By Dana Priest and Tom Hamburger
Former senior U.S. national security officials (click here) are dismayed at Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump's repeated refusal to accept the judgment of intelligence professionals that Russia stole files from the Democratic National Committee computers in an effort to influence the U.S. election.
The former officials, who have served presidents in both parties, say they were bewildered when Trump cast doubt on Russia's role after receiving a classified briefing on the subject and again after an unusually blunt statement from U.S. agencies saying they were "confident" that Moscow had orchestrated the attack....
Donald J. Trump was impossible to deal with as a candidate. He was refusing reports from the military and intelligence all during his candidacy and once elected he locke the door of the Oval Office to the intelligence agency.
November 24, 2019
By Kristen Welker, Ken Dilanian and Alexander Jaffe
President-elect Donald Trump (click here) has had only two intelligence briefings since he won the election more than two weeks ago, intelligence sources told NBC News on Wednesday — a much lower number than his predecessors had and fewer even than Vice President-elect Mike Pence.
In the wake of President Donald Trump’s renewed attacks (click here) on the U.S. intelligence community this week, senior intelligence briefers are breaking two years of silence to warn that the President is endangering American security with what they say is a stubborn disregard for their assessments.
Citing multiple in-person episodes, these intelligence officials say Trump displays what one called “willful ignorance” when presented with analyses generated by America’s $81 billion-a-year intelligence services. The officials, who include analysts who prepare Trump’s briefs and the briefers themselves, describe futile attempts to keep his attention by using visual aids, confining some briefing points to two or three sentences, and repeating his name and title as frequently as possible.
What is most troubling, say these officials and others in government and on Capitol Hill who have been briefed on the episodes, are Trump’s angry reactions when he is given information that contradicts positions he has taken or beliefs he holds. Two intelligence officers even reported that they have been warned to avoid giving the President intelligence assessments that contradict stances he has taken in public....
Graham has no right to grandstanding the hearing for political points to push through half-truths to the American people.
Peter Strzok and Lisa Page were wrongly exploited by the Republicans for their own political purposes. I probably should have addressed this a long time ago, but, there are only so many hours in the day.
The "talk" by Strzok is STUPID. There are no complete dialogues known to the American people either and that is why there is an Inspector General. The Inspector General sorts through all the mess, including complaints about superiors and looks to where the law was broken and how it mattered. I do have to say that Peter Struck should have provided a little pride in the work before him realizing Trump could become president, hence, those under him probably saw "a threat" rather than the task of finding facts.
Peter Strzok was a horrible supervisor, that does not make him a bad FBI agent. That is also true of Lisa Page, a lover to Peter Strzok. She was a good agent, but, entertained all the STUPID "talk" by her lover. That dynamic of STUPID TALK is a culture, not the law and it is why some of those under Strzok's supervision took the investigation in wrongful directions.
December 11, 2019
Lisa Page, (click here) the former FBI lawyer who exchanged anti-Trump text messages with another FBI employee, is suing the Justice Department and FBI over the disclosure of those text messages to the media. Her attorneys argue in the suit that the revelation of her text messages violates the Privacy Act, which bars "disclosing a covered record 'about' an individual unless an exception applies or the individual who is the subject of the record consents in writing to the disclosure."
The Justice Department declined on Tuesday to comment on the lawsuit.
About 375 of Page's text messages with former FBI agent Peter Strzok, who led the FBI's probe into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server while she was Secretary of State, were released in December 2017. In the texts, exchanged during the presidential campaign, the two often expressed distaste for Mr. Trump....
Lisa Page is absolutely correct in suing the departments that LEAKED her emails for political purposes. The Republicans had a field day with her and Strzok in the public. She should have been brought before supervisors when those in the Congress and/or White House had objected to the content and context of those emails. This is NOT NORMAL procedure and she is correct.
The Republicans discovered the word, "emails" and continued to push that "evil" content in their days after the election in any why they could. That "email" culture in the US Congress with the Republicans is still alive today as witnessed by Lindsey Graham and his grandstanding.
The American people need to hear from the Inspector General to understand the purpose and procedure for finding wrong doing in the way it matters to the country's national security.
The Inspector General is correct, in that, any and all bias (potential or actual) has to be reported to the court. That does not mean the court would rule differently.
The Inspector General conducts these reviews to rout out corruption of the process. There is no way of turning back the clocks to redo the FISA hearings, but, going forward there will be safeguards/guardrails within the practices of the FBI when seeking FISA warrants.
There was no prosecution of Carter Page and the FBI was correct in suspecting Russian influence with Carter Page because he had/has significant connections to Russia. In fact, Carter Page was being courted by Russia to influence the Trump Campaign. To try to change that TRUTH is a danger to the USA.
