Sen. Risch Defends Trump’s Disclosure of Classified Information To The Russians and Demands The Prosecution of “The Traitor” Who Leaked The Information

images-1440px-Jim_Risch_official_portraitOne of the most conspicuous aspects of the controversy over President Donald Trump’s sharing information with the Russians was the virtually complete silence of defenders on the Hill.  Faced with yet another scandal GOP members distanced themselves from Trump.  Most senators declined to support Trump’s disclosure of high sensitive Israeli intelligence.  The one exception was Idaho Sen. Jim Risch.  Risch made headlines in not only supporting the widely denounced disclosure of the intelligence but he called on the government to find and prosecute the person who disclosed the information.

The disclosure of Trump to the Russians has been criticized as likely jeopardizing the very life of the spy inside of the Islamic State.  Yet when asked by Wolf Blitzer if it was “right thing to do,” Risch responded “Yes, Presidents have done this regularly.”  That is true, presidents do declassify information when they deem it in the nation’s interest. However, the concern described in the article was that Trump was boasting and that the disclosure of the specific intelligence was not necessary to discuss the general threat of computer bombs on airlines.  Indeed, the White House indicated that Trump was unaware of the source of the intelligence. Of course, one of the precepts of dealing with classified information is not to make assumptions on sources and proceed cautiously before making disclosures for this very reason. Usually a president will raise his intention to disclose classified information with his staff and particularly the country that shared the information.

While completely exonerating Trump for the disclosure, Risch called for the head of the person who caused the embarrassment: “There’s a weasel here and the weasel is not the president of the United States. It’s the traitor who disclosed these facts to the Washington Post. I wish you’d go out and interview the Washington Post and ask ‘em to disclose who that is.”

While national security employees are largely unprotected as whistleblowers, many view the leaker as exposing a serious breach in both protocol and intelligence.  The casual disclosure of highly classified information can itself be a threat to national security.  As noted above, the disclosure was reportedly made as part of a boast by Trump about the great intelligence that he receives.  Risch later added on the PBS New Hour:

“The real story here is there’s a weasel here. They betrayed their own country, they betrayed their families and their neighbors, and when you disclose classified information … it is an act of treason. It’s unfortunate we can’t get that person identified, but he or she should be identified and treated as any treasonous person would be.”

Risch blamed “this anti-Trump fervor that the national media has, to try to make him look bad every time he turns around. This was a good act that he did, not a bad act. But there was a bad act here. Tell us who did this so we can put him in jail.”

I do not believe that this controversy is simply a result of anti-Trump forces.  Experts from across the political spectrum expressed shocked over Trump’s disclosure to the Russians.  Having said that, Trump has clearly alienating many in the intelligence community and the Justice Department.

Whistleblower protection laws exempt many people who work in the national security area.  Nevertheless, many believe that this leaker exposed a President who was portrayed as impulsive and dangerous in his handling of intelligence.  People tend to despise or lionize leakers based on their agreement with the purpose of the leak.  All leakers tend to violate disclosure or classification laws.  The leaker of the Pentagon Papers would also presumably be viewed as a “traitor” by Risch even though that leak is celebrated as disclosing false information on the Vietnam War.

For years, many have argued for protections to be extended to intelligence official. If this leaker believed that Trump could not be trusted with national security information, the disclosure was justified in the eyes of many.

What do you think?



178 thoughts on “Sen. Risch Defends Trump’s Disclosure of Classified Information To The Russians and Demands The Prosecution of “The Traitor” Who Leaked The Information”

  1. What do I think? I know that there are legitimate lines within the government to disclose the perceived breach of intelligence to that could evaluate it legitimately and if that body agreed with this leaker, they could deal with it to accomplish two good things. They could advise the president to act more wisely in the future if he was remiss and they could also save America from losing face among it’s allies.
    No Turley, there is only one reason to leak to the WAPO which is to sabotage the president at the expense of America’s best interests. This scum weasel should be found out and prosecuted.

  2. Hillary porked a dog back her high school days. That is classified material. I got the info off of Cloud 9. There was no “leaker”. If it on Cloud 9 and I let the rest of you know about it then it is ok because things on Cloud 9 may be classified but revealing things from Cloud 9 does not make one a leaker or a traitor.
    I agree with this Risch guy.
    What did Trump tell the Russians? If Israel was the source to America then is Israel real mad?
    Maybe Trump told the Russians something which will protect them from a terror act.

    The comments on the blog today are not focused on the actual event. You do not know what he told the Russians and do not know if it was good to tell them or bad to tell them and you worry that an ally is pissed. Jeso.
    I vote for The Donald on this one. If I had known Hillary had porked a dog in high school then I would not have voted for her. It was a mistake.

