Last Year, Obama Offered to Share U.S. Intelligence With Russia, and the Mainstream Media Was Fine With It

| |

Top Tier Gear USA

US President Barack Obama (R) listens to

Russia-Gate remains in full swing, and the latest bout of hysteria is related to President Trump’s alleged sharing of intelligence with Russia.

The original report about the supposed leak came from The Washington Post.

The Post reported that the leak put a source of intelligence on the Islamic State at risk. But the spokeswoman for the Russian foreign ministry, Maria Zakharova, said on Tuesday that the reports were nothing except “yet another fake.”

As Darius Shatahmasebi wrote on Wednesday,

According to the Post, Trump gave his Russian counterparts informationconsidered so sensitive that details have been withheld from allies and tightly restricted even within the U.S. government.” Specifically:

“Trump went on to discuss aspects of the threat that the United States learned only through the espionage capabilities of a key partner. He did not reveal the specific intelligence-gathering method, but he described how the Islamic State was pursuing elements of a specific plot and how much harm such an attack could cause under varying circumstances. Most alarmingly, officials said, Trump revealed the city in the Islamic State’s territory where the U.S. intelligence partner detected the threat.”

Apparently, this information was too sensitive for Trump to give to Russian representatives, but not too sensitive for anonymous officials to leak to the Washington Post, who turn broadcasted it to the entire world.

Shatahmasebi adds,

In other words, the Post also knows the details of this classified information. Anonymous officials can leak sensitive information to an unaccountable media outlet, but Trump can’t disclose that information to a delegation of people who could actually benefit from the information? How does that work?

Just last year, the Post didn’t seem to have any problems with the US government sharing intelligence with Russia.


Here are some excerpts from the June 30, 2016 article shown in the image above, titled U.S. Offers to Share Syria Intelligence on Terrorists With Russia:

The offer early this week of what one administration official called “enhanced information sharing” does not include joint military planning, targeting or coordination with U.S. airstrikes or other operations in Syria.

In early May, as the cease-fire and U.N.-shepherded peace talks headed toward collapse, Secretary of State John F. Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov agreed to send senior military officers to “sit at the same table” in Geneva, where they set up a center to monitor violations.

Kerry and other U.S. officials have remained in close contact with their Russian counterparts, trying out a series of possible initiatives to revitalize the cease-fire, including the new offer of increased intelligence sharing on terrorist positions.

Take a look at two more examples of articles from The Post about former President Obama’s relations with Russia.

These excerpts are from an article titled Obama Proposes New Military Partnership With Russia in Syria, dated June 30, 2016:

The Obama administration has proposed a new agreement on Syria to the Russian government that would deepen military cooperation between the two countries against some terrorists in exchange for Russia getting the Assad regime to stop bombing U.S.-supported rebels.

Under the proposal, which was personally approved by President Obama and heavily supported by Secretary of State John F. Kerry, the American and Russian militaries would cooperate at an unprecedented level, something the Russians have sought for a long time.

On July 13, 2016, The Post ran this article: Obama’s Syria Plan Teams up American and Russian Forces.

The Obama administration’s new proposal to Russia on Syria is more extensive than previously known. It would open the way for deep cooperation between U.S. and Russian military and intelligence agencies and coordinated air attacks by American and Russian planes on Syrian rebels deemed to be terrorists.

It was okay when Obama did it, but if Trump dares to try to work with Russia, the mainstream media loses its mind.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said Wednesday that he is ready to provide the U.S. Senate a transcript of last week’s controversial Oval Office meeting between President Trump and Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov.

“If the U.S. administration considers it possible, we are ready to submit a transcript of Lavrov’s talk with Trump to the U.S. Senate and Congress, if, of course, the U.S. administration would want this,” Putin said, according to the Russian-owned Tass news agency.

Two days ago, The Post wrote that Trump did not break the law when he talked about classified information with the Russians.


Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).

Contributed by Lily Dane of The Daily Sheeple.

Lily Dane is a staff writer for The Daily Sheeple. Her goal is to help people to “Wake the Flock Up!”

Wake The Flock Up! Please Share With Sheeple Far & Wide:
  • Hypocrisy.

    • Phil_Ossifer

      The lamestream media are grasping for anything that makes Trump look bad. If dissing Trump means they have to look like hypocrites, they don’t care. “Getting” Trump is the lamestream’s Prime Directive and, like all good Marxists, the end justifies the means. This is why sites like the Sheeple and others are so important. If your only exposure to the larger world is the lamestream media you haven’t been informed, you’ve been brainwashed.

      • I agree although it should be said that we must set an example by actively listening to the MSM and refuting them before we dismiss them. We mustn’t let ourselves fall into an echo chamber like progressives.

        • Phil_Ossifer

          The oldest principle of warfare: “Know thy enemy.”

