Russian Bounty on U.S. military in Afghanistan.

[Whateverman]

So basically all this is just more fake news. NYT printed a rumor that the intelligence agencies dismissed long ago and never bothered to even report to Trump.

The intelligence was shared with the UK a week ago...

aka. real news.

[Mountain Man]

So basically all this is just more fake news. NYT printed a rumor that the intelligence agencies dismissed long ago and never bothered to even report to Trump.

Pretty much. Former acting DNI Richard Grenell also says he was never briefed on this. So basically, it was quickly debunked by our intelligence agencies, and that was the end of it. You don't bother the Commander in Chief with unfounded rumors.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahba...nties-n2571503

In summary 1) The reports lacked credibility; and 2) the President was never briefed. I expect the New York Times to retract their story any minute now. Just you wait. Aaaaaaany minute now...

[DivineOb]

Again, this story has been confirmed by FNC, WSJ, and WaPo. Stop pretending that this is just coming from "the failing" NYT and can be ignored on that basis.

If you're going to listen to conservative outhouse et al. over those clearly more reliable and trustworthy sources then stop pretending you are actually interested in the truth. Just admit you want to hear only what you want to hear.

[Mountain Man]

Again, this story has been confirmed by FNC, WSJ, and WaPo.

Repeating "sources say" rumors is not the same as confirmation, you idiot. Reports from named sources including former acting DNI Richard Grenell and President Trump himself say that the President was never briefed because the reports lacked credibility.

[seanD]

How so?

How does a four year old report prove wrong anything I've said about neocons in this thread? Be specific, if you can.

That there was a neocon plot to get Trump removed. Why the playing dumb act? That type of engagement here at tweb is kiddy stuff and it bores me.

[Darth Executor]

The so called neocons originated in the 1960's, so no, as usual, you have no idea what you're talking about.

So what if they originated in the 1960's? Did I say they originated today? What does their origins have to do with their stance on Trump? Looks like it's not just Biden going senile.

[DivineOb]

Repeating "sources say" rumors is not the same as confirmation, you idiot. Reports from named sources including former acting DNI Richard Grenell and President Trump himself say that the President was never briefed because the reports lacked credibility.

Grenell denied that the Russian bounties were a thing. Trump confirmed they're a thing. Not exactly credible. Idiot.

[DivineOb]

The briefing today is for House Republicans only. How much more of a confession do you need?

[Darth Executor]

Grenell denied that the Russian bounties were a thing. Trump confirmed they're a thing. Not exactly credible. Idiot.

do you have a link to Trump confirming they're a thing

[Mountain Man]

Grenell denied that the Russian bounties were a thing. Trump confirmed they're a thing. Not exactly credible. Idiot.

No need to trust your -- *ahem* -- "interpretation". Let's go right to the source:

tweet1.jpg

tweet2.jpg

Of course you would have known this if you had followed the link I had helpfully provided in a previous post.

[DivineOb]

No need to trust your -- *ahem* -- "interpretation". Let's go right to the source:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]46124[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]46125[/ATTACH]

Of course you would have known this if you had following the link I had helpfully provided in a previous post.

Those are the tweets I had in mind. Grenell denied that there was intel indicating that Russia was putting bounties on Americans. Trump stated that there *was* such intel but it allegedly wasn't considered credible. They contradict each other.

[DivineOb]

do you have a link to Trump confirming they're a thing

The tweet from Trump which WW posted is what I was referring to.

[Cow Poke]

Those are the tweets I had in mind. Grenell denied that there was intel indicating that Russia was putting bounties on Americans. Trump stated that there *was* such intel but it allegedly wasn't considered credible. They contradict each other.

So, let's look at the actual content of the first tweet.... On June 28. apparently, Trump tweets

"Intel just reported to me that they did not find this info credible, and therefore did not report it to me..."

Do you dispute that's what he tweeted?

From that, a logical person would gather that, PRIOR to "just now", Trump had not heard of this, and was "just now" learning about it.

Next?

[DivineOb]

So, let's look at the actual content of the first tweet.... On June 28. apparently, Trump tweets

"Intel just reported to me that they did not find this info credible, and therefore did not report it to me..."

Do you dispute that's what he tweeted?

From that, a logical person would gather that, PRIOR to "just now", Trump had not heard of this, and was "just now" learning about it.

Next?

Exactly. And Grenell states that he never heard about it at all. It can't both be the case that Grenell never heard about it and that the IC had heard of it but deemed it uncredible.

And if everything where above board I can't comprehend of any single reason Trump wouldn't want to brief *all* of Congress on exactly how and why this info was deemed uncredible, and thus, ignored. Can you?

[Cow Poke]

Exactly.

And Grenell states that he never heard about it at all. It can't both be the case that Grenell never heard about it and that the IC had heard of it but deemed it uncredible.

OK, so Grenell's tweet, the day before, starts off with "I never heard this...."
What, exactly, is he saying he never heard? Remember, it's the day BEFORE Trump's tweet, so it can't possibly be responding to Trump.