son-in-law interview

At least the term "goobers" is back on the table. I still use that in our home, alternately for Mrs. B-Bob, the dog, or both, depending on who has earned it with goofball behavior.

 

He looks he sprang from a Pod.

 

Ill be embarrassed when its proven Trump is Double Agent Orange

 

I'm currently 60/40 with him playing a shtick.

You know you are a bad poster when your content seems too horrible to be done unironically.

 

is there a better eg of PGab's ignorance ?

his post publicizes the fact that he doesn't even know what $ laundering is !!!

better to remain silent and be thought of as a fool, than
to speak to remove all doubts​

 

Im 100 telling you there is no collusion. Its a ridiculous stlry. He isnt in the pockets of Russians

@bobrek

I understand this thread was sparked by the interview. Its still the same story. I totally believe the Trumps agreed to this meeting but nothing became oc it

 

Let's set the record straight. Sipher is free to get informed on this as well. An asset is someone who is being spied upon and giving information to an outside agency. There are different categories of Intelligence assets. Sipher may be referring to only one type.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asset_(intelligence)

There are numerous categories of assets. Some do it willingly and others do not.

 

so you're saying Sipher is ill-informed? I take it you are unfamiliar with him and/or his work

 

Actually re-reading the article that is exactly what Sipher says.

 

No, what Sipher says backs exactly what I claimed. Some assets are controlled agents and know what they are doing, others don't.

 

let's see what he says:

A number of commentators and critics have labeled President Trump an Agent of the Russian Federation. It is often not clear if they mean that he is unwittingly adopting Russian propaganda, knowingly doing the bidding of the Kremlin or is an out-and-out controlled secret asset of the Russian intelligence services. All are sordid. Some are merely repulsive while others are illegal and even treasonous (in the common though not legal understanding of that term). Even former FBI acting Director Andrew McCabe answered, “I think it’s possible” when asked if President Trump might be an asset of Russian intelligence.

I think it is entirely plausible that Mr. Trump is somehow compromised by his personal and financial dealings with Russia and Russians, but I do not think he is an “agent” in the sense that intelligence professionals use the term. Let me explain.

Intelligence and law enforcement professionals ascribe specific meanings to those who work on their behalf. Unfortunately, the term “agent” is less clear than some others. For example, the FBI calls its officers agents, while CIA officers never refer to themselves as agents, and instead reserve the term for those foreigners who spy on its behalf. The Russian services, on the other hand, approach human espionage operations differently from intelligence services in the West.
​

Sipher is ex-CIA. His usage of "agent" is reserved for those who "spy" on the behalf of foreign interests. This is the sense in which I believe Sipher is understanding McCabe to be using ("former FBI acting Director Andrew McCabe answered, “I think it’s possible” when asked if President Trump might be an asset of Russian intelligence.")

Later in the essay he writes "In our lingo these brave and important people are called agents, assets, or sources."

He contrasts the American/CIA understanding of agents/assets/sources with that of Russia:

The Russians have a much more expansive and nuanced view of who is an agent working on behalf of their system. Whereas the U.S. mainly relies on a relatively small cadre of fully-controlled and tested secret sources, Russia sees their foreign intelligence role in a much broader way. They too seek fully vetted and controlled sources with access to unique reporting, but they are also more comfortable with sources who can help them in some manner or other even if they are not fully recruited spies. Throughout the Cold War the Kremlin relied on a wide variety of sources, some witting and some not – from fully recruited spies to semi-witting people willing to spout their nonsense. The Russian services would be comfortable building a relationship with a journalist who accepts background material but does not take specific direction, while the CIA would most likely have no interest in that sort of connection.​

So you said:

Which I take it, you got from this last quoted paragraph. Fine.

But the entire point of the article is to examine the question whether TRUMP was a foreign asset/agent/source/spy. My point in bringing up the article was in response to the claim earlier in the thread that nobody ever claimed Trump was a foreign agent or spy. I replied with the reference to Sipher's article examining the question of whether Trump is an agent (i.e., one who spies): and Sipher makes it clear that "CIA officers never refer to themselves as agents, and instead reserve the term for those [people] who spy on its behalf. "

Not much turns on this, at least not for purposes of continuing the conversation in this thread. Again, I merely raised the point of Sipher's article to respond to the claims that you and fchowd made that nobody had ever accused Trump of being an agent/spy outside of a joking context. I think that claim is simply incorrect.

 

So as Sipher says the word can have different shades of meaning. Trump was not called a controlled agent. Nobody was saying Trump is a Russian spy.

Trump is almost certainly a Russian asset since he insists on using a civilian iPhone rather than a secured line to conduct government business. That is in addition to anything else he may be doing.

 

I'll just say that I'm disappointed in what this thread was about.

I had pictured the OP with a shotgun interviewing possible sons-in-laws.

 

Name one person in the D&D who said he was a Kremlin spy.

Name the media who are calling him a Kremlin spy.

The reason the media is not acknowledging that is because nobody credible is accusing him of being a spy.

 

... seriously citing a self-published book as the media calling 45 a "spy"?

I mean, this is all silly semantics, but still.

 

alright, that one was a joke and I was just curious if anyone would actually look it up.

This one was put out by a mainstream publisher.

 

It's a shame that we have 3 pages on just one line from this interview because the whole thing is a gold mine.


Just... wow.

Also, he looks like someone put on a prosthetic mask of his face.