The lack of disclosure and the "snowballing dynamic" of the investigation has brevity in realizing the extent Carter Page's innocense in acting against the USA within the Trump Administration was heralded by the FBI. The lack of coordination between the FBI and CIA is either comical or egotistical and it has to be addressed.
Nothing happened to the Trump Campaign and he successfully won the election WITH assistance of the Russian government. Anyone can debate whether THAT FACT has adversely effected the country and the worry by the FBI was warranted.
The flip side of Graham's focus is the question, "Was the FBI properly authorized to end the Russian influence during the elections of 2016?"
The country has a real problem. A man running for office won the nomination of a major party in the USA and continued on to win the presidency of the USA. He did this with help by a foreign power. That is fact. The idea he wanted to repeat that dynamic is the subject of a current process of impeachment. The damage Trump has done to the USA domestically and internationally will never be fully understood or measured, but, it is immense.
The responsibility of the Inspector General is as enormous as that. His truthful facts are important and this hearing will be viewed as yet another step in containing either too much power or not enough power of the FBI in conducting the national security of the USA when it comes to foreign interference in maintaining the efficacy of the USA Constitution.
The fact that Graham has focused on Strzok and his prejudice in STUPID TALK is important to a certain extent, but, is not the entire subject of the Inspector General report. The Inspector General did not exonerate anyone in the chain of command and whether those in the chain of command see themselves as wrongfully held responsible for the FISA warrants is yet to be determined.
Lisa Page obviously believes she was wrongfully used in the public realm as a problem in the investigation. I believe she is correct and any undo and ACTUAL influence by her in the investigation should have been maintained as an internal process of the FBI. She is an American with a life to live and not a celebrity by choice that may welcome public exposure. The USA government and may I say, Donald J. Trump personally should be held responsible for adverse effects of her employ that continues in her life. She should sue Trump in his use of her identity in his politics. She can sue him personally for his exploitation of her.
The Inspector General is correct again, in that, STUPID TALK was not the issue so much as that prejudice moving into the investigation. That should not have happened and the REASON for that has to be determined. If the agents involved in the chain of command felt more threat than empowerment, that has to be explored. They took the investigation into their own hands to some extent and it may be because they were not empowered to carry forward their concerns in a way that empowered their fears for the country. That is a legitimate concern and it should be the concern of Congress and the country.
Donald J. Trump was impossible to deal with as a candidate. He was refusing reports from the military and intelligence all during his candidacy and once elected he locke the door of the Oval Office to the intelligence agency.
November 24, 2019
By Kristen Welker, Ken Dilanian and Alexander Jaffe
President-elect Donald Trump (click here) has had only two intelligence briefings since he won the election more than two weeks ago, intelligence sources told NBC News on Wednesday — a much lower number than his predecessors had and fewer even than Vice President-elect Mike Pence.
A senior intelligence official cautioned that it was too early to gauge the significance of Trump's sparse briefing schedule, given that he is in the middle of his transition process.
But the news, first reported by The Washington Post, will likely fuel critics who've questioned Trump's knowledge of foreign affairs and national security issues....
It is frightening.
February 5, 2019
By John Walcott
Citing multiple in-person episodes, these intelligence officials say Trump displays what one called “willful ignorance” when presented with analyses generated by America’s $81 billion-a-year intelligence services. The officials, who include analysts who prepare Trump’s briefs and the briefers themselves, describe futile attempts to keep his attention by using visual aids, confining some briefing points to two or three sentences, and repeating his name and title as frequently as possible.
What is most troubling, say these officials and others in government and on Capitol Hill who have been briefed on the episodes, are Trump’s angry reactions when he is given information that contradicts positions he has taken or beliefs he holds. Two intelligence officers even reported that they have been warned to avoid giving the President intelligence assessments that contradict stances he has taken in public....
This is proof of how the Trump White House and the Senate Republicans are talking to the American people in "half-truths." Sure, Trump didn't receive briefings about important issues to USA national security BECAUSE HE REFUSED THEM AND THEN LIED ABOUT IT.
Graham has no right to grandstanding the hearing for political points to push through half-truths to the American people.
Peter Strzok and Lisa Page were wrongly exploited by the Republicans for their own political purposes. I probably should have addressed this a long time ago, but, there are only so many hours in the day.
The "talk" by Strzok is STUPID. There are no complete dialogues known to the American people either and that is why there is an Inspector General. The Inspector General sorts through all the mess, including complaints about superiors and looks to where the law was broken and how it mattered. I do have to say that Peter Struck should have provided a little pride in the work before him realizing Trump could become president, hence, those under him probably saw "a threat" rather than the task of finding facts.
