Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Trump on why Pelosi, Schiff Not Informed of al-Baghdadi Raid: “Adam Schiff is the biggest leaker in Washington”

Trump on why Pelosi, Schiff Not Informed of al-Baghdadi Raid: “Adam Schiff is the biggest leaker in Washington”

“Adam Schiff is the biggest leaker in Washington. You know that, I know that, we all know. I’ve watched Adam Schiff leak. He’s a corrupt politician. He’s a leaker like nobody’s ever seen before.”

Sunday, Trump confirmed ISIS terrorist and leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was killed by US Special Forces in Syria.

Monday morning, Trump was asked about the raid and in particular, whether he believed Pelosi “and others” trustworthy with “this kind of information.”

Reporter: “Mr. President, are you concerned that Nancy Pelosi and others can’t be trusted with this kind of information?”

Trump: “They were talking about why I didn’t give information to Adam Schiff and his committee and the answer is because I think Adam Schiff is the biggest leaker in Washington. You know that, I know that, we all know. I’ve watched Adam Schiff leak. He’s a corrupt politician. He’s a leaker like nobody’s ever seen before.”

Congressional leaders, including Reps Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff were not informed of the operation in advance and so Pelosi whined publicly about being left in the dark.

As Professor Jacobson pointed out Sunday, leaking has consequences.

Trump explained in his press conference that he informed countries, including Russia and others, over whose territory or through whose air defenses U.S. forces had to fly that an operation was underway, but did not inform them of the purpose. That was necessary to avoid fire on U.S. aircraft.

But Trump didn’t inform Congressional leaders until the troops were safely out of harms way, because he feared the leaks that have plagued congress and his own administration would endanger the troops.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


buckeyeminuteman | October 28, 2019 at 12:00 pm

Trump is the CINC. He doesn’t owe an explanation to anybody about time-sensitive operations. Pelosi or Schiff least of all.


    “We’re outraged. Trump didn’t inform us first”

    Because he trusts Democrats the least.

    Trump stated, “A leak could have caused the death of all of them [referring to the troops used in the operation].”

    Because the president is, by the express text of the Constitution, the C-in-C, Trump’s on solid ground arguing that the inherent authority of that constitutional text would negate the federal statute that the lefties are claiming Trump ignored. Why? Because the Supremacy Clause expressly states that federal laws must be enacted pursuant to the Constitution.

    What’s more, that statute doesn’t have any remedy. So the speaker and committee heads have the right to be informed, but there’s no enforcement or punishment mechanism.

    But rumor has it that Trump did give them advance notice. On
    Saturday, just before the raid, he walked all the letter notices to the USPS mailbox (just outside the WH). These clowns should get their letters some time this week.

Notify them and get somebody killed? No, thanks.

    TX-rifraph in reply to Valerie. | October 28, 2019 at 12:26 pm

    The Dems would actively work to cause the operation to fail. They would then blame Trump for the failure while blaming Benghazi on a video.

    The Dems continually demonstrate they are anti-American. Good for Trump.

    By any means necessary say they.

      Tom Servo in reply to TX-rifraph. | October 28, 2019 at 12:38 pm

      I honestly think that the Leadership would have let Rashid and Omar know, and they would have immediately passed notice over to their friends and family back at the old Home Place.

“We all know that. He’s a corrupt politician.”

Ahhh, music to my ears. Calling a spade a spade.

My on earth would he provide anything to those two lying scum when he isn’t legally required to? They’re both trying to stage a coup. Screw them both.

