This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39937258

The article has changed 9 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 6 Version 7
Trump defends 'absolute right' to share 'facts' with Russia Trump defends 'absolute right' to share 'facts' with Russia
(35 minutes later)
US President Donald Trump has defended his "absolute right" to share information with Russia, following a row over classified material. US President Donald Trump has defended his "absolute right" to discuss sensitive material on terrorism and airline safety at a meeting with Russia's foreign minister.
Mr Trump tweeted that he had shared "facts pertaining to terrorism and airline safety" and wanted Russia to do more against so-called Islamic State. US media reports said he had shared material that was passed on by a partner which had not given permission.
He met Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in the Oval Office last week. While this is not illegal, it is seen as a breach of trust by many in the intelligence community.
US media said Mr Trump had shared material that was passed on by a partner which had not given permission. Mr Trump met Sergei Lavrov last week in the Oval Office.
A report in the Washington Post said Mr Trump had confided top secret information relating to an IS plot thought to centre on the use of laptop computers on aircraft. Leading Republicans and Democrats have voiced concerns over what was said, with top Senate Democrat leader Chuck Schumer calling for the transcripts to be released by the White House.
Mr Trump's move is not illegal, as the US president has the authority to declassify information. The US Senate Intelligence Committee has also asked for copies of any notes taken in the meeting. CIA Director Mike Pompeo is due to brief the committee later.
The action drew strong criticism from Democrats and a call for an explanation from his own Republican party. Mr Trump's alleged disclosures are not illegal, as the US president has the authority to declassify information.
The US Senate Intelligence Committee has asked the White House for more information on the reports. Meanwhile, CIA Director Mike Pompeo is due to brief the committee later on Tuesday.
What was the president's defence?What was the president's defence?
Mr Trump tweeted: "As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining to terrorism and airline flight safety.Mr Trump tweeted: "As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining to terrorism and airline flight safety.
"Humanitarian reasons, plus I want Russia to greatly step up their fight against [IS] & terrorism.""Humanitarian reasons, plus I want Russia to greatly step up their fight against [IS] & terrorism."
It is not clear if Mr Trump was acknowledging having shared intelligence secrets with the Russian officials, thus contradicting White House statements, or whether he was simply trying to explain what had been discussed.It is not clear if Mr Trump was acknowledging having shared intelligence secrets with the Russian officials, thus contradicting White House statements, or whether he was simply trying to explain what had been discussed.
The BBC's Anthony Zurcher in Washington says this was a carefully constructed defence of the meeting, in which President Trump frames any revelation of intelligence information as a calculated move to advance US national security priorities.The BBC's Anthony Zurcher in Washington says this was a carefully constructed defence of the meeting, in which President Trump frames any revelation of intelligence information as a calculated move to advance US national security priorities.
After all, the controversy that swirled around the White House on Monday night was never legal, it was political, and this defence may be enough for Republicans to rally around, he adds.After all, the controversy that swirled around the White House on Monday night was never legal, it was political, and this defence may be enough for Republicans to rally around, he adds.
Top Senate Democrat leader Chuck Schumer has called on the White House to release the transcripts of the meeting.
What happened in the Oval Office?What happened in the Oval Office?
In a conversation with the Russian foreign minister and Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak in the Oval Office, the president revealed details that could lead to the exposure of a source of information, officials told the Washington Post. A report in the Washington Post on Monday said Mr Trump had confided top secret information relating to an IS plot thought to centre on the use of laptop computers on aircraft.
The intelligence disclosed came from a US ally and was considered too sensitive to share with other US allies, the paper reported. In a conversation with the Russian foreign minister and Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak in the Oval Office on 10 May, the president revealed details that could lead to the exposure of a source of information, officials told the paper.
The intelligence disclosed came from a US ally and was considered too sensitive to share with other US allies, it added.
Others at the meeting realised the mistake and scrambled to "contain the damage" by informing the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the National Security Agency (NSA), says the Post.Others at the meeting realised the mistake and scrambled to "contain the damage" by informing the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the National Security Agency (NSA), says the Post.
The meeting came a day after Mr Trump fired his FBI chief, James Comey, sparking criticism that he had done so because the FBI was investigating his election campaign's alleged Russian ties.The meeting came a day after Mr Trump fired his FBI chief, James Comey, sparking criticism that he had done so because the FBI was investigating his election campaign's alleged Russian ties.
How has the White House responded?How has the White House responded?
Pressed by reporters on Tuesday, National Security Adviser HR McMaster declined to say whether or not Mr Trump had shared classified information with the Russians.Pressed by reporters on Tuesday, National Security Adviser HR McMaster declined to say whether or not Mr Trump had shared classified information with the Russians.
He denied the US president had caused a "lapse in national security".He denied the US president had caused a "lapse in national security".
"What the president discussed with the foreign minister was wholly appropriate to that conversation and is consistent with the routine sharing of information between the president and any leaders with whom he's engaged.""What the president discussed with the foreign minister was wholly appropriate to that conversation and is consistent with the routine sharing of information between the president and any leaders with whom he's engaged."
He also said President Trump had not been aware of the source of information that was discussed with the Russian officials.He also said President Trump had not been aware of the source of information that was discussed with the Russian officials.
Golden rule: Frank Gardner, BBC security correspondentGolden rule: Frank Gardner, BBC security correspondent
Despite the denials issued by the White House that any actual intelligence sources were revealed to the Russians, whatever was said in that Oval Office meeting was enough to alarm certain officials and, reportedly, to alert the CIA and NSA.Despite the denials issued by the White House that any actual intelligence sources were revealed to the Russians, whatever was said in that Oval Office meeting was enough to alarm certain officials and, reportedly, to alert the CIA and NSA.
They in turn will have needed to warn the country that supplied the intelligence. There is a golden rule in the world of espionage that when one government supplies intelligence to another it must not be passed on to a third party without permission of the original supplier. The reason is simple: it could put the lives of their human informants at risk.They in turn will have needed to warn the country that supplied the intelligence. There is a golden rule in the world of espionage that when one government supplies intelligence to another it must not be passed on to a third party without permission of the original supplier. The reason is simple: it could put the lives of their human informants at risk.
In this case it appears to relate to the discovery of plans by jihadists in Syria to devise a way of smuggling viable explosive devices on board a plane inside a laptop computer. Given the well-publicised ban on laptops in cabins on certain Middle Eastern routes, whoever revealed that information is unlikely to be still in place.In this case it appears to relate to the discovery of plans by jihadists in Syria to devise a way of smuggling viable explosive devices on board a plane inside a laptop computer. Given the well-publicised ban on laptops in cabins on certain Middle Eastern routes, whoever revealed that information is unlikely to be still in place.
What has the reaction been?What has the reaction been?
Levels of US classification - from lowest to highestLevels of US classification - from lowest to highest