 
     |
| Traitor in the WH? (Page 1/3) |
|
tshark
|
SEP 06, 06:19 PM
|
|
|
... [This message has been edited by tshark (edited 09-07-2018).]
|
|
|
randye
|
SEP 06, 07:02 PM
|
|
New York Times Has History of Exaggerating Seniority of Anonymous Officials
https://townhall.com/column...s-officials-n2516340
As the Marxist left's desperation grows day by day, their tactics get more and more insane.
By the way, the BRET KAVANAUGH hearings are proceeding despite leftist stunts and he WILL be approved soon as the 2nd SCOTUS judge appointed by President Trump.[This message has been edited by randye (edited 09-06-2018).]
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
SEP 06, 07:05 PM
|
|
This doesn't look like Treason. Now, if something more were to emerge--if there is (or was) something going on here with Classified information--that would have to be considered when the culprit is identified. Short of that, it's just a federal employee that needs to be addressed with that well known remark, YOU"RE FIRED..!
Unless I've been misled by my Mainstream Media addiction, no one has been prosecuted under the federal statutes that define Treason since World War Two. There have been--and I credit this to Captain Obvious--prosecutions and convictions on the charge of Espionage. But not Treason.
Wouldn't it be ironic if the culprit were publicly identified in a news report from the New York Times? There is, or at least, there is supposed to be a Firewall that separates the News gathering and reporting part of the New York Times, from the Op-Ed part of the New York Times. The part of the New York Times that has the responsibility for the Op-Ed section has an agreement with the culprit, to protect his or her identity from being disclosed by the Op-Ed part of the New York Times.
But--and this is a discussion that was just on MSNBC--if the News side of that Firewall were to find the evidence to identify the culprit by independent means--by investigative reporting--but not by getting the culprit's name from the Op-Ed side of the Firewall--then the culprit's identify could very possibly be revealed as a news report by the New York Times.
It would likely be reviewed by the New York Time's top level lawyers, but it seems like they might be OK with the culprit's identity being revealed in a New York Time's news report, IF the lawyers were satisfied that the Firewall between News and Op-Ed was not being violated, as far as this non-disclosure agreement between the New York Times and the culprit.
"QED"...  [This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 09-06-2018).]
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
SEP 06, 07:12 PM
|
|
|
|
|
tshark
|
SEP 06, 07:16 PM
|
|
|
... [This message has been edited by tshark (edited 09-07-2018).]
|
|
|
|
blackrams
|
SEP 06, 07:51 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by randye:
New York Times Has History of Exaggerating Seniority of Anonymous Officials
https://townhall.com/column...s-officials-n2516340
As the Marxist left's desperation grows day by day, their tactics get more and more insane.
By the way, the BRET KAVANAUGH hearings are proceeding despite leftist stunts and he WILL be approved soon as the 2nd SCOTUS judge appointed by President Trump.
|
|
The truth is, we only know that this is claimed to come from a WH senior staffer. 
Give me a frigg'n break...... I am no Trump fan but the NY rag that provided this story is known to lean so far left it's almost upside down.
|
|
|
|
Wichita
|
SEP 06, 08:04 PM
|
|
Can you imagine if this was Hillary's Whitehouse? Just couldn't imagine how many "accidental" suicides we would be hearing about.
|
|
|
|
tshark
|
SEP 06, 09:04 PM
|
|
|
... [This message has been edited by tshark (edited 09-07-2018).]
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
SEP 07, 05:44 AM
|
|
A credible denial? Is she in the clear?
|
|
|
|
tshark
|
SEP 07, 08:18 AM
|
|
|
I don't believe Melania would do such a thing. She is classy. Whenever she opposes Trump, she puts her name to it. She is his wife; if she wanted to sabotage him, she has more effective ways to do it.
|
|
|
