Republican leaders rebuke Trump's attack on our intelligence people

[The Barbarian]

A growing number of Republicans are openly scoffing at President Donald Trump's handling of national security issues, with the Senate's number two Republican bashing Trump's criticism on Wednesday of the heads of the US intelligence community ahead of a vote on a measure disapproving Trump's Middle East policy.

The rebuke from Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, the Senate majority whip, came as the GOP-led chamber prepared to vote on an amendment breaking with Trump's plans to pull the US military away from Syria and Afghanistan.

"I don't know how many times you can say this, but I prefer the President would stay off Twitter -- particularly with regard to these important national security issues where you've got people who are experts and have the background and are professionals," Thune said. "I think in those cases when it comes to their judgment, take into consideration what they're saying. ... I think we need to trust their judgment."

Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and other top intelligence officials had appeared before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday and contradicted Trump on a range of issues, including North Korea, Iran and ISIS.

Trump issued a string of tweets Wednesday morning in response, defending his foreign policy decisions and taking issue with their statements, saying in regard to Iran that the intelligence officials were "extremely passive and naive."

The same day Trump's intelligence appointees appeared before the Senate, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced an amendment rebuking the President's push to withdraw troops from the Middle East.

"It would recognize the dangers of a precipitous withdrawal from either conflict and highlight the need for diplomatic engagement and political solutions to the underlying conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan," the Kentucky Republican said Tuesday.

Asked about the amendment, Thune said, "I think it reflects ... that we want to trust our military leaders when it comes to some of these decisions."
Top Republicans pushing back on Trump's national security moves - CNNPolitics

 

[Oldmantook]

A growing number of Republicans are openly scoffing at President Donald Trump's handling of national security issues, with the Senate's number two Republican bashing Trump's criticism on Wednesday of the heads of the US intelligence community ahead of a vote on a measure disapproving Trump's Middle East policy.

The rebuke from Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, the Senate majority whip, came as the GOP-led chamber prepared to vote on an amendment breaking with Trump's plans to pull the US military away from Syria and Afghanistan.

"I don't know how many times you can say this, but I prefer the President would stay off Twitter -- particularly with regard to these important national security issues where you've got people who are experts and have the background and are professionals," Thune said. "I think in those cases when it comes to their judgment, take into consideration what they're saying. ... I think we need to trust their judgment."

Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and other top intelligence officials had appeared before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday and contradicted Trump on a range of issues, including North Korea, Iran and ISIS.

Trump issued a string of tweets Wednesday morning in response, defending his foreign policy decisions and taking issue with their statements, saying in regard to Iran that the intelligence officials were "extremely passive and naive."

The same day Trump's intelligence appointees appeared before the Senate, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced an amendment rebuking the President's push to withdraw troops from the Middle East.

"It would recognize the dangers of a precipitous withdrawal from either conflict and highlight the need for diplomatic engagement and political solutions to the underlying conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan," the Kentucky Republican said Tuesday.

Asked about the amendment, Thune said, "I think it reflects ... that we want to trust our military leaders when it comes to some of these decisions."
Top Republicans pushing back on Trump's national security moves - CNNPolitics

There is essentially no difference between Dems and Repubs; basically two sides of the same coin.

 

[disciple Clint]

A growing number of Republicans are openly scoffing at President Donald Trump's handling of national security issues, with the Senate's number two Republican bashing Trump's criticism on Wednesday of the heads of the US intelligence community ahead of a vote on a measure disapproving Trump's Middle East policy.

The rebuke from Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, the Senate majority whip, came as the GOP-led chamber prepared to vote on an amendment breaking with Trump's plans to pull the US military away from Syria and Afghanistan.

"I don't know how many times you can say this, but I prefer the President would stay off Twitter -- particularly with regard to these important national security issues where you've got people who are experts and have the background and are professionals," Thune said. "I think in those cases when it comes to their judgment, take into consideration what they're saying. ... I think we need to trust their judgment."

Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and other top intelligence officials had appeared before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday and contradicted Trump on a range of issues, including North Korea, Iran and ISIS.

Trump issued a string of tweets Wednesday morning in response, defending his foreign policy decisions and taking issue with their statements, saying in regard to Iran that the intelligence officials were "extremely passive and naive."

The same day Trump's intelligence appointees appeared before the Senate, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced an amendment rebuking the President's push to withdraw troops from the Middle East.

"It would recognize the dangers of a precipitous withdrawal from either conflict and highlight the need for diplomatic engagement and political solutions to the underlying conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan," the Kentucky Republican said Tuesday.

Asked about the amendment, Thune said, "I think it reflects ... that we want to trust our military leaders when it comes to some of these decisions."
Top Republicans pushing back on Trump's national security moves - CNNPolitics

Pompeo interview on fox yesterday

Pompeo commended Trump, saying it was his administration that made the progress between the U.S. and North Korea possible.

