He didn’ t deny that Trump leaked highly classified intelligence.
National Security Adviser H. R. McMaster has a sterling reputation. Now he’s putting it on the line to become a full-throated defender of President Donald Trump. “I stand by my statement — the premise of the article is false that in any way the president had a conversation that was inappropriate or that resulted in any kind of lapse in national security, ” he said during a press conference today, responding to a question about yesterday’s report. The article’s premise was that “President Trump revealed highly classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in a White House meeting last week.” But McMaster never actually said what specific part of that “premise” was false. Instead, he chose to parrot the Trump administration’s go-to refrain in these situations — that the real issue here is leakers. “Our national security has been put at risk by those violating confidentiality and by those releasing information to the press that could be used and connected with other information available to make American citizens and others more vulnerable, ” he told reporters at the White House. This might seem like a Post-said, White House-said scenario, but this is much, much more than that. Specifically, there are three main takeaways from the press conference: When Trump picked McMaster as his second national security adviser in the wake of the, the noted how the president had selected a “widely respected military strategist” to be his top national security staffer. McMaster earned that respect. He is seen as somewhat of an in the military. As a brigade commander in Iraq, he became known as the after kicking al-Qaeda out of its stronghold there. He also literally wrote the book, called, on how dangerous it is when a president’s generals don’ t stand up to him and do the right thing. But now, by personally coming out and defending Trump’s actions, McMaster risks tarnishing his well-earned reputation. At the press conference, he stated that “ [i] n the context of that discussion” between the president and the Russian foreign minister, “what the president discussed was wholly appropriate to that conversation and is consistent with the routine sharing of information between the president and any leaders with whom he is engaged.” “I was in the room, the deputy adviser for national security, Dina [Powell] was in the room, and none of us felt in any way that conversation was inappropriate, ” he added. McMaster is putting his own personal credibility and professional judgment on the line here. And that’s risky — because when you take a closer look at his statements, it’s clear that he’s deliberately obfuscating what actually happened. There was an important exchange between a reporter and McMaster during the press conference that’s worth reading in full: Note what happened here: McMaster very pointedly that Trump shared classified information with the Russians. He merely claims that the information Trump shared was “wholly appropriate.” Remember: McMaster stated that the “premise” of the Washington Post article is “false.” But at no point in the press conference did he actually refute the core premise of the article. Instead, he tried to make it seem like the intelligence shared was no big deal. Then, right before leaving the press conference, he decided to make one additional point that he evidently thought would make Trump’s actions seem even more harmless. It did the exact opposite. Yes, that’s something the national security adviser actually said. Here’s the full quote: McMaster told reporters that Trump shared intelligence with the Russians and he had no idea where it came from and was not briefed on it beforehand. That’s big. It is now completely possible Trump gave intelligence to the Russians without any knowledge about how sensitive it was. In essence, Trump may have put a vital anti-ISIS source in danger without knowing the specifics of what he was revealing to Russia’s foreign minister and ambassador. McMaster left after that, but questions remain. Most importantly, after the press conference it certainly appears that Trump did in fact reveal intelligence to the Russians — which he is technically allowed to do as president — but it might still have been intelligence that harms our anti-ISIS fight. Here’s what is clear: McMaster is entering dangerous territory here by trying to refute this story and adopting the administration’s talking points. For the “hero” who once passionately argued for the importance of standing up for truth in the face of a president’s lies, that course of action seems decidedly unheroic.