    1. Don’t even try to match your tired wit with the Squeekster – she will always prevail. She is beloved and highly respected on this blog – even if often we all disagree on various topics – whereas you “sir” are like a cockroach – a disgusting troll only tolerated because Turley believes in free speech apparently even for odious insects.

      1. autumn, You and Squeek are mostly opposites politically, but both of you are civil, witty, gracious, and vital assets. Way to have Squeek’s back.

        1. Thanks Nick! I’m not always civil, but I do try to be most of the time. =)

  3. The bottom line here is that Trump is an infantile, megalomaniac, with some serious issues of self worth. Typically people who spend their entire lives boasting of how ‘everything’ they are, are those who are most insecure. Trump is not Presidential material, not smart enough, not intelligent enough, and simply can’t keep that big fu*#ing fish mouth closed. Perhaps that is his best quality, he openly parades how he simply has to go.

    1. issac – what are the Constitutional requirements to be President? Does Trump have them? If he does, then he is Presidential, if elected.
      Dude, buy that American Civics book and read it cover to cover before you comment on politics again. You have to get a grip on the Constitution and government in the USA.

      1. Paul,
        Give the guy a break, that whole constitutional thingy has not even been on his radar for the last 8 years.

            1. mespo – this has gone on longer than the mourning of Queen Victoria.

  4. Let’s ask the impeccable and resolute James Comey,

    if President Donald Trump had any “intent.”

      1. The Warren Commission told us that Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy.

        I wonder what the respectable, strong, stable, unassailable and beyond reproach, “deep state” operative,

        Robert Mueller, is going to tell us.

          1. Given the entrenched, preconceived beliefs that “the fix is in”, then anything that Mueller does, any conclusions he reaches, can be freely discarded by those who hold to those beliefs.
            Very handy, and really objective way😏 of prejudging performance and outcomes.
            As seen in some of the comments here, it really doesn’t matter what he does or what he concludes.

        1. George….,
          -I think “who killed JFK” will be outside of the scope of Mueller’s
          investigation, so I don’t think he’ll tell us anything about that.😒

          1. The Warren Report was arguably the greatest fraud perpetrated against the people in American history. Mueller is likely charged by the “deep state,” the American chapter of global communism, with perpetrating a fraud against the vote of the American electorate in the 2016 election and, therefore, President Trump. If there is not going to be a hanging, you don’t need a hangman.

            Comey and the FBI have been investigating candidate and President Trump since July, 2016.

            If the investigation is not complete now, the FBI is incorrigibly incompetent and must be dissolved and reformed; it must be prosecuted. America needs a “special investigator” to investigate the FBI.

      2. Thanks Steve, an excellent link – almost a sister link to the one I posted in another thread yesterday,

        I agree with COLEEN ROWLEY that Trump is actually keeping, or trying to keep his campaign promise of improving relations with Russia and that that is a significant part of why Trump is having so many problems with leakers and the DNC not giving up on its RussiaGate fantasy and the MSM and so on.

        We’ll see where it goes. Paul Jay brought up the oft repeated idea that Trump may use “another war”, such as with Iran, to do an end run around the impeachment effort, but Rowley, while not disagreeing, didn’t exactly jump on it.

        The other notion I found interesting was Rowley’s point about how all the data the NSA and other agencies are keeping on people, usually at the behest of the President, is coming back to bite the political elite and not so much the little guy. The irony. Of course, it has to happen when the President in question is trying to do something worthwhile..

  5. now is the time for the Trump administration to start the indictment of Hillary and the Wieners with the criminal e mails. he has to put pressure on the democrats and this woman. She knows where all the bodies are buried.

    1. Republicans may be more concerned with getting Pence the head job. Talk about trying to choose the better of two evils.

    2. Unless the jury is packed with people posting to this blog, there would never be a conviction. The only motivation for the “criminal emails” accusations, was to knock Hillary out of the Presidency. That plan succeeded.

  6. Professor Turley, who “classifies” material in the U.S. government if not the President? Do bureaucrats tell

    the President what he can and can’t see? Is the cart before the horse?

    What exactly did Hillary do, having 30,000 official e-mails on her bathroom server, many of which contained

    classified material according to the ex-FBI Director, James Comey, and during the debate:

    “…There’s about four minutes between the order being given and the people responsible for launching nuclear weapons to do so…”

    – Hillary Clinton


    Clinton, Oct. 19:

    “The bottom line on nuclear weapons is that when the president gives the order, it must be followed. There’s about four minutes between the order being given and the people responsible for launching nuclear weapons to do so. And that’s why 10 people who have had that awesome responsibility have come out and, in an unprecedented way, said they would not trust Donald Trump with the nuclear codes or to have his finger on the nuclear button.”

