Putin Claims He Can Prove Trump Did Not Pass on Classified Info

originally posted by: bknapple32
Waiting on pins and needles for actual Americans on this site to say they trust Putin over Comey.

Comey had been fired the day before, he wouldn't have been in the meeting - I think you are referring to another Trump faux pas, easy enough to do at the moment.

May I sum the situation up:

Supporters of US-President Trump are expecting everyone to believe the content of a piece of paper handed over from big-red-commie-and-ultra-perfect-picture-of-the-enemy Putin, because it shall save the POTUS.

Wow.

originally posted by: TomLawless
I just want peace and cooperation with other countries, including Russia, and I want this government to start operating as a functional republic again (regardless of who is president), and I want all of this nonsense from both sides to end.

I honestly can't take this anymore. I just keep looking for that one silver bullet to end the madness one way or another. One piece of undeniable, irrefutable proof of....something. Anything. It's driving me insane.

I don't care if one side wins over another. I just want it to stop.

Any evidence is being twisted by people to fit their beliefs. I can't believe our society is getting so screwed up. People are out for themselves, not respecting the rights of other citizens. No country can survive that way.

originally posted by: bknapple32

originally posted by: missed_gear

originally posted by: windword
We know that Trump shared "sensitive" information to the Russians, so sensitive that it hasn't been shared with our NATO allies.

And exactly "how" do you know? Unnamed sources that were not there?

Curious

mg

Does anyone realize deepthroat was an unnamed source.

Wow, talk about an oversimplification. The story ran with three verified sources as well.

To wit: That was true investigative journalists work, not running a story on "I got a call, about a memo, from unnamed source...and run with it...

Books have been written about the journalism involved, there is none (investigative journalism) on this topic.

mg

originally posted by: TomLawlessI'm not a really a Trump supporter, but I see so much insanity surrounding him that I feel the need to defend him for some reason. He does enough crazy stuff on his own without this constant manufacturing of events without any proof to back them. It's not healthy. If he does something illegal, roast him for it. It's usually blatantly obvious.

I'm glad that I'm not the only one. I'll be quick to comment on things that he does wrong, but wading through the utterly massive amount of explosive diarrhea that exists from fabricated or over-reactive issues surrounding him has become so tedious that I feel strong need to call that garbage out, too--maybe even a stronger urge.

For those who don't understand what constant misleading and lying does, I direct your attention to a parable about a boy who cried wolf/Russia/Putin/TravelBan/WhateverElseIsStillCirculating...

Thats not his place.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: dfnj2015


No one is claiming that the president broke the law. They're claiming that he unwisely trusted an untrustworthy ally of an "enemy", Iran. They're claiming that what the president did was incompetent.

Just curious, how do you view Iran?
Are they our enemy?
When the deals with Iran were made by the last administration, were they our enemy then?

Iran is Israel's enemy, no question. It was an embedded Israeli operative whose location was disclosed by Trump, to the Russians.

originally posted by: TomLawless

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: TomLawless
Vlad says that if Lavrov was given sensitive info, he'll be reprimanded for not passing it on to him. He said this in his usual tongue in cheek fashion.

He says he will provide the written transcripts in order to prove it. I'm not a really a Trump supporter, but I see so much insanity surrounding him that I feel the need to defend him for some reason. He does enough crazy stuff on his own without this constant manufacturing of events without any proof to back them. It's not healthy. If he does something illegal, roast him for it. It's usually blatantly obvious.

www.reuters.com...

It wouldn't really be 'proof' though, would it? It would be a written transcript containing the notes of the meeting that Putin would want to share with America/American media. If that transcript is a full and accurate copy of the actual meeting isn't something that could be confirmed other than those in attendance, and they may have a vested interest in agreeing or disagreeing with it.

Were you saying the same thing about constant manufacturing of events when pizzagate was going off?

Of course I did. Look up my posts from that time. I don't need to defend my position on Pizzagate to you.

You don't need to defend anything to me, I was merely asking a question as many on ATS would believe any old nonsense about Obama or Clinton - literally anything, and roast anyone who asked for facts - but get very defensive about Trump and complain that somehow the media is treating him differently.

a reply to: windword

It was an embedded Israeli operative whose location was disclosed by Trump, to the Russians.

Do we have proof of this or is it from unnamed sources still?

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: dfnj2015


No one is claiming that the president broke the law. They're claiming that he unwisely trusted an untrustworthy ally of an "enemy", Iran. They're claiming that what the president did was incompetent.

Just curious, how do you view Iran?
Are they our enemy?
When the deals with Iran were made by the last administration, were they our enemy then?

Iran is Israel's enemy, no question. It was an embedded Israeli operative whose location was disclosed by Trump, to the Russians.

Do you have any confirmation of that? That Trump disclosed the location?

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: TomLawless

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: TomLawless
Vlad says that if Lavrov was given sensitive info, he'll be reprimanded for not passing it on to him. He said this in his usual tongue in cheek fashion.