    • Steve Rusk

      It’s one thing to provide information openly and quite another to be sneaking around at it, American media was given the boot, but Russian media was OK at that meeting, then it becomes suspiciously like spying. If this “intelligence” was actually supplied by the Israelis, I wonder did they approve of this sharing?

      • PopDeGator

        Considering that Israel wouldn’t even exist without the U.S. they’re hardly in a position to complain.

        • Steve Rusk

          I believe they call that philosophy “Burning your bridges behind you”, works well enough until you need their help again.

      • It wouldn’t surprise me. This is just nothing but smoke and mirrors designed to alienate the Left and radicalize them into a civil war.

        • Steve Rusk

          Left? This country is a Right of Center republic, there is no “Left”. Only a near Right and an extreme Right.

          • Apparently, political ideologies mean nothing and all perspectives and stances on social and economic issues are affiliated with the Right.

          • Steve Rusk

            You do understand that most of the political spectrum exists outside of this republic? Those political ideologies on the outside simply aren’t represented here. How much do you hear from socialists and communists in the media? How many do we have in our government? We don’t even have true Liberals anymore, now we have Neoliberals, a variety much more in agreement with Conservatives.

            On the other hand financial concentration continues to spiral out of control while Nazi like groups gain increased access to government and media. And war is more profitable than ever.

  • Nailbanger

    Thats because ALL liberals are RETARDS!
    They can blow me

  • Mike

    That is because the lame stream, lying, fake msm did not care what their messiah did no matter how wrong or illegal it was.

  • Jeri Brace

    Obama has committed far more impeachable offenses than trump! Obama has committed many acts of treason while in office and yet Obama gets a free pass

    • marlene

      President Trump has NOT committed any “impeachable” offenses! That’s the point!

      • PopDeGator

        Of course he hasn’t. But that makes absolutely no difference to the hypocrites in the manistream media. They want to get Trump worse than they wanted to get Nixon forty years ago. They’re trying to meme something, anything into existence as long as it will make Trump look bad and they’re not above inventing crap to do it.

      • Steve Rusk

        It takes an investigation to make the determination as to whether Trump has committed an impeachable offense, that has yet to occur.

        • marlene

          What is deemed an “impeachable” offense is in our Constitution. Read it so you don’t make the mistake of believing what comes out of the investigation that may NOT be constitutional. According to our Constitution, I repeat, President Trump has NOT committed any “impeachable” offenses!

          • Steve Rusk

            It still comes down to a committee being appointed to investigate the accusations, if there is the political will for it. At the moment we don’t know if he has committed any impeachable offenses, there are only suspicions.

            Impeachable Offenses

            The Convention came to its choice of words describing the grounds for impeachment after much deliberation, but the phrasing derived directly from the English practice. The framers early adopted, on June 2, a provision that the Executive should be removable by impeachment and
            conviction “of mal-practice or neglect of duty.”774 The Committee of Detail reported as grounds “Treason (or) Bribery or Corruption.”775 And the Committee of Eleven reduced the phrase to “Treason, or bribery.”776 On September 8, Mason objected to this limitation, observing that the term did not encompass all the conduct which should be grounds for removal; he therefore proposed to add “or maladministration” following “bribery.” Upon Madison’s objection that “[s]o vague a term will be equivalent to a tenure during pleasure of the Senate,” Mason suggested “other high crimes and misdemeanors,” which was adopted without further
            recorded debate.777

  • Bill L

    And the smoke and mirrors continue. Watch what is going on over here, so you won’t notice what else we are doing.

  • Eileen

    They think we are stupid. After all, they thought that during the election cycle when they demonized Trump supporters as uneducated, illiterate, white old men who are racists. Not their exact words, but close enough to their intent. Yet, when Trump supporters boycotted certain businesses because those businesses dissed Trump and his family, nobody bothered to ask how could uneducated illiterate people have an effect on supposedly upscale stores like Nordstrom? The more the MSM acts like this, the more people will wake up. Even Democrats, life long Democrats who cast their vote for Clinton, are questioning this type of behavior.

    • Phil_Ossifer

      The SJW/lamestream media has absolutely no credibility left after their shameless pandering to the Hildabeast during the 2016 campaign but, like all self-styled saviors, are incapable of understanding reality. They actually think people still take them seriously and they get offended when their pronouncements are questioned. Vox Day’s Rule No. 1 is “SJWs always lie,” not only to us but to themselves. Those who tell us not to be skeptical are themselves the very reason we SHOULD be skeptical.

  • Jim

    I think if the press had called out obama on it, they would have been labeled raging racists.

  • RandyJ/ProudSurvivor

    Who needs to practice actual journalism when you can so easily sway the sheeple masses by portraying one person as a hero and another as a pseudo war criminal for the exact same thing? Hype and sensationalism have proven more effective than hard hitting, in depth, fair and factual reporting. When people are actually relying on things like “The Daily Show” and so on for their news, there’s no more need for real news.