You can still read, I'm assuming?
“At no time were any intelligence sources or methods discussed, and no military operations were disclosed that were not already known publicly.”
Sh!t show continues
- Thread starter herdfan429
- Start date
You can still read, I'm assuming?
“At no time were any intelligence sources or methods discussed, and no military operations were disclosed that were not already known publicly.”
And you can still read in assuming so read the wapo story and you will see that the two don't mesh
I'm guessing no one here has seen Biff's Twitter. He just admitted to sharing classified info to the Russians.
Let me "share some information with you"....
The context of what was actually shared isn't stated. A lot of assumption with little specifics related to the information's classification . Nice try dtard.
Yehh FDR and Eisenhower shared classified info with the Russians as well.
In addition, you don't know what in the hell he told them. Good gravy.
The actual crime(s) being committed matters not to Democrats. When Killary had all her email activity leaked, they weren't concerned about any of the actual scandal, rather they were just concerned with who leaked the info.
With this, they couldn't care less who leaked the info. Instead, Dems are worried about the actual scandal.
double standards, all. day. long.
And the same thing could be said about the repubs currently.
The issue with this is once again it shows trumps lack of judgement. Trump released classified info to the Russians which he wasn't briefed on.
But it's the medias fault
Last edited:
And that's entirely different than what you said.
It's truly sad that somebody who is college educated struggles so much with reading comprehension.
What you just quoted and what you originally said leaves ton of huge holes which makes your original comment false.
Exactly. That is why BC's first comment, which was full of shit, is not verified by the quote he posted from the article.
But, let's look at the assumption:
1) legitimate source
2) cheeto's history of Russian relations
3) cheeto's history of responding to every part of the tiniest criticisms
4) the administration's history already of manipulating words and trying to hide intent
5) cheeto not refuting the part which is the focus of the article, while still responding to other parts of it
The assumption isn't much of a stretch.
