So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
trump made the claim, which means he had access and saw the information already. Or maybe he's just full of shit. Which one is more likely?
So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
McCain, Schiff and others have been explicit that they've seen nothing. Unless you're saying Trump's only source is the media, then yes he can ensure that Congress gets what they need..because presumably it's been shown to him, driving his tweet.
So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
Oh stop it already. Your blind loyalty and defense of all things Trump not to mention your constant spin, distract and deflection is ruining what little credibility you had left. Trump can absolutely have the info released as he declassified it by putting it out there in the first place, with the sources and methods redacted, by the way. Just more brilliance, I'm sure.
Follow the money, from Russia with love, all the way to impeachment.
So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
McCain, Schiff and others have been explicit that they've seen nothing. Unless you're saying Trump's only source is the media, then yes he can ensure that Congress gets what they need..because presumably it's been shown to him, driving his tweet.
Give me a break. Don't defend the defenseless.
This is not defending the defenseless. I have already told you that I am open to the possibility that Trump is full of shit on this point. The DOJ has just asked for and been granted more time to bring evidence to the committee. There still may be no evidence to give but if that is the case I assume they would already just say so. Why ask for a delay? DOJ will either have to say there is no evidence of spying or will have to come up with a reason why it can't share any evidence that exists. Declassification of evidence, sources and methods is just not as simple as all the intelligence analysts on the AMT think. Cards are being placed on the table and we'll soon find out whether Trump is lying or whether it is the beginning of watergate 2.0 and in that case it will be all of you who will have to defend the defenseless.
So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
McCain, Schiff and others have been explicit that they've seen nothing. Unless you're saying Trump's only source is the media, then yes he can ensure that Congress gets what they need..because presumably it's been shown to him, driving his tweet.
Give me a break. Don't defend the defenseless.
This is not defending the defenseless. I have already told you that I am open to the possibility that Trump is full of shit on this point. The DOJ has just asked for and been granted more time to bring evidence to the committee. There still may be no evidence to give but if that is the case I assume they would already just say so. Why ask for a delay? DOJ will either have to say there is no evidence of spying or will have to come up with a reason why it can't share any evidence that exists. Declassification of evidence, sources and methods is just not as simple as all the intelligence analysts on the AMT think. Cards are being placed on the table and we'll soon find out whether Trump is lying or whether it is the beginning of watergate 2.0 and in that case it will be all of you who will have to defend the defenseless.
It doesn't need to be declassified to send to the select committees.
So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
McCain, Schiff and others have been explicit that they've seen nothing. Unless you're saying Trump's only source is the media, then yes he can ensure that Congress gets what they need..because presumably it's been shown to him, driving his tweet.
Give me a break. Don't defend the defenseless.
This is not defending the defenseless. I have already told you that I am open to the possibility that Trump is full of shit on this point. The DOJ has just asked for and been granted more time to bring evidence to the committee. There still may be no evidence to give but if that is the case I assume they would already just say so. Why ask for a delay? DOJ will either have to say there is no evidence of spying or will have to come up with a reason why it can't share any evidence that exists. Declassification of evidence, sources and methods is just not as simple as all the intelligence analysts on the AMT think. Cards are being placed on the table and we'll soon find out whether Trump is lying or whether it is the beginning of watergate 2.0 and in that case it will be all of you who will have to defend the defenseless.
It doesn't need to be declassified to send to the select committees.
So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
McCain, Schiff and others have been explicit that they've seen nothing. Unless you're saying Trump's only source is the media, then yes he can ensure that Congress gets what they need..because presumably it's been shown to him, driving his tweet.
Give me a break. Don't defend the defenseless.
This is not defending the defenseless. I have already told you that I am open to the possibility that Trump is full of shit on this point. The DOJ has just asked for and been granted more time to bring evidence to the committee. There still may be no evidence to give but if that is the case I assume they would already just say so. Why ask for a delay? DOJ will either have to say there is no evidence of spying or will have to come up with a reason why it can't share any evidence that exists. Declassification of evidence, sources and methods is just not as simple as all the intelligence analysts on the AMT think. Cards are being placed on the table and we'll soon find out whether Trump is lying or whether it is the beginning of watergate 2.0 and in that case it will be all of you who will have to defend the defenseless.
