The message forum is an ongoing dialogue between classmates. There are no items, topics, subtopics, etc.

Forums work when people participate - so don't be bashful! Click the "Post Message" button to add your entry to the forum.

Jack Mallory

Jay, I think Steve and I are both narrow-minded scientific evidence junkies, frustrated by life in a world where attention-getting has become a greater focus than evidence. So much of the media, regardless of political orientation, seems to value notice more than demonstrable fact. Our hang up, perhaps, but I'll stick with it. 
 

This is just about to be released, hopefully more empirically based than much of what is published these days. Sound like an interesting counter to those whose enthusiasm for endorsing photo-fascists leads to their claim that all politicians are dishonest. 
 

https://bit.ly/42BzYGW
 

Jay Shackford

Trump — the “Sex Offender”

It was the same old Donald Trump we saw last week on CNN’s so-called Town Hall meeting at St. Anselm College in New Hampshire before a stacked audience of Trump supporters, several Trump big donors including Woody Johnson (owner of the New York Jets) and a few GOP strategists, and a handful of independents leaning Trump’s way.  

CNN has taken a lot of heat for hosting that event and giving Old Bone Spurs more than an  hour to fire away with his rapid-fire lies, half truths, insults, gross distortions of recent history, racist and White Supremacist rants, absolute nonsense, jokes about his sexual assaults less than a week after a New York jury of his peers found him guilty of sexually assaulting and defaming E. Jean Carroll and finedTrump  $5 million.   The crowd, which was told “to clap but don’t boo,” laughed and cheered throughout the ordeal.    

But, all things considered, perhaps it’s best for America to see a twice-impeached, once (so far) indicted ex-President for what he really is — a social psychopath, a narcissist, a racist and White Supremacist sympathizer, the first President ever to refuse to accept the results of a free election, the first ever to stand in the way of the peaceful transfer of power and the first ever to incite a mob of insurrectionists to attack the U.S. Capitol with the goal of overturning the election even if it meant killing police and hanging Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi.  Other than that, he’s a pretty good guy.  

That, folks, is just a glimpse of what we will see if Donald Trump wins a second term in office in 2024.  And it could be a lot worse.  Fortunately, Trump’s carefree days of acting on his evil and unpredictable impulses may be nearing an end.  He faces at least four criminal indictments for his past behavior: (1) his actions and inactions during the January 6th insurrection; (2) hiding and obstructing justice in the classified documents case that resulted in a raid on his Mar-a-Largo residence to recover hidden classified documents; (3) encouraging the Georgia Secretary of State in a taped conversation to find 11,800 non-existent Trump votes that would give Trump the winning margin in Georgia; and (4) his criminal indictments last month in Manhattan for a wide range of illegal business activities, including bank and insurance fraud.  Convictions on any of these four cases could put poor Donald (who is about to turn 77) in the pokey for the rest of his life. 

Frankly, had the Jean Carroll case been tried as a criminal case, Donald J. Trump would now be classified as a “sex offender” and forced to wear an ankle bracelet that would have sent out amber warnings on our cell phones whenever he was five miles within the range of our homes. 

“Damaged Souls” — Ginni and Clarence Thomas

If you missed last week’s two-hour Frontline PBS show on Ginni and Clarence Thomas, I strongly urge that you watch it.  The show first aired last Tuesday, and will probably be replayed again on your PBS station this week.  You can also stream it on PBS. 

After tracking the childhoods of both Clarence and Ginni, I was even starting to feel some empathy for them.  Clarence had a very deprived upbringing where he was rejected and ridiculed at about every turn in his life — he lived in abject poverty, his mother abandoned him, his grandfather abused him, he felt his Catholic seminary rejected him and, by the time he reached Holy Cross and then Yale law school in the late sixties (ironically, as a beneficiary of scholarships offered under affirmative action) he had adopted Malcolm X as his hero and role model.  

Ginni, meanwhile, grew up as the late arriving child of Omaha, Nebraska parents who were faithful and far-right followers of the John Birch Society, which later spawned the modern day White Supremacist movement.  She spent a good deal of her childhood going to right-wing gatherings with her mother. She went to Creighton University and after flunking her bar exams her first time joined the cult, LifeSpring, where members stripped naked and made fun of each other’s body fat.  She soon dropped out of that cult and became a Washington lobbyist for right wing causes, and later met and married Clarence. 

