Russia bounty intelligence 'may have been' in Trump brief but wasn't deemed 'actionable'
Source: NBC
Russia bounty intelligence 'may have been' in Trump brief but wasn't deemed 'actionable,' senior Republican says
WASHINGTON The Trump administration told Republican members of Congress on Monday that intelligence about potential Russian bounties may have been included at some point in the President's Daily Brief but not conveyed to President Donald Trump in a formal threat briefing because it wasn't yet "actionable," the top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee said.
"I believe it may have been" in the written President's Daily Brief, or PDB, Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, said in an interview.
Referring to the president, McCaul said: "I think the way the process works is that he gets briefed about three times a week on sort of actionable, credible items. And the decision was made that this was not at that point in time a credible, actionable piece of intelligence. And if at any point it did, it would be raised to his attention."
Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/russia-bounty-intelligence-may-have-been-trump-brief-wasn-t-n1232498
Still have not got their stories straight.
Botany
(70,490 posts)n/t
brush
(53,764 posts)that repugs spin out of their mouths but means absolutely nothing. It does fill up the airwaves and takes up time to say though while at the same time it takes time for the listener to go "huh?", and understand that it's bullshit because it sounds like actual words and it takes time from the interviewers time which doesn't allow he/she to reclaim his/her time or allow another panelist to get in some actual non-word-salad-o-speak to refute it because all of the air is being filled and used by word-salad-o-speak that sounds like words but don't mean anything. Understand?
Oops,sorry, that's all the time we have, folks.
Botany
(70,490 posts)Trump knew that Vlad/Russia was paying to kill Americans, he did nothing about it, and when caught
he and the White House said that he was never briefed "on it" even though he had been briefed "on it."
But I still think he should have gone for a number of other reasons including the fact that he and Kush-Turd
went to make money on the C-19 Pandemic with their H.C.Q. and their own C-19 test kits instead of getting
the nation and the world ready for and set up to fight the virus
.
brush
(53,764 posts)the spineless repugs who won't do their duty to the nation to get an actual Russian agent out of the White Housea Russian asset who has known since March of 2019 when Bolton personally told him. The info was of course in the PDB but he doesn't bother, or can't, read that.
He should be gone but the repugs are circling the wagons still to protect him. McEnany said when she took over the press sec. position that she would never lie to the press. But that's all she's done on this matter.
...yes yes yes amigo...Some people spend so much and their valuable attention
on the surgery of CNN and etc.-style reporting...Ain't really all that much there
to pick apart...And what's with the items showing interviewer, subject both
2 small squares on the left of the screen, and the other 4/5ths on a big globby
close-up of Frumpo trying to look concerned..?
LastLiberal in PalmSprings
(12,582 posts)Why don't they just rename it the "Once in a While When He's Not Tweeting or Golfing or Talking With Putin Brief" )?
ancianita
(36,023 posts)to 3 times a week from the previous three years of 1 to 2 times a week, and maybe not even that.
It's not about what others decide. He's always been able to decide to make the PDB meeting a daily priority or not but he could still read it in digital form every day if he choses.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)ancianita
(36,023 posts)classified briefing daily. No one else but him decides what "the right thing to do" is.
So their excuse is a death star load of bullshit.
Botany
(70,490 posts)ancianita
(36,023 posts)SergeStorms
(19,193 posts)it's actionable. Nothing goes into the President's Daily Briefing unless it's been completely vetted, therefore actionable. Republicans think no one but themselves have ever been in positions of power before.
ancianita
(36,023 posts)brush
(53,764 posts)That new press sec. McEnany promised the press she'd never lie to them when she first took the job.
Well, that's all she's done since she took the job.
C Moon
(12,212 posts)"Still have not got their stories straight."
You'll know when they get their stories straight, when McConnell backs it.
ArizonaLib
(1,242 posts)WTF?
RockRaven
(14,959 posts)The White House didn't say initially that "it wasn't actionable," they said " he wasn't briefed on it. "
Big fucking difference, and the lie betrays their consciousness of guilt.
louzke9
(296 posts)Did the Russians offer bounties, yes or no? If they did, then that itself ALONE is ACTIONABLE. Do we actually have to have dead bodies as proof before we respond? HELL NO! Were we waiting for videos of money changing hands first or expecting to see Wanted Dead posters plastered on buildings in Afgan villages?
Arkansas Granny
(31,514 posts)sprinkleeninow
(20,237 posts)Dint raygun answer something empty like that always?
agingdem
(7,845 posts)Last edited Tue Jun 30, 2020, 07:58 AM - Edit history (2)
Iran-Contra.."out of the loop"..he was a former director of the CIA...Bush was the loop..
Rhiannon12866
(205,220 posts)ancianita
(36,023 posts)No one else has the authority to act on a military matter but civilian command close to him, and not without consulting the prez, and if he's not available or won't take someone's concern from the Pentagon seriously, it's still all on him.
RDANGELO
(3,433 posts)It it wasn't actionable, why would the put in the PDB? In any event, this contradicts what has been reported that there were briefings, and even that John Bolten briefed him on it. So we have multiple people reporting to multiple news organizations over nothing. I doubt it.
unblock
(52,196 posts)denbot
(9,899 posts)Im sure that would have gotten his attention.
Nasruddin
(752 posts)Sounds a lot like George Bush & Condoleeza Rice.
https://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/11/911.investigation/
'President Bush said Sunday that an intelligence memo he read shortly before September 11, 2001, contained no "actionable intelligence" that would have helped him to try to prevent the 9/11 attacks.'
no_hypocrisy
(46,080 posts)Same result.