It doesn't need to be declassified to send to the select committees.
So you say.
What do you mean? You have the select committees who are by law allowed to view classified materials adn if the POTUS deems certain intelligence to be too sensitive, you have the Gang of Eight. This isn't "so I say"... this is the actual US Code.
So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
McCain, Schiff and others have been explicit that they've seen nothing. Unless you're saying Trump's only source is the media, then yes he can ensure that Congress gets what they need..because presumably it's been shown to him, driving his tweet.
Give me a break. Don't defend the defenseless.
This is not defending the defenseless. I have already told you that I am open to the possibility that Trump is full of shit on this point. The DOJ has just asked for and been granted more time to bring evidence to the committee. There still may be no evidence to give but if that is the case I assume they would already just say so. Why ask for a delay? DOJ will either have to say there is no evidence of spying or will have to come up with a reason why it can't share any evidence that exists. Declassification of evidence, sources and methods is just not as simple as all the intelligence analysts on the AMT think. Cards are being placed on the table and we'll soon find out whether Trump is lying or whether it is the beginning of watergate 2.0 and in that case it will be all of you who will have to defend the defenseless.
It doesn't need to be declassified to send to the select committees.
So you say.
What do you mean? You have the select committees who are by law allowed to view classified materials adn if the POTUS deems certain intelligence to be too sensitive, you have the Gang of Eight. This isn't "so I say"... this is the actual US Code.
So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
McCain, Schiff and others have been explicit that they've seen nothing. Unless you're saying Trump's only source is the media, then yes he can ensure that Congress gets what they need..because presumably it's been shown to him, driving his tweet.
Give me a break. Don't defend the defenseless.
This is not defending the defenseless. I have already told you that I am open to the possibility that Trump is full of shit on this point. The DOJ has just asked for and been granted more time to bring evidence to the committee. There still may be no evidence to give but if that is the case I assume they would already just say so. Why ask for a delay? DOJ will either have to say there is no evidence of spying or will have to come up with a reason why it can't share any evidence that exists. Declassification of evidence, sources and methods is just not as simple as all the intelligence analysts on the AMT think. Cards are being placed on the table and we'll soon find out whether Trump is lying or whether it is the beginning of watergate 2.0 and in that case it will be all of you who will have to defend the defenseless.
It doesn't need to be declassified to send to the select committees.
So you say.
What do you mean? You have the select committees who are by law allowed to view classified materials adn if the POTUS deems certain intelligence to be too sensitive, you have the Gang of Eight. This isn't "so I say"... this is the actual US Code.
You are correct on this but it doesn't mean that the committees know everything that the different agencies are collecting or how they are necessarily going about the gathering of intelligence that maybe on going. This is why congressmen/women went to langley to "see" raw intelligence on russia related issues. They had previously been given reports but those reports are not the same as the "raw" which includes sources, methods, etc. The point is that what committees know or don't know is all assumption. Nobody on here has any clue.
I don't believe it. Trump promised us nobody would lose their insurance....and it would be cheaper....and it would be better healthcare.....and there would be rainbows....and unicorns.
I don't believe it. Trump promised us nobody would lose their insurance....and it would be cheaper....and it would be better healthcare.....and there would be rainbows....and unicorns.
So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
McCain, Schiff and others have been explicit that they've seen nothing. Unless you're saying Trump's only source is the media, then yes he can ensure that Congress gets what they need..because presumably it's been shown to him, driving his tweet.
Give me a break. Don't defend the defenseless.
This is not defending the defenseless. I have already told you that I am open to the possibility that Trump is full of shit on this point. The DOJ has just asked for and been granted more time to bring evidence to the committee. There still may be no evidence to give but if that is the case I assume they would already just say so. Why ask for a delay? DOJ will either have to say there is no evidence of spying or will have to come up with a reason why it can't share any evidence that exists. Declassification of evidence, sources and methods is just not as simple as all the intelligence analysts on the AMT think. Cards are being placed on the table and we'll soon find out whether Trump is lying or whether it is the beginning of watergate 2.0 and in that case it will be all of you who will have to defend the defenseless.
