Looks like the NY Times, not Trump disclosed crucial information to ISIS in Trump/Russia meeting

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
In the NY Times zeal to GET Trump, they identified Israel as the source of our intelligence on airplane bombings, not Trump. They have aided ISIS greatly.

Media May Have Compromised Intel Asset Crucial In The Fight Against ISIS

RYAN PICKRELL
China/Asia Pacific Reporter



Recent media reports may have jeopardized an intelligence asset providing information essential in the fight against the Islamic State.

President Donald Trump shared information provided by an ally with Russian officials about an ISIS terror plot, mentioning the town in which the plot originated, but the president did not reveal intelligence-gathering methods, the name of the country that provided the information, or the intelligence source. The media, however, filled in the gaps.

The New York Times, relying on leaked information from anonymous U.S. officials, revealed that Israel provided the information that Trump shared with Russian officials, narrowing the search field and making it easier for enemies to possibly identify the intelligence asset.

Trump “discussed with the Russians the information obtained by Israel, without identifying the country,” The Wall Street Journal explained, citing two officials with direct knowledge of the events.

“Trump may not have provided enough detail to the Russians to damage that source,” the U.S. officials introduced to the WSJ.

The WSJ decided not to reveal the source was Israel, noting that, “Trump administration officials said disclosing it could damage the two countries’ intelligence relationship and jeopardize operations” against potential threats.

The source was, “the most valuable source of information on external plotting by ISIS,” the WSJ wrote. “The source of information was particularly valuable for tracking Islamic State’s attempts to place explosive devices on commercial airplanes.”

Officials reportedly disagree over the impact of Trump’s revelations. While some suspected that the Russians might be able to identify the source from the information provided, others doubted that Russia will be able to root out the nature of the source from Trump’s comments.

“I don’t see what Trump gave as a leak,” Air Force Colonel James Waurishuk, a former senior intelligence officer, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “That is part of a foreign policy capability and process to share publicly with other countries for whatever reason.”

“If anything, the only real concern is the mention of Israel,” he added.

Russia is unlikely to share information with ISIS, which suggests that without media reports on the alleged leak, the intelligence asset might have never been at risk.

While no direct sources or methods have been revealed, the mention of Israel potentially exposes information essential to keeping this intelligence asset in the field.
 
Last edited:

TarHeelEer

Redshirt
Dec 15, 2002
89,286
37
48
In the NY Times zeal to GET Trump, they identified Israel as the source of our intelligence on airplane bombings, not Trump. They have aided ISIS greatly.

Media May Have Compromised Intel Asset Crucial In The Fight Against ISIS

RYAN PICKRELL
China/Asia Pacific Reporter



Recent media reports may have jeopardized an intelligence asset providing information essential in the fight against the Islamic State.

President Donald Trump shared information provided by an ally with Russian officials about an ISIS terror plot, mentioning the town in which the plot originated, but the president did not reveal intelligence-gathering methods, the name of the country that provided the information, or the intelligence source. The media, however, filled in the gaps.

The New York Times, relying on leaked information from anonymous U.S. officials, revealed that Israel provided the information that Trump shared with Russian officials, narrowing the search field and making it easier for enemies to possibly identify the intelligence asset.

Trump “discussed with the Russians the information obtained by Israel, without identifying the country,” The Wall Street Journal explained, citing two officials with direct knowledge of the events.

“Trump may not have provided enough detail to the Russians to damage that source,” the U.S. officials introduced to the WSJ.

The WSJ decided not to reveal the source was Israel, noting that, “Trump administration officials said disclosing it could damage the two countries’ intelligence relationship and jeopardize operations” against potential threats.

The source was, “the most valuable source of information on external plotting by ISIS,” the WSJ wrote. “The source of information was particularly valuable for tracking Islamic State’s attempts to place explosive devices on commercial airplanes.”

Officials reportedly disagree over the impact of Trump’s revelations. While some suspected that the Russians might be able to identify the source from the information provided, others doubted that Russia will be able to root out the nature of the source from Trump’s comments.

“I don’t see what Trump gave as a leak,” Air Force Colonel James Waurishuk, a former senior intelligence officer, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “That is part of a foreign policy capability and process to share publicly with other countries for whatever reason.”

“If anything, the only real concern is the mention of Israel,” he added.

Russia is unlikely to share information with ISIS, which suggests that without media reports on the alleged leak, the intelligence asset might have never been at risk.

While no direct sources or methods have been revealed, the mention of Israel potentially exposes information essential to keeping this intelligence asset in the field.

Why is the NYT not being treated like Wikileaks/Assange?
 

WVUCOOPER

Redshirt
Dec 10, 2002
55,555
40
31
Why is the NYT not being treated like Wikileaks/Assange?
It's a tough one. One is an American media company, the other is an enemy of the United States that recruits and teaches people how to steal our nations top secrets while he hides in a consulate of an unfriendly regime. Real head scratcher.
 

TarHeelEer

Redshirt
Dec 15, 2002
89,286
37
48
It's a tough one. One is an American media company, the other is an enemy of the United States that recruits and teaches people how to steal our nations top secrets while he hides in a consulate of an unfriendly regime. Real head scratcher.

One leaked classified info jeopardizing a critical source, the other did not.
 

WVUCOOPER

Redshirt
Dec 10, 2002
55,555
40
31
One leaked classified info jeopardizing a critical source, the other did not.
Correct. The other leaked classified info jeopardizing who knows how many sources, by theft. I'm not trying to excuse the NY Times, but they aren't in the same sport as Wikileaks.
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
It's a tough one. One is an American media company, the other is an enemy of the United States that recruits and teaches people how to steal our nations top secrets while he hides in a consulate of an unfriendly regime. Real head scratcher.

I would say the NY Times, has at times, been an enemy. They have published highly classified information that hurt the U.S. They outed Israel needlessly because, in my opinion, they hate Israel. They are not nearly as bad as Wikileaks, but they are no saint.
 

WVUCOOPER

Redshirt
Dec 10, 2002
55,555
40
31
I would say the NY Times, has at times, been an enemy. They have published highly classified information that hurt the U.S. They outed Israel needlessly because, in my opinion, they hate Israel. They are not nearly as bad as Wikileaks, but they are no saint.
I disagree with the term enemy for them, but I absolutely understand your point. I'm not sure of the legalities, but would hope the NY Times would chose more carefully in the future on matters of national security.
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
I disagree with the term enemy for them, but I absolutely understand your point. I'm not sure of the legalities, but would hope the NY Times would chose more carefully in the future on matters of national security.

SCOTUS has already ruled that media companies cannot be prosecuted for publishing classified information. Insane to me but that his two they ruled. People die when this information gets out.
 

Airport

All-Conference
Dec 12, 2001
82,133
2,317
113
It's a tough one. One is an American media company, the other is an enemy of the United States that recruits and teaches people how to steal our nations top secrets while he hides in a consulate of an unfriendly regime. Real head scratcher.
Sounds like both sources