My empathy for Ginni and Thomas evaporated once I regained my senses and realized that these two very damaged souls were in positions of power to radically change our democracy and way of life for our kids and grandkids.  

On our little spat over my recent columns on Ginni Thomas with my BCC classmates Jack and Stephen, who argued my columns were based on mere speculation rather than evidence proven facts, let me just say this. First, I welcome critics of my writings. Debating issues is good.  That’s why I miss Nori — she was willing to argue the other side.  (Jack and Stephen: no hard feelings and I respect your opinions.)

Second, this isn’t a discussion about climate change or pandemics where I agree that we should be using science and evidence-based reports as a foundation for our political discussions.  Here we are talking about American politics that is mainly based on upbringings and experiences,  a wide range of political views and human behavior — some good, some not so good and some downright criminal and evil.   

With that in mind, watch the PBS Frontline show and reach your own opinions.  It’s an eye-opening experience.  

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

Jay, thank you for your post. You summed up so much of what has been happening and so alarming too. I agree with you that even though Clarence Thomas and Ginny Thomas had reasons perhaps for their behavior now, the damage that is going on is too great to spend too much time on empathy. I agree too with the healthiness of getting different opinions and having a respectful discussion. You mentioned missing one of our classmates on the forum that esposed other views. The thing is, its nice to exchange differences of opinion but not easy to debate someone who is espousing conspiracy theories and maga doctrines. Love, Joanie

Stephen Hatchett

Jay (for myself, Jack may differ), my commemts were not at all in disagreement with your POV. I don't want Clarence and/or Ginni anywhere near positions of power either.  Rather I worry that getting anywhere close to Trump-like innuendo, or sounding like a Faux News screed, could weaken the argument.  Yes, on this forum it can generate discussion.  That's just fine, but what is the end goal?  Focussing on the facts of the Thomas's lives, lets the curtain be drawn back on their true characters, and these are facts Americans should be aware of.  I agree with you on a Hooray for PBS. 

Jack Mallory

Complete agreement, Steve. 
 

The rock is just a tad bit (tipping my hat to Mr. Bryant) smaller than a VW bug. The snapper isn't a whole lot smaller than that!

In the winter, snow days. In the summer, now, smoke days. From the fires in the Pacific NW. Between smoke and pollen, it's wheezy around here!

Brunch at the nest today. I'm afraid our two eaglets are now just one. 

Jack Mallory

Junior, probably a few weeks before fledging:

And a fully fledged heron!

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

Jack, the pictures are great. Thanks for taking them. Love, Joanie

It seems like so many cases are coming to fruition soon re: Trump. Its crazy how he could still be the one picked to be the Republican candidate for President. On another topic, I was so sad to see how the Supreme Court ruled against the wetlands..they have gutted the clean air act and now the clean water protections. I heard about how the wetlands are like a sponge and help the environment so much with flooding and the eco system, etc. It really is sad that the Supreme Court decides they are scientists and refute what is known about the value of clean air and clean water. Love, Joanie

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

I think Biden is underestimated. Here is a very good article.  Love, Joanie

https://news.yahoo.com/call-biden-two-step-stumble-185917188.html

Robert Hall

Jack Mallory

LOVE WAKING UP IN THE MORNING TO THE SOUND OF THE WHEELS OF JUSTICE TURNING!

I believe Donald Trump is absolutely sincere and totally believes it when he says, "I did nothing wrong."

This is why he must NEVER again be allowed to hold any public office.

Jack Mallory

As she so often does, HCR sums up an important, complex issue, the indictment of the accused Leaker in Chief. The emphases are mine:
 

At 3:00 today, Washington D.C., time, Special Counsel Jack Smith delivered a statement about the recently unsealed indictment charging former president Donald J. Trump on 37 counts of violating national security laws as well as participating in a conspiracy to obstruct justice.