    1. I would bet that there are a great many highly classified programs withing the federal government that have not been revealed to Trump, and probably won’t be.

      As for the famous 30,000 emails, I have not seen evidence that ANY of them had been leaked to the Russians. As I understand it, they were intra-departmental correspondence. The question of classification of any of them is debatable. Remember – the Secretary of State is the ultimate classification authority for correspondence within the Department of State, much as Trump is for the entire executive branch.

  7. Drain the swamp of idiot elites and msm hacks who are at the most primitive developmental level despite having had an “education “

  8. Oh well, Trump bombed Syria for a ratings boost, I mean for the children, I mean to hurt ISIS which USGinc. supports!

    1. There is no one, but no one, as slimy as Joe Lieberman. He brings deep meaning to bottom of the barrel. Even Hillary has difficulty keeping up. He will be PERFECT to figure head up the FBI.

          1. Apparently Lieberman works at the law firm that represents Trump.There is the connection.How un-swamp like.

  9. Special Counsel is far different then an Independent Special Prosecutor.

    I missed this distinction as the news broke.

    Special Counsel, as I now understand it, is still within the DOJ, while a Independent Special Prosecutor operates outside of the DOJ.

    Huge difference.

    1. “While Mr. Mueller remains answerable to Mr. Rosenstein — and by extension, the president — he will have greater autonomy to run an investigation than other federal prosecutors.

      As a special counsel, Mr. Mueller can choose whether to consult with or inform the Justice Department about his investigation. He is authorized to investigate “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump,” according to Mr. Rosenstein’s order naming him to the post, as well as other matters that “may arise directly from the investigation.” He is empowered to press criminal charges, and he can request additional resources subject to the review of an assistant attorney general.” NYT

    2. Not this case. they gave Mueller the same unrestricted powers as a Special :Prosecutor. With his mandate he is Special Counsel, Investigator and Prosecutor and then some.

      1. Not the case. If you think Mueller’s going to be analyzing sperm on blue dresses, you read the wrong faux news. Scope will be defined by the DAG, and prosecution has to be approved by the DAG. Big difference.

    3. I think I heard somewhere that the law authorizing Special Prosecutors had expired, and the current position is called Special Counsel. An interesting difference would be if Trump tries and/or succeeds in getting the Special Counsel fired.

  10. What do I think?: I think the leaker is a patriot who recognizes that Trump is ego-driven, not patriotism-driven, that he was showing off for the Russians by telling them all about what our sources have learned, including details that could easily cause the plants to be identified, thus placing their lives in danger. I also think that he doesn’t listen to or appreciate the importance of what can and should be disclosed and to whom and the reasons why, and that the leaker did the right thing. Trump either doesn’t appreciate the significance of leaking code only details to the Russians, or they’ve got a hold on him. The results are the same regardless of the reason. Hopefully, the plants got out before the Russians made a few calls, but the damage to US credibility cannot be fixed so quickly. Maybe not until after he leaves office, one way or another. To other potential leakers I say: “you go, girl”. Citizens have the right to know just how dangerous Trump is. It’s to the point that the Republicans cannot ignore the daily crises any longer.

    My family and I have scheduled some vacations this summer, for which we will be flying. I’m truly frightened for our safety, because our allies in the Middle East will no longer be as likely to share information about risks with us because Trump cannot be trusted. We know terrorists are scrambling for ways to take out airplanes because they can kill more people at one fell swoop. One of our flights will be into and out of Washington, D.C.. Can’t fail to go–major graduation in our family, We may need tranquilizers. It’s an additional risk factor that shouldn’t be there, and it’s all his fault. What right does he have to show off at the expense of my family’s peace of mind?

    All of this was foreseeable. It’s clear that Trump ran for President for ego purposes, and no other. He understands the prestige, the place in history and the power, but he is completely clueless about the responsibility that goes with all of these things. Neither he nor his children have ever served in the military or held any kind of public office. They’ve never done anything that could be called patriotic, like volunteering to help veterans, working for the Red Cross–nothing in this vein. Rather, Trump avoided military service. Trump has demonstrable emotional problems–his egotism is just a cover up for his fundamental insecurities as a person. In his world-view it’s conquer or be conquered. A fundamentally insecure person is dangerous when he has access to critical secrets and the power to use military force. He trusts only his family members because they are dependent upon him financially. He hungers for praise and adulation, and lies as a matter of course, including about easily-disproven things that really aren’t important in the big picture: like claiming he had the largest electoral college victory in history, and that he had the largest inauguration crowd. It’s important to understand that these things are critical to him because of his emotional problems– he must be seen as “winning”, even if he must tell whopper lies. He is simply not fit to be President.