This shows that another 9-11 could get past Trump. * was briefed on OBL months before 9-11 happened.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)Why, he's the 7-11 of 9-11s.
cstanleytech
(26,283 posts)that were killed because you decided not to do anything.
Midnightwalk
(3,131 posts)Don't forget Bush
Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US
[link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Ladin_Determined_To_Strike_in_US|]
The President's Daily Brief (PDB) is a brief of important classified information on national security collected by various U.S. intelligence agencies given to the president and a select group of senior officials. On August 6, 2001, the Central Intelligence Agency delivered a President's Daily Brief to President Bush, who was vacationing at his ranch in Crawford, Texas.[2][3]
President Bush's response of "All right. You've covered your ass." has been erroneously linked to this PDB. This response, however, came from a separate PDB linked to Bin Laden from several months earlier. During 2001, CIA analysts produced several reports warning of imminent attacks by Bin Laden and al Qa'ida. Senior officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney and staff from Donald Rumsfeld's office at the Department of Defense, questioned whether these reports might not be deception on the part of Al-Qaeda, purposely designed to needlessly expend resources in response. After reevaluating the legitimate risks of these recent reports, CIA analysts produced a report titled "UBL [Usama Bin Laden] Threats Are Real". It was after this report that the president gave that now-infamous response.[4]
[link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Ladin_Determined_To_Strike_in_US|]
Same excuse only the particulars are different.
But I don't believe the excuse. There were ulterior motives.
For Bush there were members of his cabinet who were aching for war with Iraq. PNAC (btw does anyone remember Bill Kriston before he was rehabilitated) advocated for regime change starting in 1998.
[link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century|]
Yeah remember back when Bill Kristol wasn't "rehabilitated"? I do. I just don't remember him being rehabilitated.
In Trump's case he has been allied with Russia for years. From memory:
The debt. The stolen election. The private Oval Office interview with only Russian press. Lifting sanctions. Interfering in Ukraine. Withdrawing troops from Syria. Many private meeting with Putin. Refusing to impose new sanctions. Inviting them to G7. Telling the pentagon to withdraw 9500 troops from Germany.
I'll add in the July 4th meeting of republican senators in Moscow.
I can go back further in time as well.
There is a long republican tradition of supporting causes against America's interest.
Maybe 2020 is the year we begin smashing bad traditions.
SergeStorms
(19,193 posts)He's worried Trump won't grease the right palms if there's another major shooting war. Only Kristol and his old PNAC buddies can truly be trusted with the safety of the United States, you know?
I have no faith in, nor do I trust, Bill Kristol for an instant. His efforts to dethrone Trump are only to bolster his own self-interests. Guaranteed.
Midnightwalk
(3,131 posts)Like Bolton.
The same bad actors who influence policy keep coming up. They screw up, get washed through lobbying jobs or worse pundit jobs, and then show up again.
Trump is the gangrenous pustule on the cancerous tumor that is the Republican Party.
keithbvadu2
(36,775 posts)regnaD kciN
(26,044 posts)Really? What part of "Presidential Daily Brief" don't you understand, Mikey?
Maeve
(42,279 posts)SergeStorms
(19,193 posts)If there's anything within the PDB his aides believe "will upset him" they don't tell him about it, either. Therefore, anything to do with Putin that wasn't complimentary to Trump's ego, would never have been discussed. Trump would have a hissy-fit, and he'd never believe it anyway because he thinks he and Putin are simpatico in every respect.
It sure would be nice to have a grown-up in the Oval Office again, wouldn't it?
Grokenstein
(5,722 posts)Will it involve the Underpants Gnomes?
Solly Mack
(90,762 posts)wishstar
(5,268 posts)New AP reports Bolton briefed Trump in 2019 (but was classified so Bolton can't confirm) about bounties and $500,000 in cash was found by our military in hands of Taliban determined to have been paid by Russians. There are enough credible indicators of the likelihood Russia was behind bounties to certainly not consider rewarding Russia.
Lithos
(26,403 posts)No longer that he did not see it, but that he couldn't do anything about it.
But that too falls flat on its face as the action was for Trump to do something.
Next phase of deniability will be that the issue was already resolved by Trump through a back channel with Putin.
Next phase of deniability is that it's Obama's fault because he created the situation.
gab13by13
(21,304 posts)that John Bolton personally briefed Trump on March 2019. It was again put in the PDB Feb. 27th 2020.
soothsayer
(38,601 posts)Actionable options.
beachbumbob
(9,263 posts)will be their wasn;t any pictures to convey to trump in the PDB so he couldn;t comprehend. PDB isn;t filled with info that isn;t actionable
gab13by13
(21,304 posts)from the AP that John Bolton personally briefed Trump on the bounty in March of 2019.
beachbumbob
(9,263 posts)truthisfreedom
(23,145 posts)There was no money in taking action on this, so he did nothing.
chriscan64
(1,789 posts)The real one, not the cartoons he has them make. The inability and/or unwillingness to do so is unacceptable. "He's unconventional" does not pass muster here. A computer programmer that puts WWE action figures on his desk is unconventional. One that doesn't learn the programming language or write any code is quickly dismissed. "Unfit for office" is not just something we say because he is in the other party.
Even though it's grounds for removal, that is the minor issue. It is a far more serious matter when the security apparatus of the nation is leery about sharing intel with the president out of fear he will blurt something out on twitter or worse get on the phone with Putin and bugger up the whole thing. Again, "threat to national security" is not just some slogan we toss around.