Although MAGA Republicans have tried to paint the indictment as a political move by the Biden administration over a piddling error, Smith immediately reminded people that “[t]his indictment was voted by a grand jury of citizens in the Southern District of Florida, and I invite everyone to read it in full to understand the scope and the gravity of the crimes charged.”

The indictment is, indeed, jaw dropping. 

It alleges that during his time in the White House, Trump stored in cardboard boxes “information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both the United States and foreign countries; United States nuclear programs; potential vulnerabilities of the United States and its allies to military attack; and plans for possible retaliation in response to a foreign attack.” The indictment notes that “[t]he unauthorized disclosure of these classified documents could put at risk the national security of the United States, foreign relations, the safety of the United States military, and human sources and the continued viability of sensitive intelligence collection methods.” 

Nonetheless, when Trump ceased to be president after noon on January 20, 2021, he took those boxes, “many of which contained classified documents,” to Mar-a-Lago, where he was living. He “was not authorized to possess or retain those classified documents.” The indictment makes it clear that this was no oversight: Trump was personally involved in packing the boxes and, later, in going through them and in overseeing how they were handled. The employees who worked for him exchanged text messages referring to his personal instructions about them.

Mar-a-Lago was not an authorized location for such documents, but he stored them there anyway, “including in a ballroom, a bathroom and shower, an office space, his bedroom, and a storage room.” They were stacked in public places, where anyone—including the many foreign nationals who visited Mar-a-Lago—could see them. On December 7, 2021, Trump’s personal aide Waltine Nauta took two pictures of several of the boxes fallen on the floor, with their contents, including a secret document available only to the Five Eyes intelligence alliance of the U.S., Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, spilled onto the floor. 

The indictment alleges that Trump showed classified documents to others without security clearances on two occasions, both of which are well documented. One of those occasions was recorded. Trump told the people there that the plan he was showing them was “highly confidential” and “secret.” He added, “See, as president I could have declassified it….Now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret.” 

This recording undermines his insistence that he believed he could automatically declassify documents; it proves he understood he could not. In addition, the indictment lists Trump’s many statements from 2016 about the importance of protecting classified information, all delivered as attacks on Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, whom he accused of mishandling such information. “In my administration,” he said on August 18, 2016, “I’m going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of classified information. No one will be above the law.”

The indictment goes on: When the FBI tried to recover the documents, Trump started what Washington Post journalist Jennifer Rubin called a “giant shell game”: he tried to get his lawyer to lie to the FBI and the grand jury, saying Trump did not have more documents; worked with Nauta to move some of the boxes to hide them from Trump’s lawyer, the FBI and the grand jury; tried to get his lawyer to hide or destroy documents; and got another lawyer to certify that all the documents had been produced when he knew they hadn’t. 

Nauta lied to the grand jury about his knowledge of what Trump did with the boxes. Both he and Trump have been indicted on multiple counts of obstruction and of engaging in a conspiracy to hide the documents. 

Eventually, Trump had many of the boxes moved to his property at Bedminster, New Jersey, where on two occasions he showed documents to people without security clearances. He showed a classified map of a country that is part of an ongoing military operation to a representative of his political action committee. 
Trump has been indicted on 31 counts of having “unauthorized possession of, access to, and control over documents relating to the national defense,” for keeping them, and for refusing “to deliver them to the officer and employee of the United States entitled to receive them”: language straight out of the Espionage Act. Twenty-one of the documents were marked top secret, nine were marked secret, and one was unmarked. 

These documents are not all those recovered—some likely are too sensitive to risk making public—but they nonetheless hold some of the nation’s deepest secrets: “military capabilities of a foreign country and the United States,” “military activities and planning of foreign countries,” “nuclear capabilities of a foreign country,” “military attacks by a foreign country,” “military contingency planning of the United States,” “military options of a foreign country and potential effects on United States interest,” “foreign country support of terrorist acts against United States interests,” “nuclear weaponry of the United States,” “military activity in a foreign country.” 

Smith put it starkly in his statement, “The men and women of the United States intelligence community and our armed forces dedicate their lives to protecting our nation and its people. Our laws that protect national defense information are critical to the safety and security of the United States and they must be enforced. Violations of those laws put our country at risk.” 