“I think it took President Trump to convince Chairman Kim that of all the commitments he made this past June in Singapore, now it’s time for my team and all of the United States government to work with the North Koreans to execute that and to deliver on our commitment to denuclearize that peninsula.”

He said Kim has told the U.S. he's "prepared" to denuclearize.

Pompeo also spoke about the threat of Iran's nuclear missile program.

“Having chance to be the director of the CIA, I think the intelligence supports that Iran presents a real risk and that they have the capability to enrich nuclear material ... they have increasing capacities and continue to work towards improving their missile program.”

He noted that just last week Iran attempted to launch a “space launch vehicle” which could help the rogue nation deliver on its controversial missile program.

"These are all components that lead us to a place where they could one day have a system that threatens America, and President Trump’s made clear we’re not going to tolerate that. We’re not going to let Iran end up where North Korea is a today, and we have a set of policies in place to prevent that.”

Pompeo also said Trump was expected to make a "significant announcement" at his State of the Union address next week on the Islamic State terror network and U.S. troop withdrawal from Syria.

“In spite of the enormous progress we’ve made and the success we’ve had... the threat from radical Islamic terrorism is real and we need to continue to do all that we can to make sure there’s not a resurgence of ISIS.”

Pompeo confident of Trump-Kim summit in February, tells Fox News he's helping lay groundwork

 

[disciple Clint]

A growing number of Republicans are openly scoffing at President Donald Trump's handling of national security issues, with the Senate's number two Republican bashing Trump's criticism on Wednesday of the heads of the US intelligence community ahead of a vote on a measure disapproving Trump's Middle East policy.

The rebuke from Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, the Senate majority whip, came as the GOP-led chamber prepared to vote on an amendment breaking with Trump's plans to pull the US military away from Syria and Afghanistan.

"I don't know how many times you can say this, but I prefer the President would stay off Twitter -- particularly with regard to these important national security issues where you've got people who are experts and have the background and are professionals," Thune said. "I think in those cases when it comes to their judgment, take into consideration what they're saying. ... I think we need to trust their judgment."

Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and other top intelligence officials had appeared before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday and contradicted Trump on a range of issues, including North Korea, Iran and ISIS.

Trump issued a string of tweets Wednesday morning in response, defending his foreign policy decisions and taking issue with their statements, saying in regard to Iran that the intelligence officials were "extremely passive and naive."

The same day Trump's intelligence appointees appeared before the Senate, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced an amendment rebuking the President's push to withdraw troops from the Middle East.

"It would recognize the dangers of a precipitous withdrawal from either conflict and highlight the need for diplomatic engagement and political solutions to the underlying conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan," the Kentucky Republican said Tuesday.

Asked about the amendment, Thune said, "I think it reflects ... that we want to trust our military leaders when it comes to some of these decisions."
Top Republicans pushing back on Trump's national security moves - CNNPolitics

'Not that big' a deal

Yet other former officials described the commotion over the president's tweets as overblown.

"This is not that big a thing," said Steve Bucci, a visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation who previously served as an assistant to former U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

"Frankly, I see both sides kind of doing what they get paid to do," he told VOA. "The intel community is supposed to be the factual analyzers and the president picks the policies he wants to follow.

"They clearly have failed to convince him that their position is correct. And now everybody is going nuts because he's not treating what the intelligence community says as holy writ," Bucci said.

Bucci also said it would be a mistake to view Trump's tweets as an indictment of his intel chiefs as opposed to messages meant for Iran and North Korea.

"He's trying to move both countries in directions that are beneficial to U.S. interests," he said. "He's not shutting down the intel community."

Not personal

Other former officials agree that despite a history of public hostility between Trump and U.S. intelligence officials – stemming from the community's public assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 election –the president's tweets were likely not intended to further inflame any feud.

"Trump's critical tweets about the new worldwide threat statement, however, probably have less to do with general antipathy than with how the statement includes inconvenient truths that clash with incorrect assertions by the administration," Paul Pillar, a veteran CIA officer now with the Center for Security Studies at Georgetown University, told VOA in an email.

Larry Pfeiffer, a 32-year veteran of the U.S. intelligence community with stints as senior director of the White House Situation Room and chief of staff to former CIA Director Michael Hayden, said such tension, in and of itself, is not unusual.

"I can't think of a president of the United States or a policymaker who didn't like what the intelligence community had to say," Pfeiffer said, adding intelligence officials have long seen it as their job to tell truth to power.

But Pfeiffer cautioned that Trump's responses could still take a toll.

"It can publicly affect morale … when the ultimate customer has this kind of attitude," he said. "He's publicly criticized the intelligence community more than he's criticized [Russian President Vladimir] Putin."

