"This is a coverup"

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer
I was asking for a source saying the potus was not the ultimate classification authority.
You nor no one else gets to challenge that authority.
He as potus doesnt have to tell anyone why.

nice try tho

I'm not sure what you think I'm 'trying' to do. I directly said that very thing myself, so I'm not sure who you're trying to get with that gotcha.

All I'm intimating is I (or anyone for that matter) can't come up with a good reason why you would classify/hide/sequester a totally innocent not criminal in any way 110% on the up-and-up fully above board completely kosher innocent conversation.

a reply to: Sookiechacha
Cool. Somebody else finally gets it's all about Executive Privilege like Nixon when it comes to locking down comms.

ganjoa

a reply to: Wayfarer
the other world leader phone calls being leaked is not, in your estimation, a good reason?

mkay

if you say so

Can we please get the transcript of Obamas call with iran right before that 1.5 billion in cash was sent?

Why shouldnt we be able to see it?+

originally posted by: ganjoa
a reply to: Sookiechacha
Cool. Somebody else finally gets it's all about Executive Privilege like Nixon when it comes to locking down comms.

ganjoa

How'd that work out for Nixon?

originally posted by: hyperlexic
a reply to: Wayfarer
So does the prosecuter saying he was fired for investigating Bidens son and the Ukraine president saying he wasnt pressured at all mean they are both now Trump lackys? And are lying for Trump?

I am loathe to repeat myself but there just aren't a lot of folks positing the facts.

The prosecutor did not say that (or at the very least there is no record of the prosecutor saying that). There are a variety of fake quotes floating around (many having popped up in the last day or so).

As for Zelinsky, my and others take on it is he's in a pretty untenable solution where even if he felt coerced he's still under the thumb of Trump's whims and to anger him could make his situation very ugly, so there is plenty of incentive for him to lie about it to protect himself and his country. This is pretty typical of coercion/bribery cases.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer
the other world leader phone calls being leaked is not, in your estimation, a good reason?

mkay

if you say so

Are you asking me if leaking is bad or good? When folks are doing evil/illegal things, leaking them is unequivocally good imo. When people aren't, its not. Of course the crux is who is the arbiter of evil/illegal/good/bad....

a reply to: Wayfarer
Round about way of saying yes you believe they are lying to protect Trump?

Its a coverup right? I thought all other world leaders hated Trump and wanted him out so why lie to protect him now?

a reply to: ganjoa

Splitting hares is for prep cooks.

Ha!!

I love it!

On all levels - the post, the quip at the end, etc.

Keep up the good work!

a reply to: Wayfarer
nope

All I'm intimating is I (or anyone for that matter) can't come up with a good reason why you would classify/hide/sequester a totally innocent not criminal in any way 110% on the up-and-up fully above board completely kosher innocent conversation.

The leaks of the calls with other world leaders is a good reason.
above board and kosher as well.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer
nope

All I'm intimating is I (or anyone for that matter) can't come up with a good reason why you would classify/hide/sequester a totally innocent not criminal in any way 110% on the up-and-up fully above board completely kosher innocent conversation.

The leaks of the calls with other world leaders is a good reason.
above board and kosher as well.

Was there anything embarrassing or bad optics in those previous leaked calls?

originally posted by: hyperlexic
a reply to: Wayfarer
I thought all other world leaders hated Trump and wanted him out so why lie to protect him now?

Just Zelinsky, and for the reasons I stated above.

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer
nope

All I'm intimating is I (or anyone for that matter) can't come up with a good reason why you would classify/hide/sequester a totally innocent not criminal in any way 110% on the up-and-up fully above board completely kosher innocent conversation.

The leaks of the calls with other world leaders is a good reason.
above board and kosher as well.

Was there anything embarrassing or bad optics in those previous leaked calls?

yep
potus speaking to other world leaders is not secure because of leakers

when did bad optics or embarrassment become qualifiers?

was that a section in the politics for dummys class hildog presented?

a reply to: Wayfarer

To save you some time I'll go ahead and address your previous assertion that the President can classify whatever he wants, whenever he wants, for whatever reason. That being said, since its obvious nothing in the call pertained to national security, and as many have said that what was in the transcript wasn't criminal in any way: why would Trump move to lock this down and hide it so quickly before it came out?

The only thing I seen that I would consider a sensitive matter was two leaders speaking badly of Merkel. Both leaders probably would have preferred that such stance was being discussed. It can have effect on diplomatic relations in the future.

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: hyperlexic
a reply to: Wayfarer
I thought all other world leaders hated Trump and wanted him out so why lie to protect him now?

Just Zelinsky, and for the reasons I stated above.

sorry
the assertion that the president of ukraine lies on command for the world leader that attempted to extort him and his nation is simply comical
it will be hard to seriously move forward with out that coloring future comments

I have a castle for sale on some refurbished wetlands outside new orleans for sale if you are interested?

a reply to: Wayfarer

does security of communication require them to be labled "good" and "bad"?

I do not know what the "optics" were on the leaked calls, all I know is when I was in charge of secure documents

keeping them secure was paramount. Do you not think so?

Should we just let our adversaries know our "plans".

You don't seem to grasp the idea of security it seems?

I'm somewhat of an expert in the field if you have any questions about security and protocols.

It was my Job in th USMC

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: hyperlexic
a reply to: Wayfarer
I thought all other world leaders hated Trump and wanted him out so why lie to protect him now?

Just Zelinsky, and for the reasons I stated above.

sorry
the assertion that the president of ukraine lies on command for the world leader that attempted to extort him and his nation is simply comical
it will be hard to seriously move forward with out that coloring future comments

I have a castle for sale on some refurbished wetlands outside new orleans for sale if you are interested?

Why is it that farfetched? If Zelinsky cries that Trump coerced him, his own people will eat him alive for being a toady lickspittle to the US. Additionally, Trump then begins witholding funds, limiting interaction, and generally making things as awful for Ukraine as possible (which isn't hard considering how friendly he is with Putin).

Or, Zelinsky puts up and carry's water for Trump a little longer (I imagine he's hoping just for another year), and then Ukraine gets the money/assistance it needs, Trump's gone, Zelinsky gets to avoid a domestic kerfluffle and the world keeps spinning.

a reply to: thedigirati
gawdam jarheads.........

thanks for your service!

in general is there any reason you can think of that moving info to a more secure location would be a crime?
thanks in advance

originally posted by: thedigirati
a reply to: Wayfarer

does security of communication require them to be labled "good" and "bad"?

It is precisely why we have whistleblower protections enshrined in the law.

a reply to: Wayfarer

Why is it that farfetched?

not only is it farfetched; it is utterly ridiculous to impure a newly elected foreign leaders character on your whim and no more.
simply because it fits into your bs conspiracy about a potus that repulses you

you got evidence for such, by all means show it
otherwise crapping all over someone ,who is not a career politician, just to fit your pretend story is unacceptable

whistleblower-turns out to be 2ndhand crap including newspaper stories
transcipt released- omg he asked for a favor
leader in question speaks-it must be a lie

when you get some real evidence let us know
otherwise go get your shinebox