It doesn't need to be declassified to send to the select committees.
So you say.
What do you mean? You have the select committees who are by law allowed to view classified materials adn if the POTUS deems certain intelligence to be too sensitive, you have the Gang of Eight. This isn't "so I say"... this is the actual US Code.
You are correct on this but it doesn't mean that the committees know everything that the different agencies are collecting or how they are necessarily going about the gathering of intelligence that maybe on going. This is why congressmen/women went to langley to "see" raw intelligence on russia related issues. They had previously been given reports but those reports are not the same as the "raw" which includes sources, methods, etc. The point is that what committees know or don't know is all assumption. Nobody on here has any clue.
Spin baby spin, spin the black site, spin, spin, spin, spinning it around, spin, spin, spin, spin the black site, spinning it around.
So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
McCain, Schiff and others have been explicit that they've seen nothing. Unless you're saying Trump's only source is the media, then yes he can ensure that Congress gets what they need..because presumably it's been shown to him, driving his tweet.
Give me a break. Don't defend the defenseless.
This is not defending the defenseless. I have already told you that I am open to the possibility that Trump is full of shit on this point. The DOJ has just asked for and been granted more time to bring evidence to the committee. There still may be no evidence to give but if that is the case I assume they would already just say so. Why ask for a delay? DOJ will either have to say there is no evidence of spying or will have to come up with a reason why it can't share any evidence that exists. Declassification of evidence, sources and methods is just not as simple as all the intelligence analysts on the AMT think. Cards are being placed on the table and we'll soon find out whether Trump is lying or whether it is the beginning of watergate 2.0 and in that case it will be all of you who will have to defend the defenseless.
Still completely unable or unwilling to consider the possibility that there was sufficient evidence to investigate Crooked Trump's improper ties to Russia??
So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
McCain, Schiff and others have been explicit that they've seen nothing. Unless you're saying Trump's only source is the media, then yes he can ensure that Congress gets what they need..because presumably it's been shown to him, driving his tweet.
Give me a break. Don't defend the defenseless.
This is not defending the defenseless. I have already told you that I am open to the possibility that Trump is full of shit on this point. The DOJ has just asked for and been granted more time to bring evidence to the committee. There still may be no evidence to give but if that is the case I assume they would already just say so. Why ask for a delay? DOJ will either have to say there is no evidence of spying or will have to come up with a reason why it can't share any evidence that exists. Declassification of evidence, sources and methods is just not as simple as all the intelligence analysts on the AMT think. Cards are being placed on the table and we'll soon find out whether Trump is lying or whether it is the beginning of watergate 2.0 and in that case it will be all of you who will have to defend the defenseless.
Still completely unable or unwilling to consider the possibility that there was sufficient evidence to investigate Crooked Trump's improper ties to Russia??
Roles reversed and righties would be calling treason, punishable by death.
CNN aired "The Most Powerful Man in the World," about V. Putin last night. I hate to spoil the ending but...turns out it WAS Russia, and a certain OF is in way over his head..
So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
McCain, Schiff and others have been explicit that they've seen nothing. Unless you're saying Trump's only source is the media, then yes he can ensure that Congress gets what they need..because presumably it's been shown to him, driving his tweet.
Give me a break. Don't defend the defenseless.
This is not defending the defenseless. I have already told you that I am open to the possibility that Trump is full of shit on this point. The DOJ has just asked for and been granted more time to bring evidence to the committee. There still may be no evidence to give but if that is the case I assume they would already just say so. Why ask for a delay? DOJ will either have to say there is no evidence of spying or will have to come up with a reason why it can't share any evidence that exists. Declassification of evidence, sources and methods is just not as simple as all the intelligence analysts on the AMT think. Cards are being placed on the table and we'll soon find out whether Trump is lying or whether it is the beginning of watergate 2.0 and in that case it will be all of you who will have to defend the defenseless.