"The question for me is, at what point do these intelligence chiefs quit," said John Sipher, a 28-year veteran of the CIA who once ran the agency's Russia operations.

"It is one thing for the president to have differing views," he said. "It is another thing altogether to openly attack or belittle the IC."

Trump Takes Aim at Intelligence Chiefs Via Tweet-Storm

 

[Ada Lovelace]

A growing number of Republicans are openly scoffing at President Donald Trump's handling of national security issues, with the Senate's number two Republican bashing Trump's criticism on Wednesday of the heads of the US intelligence community ahead of a vote on a measure disapproving Trump's Middle East policy.

The rebuke from Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, the Senate majority whip, came as the GOP-led chamber prepared to vote on an amendment breaking with Trump's plans to pull the US military away from Syria and Afghanistan.

"I don't know how many times you can say this, but I prefer the President would stay off Twitter -- particularly with regard to these important national security issues where you've got people who are experts and have the background and are professionals," Thune said. "I think in those cases when it comes to their judgment, take into consideration what they're saying. ... I think we need to trust their judgment."

Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and other top intelligence officials had appeared before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday and contradicted Trump on a range of issues, including North Korea, Iran and ISIS.

Trump issued a string of tweets Wednesday morning in response, defending his foreign policy decisions and taking issue with their statements, saying in regard to Iran that the intelligence officials were "extremely passive and naive."

The same day Trump's intelligence appointees appeared before the Senate, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced an amendment rebuking the President's push to withdraw troops from the Middle East.

"It would recognize the dangers of a precipitous withdrawal from either conflict and highlight the need for diplomatic engagement and political solutions to the underlying conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan," the Kentucky Republican said Tuesday.

Asked about the amendment, Thune said, "I think it reflects ... that we want to trust our military leaders when it comes to some of these decisions."
Top Republicans pushing back on Trump's national security moves - CNNPolitics

I think Trump expects fealty from all, and gives loyalty only when it's personally advantageous. People risk their lives for the intelligence Trump flippantly casts aside on Twitter.

One of my professors is an intelligence scholar was interviewed about Trump's renewed attacks on our intelligence community for contracting him. She state: “Coats’ job isn’t to support whatever the president wants. It’s to say what the president needs to know, based on the intelligence community’s best assessment of ground truth. He did that and deserves props, not insults."

Another noted how Putin would be delighted to provide the intel that is to Trump's liking. Trump gave Putin more presents today...

 

[Ada Lovelace]

Hmmmmm.

Perhaps Trump outrageously mocking his intelligence chiefs on Twitter was a strategy to distract us from how not once, in hours of discussion of security threats, mention the need for a wall along the southern border, which he has portrayed as the single most pressing need facing the country.

 

[The Barbarian]

If there was any doubt that Trump is an idiot or a Russian agent, this removes it.

 

[The Barbarian]

There is essentially no difference between Dems and Repubs; basically two sides of the same coin.

You know of a democrat president who denied what U.S. intelligence agencies have found, and instead believed the story the Russians told him?

Show us that. I don't think there's even been another republican president who did that. So you'll get credit for any kind of president who turned his back on our intelligence agencies and instead believed what the Russians told him.

What have you got?

 

[RDKirk]

I think Trump expects fealty from all, and gives loyalty only when it's personally advantageous. People risk their lives for the intelligence Trump flippantly casts aside on Twitter.

One of my professors is an intelligence scholar was interviewed about Trump's renewed attacks on our intelligence community for contracting him. She state: “Coats’ job isn’t to support whatever the president wants. It’s to say what the president needs to know, based on the intelligence community’s best assessment of ground truth. He did that and deserves props, not insults."

Another noted how Putin would be delighted to provide the intel that is to Trump's liking. Trump gave Putin more presents today...

Having spent 26 years in that business myself, and having served under six presidents, I agree with your professor. A better response--one that I heard often from commanders--was, "I hear what you're saying, but I have reasons to do otherwise."

That works much better from a leader than, "You're wrong."

 

[RDKirk]

You know of a democrat president who denied what U.S. intelligence agencies have found, and instead believed the story the Russians told him?

Show us that. I don't think there's even been another republican president who did that. So you'll get credit for any kind of president who turned his back on our intelligence agencies and instead believed what the Russians told him.

What have you got?

I do know of a case that came out in the media in the 90s. China had provided Pakistan with a type of ballistic missile in a transaction that had been "prohibited" by Congressional law. The existence of that missile in Pakistan required the president to establish trade sanctions on both Pakistan and China.

Every intelligence agency, using its own resources, absolutely confirmed that the Pakistanis had possession of the missile and had incorporated it into their military. That's the part that came out in the media.

The issue was that the US was just establishing major trade relations with China (i.e., setting up schemes to transfer manufacturing capacity from the US to China), so there was big money at stake for the 1%.

