The Glade 4.0

No, actually you're not. I know you guys like to think you are, but you're not. Being a citizen doesn't qualify you to have an opinion, it just permits you to do it whether it's a good idea or not. The nature of a free country is that we allow people who are too arrogant to know better to have opinions.

I, on the other hand, am in fact in a position to have an opinion informed by the facts of how classification and security clearances actually work. I, you know, get paid for that stuff.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Uh huh.

You're better than us uninformed plebes. We totally lack any semblance of critical thinking and intelligence.

And we're the arrogant ones. Right.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Your way of speaking to others still points you out as being a **** douchebag though. I had a much more vitriol filled post here, until it dawned on me that someone like you is not worth it.

_________________
Darksiege
Traveller, Calé, Whisperer
Lead me not into temptation; for I know a shortcut

Like, I don't see how it's all that relevant in the first place whether Trump actually broke the law or not. Like I said before, impeachment is a political exercise. He doesn't need to have broken any laws in order to be impeached, and even ironclad proof that he did break the law does not mandate he be impeached. Further, federal laws are so expansive and all-encompassing that if the narrative requires Trump to have broken a law, I'm sure at least one can be found. That's not what's at issue here, what's at issue is public perception. Whether or not Trump broke the law is irrelevant, he can break all the laws he wants if he has the public and by extension Congress on his side. What's important is whether or not Trump has committed "wrongdoing" that the public actually cares about, or can be made to care about. That's why the liberal media is so laser fixated on this, if they can hammer the appearance of corruption into the perception of maybe two-thirds of the country they can make him a lame duck less than a year into his term that even the GOP won't dare work with and who can't take drastic actions without Congress dropping the impeachment hammer on him. I don't think it's working too well but it's also definitely not killing the liberals in the opinion polls as of yet. Around 40% of Americans currently have a favorable view of the DNC, this is down from 44% in December 2016 and that small drop is despite several serious, hilarious missteps like Pissgate. Who knows if it will eventually start working if they just keep hammering on it?

To put this in comparison, when Obama was the President-elect, he sent a delegation to New Zealand to negotiate the entry of US warships into their territorial waters in spite of the fact that they maintain a nuclear-free zone. This was a very blatant violation of the Logan Act and a felony. The GOP tried to make an issue out of it. But because this was not "wrongdoing" that anyone really cared about, it went nowhere. Obviously, the government of New Zealand is far more concerned at that point about what Obama thought than what Bush thought. It just didn't make sense, at least from the standpoint of how the public views it, to actually prosecute and jail Obama for it.

"Its not the crime, its the cover-up."

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

You have a really high opinion of your opinion.

_________________
Darksiege: You are not a god damned vulcan homie.

Yes. Someone who has training in creating, managing, and classifying material is more qualified to have opinions on the subject than "you plebes". Most Americans have never held any type of security clearance, let alone handled classified material.

_________________
"If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me." - Alice R. Longworth

"Good? Bad? I'm the guy with the gun." - Ash Williams

I swear not more than 2 years ago we had a similar discussion where several members of this community declared Obama guilty of treason for revealing an ally's classified data to Russia.

And so a special council is appointed and the investigation isn't being quashed. No chilling effect.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

A NEW CHALLENGER HAS BEEN APPOINTED!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... 90353a4e6e

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Goddamnit Llama-man. >.<

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

You missed it by ->that<- much.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

I love you man!

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Mutual Mano. Its mutual.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Critical thinking and intelligence by itself is not sufficient. That's hardware. You need the software as well, and you don't have it. Just like your nonsense about not blowing up the runway with Tomahawks - you don't have the information to make an evaluation. Your critical thinking, furthermore, sucks, because when presented with the information you ignore or reject it to avoid having to alter your conclusion.

Yes, you are in fact the arrogant ones. You think your natural gifts empower you to evaluate matters that other people have spent decades learning about.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

I have natural gifts! ... wait for it...


...wait for it ...


There! Smell that?

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

We did, and some of the rest of us pointed out that this does not meet the Constitutional criteria for treason, so I don't know what you're ***** about.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

I just have a higher opinion of my opinion than I do of most of the Glade. When I'm around my peers, I consider my opinion to be about equal.

Most of you guys, though, don't qualify as my peers any more than I, or the rest of you, are shuyung's peer when it comes to networking, or Coro's when it comes to electricity. The matters we discuss here are different in nature but not in complexity.

I basically give you guys free classes in a lot of **** and all you do is ***** that I tell you you're wrong. Stop **** being wrong so much if you don't like it.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

That's fine, you can think I'm a douchebag all you want. None of that affects my qualifications in the slightest. I earn my qualifications in the sight of people you can't hold a candle to, and they aren't going to come ask your opinion of me. I've got 3 little girls and one all grown that think I'm pretty **** awesome. I'm no more of a douchebag than Coro, for example, I just post more, and I give no more of a **** what you think.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Who is *****? I'm just making a observation.

That's hardly a ringing endorsement, and I LIKE Coro.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Agreed.

Since you are new here I'll point out that some posters have ALWAYS lived and died with technicalities. Since the President has authority to declassify information, technically he cannot disclose classified information. If he tweeted out the nuclear launch codes and was called out for disclosing classified information, some posters would jump to the technicality that he did not send classified information.

Doesn't change the fact that it was classified until disclosed and it is regardless if it was intended to remain classified.

_________________

I'm confused here. So... we are supposed to trust McMaster's take on the situation over this "anonymous source"? In the report, the anonymous source accuses Trump of sharing sensitive facts with the Russians. McMasters says the report is false. Then Trump and other white house officials come out and say that facts were shared with the Russians. So, it seems the report wasn't false. Not as a whole.

And yet... we're supposed to trust McMaster, who has been proven wrong, over the anonymous source? I think it's pretty clear at this point that the anonymous source is at least somewhat credible. If they were just making **** up, the administration could have easily just denied the whole thing as nonsense.

I don't recall if the article used the word "sensitive facts" but regardless, "sensitive" is not a synonym for "classified". either way, McMaster was in the room and put his own name and the specific names of other senior officials out there as witnesses. The "anonymous source" may or may not have even actually been there.



McMaster hasn't been proven wrong, and he did deny the whole thing as nonsense - aside from the fact that a meeting with Russian officials did occur and facts of some nature were discussed. Some of those facts may have been "sensitive" but that does not contradict anything McMaster said. The article is attempting to make it appear that the discussion of any fact at all with the Russians other than those obviously available in public. This is silly; what do you think happens in private diplomatic exchanges? All of the suspicion so far has been generated by playing fast and loose with the lack of a general public understanding of how "classified", "sensitive", and "facts" are not the same thing in this context.

Furthermore, the Russians have their own intelligence means and sources. They are likely aware of many of the "classified" facts that we are aware of by their own means. If the Russians are already known to be aware of some fact anyhow, discussing it with them is hardly giving anything away to them, and whether its classified or not is irrelevant. There has been no mention of this in any of this discussion. Once again, we are obsessing over the domestic implications and behaving as if a major foreign power has no ability to act on its own. In fact, the Russians may have a better intelligence operation than we do in the Middle East since they are notably less recalcitrant about either spending money or the risks of embarrassment if they're exposed.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Your observation did not include the full circumstances of the matter you're referring to. Let's not play innocent, shall we?

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."