    1. All this crap “is clear” to you, because you are simply a partisan, and have bought into all the hysteria. It isn’t clear at all to other people, such as myself. I once supported Hillary Clinton, but I allow myself to think new thoughts, based upon the facts and evidence then available.

      I stopped supporting Hillary when the email server crap came out, because while I tolerate a crook, I can;t tolerate a complete imbecile, which is what she was when she decided to set up her own server. Sooo, you see, I don’t require perfection in the people I support. There are facets of Trump’s personality that get on my nerves, but compared to the run of the mill politicians, he is a breath of fresh air.

      Your OPINION of him is just that, an OPINION. And as such, that doesn’t mean it “is clear” to everyone else. It is just clear to you. But I don’t see from your past comments that you really do much besides parrot the opinions of others. Garbage in. Garbage out.

      For example, have you really asked yourself if Hillary, and other politicians, “hunger[] for praise and adulation, and lies as a matter of course, including about easily-disproven things that really aren’t important in the big picture.” Because I think they all do. A certain amount of narcissism is required to run for office in the first place.

      If Hillary had won, would you be saying the same things about her? Or Bernie. What does he need 3 houses for??? My goodness, he is an old fart, and how is he going to keep up 3 places. If he had won, would you be saying things like that about him. I doubt it in both case. Trump’s flaws are just magnified to you, because you don’t see things clearly. Your partisanship has blinded you..

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. “I once supported Hillary Clinton, but I allow myself to think new thoughts, based upon the facts and evidence then available.”


        How dare you react to new information!!

        1. I know! I am such a piece of work!

          BTW, I could use some “new thoughts” here, because I got a new toy in today, and like typical male stuff, it has all kinds of wires, and holes, and cables and stuff. I think it must satisfy some kind of primitive male libidinal urge to stick cables in multiple holes, without even giving them proper names.

          If anybody here has a Behringer Vamp3, is it okay to hook it up straight to an amplifier??? Because one hole says “phones”, and the other holes are two of them, and the picture says use the right one, but crap, why just use one of the holes???

          I used the “phones” hole, but it was as loud as all get out.

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

          1. Squeeky – I find there are usually videos online to help assemble anything. 🙂

            1. Thanks! All the ones I found just give you samples of the sounds. I found an 18 page manual in English, instead of the short multi-lingual one they had with the device. Maybe that will explain more. I will read it, and see how to make it sound better. I bet I am going to have to go thru the Aux Input on my amp, instead of the hole thing where I plug my guitar in.

              That’s what I did on my Amplifii to make it work.

              Squeeky Fromm
              Girl Reporter

                1. Not sure Tulsi wants to leave dem party or give up her house seat at such a young age for a long shot.

                  1. Bernie will be pushing 80 but he is mentally fit unlike the orange one.

                    1. Honolulu is a heavily democratic city. She might not as an independent. Vermont is a haven for independents.

              1. I would go for it (Bernie/Gabbard) even though, much to my surprise,

                Sanders doesn’t fare too well either when it comes to Israel and the middle east. Jill knows quite a bit about this darker side. Also, having watched Sanders capitulate till flat on his face with Hillary, (and subsequently not offer a bill for Single Payer because he says it would distract from the Democrats) has sobered me somewhat.

                But you can’t have everything.

                1. BB and Autumn,

                  Bernie, no way. Trump ditched his voters values. Bernie told his voters to stuff their values. Any person who demands you give up your values and vote for another person who is antithetical to those values is a very bad person. He will sheepdog you again, count on it. don’t follow any person who tells you your vote or your values don’t count. That’s really evil.

                2. “Sanders doesn’t fare too well either when it comes to Israel and the middle east. Jill knows quite a bit about this darker side. Also, having watched Sanders capitulate till flat on his face with Hillary, (and subsequently not offer a bill for Single Payer because he says it would distract from the Democrats) has sobered me somewhat.”

                  Israel’s a problem for Bernie, and no one called him on it last year, surprisingly. I wouldn’t have voted for him if he’d been the Demo nominee, and you’ve nailed it with regard to his “capitulation”: in the primary, Hillary’s not qualified to Hillary would make a great president not six months later, for example. I think the party’s too indebted to its benefactors and the consequences of trying to win at all cost, but maybe he’d be less restrained on an independent run, knowing he can’t win a Democratic primary for now-obvious reasons. I thought he was working on a single-payer bill though:


                  Did he end that campaign?

