Russian Bounty on U.S. military in Afghanistan.

[Mountain Man]

The Russian bounties story was included in the PDB.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/29/polit...ing/index.html

The intelligence that assessed there was an effort by a Russian military intelligence unit to pay the Taliban to kill US soldiers was included in one of President Donald Trump's daily briefings on intelligence matters sometime in the spring, according to a US official with direct knowledge of the latest information.
That assessment, the source said, was backed up by "several pieces of information" that supported the view that there was an effort by the Russian intelligence unit -- the GRU -- to pay bounties to kill US soldiers, including interrogation of Taliban detainees and electronic eavesdropping. The source said there was some other information that did not corroborate this view but said, nonetheless, '"This was a big deal. When it's about US troops you go after it 100%, with everything you got."

So now one needs to ask why Trump, Pence, Ratcliffe and Grenell lied.

"Sources say..."

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me a hundred times with the exact same ruse, I'm probably a liberal moron.

[DivineOb]

It wasn't my article, it was FOX News reporting an official statement from the White House saying that both Republican and Democrat congressmen will be briefed. You conceded this point.

Hey idiot, this is what your article said

The press secretary said the White House had invited eight members of Congress from both parties to be briefed on the situation Monday afternoon.

That is false.

[Mountain Man]

Hey idiot, this is what your article said

The press secretary said the White House had invited eight members of Congress from both parties to be briefed on the situation Monday afternoon.

That is false.

How is it false? He's briefing eight members from each party. You conceded this yourself. Are you trying to backpedal?

As I read the sentence, the invite was sent out on Monday, it doesn't say the briefing was necessarily happening on Monday. For Democrats, it's happening tomorrow.

[DivineOb]

Patrick [Harris];756689]How is it false? He's briefing eight members from each party. You conceded this yourself. Are you trying to backpedal?

As I read the sentence, the invite was sent out on Monday, it doesn't say the briefing was necessarily happening on Monday. For Democrats, it's happening tomorrow.

Sure thing "Christian."

Are you saying FNC editors can't identify a dangling modifier when they see one? I *suck* at English and I can see it.

[DivineOb]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/29/u...?smid=tw-share

American officials provided a written briefing in late February to President Trump laying out their conclusion that a Russian military intelligence unit offered and paid bounties to Taliban-linked militants to kill U.S. and coalition troops in Afghanistan, two officials familiar with the matter said.

The investigation into the suspected Russian covert operation to incentivize such killings has focused in part on an April 2019 car bombing that killed three Marines as one such potential attack, according to multiple officials familiar with the matter.

The new information emerged as the White House tried on Monday to play down the intelligence assessment that Russia sought to encourage and reward killings — including reiterating a claim that Mr. Trump was never briefed about the matter and portraying the conclusion as disputed and dubious.

This is going to keep getting uglier.

[Ronson]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/29/u...?smid=tw-share

American officials provided a written briefing in late February to President Trump laying out their conclusion that a Russian military intelligence unit offered and paid bounties to Taliban-linked militants to kill U.S. and coalition troops in Afghanistan, two officials familiar with the matter said.

The investigation into the suspected Russian covert operation to incentivize such killings has focused in part on an April 2019 car bombing that killed three Marines as one such potential attack, according to multiple officials familiar with the matter.

The new information emerged as the White House tried on Monday to play down the intelligence assessment that Russia sought to encourage and reward killings — including reiterating a claim that Mr. Trump was never briefed about the matter and portraying the conclusion as disputed and dubious.

This is going to keep getting uglier.

Allow me to summarize:

... two officials familiar with the matter said...

... according to multiple officials familiar with the matter ...

Still waiting for someone with a name to step forward and put their reputation on the allegations.

[DivineOb]

Republican Senators signalling that this scandal has legs.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...-russia-345160

Senate Republicans are vowing to get to the bottom of bombshell reports that Russia offered bounties to Afghan militants for targeted killings of U.S. troops overseas — and suggesting that retaliation against Moscow may be in order.

Key committee chairs made clear on Monday that they will press the White House for answers about the intelligence assessments, and GOP senators pushed President Donald Trump to exact severe punishments on the Kremlin if the claims are true — even as the president asserts that he was never briefed on the matter.

“I want to understand how it’s conceivably possible that the president didn’t know. How does that possibly happen?” Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) said. “Number two, what is their plan to make sure that our enemies know that if you target American servicemen and women, the consequences are going to be draconian? And right now, I want to hear their plan for Taliban and GRU agents in body bags.” GRU refers to Russia’s military intelligence agency.