Peter Strzok was a horrible supervisor, that does not make him a bad FBI agent. That is also true of Lisa Page, a lover to Peter Strzok. She was a good agent, but, entertained all the STUPID "talk" by her lover. That dynamic of STUPID TALK is a culture, not the law and it is why some of those under Strzok's supervision took the investigation in wrongful directions.
December 11, 2019
Lisa Page, (click here) the former FBI lawyer who exchanged anti-Trump text messages with another FBI employee, is suing the Justice Department and FBI over the disclosure of those text messages to the media. Her attorneys argue in the suit that the revelation of her text messages violates the Privacy Act, which bars "disclosing a covered record 'about' an individual unless an exception applies or the individual who is the subject of the record consents in writing to the disclosure."
The Justice Department declined on Tuesday to comment on the lawsuit.
About 375 of Page's text messages with former FBI agent Peter Strzok, who led the FBI's probe into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server while she was Secretary of State, were released in December 2017. In the texts, exchanged during the presidential campaign, the two often expressed distaste for Mr. Trump....
Lisa Page is absolutely correct in suing the departments that LEAKED her emails for political purposes. The Republicans had a field day with her and Strzok in the public. She should have been brought before supervisors when those in the Congress and/or White House had objected to the content and context of those emails. This is NOT NORMAL procedure and she is correct.
The Republicans discovered the word, "emails" and continued to push that "evil" content in their days after the election in any why they could. That "email" culture in the US Congress with the Republicans is still alive today as witnessed by Lindsey Graham and his grandstanding.
The American people need to hear from the Inspector General to understand the purpose and procedure for finding wrong doing in the way it matters to the country's national security.
The Inspector General is correct, in that, any and all bias (potential or actual) has to be reported to the court. That does not mean the court would rule differently.
The Inspector General conducts these reviews to rout out corruption of the process. There is no way of turning back the clocks to redo the FISA hearings, but, going forward there will be safeguards/guardrails within the practices of the FBI when seeking FISA warrants.
There was no prosecution of Carter Page and the FBI was correct in suspecting Russian influence with Carter Page because he had/has significant connections to Russia. In fact, Carter Page was being courted by Russia to influence the Trump Campaign. To try to change that TRUTH is a danger to the USA.
The lack of disclosure and the "snowballing dynamic" of the investigation has brevity in realizing the extent Carter Page's innocense in acting against the USA within the Trump Administration was heralded by the FBI. The lack of coordination between the FBI and CIA is either comical or egotistical and it has to be addressed.
Nothing happened to the Trump Campaign and he successfully won the election WITH assistance of the Russian government. Anyone can debate whether THAT FACT has adversely effected the country and the worry by the FBI was warranted.
The flip side of Graham's focus is the question, "Was the FBI properly authorized to end the Russian influence during the elections of 2016?"
The country has a real problem. A man running for office won the nomination of a major party in the USA and continued on to win the presidency of the USA. He did this with help by a foreign power. That is fact. The idea he wanted to repeat that dynamic is the subject of a current process of impeachment. The damage Trump has done to the USA domestically and internationally will never be fully understood or measured, but, it is immense.
The responsibility of the Inspector General is as enormous as that. His truthful facts are important and this hearing will be viewed as yet another step in containing either too much power or not enough power of the FBI in conducting the national security of the USA when it comes to foreign interference in maintaining the efficacy of the USA Constitution.
The fact that Graham has focused on Strzok and his prejudice in STUPID TALK is important to a certain extent, but, is not the entire subject of the Inspector General report. The Inspector General did not exonerate anyone in the chain of command and whether those in the chain of command see themselves as wrongfully held responsible for the FISA warrants is yet to be determined.
Lisa Page obviously believes she was wrongfully used in the public realm as a problem in the investigation. I believe she is correct and any undo and ACTUAL influence by her in the investigation should have been maintained as an internal process of the FBI. She is an American with a life to live and not a celebrity by choice that may welcome public exposure. The USA government and may I say, Donald J. Trump personally should be held responsible for adverse effects of her employ that continues in her life. She should sue Trump in his use of her identity in his politics. She can sue him personally for his exploitation of her.
The Inspector General is correct again, in that, STUPID TALK was not the issue so much as that prejudice moving into the investigation. That should not have happened and the REASON for that has to be determined. If the agents involved in the chain of command felt more threat than empowerment, that has to be explored. They took the investigation into their own hands to some extent and it may be because they were not empowered to carry forward their concerns in a way that empowered their fears for the country. That is a legitimate concern and it should be the concern of Congress and the country.