                  1. Steve, I don’t know about that bill. As to the other points, Bernie is a war monger. He had the chance to go as an independent candidate when Queen Jill said he could take the top spot on the Green party. Instead, he stayed Democratic. He told his voters not to fight for their votes and not to live their values. How will he bring change? I just don’t see it.

                    No more saviors. We do this as citizens because the powerful don’t want anything but power.

                    1. Wouldn’t running on an independent ticket reduce Bernie’s need for shepherding?

                      And if not Bernie, how about Gabbard/Teachout? I love the thought of femme fatales having power over the old school cronies in Washington. 🙂

                    2. Steve, I don’t see how it would. He can say, oh this 3rd party isn’t viable, back to the Democrats.

                      I’ve read some interesting things about the other possible condidates. I don’t think I would vote for them either.

                  2. Nader Rips Sanders and Democrats For Putting Single Payer On Back Burner


                    It’s quite a laugh if you do a Grep (or a Google or a duckduckgo) on the query, “Bernie Sanders withdraws Single Payer bill”

                    You get back a history of Sanders going back and forth, back and forth since around 2006 or so, on Single Payer. Put’s it on, Takes it off, Puts it on, Takes it off – Hilarious.

            1. She ran twice and lost both times. I don’t know but I would say anyone but Hillary. She ran a bad campaign. Suppose Warren is the favorite but I think Amy Klobuchar is going to work really hard along with Kirsten Gillibrand.Both of them are young and would contrast well to the elderly Trump if he is still around around. Will Bernie be too old?

              1. I agree. The Democrats will pick a younger face. Maybe the ones you mention, maybe somebody else. It is impossible to guess who might be a Republican candidate then. Will Trump last that long? — there is reason to think he won’t.

          1. It’s a good thing there isn’t any incompetence or lies in the White House right now…..

      2. Are you proud of a “President” who brags about grabbing womens’ genitalia, or brags about the size of his penis? How about someone who brags about how smart he thinks he is, or who discloses the most highly confidential secrets this country has to an enemy, just to show off? How about refusing to pay carpenters who did custom carpentry work for one of his casinos? These are things this person actually did. Let’s not forget that when Dumpster was bragging about his genital grabbing to that all -important celebrity interviewer, Billy Bush, Melania was either just about to or had just given birth. He’s putting tic tacs in his mouth because he just can’t restrain himself from kissing women who are attractive. He wants to impress Billy Bush, so he brags about grabbing bushes. What does that tell you about this man? He wants the Russians to think he’s smart and powerful, so he blabbers about top secret information. He either didn’t remember or didn’t care what information was appropriate to disclose. Still doesn’t. He hires Flynn and grants him access to top-secret information because he won’t listen to Sally Yates or anyone else. After all, she’s female, and not attractive enough, apparently, to have her crotch grabbed. Fine person, isn’t he? Weren’t Lincoln, FDR and George Washington just like him?

        You say this is just narcissism. No–habitual lying for the purpose of self aggrandizement is mental illness. The need for constant affirmation is mental illness. The underlying root cause is low self-esteem. The President of the U.S. is supposed to be first and foremost a patriot, which means putting the country first. Dumpster isn’t. He didn’t run for president out of patriotism–it was out of the need to win the highest prize possible–Presidency of the United States of America. His failures to date are historic, and we’re not even 4 months in. He is a complete failure because he’s unfit. His promises were bogus–we’ll make Mexico pay billions to build a wall; we’ll have better health coverage for everyone, pre-existing coverage and lower premiums. Not going to happen. Even though he’s unfit, he could squeak by if he listened to the smart people who try to advise him and just stuck to the scripts they write for him, but his ego requires him to ad lib, to his own detriment. He makes liars out of his spokespeople by undercutting the stories they give out. All of his failures are the fault of the media–right? He’s just a victim of a “witch hunt”–right? Not right.

        No, Mrs. Clinton is not an imbecile. She is smart and patriotic. She stuck with her husband after he publicly humiliated her. We now know, with certainty, that both Benghazi and the e-mail flap were all politically-motivated. You still believe it however. Your fake yellow hair tells more about you than you realize.

        1. “Fake yellow hair”? WTF? I agree with you “Natacha” that HRC is not an imbecile – she is a cunning person backed by the Deep State – a Globalist who will NOT put this country first. Pro TPP, selling uranium to Russia for Clinton Foundation $$, pushing conflicts with Syria and Russia. Some patriot!

