UK stops sharing information on Manchester attack with United States after leaks - BBC

[Caps]

Just now, RickBradford said:

Given that the relentlessly "progressive" New York Times was the recipient of the leak, it seems fairly clear that nobody on President Trump's side of the aisle would have leaked it to them.

 

The conclusion has to be that there are people towards the top of US intelligence who are actively attempting to undermine the President, which is not a great state of affairs, no matter what you think about the man.

it does not matter, who, when, why , what.  The point is info was leaked, twice I think, and it should not have been

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, RickBradford said:

Given that the relentlessly "progressive" New York Times was the recipient of the leak, it seems fairly clear that nobody on President Trump's side of the aisle would have leaked it to them.

 

The conclusion has to be that there are people towards the top of US intelligence who are actively attempting to undermine the President, which is not a great state of affairs, no matter what you think about the man.

Why is it assumed that it was Americans who leaked the info? I'm not saying it wasn't but I haven't seen any kind of evidence pointing to Americans as a source. But I could have missed it.

[scorecard]

On 5/25/2017 at 10:43 PM, edwardandtubs said:

 

The "intelligence services" you extol are the ones doing the leaking, not Trump.

 

Does that not bring the question, why are they leaking information?

 

Could it be that they in reality have absolutely no respect for the guy, etc?