The Clinton Administration's response to the intelligence community was: "You are wrong. You don't know for sure they have the missile until they launch one."

Notice that I put that in quotes.

We were gobsmacked. Gobsmacked, I tell you.

I can't imagine Kennedy having said that to the analysts who reported missiles in Cuba.

 

[The Barbarian]

The Clinton Administration's response to the intelligence community was: "You are wrong. You don't know for sure they have the missile until they launch one."

Notice that I put that in quotes.

I notice you didn't give a checkable source. It would be rather surprising, since it was known that Pakistan had ballistic missiles during the Reagan Administration.
https://www.nti.org/media/pdfs/pakistan_missile.pdf?_=1316466791?_=1316466791

What have you got?

 

[RDKirk]

I notice you didn't give a checkable source. What have you got?

If you're interested enough, you can go back to the mid 90s and search for newspaper reports.

It's 9:29 am on a Thursday where I am, and I can assure you I'm actually too busy to put that much effort into it at the moment.

 

[The Barbarian]

If you're interested enough, you can go back to the mid 90s and search for newspaper reports.

It's 9:29 am where I am, and I can assure you I'm actually too busy to put that much effort into it at the moment.

So nothing, then. Just checking.

 

[RDKirk]

So nothing, then. Just checking.

Just the testimony of an old man. I contrived that elaborate story just for nothing.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Just the testimony of an old man. I contrived that elaborate story just for nothing.

Some people only credit testimony of sources that are called anonymous. Having a source called RDKirk doesn't compute to them.

 

[Oldmantook]

You know of a democrat president who denied what U.S. intelligence agencies have found, and instead believed the story the Russians told him?

Show us that. I don't think there's even been another republican president who did that. So you'll get credit for any kind of president who turned his back on our intelligence agencies and instead believed what the Russians told him.

What have you got?

That's my opinion based on my own research. You do your own research.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian suggests:
You know of a democrat president who denied what U.S. intelligence agencies have found, and instead believed the story the Russians told him?

Show us that. I don't think there's even been another republican president who did that. So you'll get credit for any kind of president who turned his back on our intelligence agencies and instead believed what the Russians told him.

What have you got?

That's my opinion based on my own research. You do your own research.

We got it. You don't have a source, and you think maybe if we look we might find something. The usual.

 

[Johnny Slick]

A growing number of Republicans are openly scoffing at President Donald Trump's handling of national security issues, with the Senate's number two Republican bashing Trump's criticism on Wednesday of the heads of the US intelligence community ahead of a vote on a measure disapproving Trump's Middle East policy.

The rebuke from Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, the Senate majority whip, came as the GOP-led chamber prepared to vote on an amendment breaking with Trump's plans to pull the US military away from Syria and Afghanistan.

"I don't know how many times you can say this, but I prefer the President would stay off Twitter -- particularly with regard to these important national security issues where you've got people who are experts and have the background and are professionals," Thune said. "I think in those cases when it comes to their judgment, take into consideration what they're saying. ... I think we need to trust their judgment."

Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and other top intelligence officials had appeared before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday and contradicted Trump on a range of issues, including North Korea, Iran and ISIS.

Trump issued a string of tweets Wednesday morning in response, defending his foreign policy decisions and taking issue with their statements, saying in regard to Iran that the intelligence officials were "extremely passive and naive."

The same day Trump's intelligence appointees appeared before the Senate, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced an amendment rebuking the President's push to withdraw troops from the Middle East.

"It would recognize the dangers of a precipitous withdrawal from either conflict and highlight the need for diplomatic engagement and political solutions to the underlying conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan," the Kentucky Republican said Tuesday.

Asked about the amendment, Thune said, "I think it reflects ... that we want to trust our military leaders when it comes to some of these decisions."
Top Republicans pushing back on Trump's national security moves - CNNPolitics

Trump didn't attack anyone. He was draining the swamp. There's a big difference, get it?

 

[The Barbarian]

Trump didn't attack anyone.

Trump’s Attacks on Spy Agencies Are Called a National Security Risk

Intelligence experts and lawmakers criticize public statements that officials are ‘passive and naive’ on Iran threat
Trump’s Attacks on Spy Agencies Are Called a National Security Risk

 

[Oldmantook]

Barbarian suggests:
You know of a democrat president who denied what U.S. intelligence agencies have found, and instead believed the story the Russians told him?

Show us that. I don't think there's even been another republican president who did that. So you'll get credit for any kind of president who turned his back on our intelligence agencies and instead believed what the Russians told him.

What have you got?



We got it. You don't have a source, and you think maybe if we look we might find something. The usual.

I won't do you due diligence for your. You can keep drinking all your kool-aid. I'll give you one hint among many. Since you seem to implicitly trust our intelligence agencies, Has John Brennan ever lied to Congress?