On Twitter, Bill Kristol said it more clearly: “These were highly classified documents dealing with military intelligence and plans. What did Trump do with them? Who now has copies of them?” Retired FBI assistant director Frank Figliuzzi noted that there is a substantial risk that “foreign intelligence services might have sought or gained access to the documents.” 

There is also substantial risk that other countries will be reluctant to share intelligence with the United States in the future. At the very least, it is an unfortunate coincidence that the Central Intelligence Agency in October 2021 reported an unusually high rate of capture or death for foreign informants recruited to spy for the United States.

Since Trump supporters have taken the position that Trump’s indictment over the stolen documents is the attempt of the Biden administration to undermine Trump’s presidential candidacy, it is worth remembering that Trump’s early announcement of his campaign was widely suspected to be an attempt to enable him to avoid legal accountability. Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Special Counsel Jack Smith precisely to put arms length between the administration and the investigations into Trump.

Smith noted today, “Adherence to the rule of law is a bedrock principle of the Department of Justice. And our nation’s commitment to the rule of law sets an example for the world. We have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone. Applying those laws. Collecting facts. That’s what determines the outcome of an investigation. Nothing more. Nothing less.

“The prosecutors in my office are among the most talented and experienced in the Department of Justice. They have investigated this case hewing to the highest ethical standards. And they will continue to do so as this case proceeds.”

Smith added: “It’s very important for me to note that the defendants in this case must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. To that end, my office will seek a speedy trial in this matter. Consistent with the public interest and the rights of the accused. We very much look forward to presenting our case to a jury of citizens in the Southern District of Florida.”

Likely responding to MAGA attacks on the FBI and the rule of law, Smith thanked the “dedicated public servants of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with whom my office is conducting this investigation and who worked tirelessly every day upholding the rule of law in our country,” before closing his brief statement.

The indictment revealed just how much detailed information Smith’s team has uncovered, presenting a shockingly thorough case to prove the allegations. Trump’s lawyers will have their work cut out for them…although the team has shifted since this morning: two of Trump’s lawyers quit today. The thoroughness of the indictment also suggests that Trump and his allies might have reason to be nervous about Smith’s other investigation: the one into the attempt to overturn results of the 2020 election.

Some of Trump’s supporters are calling for violence. After Louisiana representative Clay Higgins appeared to be egging on militias to oppose Trump’s Tuesday arraignment, Democratic senate majority leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) issued a joint statement calling for “supporters and critics alike to let the case proceed peacefully in court.” Legal scholar Joyce White Vance noted that it was “extremely sad for our country that this isn’t a bipartisan statement being made by leaders from both parties.”
—
Notes:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/special-counsel-jack-smith-delivers-statement
https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/09/politics/walt-nauta-trump-indicted/index.html
​​
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.3.0_2.pdf
https://www.nola.com/news/politics/clay-higgins-urges-war-over-trump-indictments-author-says/article_db78acde-0701-11ee-af01-73c2414fd4d7.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/09/us/politics/trump-indictment-lawyers-trusty-rowley.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/05/us/politics/cia-informants-killed-captured.html
https://www.cornellpolicyreview.com/the-executive-records-recovered-from-mar-a-lago-and-the-c-i-a-s-missing-informants/
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793
Twitter links:
BillKristol/status/1667332834514616320
JRubinBlogger/status/1667287186616754177
JoyceWhiteVance/status/1667277258183065601
petestrzok/status/1667276941043351555
djrothkopf/status/1667237607388880922
petestrzok/status/1667276952439324674?s=20

----------------

When I had a Top Secret clearance (yeah, really: young Army officer, 1967-1970) I always kept classified documents in my bathroom. Where else you gonna put 'em? My bachelors officers quarters didn’t have chandeliers, though.

Really, this shit gives many of us who had access to classified stuff the heebie-jeebies. The mere THOUGHT of bringing TS docs home and stashing them by the toilet . . .

-------------
 

Any of you ladies out there lose a slipper?

