The Russian intel story: How the left concocted a crisis

Shortly after 6 p.m. on Monday, the Washington Post broke a story and panic ensued: “Trump revealed highly classified information to Russian foreign minister and ambassador.”

Within a matter of minutes, last Tuesday’s concocted crisis — the firing of the widely-criticized FBI Director Jim Comey – was replaced with a newly concocted crisis. President Trump had shared information that he had the legal power to share with representatives of foreign leaders.  

That’s right, even the Washington Post had to undercut its engineered outrage by admitting seven paragraphs into the story that, “As president, Trump has broad authority to declassify government secrets, making it unlikely that his disclosures broke the law.”

{mosads}The explosion of criticism nevertheless persisted as pundits decried the irresponsibility of the Trump administration. Some even went so far as questioning the president’s competence.

One has to wonder where the similar outrage was in March of 2014 when a Washington Post headline read “White House mistakenly identifies chief in Afghanistan.” The Obama White House had “exposed” the “highest-ranking spy in (Afghanistan),” and the nothing-to-see-here reaction of the punditry class could not have been more dissimilar.

To diffuse the media hysteria, National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster gave a brief statement Monday night dismissing the Washington Post story, calling it false as reported. He openly acknowledged that Trump discussed threats to aviation with the Russians but “at no time were intelligence sources or methods discussed” and “no military operations not publicly known” were revealed.  

.@kayleighmcenany defends McMasters denial: Sources weren’t jeopardized, he thought info was “worth sharing” https://t.co/7tgYjSI8bf

— CNN Newsroom (@CNNnewsroom) May 16, 2017

In typical fashion, Democrats rushed to judgment, immediately disparaging the White House’s response. They dismissed McMaster, the man they hailed just months ago as a good choice for National Security Adviser. It was all too reminiscent of last week when Jim Comey quickly became a beloved hero of the Democrats — the same Jim Comey they once loved to hate.

Months ago, Democrats like House Intelligence Committee ranking member Adam Schiff praised McMaster’s appointment saying, “I am happy with the choice. I think he’s a very bright man, has a lot of integrity, certainly very outspoken.” Democratic Congressman Steve Israel along with several others called McMaster “a brilliant, reasoned leader.”

But despite Democrats’ effusive and recent praise for McMaster, he soon became public enemy No. 1 after he rebutted the narrative of Trump engaging in wrongdoing.

On Twitter Tuesday morning, Trump echoed McMaster’s revelation that Trump had discussed aviation security:

As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining….

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 16, 2017

…to terrorism and airline flight safety. Humanitarian reasons, plus I want Russia to greatly step up their fight against ISIS & terrorism.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 16, 2017

In the eyes of the left, this was surely a contradiction, though. McMaster and Trump both admitted to revealing information regarding aviation security, but this was nevertheless contradictory since McMaster called the Washington Post’s story “false … as reported” and Trump did not proactively negate it.

For those capable of rationalization, the statements were in fact complimentary. McMaster was not denying the communication of aviation threat information; rather, he was denying the Post’s story which states in its opening sentence that “Trump’s disclosures jeopardized a critical source of intelligence on the Islamic State.”

“With lives at risk, Trump’s aides have no recourse but to leak” https://t.co/1av6iOOjI3 pic.twitter.com/oRC78F5bhj

— The Hill (@thehill) May 16, 2017

Both McMaster and Trump dismiss the notion that a source was jeopardized — and thus the thrust of the Post story — as false while both admitting that they discussed aviation security in a manner that was “wholly appropriate.”

This is why on Monday McMaster did not say that the entirety of the story was false but that it was “false … as reported.” He echoed this sentiment in his Tuesday briefing:

“The premise of that article is false that in any way the president had a conversation that was inappropriate or in any way resulted in a lapse of national security.”

He continued by saying that the first-hand participants in the meeting, from the secretary of State to both the deputy national security advisor and himself, saw the conversation about aviation security as appropriate, especially considering that ISIS had killed 220 passengers on a Russian plane in October of 2015.

McMaster explained further that the Post had:

“Combined what was leaked with other information and then insinuated about sources and methods, so I wanted to make clear to everybody that the president in no compromised any sources or methods in the course of this conversation.”

As is often the case with the Trump administration, there was a hysteric and widespread rush to judgment on the facts. Harsh and hasty condemnations filled the airwaves, just as they did last Tuesday after the firing of Comey.

“Republicans in a panic over Russia — will they do the right thing?” https://t.co/BCFrFBA8c3 pic.twitter.com/xrCYDCCuiL

— The Hill (@thehill) May 16, 2017

On the night of Comey’s dismissal, 107 comparisons of Trump to Nixon flooded the news according to Media Research Center. The Washington Post reported that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein threatened to resign after the firing only to be refuted by the Department of Justice, where Rosenstein resides.

The left and the Washington Post — which are perhaps one in the same — default to an innately negative lens in analyzing the actions of the Trump administration. The Washington Post, after all, is the same paper that hired 20 reporters to pry into “every phase of his life” in the lead-up to the 2016 election.

Sounds more like an arm of the Democratic Party than a member of the unbiased, independent press.