It doesn't need to be declassified to send to the select committees.
So you say.
What do you mean? You have the select committees who are by law allowed to view classified materials adn if the POTUS deems certain intelligence to be too sensitive, you have the Gang of Eight. This isn't "so I say"... this is the actual US Code.
You are correct on this but it doesn't mean that the committees know everything that the different agencies are collecting or how they are necessarily going about the gathering of intelligence that maybe on going. This is why congressmen/women went to langley to "see" raw intelligence on russia related issues. They had previously been given reports but those reports are not the same as the "raw" which includes sources, methods, etc. The point is that what committees know or don't know is all assumption. Nobody on here has any clue.
Under US law, that information must be shared with them. I'm not aware of any precedent or law that allows the executive branch to withhold any intelligence from the Gang of 8. In fact, Congress has subpoena power over the executive branch. Now the EC could claim executive privilege but that wouldn't hold up for one minute in court in this situation. And it would cause a fatal deterioration of relations between Capitol Hill and this White House. So bottom line, we're still in the same place we were.
Richard Nixon was impeached for ignoring subpoenas, among other things. He claimed Executive Privilege, but that really didn't work out too good for him.
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE ABUSE OF POWER DEFIANCE OF SUBPOENAS
no subpoenas yet, but give the House Judiciary Committee time
So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
McCain, Schiff and others have been explicit that they've seen nothing. Unless you're saying Trump's only source is the media, then yes he can ensure that Congress gets what they need..because presumably it's been shown to him, driving his tweet.
Give me a break. Don't defend the defenseless.
This is not defending the defenseless. I have already told you that I am open to the possibility that Trump is full of shit on this point. The DOJ has just asked for and been granted more time to bring evidence to the committee. There still may be no evidence to give but if that is the case I assume they would already just say so. Why ask for a delay? DOJ will either have to say there is no evidence of spying or will have to come up with a reason why it can't share any evidence that exists. Declassification of evidence, sources and methods is just not as simple as all the intelligence analysts on the AMT think. Cards are being placed on the table and we'll soon find out whether Trump is lying or whether it is the beginning of watergate 2.0 and in that case it will be all of you who will have to defend the defenseless.
Still completely unable or unwilling to consider the possibility that there was sufficient evidence to investigate Crooked Trump's improper ties to Russia??
Roles reversed and righties would be calling treason, punishable by death.
So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
McCain, Schiff and others have been explicit that they've seen nothing. Unless you're saying Trump's only source is the media, then yes he can ensure that Congress gets what they need..because presumably it's been shown to him, driving his tweet.
Give me a break. Don't defend the defenseless.
This is not defending the defenseless. I have already told you that I am open to the possibility that Trump is full of shit on this point. The DOJ has just asked for and been granted more time to bring evidence to the committee. There still may be no evidence to give but if that is the case I assume they would already just say so. Why ask for a delay? DOJ will either have to say there is no evidence of spying or will have to come up with a reason why it can't share any evidence that exists. Declassification of evidence, sources and methods is just not as simple as all the intelligence analysts on the AMT think. Cards are being placed on the table and we'll soon find out whether Trump is lying or whether it is the beginning of watergate 2.0 and in that case it will be all of you who will have to defend the defenseless.
Still completely unable or unwilling to consider the possibility that there was sufficient evidence to investigate Crooked Trump's improper ties to Russia??
What are you talking about? I am willing to consider that possibility. In due time we will find out whether the evidence was sufficient or not. At the moment though there is no evidence that the "ties" were "improper"...there is only evidence that there were "ties". This is what Clapper and anyone else in the know stated two weekends ago. Now of course these findings can change but that would require new evidence that nobody in the public has been made aware of to date.
So...over the weekend had a little CNN on. 2 talking heads, one conservative and one liberal, around the weekend anchor. Maybe it was the time change, maybe I'm just OVER it, but I have no idea what anyone's names were, the anchor may have been Ana Cabrera.
The conservative says that it's assumed as fact that there was a turned down FISA warrant and one that was accepted. The lib starts yelling at the guy and soon they're just shouting over each other. I'm thinking, is that what happened? Is that true? Is it just spin? I've gotten to the point where I can't even follow this shit along.