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

Stephen Hatchett

I can hardly bear to read HCR some days; she has news and historical insights that too often I wish I did not need to hear ---, but I am sure glad she's writing it.  And a shout out "HOORAH" to that panel of South Florida citizens serving on the Grand Jury that indicted Trump.

Jack Mallory

Yes, Stephen, the citizens of the free state of Florida can be proud of their jury of peers. 

--------------

To be published in September. Gov. DeSantis, told by an aide that the book is “coming out,” has asked school boards to keep it away from elementary school students younger than 75.

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

Just another comment on what Trump knew. One of the biggest points is that Jack Smith proves in the indictment that Trump knowingly committed crimes. When Trump was trying to blast Hlilary Clinton in 2016 with the emails story that turned out to be nothing, he was screaming about the importance of classified documents and doing the legal things you have to do to protect them. That is in the indictment so that shows when he later says he can do whatever he wants as there isn't a process to do it, just he has to think it, it shows that he knowingly broke the law. In the indictment there also is information that he was discussing hiding the documents before the government came to supoena more of them or say that this is all there is.He got his valet to hide documents.  Well, anyway, the obstruction case is very clear cut. I am sorry Eileen Cannon got the case. That is a bad turn of events and hope she won't ruin it all as she for sure is a Trump biased judge unlike the many in the 60 court cases that said there was no there there when Trump was trying to sue that the election was stolen. As we all know these were lies and he was told by multiple sources that the election wasn't stolen. Again, he knew it was wrong but didn't care as to him the end justifies the means...Truth doesn't matter to him. Power matters and self enrichment matters. That's it. The destruction he has done to this country is tragic as he has developed an authoritarian cult behind him,  but I am hoping that the words of Martin Luther King who said, "The Arc of the Moral Universe is Long, But it Bends Toward Justice..." will prove true.  Love, Joanie
 

Joan Ruggles (Young)

If you haven’t yet read the text of the Trump indictment, it’s worth reading. It’s not as long as it sounds and there are ample blank spaces. One part I found especially interesting was the formal declaration T made damning those who leave office and still have security clearances which give them access to top secret documents. He rails about how wrong this is. I remember this incident pretty well. I believe it was in response to former CIA director under Obama, John Brennan. He criticized Trump and as a result, Trump had his security clearance revoked. The document deriding former administration officials with this kind of access was directly pointing to Brennan. In the report, there are a number of alarming photos of stacks of boxes of Trump's stuff next to a toilet and piled into a shower. Another photo shows a box spilled on the floor with secret documents lying there—quite a shock. 

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

Jack Mallory

Keeping up with Trumpdictments is tiring. Deb snuck a pic of me napping.

. 

 

John Smeby

Please keep in mind that a grand jury only is presented "evidence" from the Government prosecuting attorney. (Some of you) guys have already found former President Trump guilty on all 37 indictment counts. A defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty by a trial jury of his/her peers. Can you please wait until after a trial is held and the defendant is allowed to present his testimony, witnesses and evidence.

And yes I am disgusted at the way some politicians, government personnel (military and civilian) and others that have not FULLY complied with the agreements called out in classification agreements, Security Classification Guides (SCG), program access agreements (SAP/SARs). In my career supporting the United States of America, if I left even one classification marked page unattended in a SCIF (or elsewhere in a secured facility) to go to the restroom or anywhere else, I would have been debriefed on the spot, to include all SAP/SARs and fired by my employer. The U.S. Government has approved the following words that I can use on my resume: "Security Clearance: Up to and including Top Secret SSBI adjudicated for Senstive Compartmented Information with Polygraph". My blood boils at what continues to go on with classified documents, illegal "email servers", and the like and no one seems to get procecuted, found guilty and imprisoned.  So go after some of the "other people" that have left classified documents, classified marked pages in their homes to include unsecured garages next to their prized corvette automobile.

Jack Mallory

John, if you actually read the posts you'll see in the article I posted Special Council Smith's emphasis on Trump's presumed  innocence--I put his words in bold to make sure people saw them. Here they are again: “It’s very important for me to note that the defendants in this case must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. To that end, my office will seek a speedy trial in this matter."

