This Is Fuckin' BAD Y'ALL
First: every human being on Earth knew Donald Trump would give up classified intelligence sooner than later; our mistake was in thinking he would be shouting out some shit during a Tampa Klan rally. Instead, he apparently waited until the day after he fired the FBI director for investigating his ties to Russia, hosted Russia in the Oval Office, and gave up "code word classified" intelligence straight to them.
Second: Here's what we're talking about.
The information the president relayed had been provided by a U.S. partner through an intelligence-sharing arrangement considered so sensitive that details have been withheld from allies and tightly restricted even within the U.S. government, officials said.
The partner had not given the United States permission to share the material with Russia, and officials said Trump’s decision to do so endangers cooperation from an ally that has access to the inner workings of the Islamic State. After Trump’s meeting, senior White House officials took steps to contain the damage, placing calls to the CIA and the National Security Agency.
The Washington Post story just gets crazier as it goes on. You should read it.
Like this:
At a more fundamental level, the information wasn’t the United States’ to provide to others. Under the rules of espionage, governments — and even individual agencies — are given significant control over whether and how the information they gather is disseminated, even after it has been shared. Violating that practice undercuts trust considered essential to sharing secrets.
The officials declined to identify the ally but said it has previously voiced frustration with Washington’s inability to safeguard sensitive information related to Iraq and Syria.
Oh and of course it was because HE CAN'T FUCKING STOP BRAGGING.
In his meeting with Lavrov, Trump seemed to be boasting about his inside knowledge of the looming threat. “I get great intel. I have people brief me on great intel every day,” the president said, according to an official with knowledge of the exchange.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Gen. HR McMaster (who was in the room -- and who when the Post interviewed him on the record declined to call the story false ) both immediately "denied" President Trump discussed "sources, methods or military operations," citing identical charges of which no one had accused him, until their chips malfunctioned and they ripped that one dude's arm off and did other bad stuff to him too.
Buzzfeed was first to confirm WaPo's story with two US officials. They also added this, from Tennessee Republican Bob Corker:
After news of Trump's revelations broke Monday, Sen. Bob Corker — a Tennessee Republican and chairman of the Foreign Relations committee — said "obviously they're in a downward spiral right now and they've got to figure out a way to come to grips with all that's happening."
"And the shame of it is, there's a really good national security team in place...but the chaos that is being created by the lack of discipline is creating an environment that I think makes — it creates a worrisome environment," Corker told reporters in Washington, DC, Monday afternoon.
Even Speaker of the House Paul Ryan vaguely alluded to wanting some "facts."
"The speaker hopes for a full explanation of the facts from the administration," per Paul Ryan spokesman.
— Josh Dawsey (@jdawsey1) May 15, 2017
sure we do.
1. inherit a gazillion dollars.
2. (optional) pull yourself up by your bootstraps.
3. buy an "elected" office, media network(s), or politician(s).
4. ???
5. profit!
see, you have all kinds of power. you just have to apply yourself.
In a single choice that is neither influenced by past elections, nor would influence future elections... in that fictional place where the choice was wholly independent, I would agree.
But as a liberal who has been advocating for more progressive voices in the party for years, for candidates who weren't completely bought by the donors, this election could very much influence future candidates.
If the goal is moving the Party to a progressive place, I see no logic in continuing to support bad, belligerent, compromised candidates. If the Party wants my vote, they can start producing more electable offerings.
Of course, this means the Hillary trolls here will cry "Purity!!" and 'Bern' me in effigy. To that, I say no organization trying to sell a product has ever been successful by blaming the customers for not buying it.