          Can someone please send her back into the woods??

        2. The more you comment, the more you prove how much your partisanship blinds you to reality. Trump may have TALKED about grabbing genitals, but Bill Clinton did much more than talk. Bill Clinton actually grabbed women’s genitals, and then stuck cigars in them!

          Your :”smart and patriotic” Hillary, not only stayed with the cigar-stuffing lech, she lied, said he didn’t do it, and enabled him to keep on doing it. YET, you aren’t mad about that. Ohhhh noooo. Hillary is just wonderful!

          You see, if one person does a gross thing, and it doesn’t make you mad, and then a person of the other political party only talks about doing an arguably less gross thing, and you get super irate about it, up in arms about it, rabidly drooling nutz about it – – – then it isn’t the gross thing that pisses you off. It’s the political party, which just as I said above, you are sooo partisan that you are blind to reality.

          You are not some arms-length purveyor of independent intellectual thought. No, you are just a partisan shill, on the low intellectual level of the Moron Maxine Waters, who candidly admits that if Hillary fired Comey that would be peachy, but an impeachable offense if Trump does it. But at least, the drooling hag Waters is honest enough (or dumb enough) to not try to put a pretty face on it.

          Quit pretending that you are using your brain here. Because you aren’t.

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

          1. Can’t deny you bleach, can you? Why do you buy into a standard for your looks dictated by others? Answering that question explains why you are vulnerable to seeing Dumpster as something other than the unfunny joke that he is. See–it’s falling for the image thing, rather than developing standards for yourself. BTW: most fake blondes look stupid. The yellow of their fake hair color clashes with their skin tones, and the ubiquitous black roots look just awful. Brown eyes with fake yellow hair is just too ugly to look at. Maybe that’s why Ivanka disguises her brown eyes with green contacts. My point is: why do this to yourself? You don’t look better.

            More to the point: the difference between Bill Clinton, and JFK and his father, for that matter, cheating on their wives is that they didn’t brag about it, weren’t proud of it, and they didn’t publicize it because they don’t have the low self-esteem issues that Dumpster has. They didn’t see it as anything to brag about. They also loved their wives and children. At the end of the day, their indiscretions were a private matter between them and their wives, and only became public knowledge due to third parties putting out the information for their own selfish purposes. In Clinton’s case, it was to hurt him politically. In JFK”s case, it was to sell books. Dumpster made his sexual assaults a public matter, and is proud of what he thinks is the power he holds to assault women and get away with it. Plenty of women confirm that Dumpster has groped them. He cheated on Ivana, which is public record.

            1. Now you are dissembling, trying to provoke me, and making up laughable distinctions so that you can justify your personal prejudices. You would not have liked Trump regardless of any of this, simply because he is a Republican. But, that seems sooo shill-like, that you scrounge around digging for some justification so that you can pretend to yourself and others that you actually have some sort of principles. But you don’t.

              Plus, you really think Presidents cheat on their spouses without the staff and Secret Service knowing what it going on??? And half the frigging world???


              Talk about openly strutting your slut, I mean, strutting your stuff.

              Squeeky Fromm
              Girl Reporter

              1. Squeek, “openly strutting your slut” LOL Hey, I know you were thinking about law school, but I think you are a super talented wordsmith (smithette?) Maybe consider an MFA in writing?

                  1. Go under une Plume, and you won’t stop laughing. They tickle.

        3. Natacha – FDR had at least one mistress, maybe more, as did his wife. Eleanor seems to have had both male and female lovers. The press covered up the fact that FDR was handicapped and his and her affairs.

          1. Yeah, back in the good old days, when presidents could fool around, and nobody was the wiser.

    2. Becomes more apparent as each day passes. i had no idea he was this incompetent.

    3. You can’t be a left winger and a patriot to the USA. One supports the Constitution the other supports a foreign ideology usually either National or International Socialism. .

  11. The issue is whether Sen. Risch’s position is correct under the particular circumstances of this incident. The answer is that it is not.

    1. “The answer is that it is not.”

      That’s a far cry from opinion, so why do you believe yours is the correct answer?

      1. The person or persons who leaked the fact of Trump’s disclosure did not commit “treason” as a matter of law. Sen. Risch’s comments were a product of anger rather than analysis.

          1. I have not seen anything suggesting that Trump violated any laws. My inquiry would be to determine whether we have an agreement with the source of the intelligence that imposes restrictions on its publication or other use and, if so, whether what was disclosed to the Russians violated that agreement.

