Fake news, trumped up by one of 2AHawaii's liberal trolls.

No wonder few decide to respond to him/her/it.  Benn rejecting anything this fisheye troll has to say for many months now.  Guess the HPD is still paying to be a provocateur.

The unauthorized disclosure of classified information is in and of itself classified information.  If Trump really did breach national security, then whoever told WAPO is even more guilty, because they did so knowingly and willfully.

If I were on the WH staff, I'd make looking for that leak my #1 priority until he/she is found.  That's more egregious than what they claimed Trump did.

I doubt this is fake news.   But I also doubt its 100% true.

There’s a reason why the Washington Post is not-so-affectionately tagged the “Washington Compost” by its fast-growing pool of distrustful detractors.
That reason is embodied in both the person (and the “journalism”) of one Jonathan Capehart, homosexual activist, Washington Post mercenary-hack
and editorial board member. Capehart is a liar and, by extension, so is the Washington Post.

Now, when I say that Capehart is a liar, I don’t mean it in the pejorative sense. It’s not an ad hominem attack. It’s a fact, supported by the overwhelming
weight of the evidence. In the journalism biz, a reputation for truth and accuracy is everything, and Capehart’s reputation is polluted by an extensive
history of inaccuracies, journalistic spin and outright lies. His word processor is the beaker from which he regularly concocts a poisonous brew intended
to sway the public toward his left-wing extremist ideology. Indeed, the Post’s liberal bias is better documented than Hillary Clinton’s cyber-crimes – and
 Capehart’s yellow journalism more known than her wayward hubby’s womanizing.

To be sure, Capehart’s agenda-driven shenanigans have the dubious distinction of managing to tick off both conservatives and liberals. Consider, for
instance, that during the Democratic presidential primary, Capehart, who is “in the bag for Hillary Clinton, lock, stock, and barrel,” infuriated Bernie Sander’s
supporters with a now-discredited missive that “progressive” Paste Magazine writer Shane Ryan called, “A dishonest narrative propagated by a supposedly
neutral journalist, with perfect timing, in an attempt to smear Bernie Sanders.”

The crux of the piece was that Bernie Sanders really offered little support during the civil rights movement for racial equality. You can read Ryan’s article
to learn of how, once busted for a litany of gross inaccuracies and outright lies, Capehart, as wont to do, merely doubled down with more lies and
obfuscation.

“Why wasn’t Capehart just admitting that he’d gotten it wrong?” wondered Ryan. “Didn’t he understand that his attempt to cover his own tracks was
blatantly obvious, and that no matter how much bulls–t he tried to heap on his original mistake, it would only make him look worse?”

Ryan called Capehart’s actions “rash dishonesty of a journalist with an agenda who had failed to do basic research before printing a smear piece.”

Ryan acts surprised. I’m not. This is Capehart’s modus operandi – rash dishonesty with an agenda, and failing to do basic research before printing a
smear piece. Truth never matters. It’s only the narrative.

And never the twain shall meet.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster denied a report that President Trump
shared highly classified information with Russian government officials during an Oval Office meeting last week.

"During President Trump's meeting with Foreign Minister Lavrov, a broad range of subjects were discussed among which
were common efforts and threats regarding counter-terrorism," Tillerson told reporters at the White House Monday evening.
"During that exchange, the nature of specific threats were discussed, but they did not discuss sources, methods or military
operations."

McMaster attended the meeting and also pushed back against the reports of Trump's comments to Russian Foreign Minister
Sergey Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak.

"The story that came out tonight as reported is false. The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common
threats to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation. At no time, at no time, were intelligence sources or methods
discussed and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not already publicly known," McMaster said
in a press conference Monday evening.

"The record should outweigh the anonymous sources. I was in the room. It didn't happen," McMaster added.

Multiple outlets reported early Monday evening that Trump had revealed the Islamic State's intentions of carrying out a terrorist
attack on an airplane by using a laptop computer.

The details of the attack, including the name of the city, were withheld by the Washington Post, at the direction of government
officials, but the two Russian officials and their aides were told of the exact location the Islamic State was targeting. Russia could
use that detail to determine how America or its ally uncovered the plot.

Trump said the U.S. received the intelligence from an ally who did not give Trump permission to share that information with Russia,
an adversary to the U.S.

Last week, European officials said the U.S. was expected to ban laptops on flights over the Atlantic, but the action was never
formally announced. It's not clear if the potential Department of Homeland Security decision is related to the Islamic State's plot.

Russia is an ally to Syrian President Bashar Assad and has helped his regime fight rebel forces and the Islamic State.

Deputy national security adviser for strategy Dina Powell also attended last week's meeting and pronounced the reports as false.

"This story is false," Powell said in a statement. "The president only discussed the common threats that both countries faced."

What I found interesting is that NPR caveated their reporting on this story as something that "NPR has not been able to independently verify".  They usually just roll with the story another outlet reports, but they took the time to add that in.  Not really a confirmation either way, but just struck me as interesting that they would go out of their way to state that.  Kind of like when an agency typically gives you the "we can neither confirm nor deny" line, but then all of a sudden, they give you a flat out deny. 

It was also my understanding that the information discussed wasn't related to US national security, which is what I recall the NSA director has come out and stated as well.  There has been speculation that the information shared was more about the source being a US partner that isn't exactly friendly with Russia.  That is all speculation and my vague recollection.

Considering the source of this news being WAPO and their track record of being the biggest fake news agency of all the MSM's and considering they were quoting their anonymous sources AGAIN (which we all know are just the voices in their heads  ) I would make sure I didn't report this as factual just to find out the news is fake and then have to do retractions. If NPR wants to be considered a serious source for news they should do exactly what you say they did.

What I heard is that the information was related to national security but was already public knowledge so no harm no foul. But then we get to what the left still claims as classified information being told to the Russian delegation. But it is not illegal for the president to disclose any classified information he deems as necessary and McMaster saying everything they talked about was not inappropriate for the meeting. Then you have the Russian delegation themselves saying it is all fake news. The thing I go by is that I believe McMaster has the integrity to resign before lying if he was so asked to do so.

Too much speculation yet to know the exact story. But suffice to say it once again is a non sequitur fake news report from the kings of fake news.

I doubt this is fake news.   But I also doubt its 100% true.

That too.  Forgot to add that.

However, again, the MSM is jumping all over this.  Probably a situation of much ado about nothing, but too late.  All people will remember is that "Trump shared classified information with the Ruskies".  He may very well have, but if so, what was that information and who reported it?