He says he will provide the written transcripts in order to prove it. I'm not a really a Trump supporter, but I see so much insanity surrounding him that I feel the need to defend him for some reason. He does enough crazy stuff on his own without this constant manufacturing of events without any proof to back them. It's not healthy. If he does something illegal, roast him for it. It's usually blatantly obvious.

www.reuters.com...

It wouldn't really be 'proof' though, would it? It would be a written transcript containing the notes of the meeting that Putin would want to share with America/American media. If that transcript is a full and accurate copy of the actual meeting isn't something that could be confirmed other than those in attendance, and they may have a vested interest in agreeing or disagreeing with it.

Were you saying the same thing about constant manufacturing of events when pizzagate was going off?

Of course I did. Look up my posts from that time. I don't need to defend my position on Pizzagate to you.

You don't need to defend anything to me, I was merely asking a question as many on ATS would believe any old nonsense about Obama or Clinton - literally anything, and roast anyone who asked for facts - but get very defensive about Trump and complain that somehow the media is treating him differently.

I'm not a Trump supporter.

Hillary hater? Guilty as charged, but that doesn't mean that I don't want the truth. I would never advocate ruining someone's life over hearsay. My belief in the Constitution wins over every personal feeling I might have.

You're going after the wrong guy.

a reply to: joemoe

a reply to: butcherguy

That's the way the story is being reported, and the reason for the outrage.

“In March, CNN’s Evan Perez had learned from numerous officials that intelligence deemed credible said that ISIS was developing laptop computer bombs to be used on international flights,” Tapper said.

“Perez talked to Trump administration officials, who cautioned Perez and subsequently CNN executives, to not report certain details about the threat, including the city from which some of the intelligence was collected,” he said.

Tapper continued, saying that administration officials told CNN that reporting the city’s name could “get people killed.” He then scolded the administration for not following their own advice. According to media reports, Trump revealed the name of the city where the intelligence came from to Lavrov.

ntknetwork.com...

Isn't that great..
Vlad has transcripts of the meeting. But the American people don't.

MRGA

originally posted by: TomLawless

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: TomLawless

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: TomLawless
Vlad says that if Lavrov was given sensitive info, he'll be reprimanded for not passing it on to him. He said this in his usual tongue in cheek fashion.

He says he will provide the written transcripts in order to prove it. I'm not a really a Trump supporter, but I see so much insanity surrounding him that I feel the need to defend him for some reason. He does enough crazy stuff on his own without this constant manufacturing of events without any proof to back them. It's not healthy. If he does something illegal, roast him for it. It's usually blatantly obvious.

www.reuters.com...

It wouldn't really be 'proof' though, would it? It would be a written transcript containing the notes of the meeting that Putin would want to share with America/American media. If that transcript is a full and accurate copy of the actual meeting isn't something that could be confirmed other than those in attendance, and they may have a vested interest in agreeing or disagreeing with it.

Were you saying the same thing about constant manufacturing of events when pizzagate was going off?

Of course I did. Look up my posts from that time. I don't need to defend my position on Pizzagate to you.

You don't need to defend anything to me, I was merely asking a question as many on ATS would believe any old nonsense about Obama or Clinton - literally anything, and roast anyone who asked for facts - but get very defensive about Trump and complain that somehow the media is treating him differently.

I'm not a Trump supporter.

Hillary hater? Guilty as charged, but that doesn't mean that I don't want the truth. I would never advocate ruining someone's life over hearsay. My belief in the Constitution wins over every personal feeling I might have.

You're going after the wrong guy.

I'm not going after anyone, I merely asked the question - I don't look at peoples posting record before asking a question unless I feel the need. I was stating what many on ATS did do - drink up anything no matter how outrageous about the Obama administration or about Clinton in the election.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Isn't that great..
Vlad has transcripts of the meeting. But the American people don't.

Chuck Schumer (of course) is asking for them, transcripts of meetings are protocol. Nothing new here.

mg

a reply to: windword

The problem is these reports from these unknown sources are not verified. However, verified sources from people that were at the meeting denied any wrong doings by Trump. The Russians even wants to give us a transcript just to troll our MSM.

Watching with popcorn....!

a reply to: TomLawless

Wonder why Putin is jumping to his defense.....Hmmmm

a reply to: TomLawless

When you remove the current/past allegations that have been proven as FAKE, or suspected as FAKE, (candidate Trump colluding)..

THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ACCOMPLISHMENTS LOOK DAMN GOOD SO FAR.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: TomLawless

When you remove the current/past allegations that have been proven as FAKE, or suspected as FAKE, (candidate Trump colluding)..

THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ACCOMPLISHMENTS LOOK DAMN GOOD SO FAR.

Can you, for the record, state his accomplishments???

a reply to: joemoe


Jake Tapper's sources are verified. They came from the White House.