            1. Thank you Mike. I would also be concerned if an agreement was violated. The question I would have then for the so called whistle-blower (leaker); if the President is not breaking a law, is it his/her duty to leak to the public classified information that was lawfully disseminated in a non-public forum?

        1. You’re right, of course, Mike. Where are those two witnesses to the overt act? The leaker was not a traitor in the constitutional sense of the term, merely a felon with betrayal of his country in his heart. Pretty close.

          1. “The leaker was not a traitor in the constitutional sense of the term, merely a felon with betrayal of his country in his heart. ”


            1. “Poppycock”

              So the leaker was a traitor in the constitutional sense of the term.

              Got it.

            2. The Presidient has the power to decide what is classified and change same. Congress wrote up Title 50 USC that way.

        2. Wow anger is now an excuse for commiting a felony? Give me a break. Stupidity has reached new heights …I get to betray my country because I couldn’t control my emotions? Maybe Risch needs a safe spot and some diapers.

    1. Everything going on right now reminds me of the following story:

      No, I don’t believe Trump thinks he is Jesus, but I do think his every step is being monitored to make it his last. The reason the D.C. swamp is such a dangerous place is that nothing is said or done on the record that is not intended to become public knowledge. People rise to the top of this swamp’s food chain because they have avoided the traps that put them on record for things that were never meant to be made public. In walks President Trump who has no reputation in the swamp, has not had to maneuver around the traps and who is a direct threat to the swamp.

      Who knows what truly happens among the swamp critters? What investigative reporter is going to have the courage to enter the swamp, maneuver around and get to the truth. Short of video, audio and maybe documents, the rest of this is the swamp being the swamp.

  12. When the leaker that leaks leaks leaks about leaches, they’re heroes. When they leak leaks about about –you– they are traitors. Why they would leak leaks about you is the puzzle. What a strange world it is. So quite obviously, the trick is to get them to leak all the good leaks about you all leaked out before you lynch them for leaking.

    1. Damn your programmer working overtime for nickel raise?

    1. The loud mouth compromised someone’s identify and endangered their life. It is a big deal to them and their family.

      1. The loudmouth, as you call him, did not compromise anyone’s identity. He passed along intelligence, as all Presidents do during their respective terms, to another ally fighting Islamic terror. It’s a two-way street. We both supply and receive intelligence, all of the time, and your apparent complete and total lack of understanding, in this regard, is astounding. It’s a common occurrence. If you wish to assign blame and responsibility, for the grave and mortal danger now facing the individual and/or individuals who have managed to infiltrate these terrorist groups–accessing secrets and potential plots–i strongly suggest that you blame the person and/or persons who decided to leak this vital information to the world. That person and/or persons should, instead, be the target of your misplaced rage. Unfortunately, examining this occurrence, in any sort of a realistic and unbiased manner, does not fit with your agenda of bashing Trump. Carry on.

        1. Maybe the buffoon should try attending the intelligence briefings on such matters. That is if his attention span is long enough.

        2. What he leaked that he shouldn’t have was the LOCATION of the terrorist cell that was working on the laptop bomb. That little detail was critical, and was code only–a step beyond top secret, because this detail limited the number of people who could be plants in ISIS, making it easier to take them out. It may well be that ISIS took out the entire group, as insurance. That’s what our allies are afraid of, and why this detail was not supposed to be disclosed, especially to Russians.

          Stop arguing about what Presidents do all of the time. None of them ever disclosed code only information before, and Trump only did it to show off for the Russians–to show what a big shot he is, how much he knows, etc.. The leaker knew this detail was not supposed to be disclosed. I have no doubt Trump was told that this shouldn’t be disclosed. He either didn’t listen, didn’t appreciate the importance, or the Russians have something on him. Reason doesn’t matter–the outcome is the same. Trump is dangerous and can’t be trusted with the most secret of top secret information.

          1. So tell me something. How did you get the information? Did you know it was classified? Do you a clearance and a need to know? Hmmmmm. Sound like a felony to me.

            Now to directly atttack your stupidity. In the country there is only one individual who can declassify and disseminate information and that individual is named President. Read the Title 50 USC on National Security…. Congress passed it and gave the operation of same to National Security Agency and placed them IN the Executive Branch under control of the President who is the boss of bosses

            No law was broken.

      2. The only one saying that is you, Frank. Everyone agrees that no “methods and means” were discussed merely that the info originated in Israel. Israel’s population is 8.4 million.

          1. and that is supposed to mean what? Some flake reportere is now in charge of national security? What a joke REJECTED.

      3. Thank you Frank for bringing some balance and perspective into this situation. The delegates elected this candidate for president. It was supposed to stop the status quo. Can anybody please show me one positive contribution from President Trump for the American people?