Although we have not found Trump guilty--only a jury can do that--several of us have expressed opinions as to his guilt, based on evidence cited in the indictment itself (https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2023/06/trump-indictment.pdf).

Your complaints about our coming to those conclusions would be more convincing if you had a track record of criticizing Trump's own problems with premature adjudication (didn't Stormy Daniels suggest something like that?) of the guilt of people like Hillary Clinton--"She's guilty as hell!"(https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/06/trump-hillary-clinton-belongs-in-jail.html) and “I will say this, Hillary Clinton has got to go to jail” (https://www.cnn.com/2016/06/02/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-imprisoned/index.html ).

Or have I forgotten your condemning Trump for presuming guilt before trial? 

Also in bold in the HCR piece are Trump's own words about prosecuting crimes involving national secrets: “In my administration,” he said on August 18, 2016, “I’m going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of classified information. No one will be above the law."  Do you disagree with Trump's policy?

I expect all of us in the forum are eager to see Trump have a chance to defend himself in a court of law, and support a "speedy trial" for this purpose. A grand jury of your own peers in Florida demands such a trial. Keeping in mind, of course, that a jury will find Trump "guilty" or "not guilty." They will not declare him innocent. 

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

John, You seem like you are telling us how careful the security of classified information is and you personally would have to be so careful and not leave it unattended, so then are you concerned that Trump has left boxes in bathrooms and things were spilled out on the floor and he has said he could declassify them by just thinking they were declassified. I agree that he is entitled to a trial and presumed innocent until proven guilty. Its just that he has been his own worse enemy proclaiming in 2016 about the importance of following the law and legality of classified documents and then fast forward to now where he has refused to turn over documents and has said publically that they are his and he can do with them what he wants. Its just that these are Trumps own words So yes, he deserves a trial and a chance to defend himself but I don't know how these statements that came directly from Trump would not concern us. Love, Joanie

Joan Ruggles (Young)

I think Mr. Smeby must be reading a different forum. Not one person on this forum has said Trump is guilty of 37 counts, nor of even one count. We have discussed the evidence given and alarm at some of it. You however are equating documents voluntarily turned over when discovered (Biden) with documents being held, hidden, and lied about (Trump). If Trump had simply handed over all the documents when he was asked for them, no criminal case would have been charged. This indictment wasn't brought by Merrick Garland, it was brought by a grand jury of Trump's peers in Florida. We all await the trial and verdict. 

Janet Lowry (Deal)

Jack Mallory

Folks, remember--as I must remind myself--that when John accuses us of doing something, saying something, or believing something he's really not referencing anything real. That's why he can't point to an actual example of the acts, words, or beliefs he accuses us of.

He, like others on the right, isn't seeing what we do but imagining what the "libs," or as Trump now labels us the "communists," do. It doesn't matter that there's no evidence for the accusations, any more than there was no evidence of a stolen election.

Evidence isn't important, demands for evidence are a liberal/communist trick designed to mislead the faithful. What's important is having faith in the leader--listen to what he says, trust him, agree with him. We don' need no stinkin' facts! 

It's interesting how things come around again. I, and some of you, perhaps, were called communists decades ago, for opposing that atrocity of a war in Vietnam. Now we're communists again because we oppose an authoritarian demagogue not dissimilar to Nixon. When I protested at a Trump rally here years ago a Trumper called me a commie--it was like being young again!

Like most of those who tossed that word around then, most of those who use it today probably haven't got a clue what it means, other than someone they disagree with. I doubt that Trump is well-read in either traditional or neo-Marxist theory. 

Joan Ruggles (Young)

Yes, it's correct that we should all wait for a trial and conviction. It's a shame the same courtesy was not offered to Hillary Clinton as cries of "Lock Her Up!" were ringing at every Trump rally despite FBI director James Comey saying that “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring charges against her. I imagine Mr. Smeby's blood must really be boiling after he read in the indictment that Trump retained and bragged of among the documents in his possession were military documents concerning "nuclear weaponry of the United States", "military contingency planning of the United States", "military capabilities of a foreign country and the United Staes".  Yeah, my blood would boil too. But maybe it was all a silly misunderstanding. We will wait to hear further information.