Video & Multimedia

rsacamano

(1,908 posts) Tue Feb 9, 2021, 10:54 AM Feb 2021

Biden BANNING Trump from Intelligence Briefings

7 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Biden BANNING Trump from Intelligence Briefings (Original Post) rsacamano Feb 2021 OP

It has been reported that he didn't read the briefings, but notinkansas Feb 2021 #1

They should have continued to give him his "Intelligence Briefings". Ligyron Feb 2021 #2

That's what I would have done. OAITW r.2.0 Feb 2021 #3

I would be disappointed if our intelligence community Mr.Bill Feb 2021 #7

OOooh, that would be so MEAN! lagomorph777 Feb 2021 #4

I've seen that concept explored elsewhere. jaxexpat Feb 2021 #5

I thought Biden answered O'Donnell's question perfectly. Old Crow Feb 2021 #6

notinkansas

(1,096 posts)

1. It has been reported that he didn't read the briefings, but

Reply to rsacamano (Original post)

Tue Feb 9, 2021, 11:10 AM

Feb 2021

it could be a revenue generating opportunity. Selling them to the highest bidder? Based on his performance over the last 4 years, it does not seem like that would be beneath him.

Ligyron

(7,639 posts)

2. They should have continued to give him his "Intelligence Briefings".

Reply to rsacamano (Original post)

Tue Feb 9, 2021, 11:19 AM

Feb 2021

Made up entirely by the DOJ and then have an FBI agent offer him a ton of money for access.

GOPers acquit him during Senate trial? Once he bites on the offer of money for info, and he will...

BOOM, Trump is arrested and removed from polite society anyway.

OAITW r.2.0

(24,581 posts)

3. That's what I would have done.

Reply to Ligyron (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 9, 2021, 11:27 AM

Feb 2021

Give him a briefing of totally bogus, but plausible intel. See if it shows up in our sig-intel gathering....

Mr.Bill

(24,319 posts)

7. I would be disappointed if our intelligence community

Reply to OAITW r.2.0 (Reply #3)

Tue Feb 9, 2021, 04:28 PM

Feb 2021

hasn't been doing that for years.

lagomorph777

(30,613 posts)

4. OOooh, that would be so MEAN!

Reply to Ligyron (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 9, 2021, 11:36 AM

Feb 2021

SO, yes, of course we should do it!

jaxexpat

(6,849 posts)

5. I've seen that concept explored elsewhere.

Reply to Ligyron (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 9, 2021, 12:15 PM

Feb 2021

My take is that since it's so plainly logical no one would believe Trump could have anything to do with it. It's not like Trump to "plan" stuff.
Those channels are probably already worn out from overuse anyway. Let's look in and see.......
Russian spies in their proletarian hideout, "Natasha, it's Trump again. You wanna take his call this time?" "Good griefskis, will that troll never stop? No Boris, you take it. I can't stand to talk with heem again." "You don't wanna hear about his crowds or his stolen election problems again, my darlink?" "Not today, Boris, I have a splitting headache. Must be the AmWay wine he tried to bribe us with."

Old Crow

(2,212 posts)

6. I thought Biden answered O'Donnell's question perfectly.

Reply to rsacamano (Original post)

Tue Feb 9, 2021, 12:20 PM

Feb 2021

He was matter-of-fact, stated an awkward truth plainly, and yet also managed to be a bit cautious. It's the kind of response I'd describe as worthy of the office of the presidency. It's been a long time since we've seen that. Thank goodness Joe's in the Oval Office.

Reply to this discussion