Do You Trust Our Intelligence Agencies?

[ProudLib72]

They are a lot more in the know than we are, and we know that tRump is under serious investigation for collusion. I would think that our intelligence agencies would be very careful how the handle classified info around tRump. I would also think they would want to maintain good relationships with other countries' intelligence agencies. However, we have seen on several occasions how our intelligence agencies have handed over intel that tRump has not been able to keep from blabbing.

So tRump meets with Pootie at the G20... alone. Does this seem strange? Maybe Germany bugged the meeting room. Who knows? But even if they did, would they share the recordings with our intelligence?

Obviously, none of us are going to be aware of the lengths our intelligence may be going to in order to catch tRump. (This info might appear in a book fifty years down the road.) But the disregard they've shown in providing classified info to blabber mouth in chief tRump makes me circumspect. Is anyone else feeling uncomfortable?

[Historic NY]

1. 17 agencies vs the KGB.......

which does Trump trust?

[ProudLib72]

5. 17 agencies basically told him he didn't win the election on his own

Pootie was there to reassure him of his win.

[NanceGreggs]

10. Precisely. n/t

[Takket]

2. 45 and putin didn't meet alone. there were cabinet members from both sides present

There are things about our intelligence agencies I distrust, but compared to the mob clan destroying our country, they are paragons of virtue

[ProudLib72]

4. I just tried to look up who was in there

The only thing I could find was what we already knew: Tillerson and no US journalists. Maybe I just didn't look hard enough?

[MiniMe]

6. I think it was Tillerson and Lavrov with them, plus the translators

So it wasn't a huge contingent, and only one cabinet member on each side

[Buns_of_Fire]

12. From all reports, this is correct.

"Only Trump, Putin, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson were present for the talks, which lasted two and a half hours, accompanied by two translators. Neither Tillerson nor Trump have previous foreign policy or national security experience, and the decision not to include National Security Adviser HR McMaster – a veteran security officer – at the talks raised some eyebrows."
http://www.france24.com/en/20170707-first-trump-putin-talks-g20-secret-closed-meeting-hamburg

I'd heard that Rump insisted on a small meeting (to cut down on the dreaded LEAKS, probably), but the article implies that Pootie is just fine with that setup:

(snip)

Michael McFaul, a former US ambassador to Moscow and former president Barack Obama’s adviser on Russian affairs, expressed concern that McMaster was being left out of talks.

"Putin likes small meetings. This means WH (White House) is letting Kremlin dictate the terms of this meeting. HR [McMaster], at a minimum, should also be there," he wrote on Twitter.

(/snip)

Donnie figures his golden tongue and the presence of "Smilin' Rex" Tillerson is all he needs to close the deal. It's a pity that Putin isn't one of the gullible investors in one of Donnie's properties.

[marylandblue]

3. Really it's all about Mueller now

He's got all the data, the subpoena power, the ability to grant immunity to the small fry. When he comes out with his report or his indicments, we will know all there is to know.

[MedusaX]

7. Before Comey was fired he went to New Zealand for a 5 I's weekend meeting...

To obtain various audio/video/transcripts in person..
That was to ensure that no foreign intelligence related to *45/Russia would be intercepted by WH or Pompeo{CIA}...

IC {with the exception of Pompeo} as a whole are not emotionally tied to any administration.
What they do is, for the most part, based on long term operations which are -for lack of a better word- proactive in nature.

Do they have a certain level of obligation to provide *45 with security related info.. sure
But these are people who deal with the most sensitive Classified intelligence info in the world.
Clearly, these are the least likely people to overshare information with people who have loose lips and deep affection for unfriendly authoritarian leaders.


IMO, I think the Israeli intelligence fiasco was probably a 'test' which *45 failed miserably.
Regardless of what the true circumstances were...
everyone learned just how dangerous *45 was as a result of his actions.

The international intelligence community recognizes that the alliances which exist amongst various countries' agencies are of great value and none are likely to put the future of an alliance at risk by oversharing with *45 & klan.

IMO/FWIW...

[ProudLib72]

8. Ok, you've allayed my fears a little

It crossed my mind that Israel could have been a test. There were Britain and our submarines, too.

The two things that set me off were the selection of Chris Wray and this meeting with Putin. Maybe I've been falling for the alarmists' cries, though.

[Igel]

9. Mostly.

They fall into group-think where they don't consider possibilities because they're somehow a priori "wrong".

Take the breakup of the Soviet empire. It wasn't foreseen. It was assumed that the constituent countries would somehow be brought back into line. Then it was assumed that hardliners would keep the USSR together. It was assumed that while the USSR had some financial problems and dissent the economy was good enough to hold together for decades and the dissent could be managed.

Some dissident voices in the US said otherwise. In 1992 I watched a AAASS panel in which a bunch of PhDs said they'd been right about the breakup. A young upstart PhD slammed them each in turn. "I pointed out this was a very real possibility in my monograph"--and he had it, and pointed out that on page 350 (or whatever) in endnote 93 to chapter 18 it said, "The highly improbable possibility that the USSR's economy is worse than we suspect can't be entirely ruled out." It was all like that--the State Department people (relying on high-confidence intelligence), the non-government researchers. The intelligence was whacked. When the grey-hairs said that nobody saw it coming, he was ready to shove a list of references written by people *not* invited to the high-powered panel or denied tenure right up their butts.

It's like that on lots of issues. Every group is closed-minded in some ways.

As for classified intelligence going to Trump and then to Putin so we all know about it, it remained classified until somebody leaked it. They got somebody into ISIS? Well, Putin wouldn't tell. But the NYT did. It was Israeli? Well, Trump didn't know; but the NYT told us. The blabbing is less Trump and more the leakers.

It's the intelligence services job to keep Trump abreast. Otherwise he'll still decide, but based on bad info. Then the intelligence folk in the name of keeping the US safe hurt the US. They should do their jobs; the only reason they have the authority to do their jobs is because of the executive authority invested in the President. It's the same as under Obama.

[Blue_Roses]

11. But when you have a president who is cozy

with a country that is not trusted and one that has a long, hostile, tumultuous relationship with the US, I'm guessing that the IC knows how to do their job. And their job is to the U.S., not the president.

This is an unprecedented situation we (US) are in now. Never in the history of our country have we had to worry about a sitting president like this. He's belligerent, hot-headed, and irrational. He's is careless and downright ignorant to how a democracy works.

And this has nothing to do with Obama.