Quote (IceMage @ Jul 4 2020 10:10am)

I find the quote murky and meaningless.

If the intelligence is bunk, why was it in the PDB on Feb. 27? Why were British officials aware of it? Why was NATO informed? If it was shared with those people, the intelligence had to at least have a fair amount of credibility and confidence in the IC.

Quote

I don't find your uninformed speculation convincing at all. GRU doesn't always display the best tradecraft, and ultimately we're just receiving sentence-long summaries of the intelligence that American experts are analyzing.

Quote

I'd prefer if stories like this didn't devolve into the typical cult vs the world arguments. According to reporting Trump's intel briefers avoid bringing up Russia because he mysteriously has a hard-on for the country and Putin, so it's possible O'Brien decided not to brief him on it for that reason. We have a toddler who can't read his PDB so it's possible he never saw it. But instead of getting angry at his people for the screw up, he goes straight into incompetent divider mode, and calls the reporting completely fake. I can't trust most of his people, because he hires hacks without any integrity, so hopefully Congress investigates and gets the real story.

My fear is that the cult won't accept the evidence though. You guys hate Democrats more than Russians paying to kill American troops, so whatever they find, it won't matter to you or any other Trumpsters here. You'll snap right into denial mode, and pretend the incident never happened.


I'm not sure that's true. That sounds more like the ODNI. Obviously the military would work with the intelligence agencies, but the denial is murky and could just be an admission that DOD weren't the ones who found corroborating evidence.

The lack of declarations is telling though. We can't even get an official to deny that the intelligence was in Trump's Feb. 27th briefing. That seems like an easy thing to do. Why won't they? Try pretending that Trump isn't a religious figure and think it over.

Quote (IceMage @ Jul 4 2020 11:10am)

I find the quote murky and meaningless.

If the intelligence is bunk, why was it in the PDB on Feb. 27? Why were British officials aware of it? Why was NATO informed? If it was shared with those people, the intelligence had to at least have a fair amount of credibility and confidence in the IC.

I don't find your uninformed speculation convincing at all. GRU doesn't always display the best tradecraft, and ultimately we're just receiving sentence-long summaries of the intelligence that American experts are analyzing.

I'd prefer if stories like this didn't devolve into the typical cult vs the world arguments. According to reporting Trump's intel briefers avoid bringing up Russia because he mysteriously has a hard-on for the country and Putin, so it's possible O'Brien decided not to brief him on it for that reason. We have a toddler who can't read his PDB so it's possible he never saw it. But instead of getting angry at his people for the screw up, he goes straight into incompetent divider mode, and calls the reporting completely fake. I can't trust most of his people, because he hires hacks without any integrity, so hopefully Congress investigates and gets the real story.

My fear is that the cult won't accept the evidence though. You guys hate Democrats more than Russians paying to kill American troops, so whatever they find, it won't matter to you or any other Trumpsters here. You'll snap right into denial mode, and pretend the incident never happened.




I'm not sure that's true. That sounds more like the ODNI. Obviously the military would work with the intelligence agencies, but the denial is murky and could just be an admission that DOD weren't the ones who found corroborating evidence.

The lack of declarations is telling though. We can't even get an official to deny that the intelligence was in Trump's Feb. 27th briefing. That seems like an easy thing to do. Why won't they? Try pretending that Trump isn't a religious figure and think it over.

Quote (fuzzy159 @ Jul 4 2020 01:20pm)

You guys hate Trump more than you hate Americans dying. The derangement is scary.

Quote (fuzzy159 @ Jul 4 2020 10:20am)

You guys hate Trump more than you hate Americans dying. The derangement is scary.

Quote (ofthevoid @ Jul 4 2020 11:53am)

...

Dude they are denying the intel that the Russians were doing this, why would they need to deny that Trump was briefed on something they've already said they have no evidence of?

The denial is not murky. It uses very direct, basic English. What Goom highlighted in that quote is extremely clear to understand.

Quote (Goomshill @ Jul 4 2020 12:46pm)

You keep saying "Murky", but do you have anything other than murky accounts of what the British / NATO were actually told?
Do you know whether it was a briefing saying "We think the Russians paid bounties to kill Americans", or do you think it could have been "We heard some Taliban claim they were paid by Russia and doubt it, do you guys have any intel to back it up?"

Quote (Goomshill @ Jul 4 2020 12:46pm)

I don't like conspiracy theories that require actors to both be cunning and nefarious in their covert activities but also comically incompetent and overt. Its one of the telltale signs someone's theory is trying to warp facts to suit a narrative instead of vice versa. You can't just handwave such an inconsistency by saying "they don't have the best tradecraft". You're talking about an operation that doesn't serve their geopolitical interests, has no apparent motive, poses incredible risks, and the evidence is overt. None of that makes a lick of sense.

Quote (Goomshill @ Jul 4 2020 12:46pm)

You believe murky reports from anonymous leakers to the NYT because you cite the credibility of the US intelligence community, then when the US intelligence community turns around and denies the story you call that response murky and say you can't trust them because they're Trump people. Then you say the Trump cult will snap into denial and refuse to accept the facts. C'mon, we already did this dance several times over the past few years, it gets boring

Quote (fuzzy159 @ Jul 4 2020 01:20pm)

You guys hate Trump more than you hate Americans dying. The derangement is scary.

Quote (IceMage @ Jul 5 2020 01:30am)

Trump either didn't read the intelligence because he's a toddler, or he read it and decided not to do anything about it. He's surrounded himself with sycophants so they may not have had the courage to tell him, because he weirdly gets upset when bad Russian actions get brought to his attention.

I never thought he would be this bad at the job. I guess now defending the troops is a liberal position.

Quote (Goomshill @ Jul 5 2020 01:41am)

He's probable he didn't read it, or read it and didn't remember it. Or maybe he did and he lied. Or maybe due to some fluke he didn't actually receive it. But you seem hyperfocused on whether Trump had the intel and whether he's telling the truth about what he knew, rather than the merits of the allegation itself. As fuzzy correctly identified, your focus isn't on our national security or potential russian threat here, its on Trump.

As we've seen repeatedly over the past few years, "detail and corroboration from multiple outlets" doesn't evidence a story being true due to multiple sources, it evidences that the reporters are all talking to the same source or people who got it from that source. The authoritative source are the actual senior US government officials, who have spoken out saying the intel was not credible. But I guess that's no match for the word of an anonymous leaker.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Jul 5 2020 02:09am)

Why shouldnt it be on Trump? Hes literally the leader of the country. If he said he read it, asked his team to investigate, and didnt find anything credible thats one thing. Him just ignoring it or being too childish to even absorb his briefings is a legitimate problem and worthy of scandal when something like this would have fallen through the cracks.