Trump Revealed Highly Classified Secrets to Russia Last Week

Getin the ring said:
Oh that's rich

So tell me lefty,

If the shoe was on the other foot, A Trump staffer was murdered in the street, and then found to have leaked unflattering emails to wikileaks days before the election.
Still be a non story?

Do you have any sense of dignity, right from wrong in your bones, ANY?
Click to expand...

You are self-moderating.
We have a rule against that.
Start your own thread, twat waffle
 
"There is a golden rule in the world of espionage that when one government supplies intelligence to another it must not be passed on to a third party without permission of the original supplier," he said.

BBC quoting Frank Gardner
 
attachment.php
 
Micawber said:
"There is a golden rule in the world of espionage that when one government supplies intelligence to another it must not be passed on to a third party without permission of the original supplier," he said.

BBC quoting Frank Gardner
Click to expand...

Frank Gardner is wrong. Information is power. Don't give it away unless you intend it to be distributed.
 
anatta said:
who are the unnamed officials?
WaPo has a hard on for Trump, and leaks from the administration
( or better yet '' former senior U.S. official who is close to current administration official") :whome:
are dubious because of entrenched political opposition..

It's typical WaPo styled sensationalism..a few facts dressed up in rabid language - with little context
other then what WaPo's agenda wnats to shove down your throat
Click to expand...

When they find the leak or leakers they should have them beheaded!
 
Guille said:
Frank Gardner is wrong. Information is power. Don't give it away unless you intend it to be distributed.
Click to expand...

Disagree that that is the sole consideration. Discretion. Reputation. Conflicting interests, some diametrically opposition, some not. Valuation of the intel. Value variance depending on the party. Quid pro quo. Win-win. It's much more complicated a calculus than just that slogan.
 
Micawber said:
Disagree that that is the sole consideration. Discretion. Reputation. Conflicting interests, some diametrically opposition, some not. Valuation of the intel. Value variance depending on the party. Quid pro quo. Win-win. It's much more complicated a calculus than just that slogan.
Click to expand...

You just used many words to say nothing at all. It's OK to walk away if you don't understand the subject matter...and you clearly don't understand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top