I would like to hear Pelosi or Schiff at least state for the record that they would not have passed the information along to anyone else. There’s the rub. Informing them or anyone else in Congress serves only one of five conceivable purposes, none of which holds water. (1) The President’s seeking advice. Nope. The die was already cast; no further advice was needed or appropriate. This was not an operation where there was another conceivable course, like the Cuban Missile Crisis or a decision whether to do it if civilian deaths were likely or inevitable, where the perspective of Congress as the branch closest to the People was needed. (2) The President’s seeking consent and support. He might or might not have gotten it, but he did not need it. See #1. (3) So that Pelosi & Schiff are comfortable than they’re confidants of the President, in the loop etc. Unnecessary under the best of circumstances; downright laughable under present circumstances. (4) So that Pelosi & Schiff could pass the information along in real time if THEY decided that there were others who should know. Obviously no rational President takes that risk. (5) To give Pelosi & Schiff time to organize and announce their own impending “very important statement” to the press to preempt the President. Nope. This is where members of Congress sit back and acknowledge that the President runs this area. Proof of how they might have subverted this is that Pelosi is either clueless or dishonest in whining that the Russians knew before Congress knew. Of course the Russians knew — at least that US aircraft would be coming through — they had to be told not to fire on them.

When it first got mentioned by shining Nancy about her and other congress critters not being informed till afterward my first thought was Good for Trump, he didn’t want them leaking and tipping off the enemy.
The left has so politicized everything that you can’t trust them with information. That is truly sad.

    barbara in reply to oldgoat36. | October 28, 2019 at 7:59 pm

    “you can’t trust them with information”

    You can’t trust them, PERIOD. If a DemoncRat told me the sun was shining, I’d look outside myself AND check 3 independent sources. >:-(

Check out this sublime example of two-for-one propaganda headlining at WaPo : “In creating spectacle around Baghdadi’s death, Trump departs from Obama’s more measured tone on bin Laden.”

Ah, what a surprise — the water-carrying prostitute-propagandists of the MSM must always lavish effusive praise upon the sainted Obama, who can do no wrong, while always denigrating Trump, who can do no right.

Funny thing is, contrary to the Post’s assertion, I recall after bin Laden’s death, Obama — in typically arrogant and fatuous form — sanctimoniously lecturing Americans not to “spike the football.” And, yet, despite this admonition, the sainted Obama promptly traveled to Ground Zero in lower Manhattan, to take a self-congratulatory victory tour and to brandish bin Laden’s scalp as a potent campaign prop in his bid for re-election.

What a hypocritical, self-serving and perennially grandstanding pathological narcissist.

“Obama’s more measured tone”


Isn’t that impeachable, to use foreign policy to advance your election prospects?

    guyjones in reply to FOAF. | October 28, 2019 at 8:09 pm

    Spot-on. This slogan, brimming with braggadocio and self-congratulatory egotism, such that Obama was basically acting as if he had personally delivered the coup de grace to bin Laden, himself, makes a lie out of WaPo’s claims, which are an attempt to re-write the historical record.

    Those of us rational plebes who don’t view Obama as a deity, and, who recall history, know otherwise.

If I remember correctly, President Trump repeatedly told reporters that he would not disclose foreign policy plans because you are specifically telling the enemy.

He is just following what he said he would do.

2smartforlibs | October 28, 2019 at 1:19 pm

So how is it with a WH full of leakers or so the propaganda machine would have you believe. Not a single mention and the planning has gone on for weeks. Would the Propgana machine be lying about its sources?

He should say so sorry, and inform them of a bogus upcoming op. As soon as it appears it the NYT, we’ll know where it came from.

Isn’t the President’s statement a bit unfair to Crying Chuck Schumer? Doesn’t he deserve a shout out?

In an era with real journalists – say, 1988, when the DNC’s bizarre decision to put the “Where was George?” speech in Ted Kennedy’s mouth drew catcalls during the speech from the press room, albeit not the famous “Dry, sober, and in bed with his wife” – Trump’s accusation would spur a discussion amongst journalists as to who, exactly, is the biggest leaker in DC.

It’s a matter of trustworthiness. Shiff is below the Russians, the Turks and the Syrians.

The Dems have proven repeatedly that they can’t be trusted with classified data. Why would POTUS Trump expect that to change now? They’re angry because he didn’t treat them with “courtesy” and, like respect, that is a reciprocal concept. Give some to get some…

In a way I am glad that the Democrats keep showing that they are unfit for any type of leadership.

I just wish more of the voters who call themselves Democrats would notice and take the appropriate action.

The President is spot on. I wouldn’t trust Schiff any further than I could throw him.