Senators have already proposed harsh repercussions, including imposing new sanctions and designating Moscow as a state sponsor of terrorism — a step the Trump administration has thus far refused to take.

Republicans only do the right thing if it makes their re-election more likely so this scandal must be pretty bad to risk openly defying Russian asset Trump.

[DivineOb]

Allow me to summarize:

... two officials familiar with the matter said...

... according to multiple officials familiar with the matter ...

Still waiting for someone with a name to step forward and put their reputation on the allegations.

These aren't names but the sources in that article are getting awfully specific

One of the officials said the item appeared in Mr. Trump’s brief in late February; the other cited Feb. 27, specifically.

Moreover, a description of the intelligence assessment that the Russian unit had carried out the bounties plot was also seen as serious and solid enough to disseminate more broadly across the intelligence community in a May 4 article in the C.I.A.’s World Intelligence Review, a classified compendium commonly referred to as The Wire, two officials said.

If you think this and the other leaks about Trump's phone calls with leaders is more than the very tip of the iceberg I've got an entirely fair and above board 2016 election to sell you.

[Mountain Man]

Are you saying FNC editors can't identify a dangling modifier when they see one?

A lot of news organizations tend to be sloppy in their rush to get a story out before the competition.

[Mountain Man]

These aren't names but the sources in that article are getting awfully specific

One of the officials said the item appeared in Mr. Trump’s brief in late February; the other cited Feb. 27, specifically.

Moreover, a description of the intelligence assessment that the Russian unit had carried out the bounties plot was also seen as serious and solid enough to disseminate more broadly across the intelligence community in a May 4 article in the C.I.A.’s World Intelligence Review, a classified compendium commonly referred to as The Wire, two officials said.

If you think this and the other leaks about Trump's phone calls with leaders is more than the very tip of the iceberg I've got an entirely fair and above board 2016 election to sell you.

More unconfirmed "sources say" rumormongering. Seriously, how dumb do you have to be to keep falling for this?

[Mountain Man]

Here's a named source speaking on the record...

On Monday’s broadcast of CNN’s “Situation Room,” Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL), who was briefed on the intelligence about Russian bounties on U.S. soldiers, said he understands that President Trump “was not briefed” about the matter, but the intelligence might have been in the briefing book that most presidents don’t read all of every day. Kinzinger also said that Trump not being briefed is “not a scandal,” and the decision on whether to brief the president was made “by career people who make the decision on what they want to highlight to the president.”

Kinzinger said, “Everything I understand is that the president was not briefed about this. Now, if it was in his book, that’s one thing. And maybe he didn’t read it, there’s — most presidents don’t read the entire book every day. They rely on intel to brief them.”

Kinzinger added, “I don’t think it shouldn’t have been told to the president. But what I said, and what I meant, if I didn’t quite say it right, is there was conflicting evidence. So, that’s where you have to make a decision, especially on something as big as Russia. Do you want to present the president with the idea that Russia’s put bounties out on U.S. troops if you don’t fully know yet and if there’s conflicting intelligence, or is it better to gather the rest of that? We’re in a gathering phase. And now with this story out there, obviously, I think some of those trails may be wiped up if, in fact, it’s true. And so — but, you know, I think that’s a question for who makes the decisions to brief the president on what. That’s typically a career person. But it’s not a scandal, and the point of the president knew and he didn’t do anything about it, the real issue here though is, if it’s true.”

He further stated that if the bounties exist, “let’s let this come out, and then the president needs to take aggressive action at that point. But you can’t really do it if you don’t know.”

Kinzinger also stated that he “quite possibly” would have briefed the president about the issue, but “I also know what the intelligence was, I know what the conflicts were. Obviously, can’t say them here. And I can tell you, it’s a tough decision that you have to make at that point. Because it’s not just cut and dry. … That was a decision made, not by the president, not by anybody political, by career people who make the decision on what they want to highlight to the president.”

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020...not-a-scandal/

[Ronson]

Here's a named source speaking on the record...

Can you imagine if the decision of the "career person" to brief-or-not-to-brief the president was left up to someone like Strozk or Comey? And they decided not to brief him, and then scoot their information over to the New York Times? Setting Trump up for a fall? I wouldn't put it past some of these people.

It's interesting how this months-old alleged incident is only coming out now nearer election time.

[JimL]

Here's a named source speaking on the record...