Support media you trust. I just bought a 9.99 Washington Post subscription. The NYT is next.
Most reporting confirms the FISA warrant story above but the truth is nobody knows 100%. FISA requests are classified and if there even was/were FISA requests the next question would be who was/were listed as the target(s). Nobody knows anything with certainty. The New York Times and the Washington Post are hardly anymore trustworthy on this issue.
No offense, but this is sort of crap. Trump made the accusation. He can easily have the information sent down to the select committees. He could even strong arm a public release. The fact that there are "media reports" and conflicting information is emblematic of what a crock of shit this likely is.
"He can easily have the information sent down" is sort of crap as well. That's the kind of sentence one would read in the Washington Post. This involves sources and methods. You don't know if this is "easy" at all. You also don't know what the select committee even knows or can talk about at this point. Also...no offense.
McCain, Schiff and others have been explicit that they've seen nothing. Unless you're saying Trump's only source is the media, then yes he can ensure that Congress gets what they need..because presumably it's been shown to him, driving his tweet.
Give me a break. Don't defend the defenseless.
This is not defending the defenseless. I have already told you that I am open to the possibility that Trump is full of shit on this point. The DOJ has just asked for and been granted more time to bring evidence to the committee. There still may be no evidence to give but if that is the case I assume they would already just say so. Why ask for a delay? DOJ will either have to say there is no evidence of spying or will have to come up with a reason why it can't share any evidence that exists. Declassification of evidence, sources and methods is just not as simple as all the intelligence analysts on the AMT think. Cards are being placed on the table and we'll soon find out whether Trump is lying or whether it is the beginning of watergate 2.0 and in that case it will be all of you who will have to defend the defenseless.
It doesn't need to be declassified to send to the select committees.
So you say.
What do you mean? You have the select committees who are by law allowed to view classified materials adn if the POTUS deems certain intelligence to be too sensitive, you have the Gang of Eight. This isn't "so I say"... this is the actual US Code.
You are correct on this but it doesn't mean that the committees know everything that the different agencies are collecting or how they are necessarily going about the gathering of intelligence that maybe on going. This is why congressmen/women went to langley to "see" raw intelligence on russia related issues. They had previously been given reports but those reports are not the same as the "raw" which includes sources, methods, etc. The point is that what committees know or don't know is all assumption. Nobody on here has any clue.
Under US law, that information must be shared with them. I'm not aware of any precedent or law that allows the executive branch to withhold any intelligence from the Gang of 8. In fact, Congress has subpoena power over the executive branch. Now the EC could claim executive privilege but that wouldn't hold up for one minute in court in this situation. And it would cause a fatal deterioration of relations between Capitol Hill and this White House. So bottom line, we're still in the same place we were.
I don't think in this situation Trump is claiming executive privilege. This spying (if it occurred at all) took place under the previous administration and I don't think Trump would prevent this from going to the committees. What we don't know is whether DOJ/CIA/NSA/DIA holdovers are resisting the sharing of some of this info or not and yes if they do resist that can and will likely result in subpoenas if it even goes that far. Another twist is that it was just reported (via three anonymous sources) that someone within the Obama administration relied on British Intelligence to access the NSA database for recordings of conversations allowing Obama to bypass American restrictions. Again this is all anonymous and could be bullshit as well but it demonstrates the limited reach of congress should the executive branch choose to use a foreign agency to do it's work.
Comments
Unless you're saying Trump's only source is the media, then yes he can ensure that Congress gets what they need..because presumably it's been shown to him, driving his tweet.
Give me a break. Don't defend the defenseless.
Follow the money, from Russia with love, all the way to impeachment.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I hate to spoil the ending but...turns out it WAS Russia, and a certain OF is in way over his head..
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
ABUSE OF POWER
DEFIANCE OF SUBPOENAS
no subpoenas yet, but give the House Judiciary Committee time
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-administration-appointee-tracker/database/?hpid=hp_no-name_graphic-story-b:homepage/story
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com