Posted on 06/15/2019 9:22:06 PM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
Maddow will be all over this. After one Russia hoax went away, she has been speculating about infrastructure attacks. Maybe she and NYT might have the same so-called source.
Depending on what this source said, he/she could have divulged TS:SCI information at the very least, maybe even sub-gamma. That is highly illegal. Given the nonsense in this article, though, even if that did happen, the reporter was too dumb to understand what the information meant and thus this idiotic article was born.
“Pentagon and intelligence officials describe to the Times “broad hesitation” to tell Trump about the details of the operations against Russia. They tell the Times there was concern over how Trump would react, and the possibility that Trump might reverse the operations or discuss it with foreign officials.”
Manufactured “news” to push a narrative. (Trump is erratic, can’t be trusted)
“I only drink rain water and pure grain alcohol...”
General "Buck" Turgidson: Well, I, uh, don't think it's quite fair to condemn a whole program because of a single slip-up, sir.
Not for a moment do I believe this doggerel.
But the action inside the Russian electric grid appears to have been conducted under little-noticed new legal authorities, slipped into the military authorization bill passed by Congress last summer. The measure approved the routine conduct of “clandestine military activity” in cyberspace, to “deter, safeguard or defend against attacks or malicious cyberactivities against the United States.”
Under the law, those actions can now be authorized by the defense secretary without special presidential approval.
I could not find that exact text in H.R.5515 — 115th Congress (2017-2018). But if that really is the effect of that new law, it sounds like "Plan R" from Dr. Stangelove:
General "Buck" Turgidson: "Plan R is an emergency war plan in which a lower echelon commander may order nuclear retaliation after a sneak attack if the normal chain of command is disrupted. You approved it, sir. You must remember. Surely you must recall, sir, when Senator Buford made that big hassle about our deterrent lacking credibility. The idea was for plan R to be a sort of retaliatory safeguard."
President Muffley: "A safeguard?"
Turgidson: "I admit the human element seems to have failed us here. But the idea was to discourage the Russkies from any hope that they could knock out Washington, and yourself, sir, as part of a general sneak attack, and escape retaliation because of lack of proper command and control."
No I don't, and don't call me Shirley.
I believe that’s the same paper that ran a front page article on the hiding place of Anne Frank and her family. To which the SS properly responded by putting them in concentration camps.
My question is, of course, who would believe CNN and/or NYT?
‘Face
I don’t trust the NYT. But what if Nakasone (cyber command) leaked the information (or disinformation) because he wanted Russia to know? Remember. Trump issued Presidential Policy Directive 20 last year, giving Cyber Command and others the power to act without a specific Presidential directive.
In that case, I guess one should be thinking about prosecuting the cyber command for treason. Undermining the country and all that.
‘Face
Clearing away all the complexities (which helps me understand) isn’t it true:
The Leftist Biased Media (which others call the MSM) and
the Dems
are siding with our enemies?
They take Iran’s side against us to hurt Trump.
They release any leaked information even if it hurts our national security by revealing secrets.
They make enemies confident that “The Americans are weak and divided. They are about to overthrow Trump. They are not united and we should test this with a war.”
Whether acts of “sedition”,”treason” or the acts of a “traitor” can occupy FR for days at a time.
Had this been WWII, CNN would have had a panel led by Don Lemon say “It won’t be the Pas-de-Calais, our source says D-Day is going to be at Normandy and we have a reporter on site who sees hundreds of thousands secretly massing in England for an attack which may come on June 7th. And another who talked to Rommel and told him to get approval for a Panzer counterattack.”
We are up against those who are anti-American, let alone un-American.
> They take Iran’s side against us to hurt Trump.
False narrative.
The sides are Deep State vs. humanity. Trump is on the latter team, and on a practical matter with respect to this specific incident, so is Iran.
I told you I needed to remove the complexities. My humble grasp of this needs assistance.
I thought the religious leadership in charge in Iran will accept the destruction of human life as a means of restoring their caliphate and doing something in the afterlife at our expense.
How does Iran align with us against the Deep State? Not arguing, I just don’t understand.
Fast forward to today and cyber is recognized as its own warfighting domain ("there is no cyber warfare, there is warfare in the cyber domain") and each branch is more or less doing its own thing, DoD kind of ties it all together, but the resources are all over the place. USCYBERCOM was a sub-unified command under US Strategic Command until last year when Trump and Mattis finalized its elevation to a Unified Combatant Command. As part of operationalizing USCYBERCOM, some authorities were released from POTUS down to the SECDEF and USCYBERCOM Commander levels. It allows for far more flexibility in cyber actions and responses.
> How does Iran align with us against the Deep State?
The same way that two complete strangers getting shot at by the same psycho are aligned.
Of course I do not understand how the military could trust Obama.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.