On Monday’s broadcast of CNN’s “Situation Room,” Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL), who was briefed on the intelligence about Russian bounties on U.S. soldiers, said he understands that President Trump “was not briefed” about the matter, but the intelligence might have been in the briefing book that most presidents don’t read all of every day. Kinzinger also said that Trump not being briefed is “not a scandal,” and the decision on whether to brief the president was made “by career people who make the decision on what they want to highlight to the president.”

Kinzinger said, “Everything I understand is that the president was not briefed about this. Now, if it was in his book, that’s one thing. And maybe he didn’t read it, there’s — most presidents don’t read the entire book every day. They rely on intel to brief them.”

Kinzinger added, “I don’t think it shouldn’t have been told to the president. But what I said, and what I meant, if I didn’t quite say it right, is there was conflicting evidence. So, that’s where you have to make a decision, especially on something as big as Russia. Do you want to present the president with the idea that Russia’s put bounties out on U.S. troops if you don’t fully know yet and if there’s conflicting intelligence, or is it better to gather the rest of that? We’re in a gathering phase. And now with this story out there, obviously, I think some of those trails may be wiped up if, in fact, it’s true. And so — but, you know, I think that’s a question for who makes the decisions to brief the president on what. That’s typically a career person. But it’s not a scandal, and the point of the president knew and he didn’t do anything about it, the real issue here though is, if it’s true.”

He further stated that if the bounties exist, “let’s let this come out, and then the president needs to take aggressive action at that point. But you can’t really do it if you don’t know.”

Kinzinger also stated that he “quite possibly” would have briefed the president about the issue, but “I also know what the intelligence was, I know what the conflicts were. Obviously, can’t say them here. And I can tell you, it’s a tough decision that you have to make at that point. Because it’s not just cut and dry. … That was a decision made, not by the president, not by anybody political, by career people who make the decision on what they want to highlight to the president.”

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020...not-a-scandal/

The briefing is simply the White House telling what they want to tell. The Briefing needs to come from the Intel community, not from the White House.

[DivineOb]

Here's a named source speaking on the record...

On Monday’s broadcast of CNN’s “Situation Room,” Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL), who was briefed on the intelligence about Russian bounties on U.S. soldiers, said he understands that President Trump “was not briefed” about the matter, but the intelligence might have been in the briefing book that most presidents don’t read all of every day. Kinzinger also said that Trump not being briefed is “not a scandal,” and the decision on whether to brief the president was made “by career people who make the decision on what they want to highlight to the president.”

1) So the info *was* in the President's Daily Briefing
2) Presidents read the PDB. To claim otherwise is just a bold faced lie.
3) Once this broke Trump spent 2 days golfing rather than try to get to the bottom of it
4) We now have confirmation from a *named source* that this Intel exists
5) Chris Murphy also that this intel edxists
6) He is lying to say it's commonplace for Presidents to ignore the PDB. A bold faced lie.

Kinzinger said, “Everything I understand is that the president was not briefed about this. Now, if it was in his book, that’s one thing. And maybe he didn’t read it, there’s — most presidents don’t read the entire book every day. They rely on intel to brief them.”

Kinzinger added, “I don’t think it shouldn’t have been told to the president. But what I said, and what I meant, if I didn’t quite say it right, is there was conflicting evidence. So, that’s where you have to make a decision, especially on something as big as Russia. Do you want to present the president with the idea that Russia’s put bounties out on U.S. troops if you don’t fully know yet and if there’s conflicting intelligence, or is it better to gather the rest of that? We’re in a gathering phase. And now with this story out there, obviously, I think some of those trails may be wiped up if, in fact, it’s true. And so — but, you know, I think that’s a question for who makes the decisions to brief the president on what. That’s typically a career person. But it’s not a scandal, and the point of the president knew and he didn’t do anything about it, the real issue here though is, if it’s true.”

More lies. The information in the PDB is the best vetted and/or most relevant intel for the President (duh).

So now that we have *confirmation* from both a Republican and Democrat that this is a real thing what is Trump going to do about it? Where is Trump's fury and righteous desire to retaliate?

And why did Ratfink and Grennell lie about the intel existing?

He further stated that if the bounties exist, “let’s let this come out, and then the president needs to take aggressive action at that point. But you can’t really do it if you don’t know.”

It has been nearly 96 hours and 36 holes of golf since this broke. What is Trump's response? When will he address the nation and indicate he has directed a round of punishing sanctions against his butt buddy Putin?

[DivineOb]

So for all those of you blasting that this was just made up by "the failing" NYT I've got a big pile of crow over here for you. MM gets a double portion just because I like his face. I'll wait for you all to man up and admit your error.