It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Meanwhile, four people with knowledge of the matter told NBC News that one of the advisers Trump brought to the briefing, retired general Mike Flynn, repeatedly interrupted the briefing with pointed questions.
Two sources said Christie, the New Jersey governor and Trump adviser, verbally restrained Flynn -- one saying Christie told Flynn to shut up, the other reporting he said, "Calm down." Two other sources said Christie touched Flynn's arm in an effort get him to calm down and let the officials continue.
Christie denied that he had silenced or restrained Flynn. "The comments and actions attributed to me in this story about General Flynn are categorically untrue. I did not make the statements alleged nor did I touch General Flynn's arm for any reason during the briefing. The report is a complete work of fiction."
Flynn told NBC News the report was "total b__s___" and added, "These are anonymous sources. They're lying."
Meanwhile, four people with knowledge of the matter told NBC News
Two sources said
Michael Morell, a former acting CIA director who was President George W. Bush's briefer and is now a Hillary Clinton supporter, said Trump's comments about his briefing were extraordinary.
"This is the first time that I can remember a candidate for president doing a readout from an intelligence briefing, and it's the first time a candidate has politicized their intelligence briefing. Both of those are highly inappropriate and crossed a long standing red line respected by both parties," he said.
originally posted by: ipsedixit
a reply to: xuenchen
You bring up a good point. Trump doesn't believe that what he had was just a feeling. He has said that he is "pretty good" at reading "body language". I think you might have put your finger on something. Maybe a guy who puts too much emphasis on reading body language, as you point out, more of a feeling than a science, ought not to be basing a fairly substantial conclusion, that intelligence officers disapprove of the President, on something so insubstantial.
Maybe that kind of person ought not to be President, and that's not even considering the counterproductive effect of broadcasting to the world that in your opinion, senior intelligence officers disapprove of the President.