The media idea that American spy agencies are in the dark about what was said in the Trump/Putin sit-down a week ago is laughable to those who know about the capabilities of the intelligence agencies….
Weather it was the exact talking in the room , or what was sent back home to Russia, or what was said in Russia?
The people at the NSA most probably know in general or verbatim that information…
The NSA either would have gathered the info itself….
Or got the info from a third countries intel operation….
I do NOT believe if people in the community say they don’t know….They don’t know….
They will need to protect sources and methods….
And THAT could even include them lying to lawmakers…..
And making sure that the President does NOT know everything they know…..
Since Trump does not trust or support them…But does support and trust the Russian President….Someone they deal an adversary….
President Donald Trump’s insistence on holding a one-on-one meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin hobbled U.S. intelligence agencies that would usually get an intimate look at such a sit-down, but American spies still have extraordinary capabilities to piece together what was discussed.
That’s in large part due to the existence of a top-secret U.S. collection service that specializes in tapping adversaries’ communications on the fly, including those of Putin’s entourage at last week’s summit in Helsinki.
Privately, sources familiar with U.S. intelligence capabilities expressed confidence that the so-called Special Collection Service scooped up not only Putin’s readout of the two-hour meeting, but what the Kremlin’s top spymasters really think about it — and how they’re spinning it to their foreign counterparts.
That means the National Security Agency and CIA are at less of a strategic disadvantage than U.S. intelligence officials have acknowledged publicly. But because they likely are missing the one critical piece of intelligence they need the most — a word-by-word account of what Trump and Putin said during the meeting — those officials appear to be flying somewhat blind when it comes to fulfilling their most important mission of helping U.S. policymakers figure out what comes next.