        And please, whoever replies save the labels for another debate. I love capitalism. I love money. But I do not kill, destroy, lie, manipulate and ignore other’s needs to satisfy my love for capitalism and money. Equilibrium in life is indispensable for a happy productive life. That is why I like Frank’s comment. Every event has two sides to be considered. And we must not be blind to either.

        1. Frank appears to be quite the “labeler” yet you find his comments to be “balanced” and to bring “perspective”. What would the label be for that line of thinking? But, I’m curious as to what particular bit of information in his referenced article — other than the clickbait headline — indicates that said allegedly-passed information endangered the life of a presumably-anonymous spy? How does that work?

        2. “Can anybody please show me one positive contribution from President Trump for the American people?”

          Gorsuch was a solid pick for SCOTUS. Other than that, I got nothin’.

          1. Drew:

            73% drop in border arrests; MS-13 on the run. S&P are record highs -pre-Comey; Housing sales through the roof; Business optimism at historic levels; Allies willing to renegotiate unfavorable trade deals. law & order getting better press. How’s that for a start in 100 or so days?

        3. Easy. He’s an outsider and he gave us some one to vote for to keep the Clilnton Crime Cartel out of the
          White House. Can’t get much better than that for starters. Now speaking of love for money. THAT would be Hillary and bag lady Huma.

      4. When you say “loud mouth” I just know you mean Hillary when she and Obama compromised security at Benghazi resulting in the death of an ambassador and three U.S. security personnel then went on the “Lie Tour” with Susan Rice as Obama vacationed in Sin City.

      5. Compromised what? Still waiting. So far…nothing. Except ….more stupidity.

  13. It’ssss a three ring circus! America the Bannana Republic. Making South American governments look good again!

    America is a country of whack-a-doodles!

    I hear the anthem of Benny Hill show!

    1. Only less than half. The rest are just regular citizens who have no representation and struck a blow against Hi Ho’s Ding Dongs and got rid of them at least for a while. Remember when your taxes don’ t get cut and your COLA starts with point zero zero, and your medical system starts costoing a other trilion a year. in tax funds.. You could have continued voted No to the Left at the local level….Nov 8th we won…but it’s not a one shot deal.

      We’re still on the right track. Multi party system of government being employed again. and regaining OUR Constitutional Republic instead of a one party set of one size fits all jackbooters

      No deals with foreign ideologies and no deals with former citizens who promote that socialist nonsense.

      and that’s the view from the moderate center where we apply the prnciples set down by the founders including ‘self government.’

  14. This may be duplication, but:

    NYT: Trump Asked Comey to Jail Journalists Who Report on Leaks

    MAY 17, 2017

    “Meanwhile, The New York Times also reported that President Trump asked James Comey during the February 14 Oval Office meeting to consider imprisoning journalists who report on leaks of classified information. In a statement, Bruce Brown of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press wrote, “No president gets to jail journalists. Reporters are protected by judges and juries, by a Congress that relies on them to stay informed, and by a Justice Department that for decades has honored the role of a free press by spurning prosecutions of journalists for publishing leaks of classified information.””

      1. And in Mexico:

        AMY GOODMAN: Mexican journalist Javier Valdez, speaking in 2011 in New York. The Committee to Protect Journalists said Valdez “combined the grit of the most battle-hardened reporter with the [elegiac] soul of a 19th century Romantic poet.” On the same day of his assassination, another journalist, Sonia Córdova, was also shot and wounded in a separate attack that left her son dead. Since 2000, more than 100 journalists have been murdered in Mexico. A recent report by the International Institute for Strategic Studies says Mexico endured the second most conflict deaths of any country in the world last year, with a staggering 23,000 people killed amidst Mexico’s so-called war on drugs. Mexico was second only to Syria, where 50,000 people were killed in 2016 by the ongoing war. The third, fourth and fifth most dangerous countries were Iraq, Afghanistan and Yemen.

        (You’re welcome, Steve. We need whistleblowers and leakers — like never before.)

        1. “Mexico was second only to Syria, where 50,000 people were killed in 2016 by the ongoing war. The third, fourth and fifth most dangerous countries were Iraq, Afghanistan and Yemen.”

          That’s an incredible statistic. Our war on drugs really works!

      2. Funny. i read that in exactly the opposite manner. But then you have to be on the receiving end of the results of ‘real’ leaks and not hiding in the rear with the rest of the REMFs. Unless of course you meant to say ‘had’ instead of ‘have.’ Otherwise say hi to your programmer RoboClone

Comments are closed.