Scrutinizing intelligence product and process is exactly what is expected of Director Haspel not only because it’s her job, it’s her life’s work — developing sources, vetting information, and checking assumptions — it’s in her blood,” said CIA press secretary Timothy Barrett. “She rightfully asks difficult questions and ensures intelligence is corroborated, double-checked, and then run through the wringer once more. Any suggestion of a political motive for how she leads this agency is misguided.”

After this story was published, Barrett added: “The notion that the General Counsel or anyone else in senior leadership impedes analysis is laughable. Everyone who works here knows that analytic objectivity is beyond reproach.”

 

Hmm... so you didn't read the article either. But don't worry that what you've written is inaccurate, because you'll reach back for the headline, and not the content of the article and feel yourself vindicated for your own manufactured narrative it was based on. But sure, crocodiles cry too.... boo hoo....

 

Feel free to be specific.

I read this article, just as I read the one in the OP. They're very consistent.......don't ya think?

Trump's resistance led intel agencies to brief him less and less on Russia
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/01/politics/trump-intel-briefings-russia/index.html

 

All the briefings have to be presented in cartoonish fashion or he loses interest.

However, he inattention to intel, his refusal to read the material, his slovenly, lazy habits of watching cable news and tweeting............all these things are damning.

But making it clear to the intel agencies he does not want to be presented with urgent matters pertaining the the nation's security................that should be game over for any prez. Tragically, just as Don doesn't want to listen to news he doesn't like so do Trumpette's.

 

I read the article. So? How does me reading the article (or not reading it, if you prefer) change anything I said?

You are the specialist in this forum of writing the most words without making any argument. Or, for that matter, without saying anything. As I always end up telling you: If you have something to say... say it. I have realized that you never do.

 

So.... since what you are quoting was a response to Golem, are you now admitting that you and he are the same person? Isn't that against the rules of the forum?

 

If you are using the article as a demonstration of your point, you are mistaken, and the article in question doesn't support your assertion. This isn't that hard. But for sure, you read the headline, which you then launched with. Oh, and why did you send Lee to do your dirty work today?

 

Really? I've repeatedly asked you to be specific in citing what you claim is a contradiction in the link I provided. You can't, so you come with this lame accusation? I would say "surely you can do better" but clearly yuz got nothin'.

 

You keep writing that but you refuse to try to prove it. What's the problem?

 

Hmm.. so...
“Scrutinizing intelligence product and process is exactly what is expected of Director Haspel not only because it’s her job, it’s her life’s work — developing sources, vetting information, and checking assumptions — it’s in her blood,” said CIA press secretary Timothy Barrett. “She rightfully asks difficult questions and ensures intelligence is corroborated, double-checked, and then run through the wringer once more. Any suggestion of a political motive for how she leads this agency is misguided.”

After this story was published, Barrett added: “The notion that the General Counsel or anyone else in senior leadership impedes analysis is laughable. Everyone who works here knows that analytic objectivity is beyond reproach.”

Do you now have anything to say for yourself? And again, why do Golem's dirty work? I remind you of the forum rule against maintaining more than one identity on it.

 

Wait.......I need to stop laughing.....................................................................................you are going to discount the substance of the article, which corroborates similar reporting from other sources, because a spokesperson defended Haspel's reluctance to pass on intel to Vlad's favorite candidate he doesn't want to hear.

 

Haspel, as noted has also challenged the quality of the intel, and has addressed that, or didn't you read that part? Just asking. You seem entirely willing now to simply invent, as did the politico article the "rest" of the story.

 

If you think I have two identities I encourage you to report me to the mods. Just stop with the deflection.

 

As I said, I read the entire piece. I gather you have too, you've just filtered out the parts you don't like.

 

Why worry about the fluff, when the meat is right there for you to ignore? That is the dilemma that you now have. Your own article demonstrates that nothing untoward is happening, and yet, Politico couldn't stop themselves from creating yet another hit piece that is factually in error. They knowingly did this, and inserted this little nugget so they couldn't be sued. It really is that simple. And you fell for it, and you continue to shill for it. That's pretty bold.