You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
Leakers! Find the leakers! Both candidates were under investigation but only one was publically exposed before the election. With all the Russian ties, shady business dealings and Wiki knowledge, why would it be a surprise that Trump was under surveillance? And, we've already heard testimony that Obama couldn't order up a wiretap. Distraction and deflection from the true crimes of the Trump administration.
“I have seen intelligence reports that clearly show that the president-elect and his team were, I guess, at least monitored,” Nunes told reporters. “It looks to me like it was all legally collected, but it was essentially a lot of information on the president-elect and his transition team and what they were doing.”
Nunes described the surveillance as most likely being “incidental collection.” This can occur when a person inside the United States communicates with a foreign target of U.S. surveillance. In such cases, the identities of U.S. citizens are supposed to be kept secret — but can be “unmasked” by intelligence officials under certain circumstances.
He also said he did not know yet whether the Trump transition team members who were unmasked were communicating from Trump Tower. Earlier this month, Trump claimed in a series of Tweets that former President Barack Obama ordered a wiretap of the phones at Trump Tower — something Nunes reiterated on Wednesday he had no evidence of.
FBI Director James Comey appeared before the panel on Monday and confirmed that the FBI launched a counterintelligence investigation in July into Russia’s election meddling, including possible coordination with the Trump campaign.
More like the sound of a felt slipper falling gently to a carpeted floor in the basement. Nice try though.
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
Yea, that's the whole point. That Trump was under surveillance. Sure, not the reasons why he was under surveillance. Brilliance at its finest.
If they had been investigating the Russian connection since July 2016 & had found that a lot of the Russian ties were to the Trump campaign, it makes perfect sense that they would look into the transition team. This is just spin, folks.
Like I stated earlier, we don't have all of the facts. That being said, based on what we know, this doesn't look good for Trump and/or his administration/transition team/whateveryouwantocallthem. Manafort went from being a "key part of the campaign & transition" to being a nobody overnight. Why? SPIN & DEFLECTION.
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
Proven right the he was wiretapped by Obama? Seems like we closed that book already.
The book was closed on the literal interpretation of the tweet but not on the substance that people within the Obama administration were conducting surveillance of the Trump administration via a backdoor of incidental collection and then selectively leaked said information illegally for nefarious purposes.
Most of you support this type of duplicitous game as members of the #resistance but rest assured it is watergate 2.0 if true. People don't seem to be comprehending how seriously this damages your country. With a new found hate for Putin members of the previous administration decided to act like him. When the story is finally told this will be the Obama and Democratic party legacy.
Addendum - What's crazy is that Trump had this information all along but he and Nunez waited for the massive over reach by the left post-Comey that they knew would come. Most of you just can't help yourselves. Brilliance.
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
If Trump is correct based on this conversation, then the full, honest story would read: "The US routinely surveils foreign targets, and captures conversations between those foreign targets and domestic counterparts. If Trump or his associates were in contact with those foreign targets, it is plausible that security agencies would have recorded said conversations."
Instead, the story delivered was: "How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!"
Whether true or not, the man uses ambiguity and timing to control messages brilliantly. The omission of context (if this is, in fact, the context he was referring to) and the accusation of malice attributed directly to Obama, are highly effective means of controlling the perception of an event. Trump has managed to frame a controversial and potentially damaging story (my team and I were in contact with foreign agents being monitored by security agencies) as one where they are victims (I've been spied on by my own government). If Trump knew that this information would come to light, there's little doubt in my mind that his action (making an ambiguous statement involving conspiracy, shock value, discrediting of the establishment) was the most effective damage control available. Best case scenario, he gave people a meaningless and unimpeachable topic to distract them while he continues with the topics people have serious objection to (like a poor attempt at a Health Care Bill). Worst case scenario, he loses a handful of supporters for a re-election he likely has no concern about, and is no further away or closer to accomplishing what he'd like to.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
Proven right the he was wiretapped by Obama? Seems like we closed that book already.
The book was closed on the literal interpretation of the tweet but not on the substance that people within the Obama administration were conducting surveillance of the Trump administration via a backdoor of incidental collection and then selectively leaked said information illegally for nefarious purposes.
Most of you support this type of duplicitous game as members of the #resistance but rest assured it is watergate 2.0 if true. People don't seem to be comprehending how seriously this damages your country. With a new found hate for Putin members of the previous administration decided to act like him. When the story is finally told this will be the Obama and Democratic party legacy.
Addendum - What's crazy is that Trump had this information all along but he and Nunez waited for the massive over reach by the left post-Comey that they knew would come. Most of you just can't help yourselves. Brilliance.
Watergate 2.0.. you're drinking the crazy juice. Watergate was a break in, an ILLEGAL wiretap and a cover up. Using Director Comey's testimony as a source, which of those things happened to implicate Obama?
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
Yea, that's the whole point. That Trump was under surveillance. Sure, not the reasons why he was under surveillance. Brilliance at its finest.
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
Yea, that's the whole point. That Trump was under surveillance. Sure, not the reasons why he was under surveillance. Brilliance at its finest.
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
Yea, that's the whole point. That Trump was under surveillance. Sure, not the reasons why he was under surveillance. Brilliance at its finest.
Still trying to have it both ways...
1) There is so much evidence through surveillance that Trump is colluding with Russia!
2) Trump is a liar on "wire tapping"! Obama's administration wasn't spying on him! This is outrageous!
3) Well of course he was under surveillance! He was colluding with Russia for fuck sakes!
This has been the basics of HalifaxToTheMaxineWatters since inauguration. It is why I spend most of the time laughing at you. It is funny.
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
Proven right the he was wiretapped by Obama? Seems like we closed that book already.
The book was closed on the literal interpretation of the tweet but not on the substance that people within the Obama administration were conducting surveillance of the Trump administration via a backdoor of incidental collection and then selectively leaked said information illegally for nefarious purposes.
Most of you support this type of duplicitous game as members of the #resistance but rest assured it is watergate 2.0 if true. People don't seem to be comprehending how seriously this damages your country. With a new found hate for Putin members of the previous administration decided to act like him. When the story is finally told this will be the Obama and Democratic party legacy.
Addendum - What's crazy is that Trump had this information all along but he and Nunez waited for the massive over reach by the left post-Comey that they knew would come. Most of you just can't help yourselves. Brilliance.
Watergate 2.0.. you're drinking the crazy juice. Watergate was a break in, an ILLEGAL wiretap and a cover up. Using Director Comey's testimony as a source, which of those things happened to implicate Obama?
All you need to know or see is the opening statements from the respective party leaders of the House Intelligence Committee. One was sweaty, nervous, misspoke, eyes blinking and darted around. The other was calm, steady, didn't blink much and looked the camera in the eye as he listed all the things we do know and wondered aloud if they were coincidences. And that the investigation was continuing. I expect Obama will be locked up, just like Hillary?
Follow the money, from Russia with love, all the way to impeachment. That'll be the real brilliance.
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
Proven right the he was wiretapped by Obama? Seems like we closed that book already.
People don't seem to be comprehending how seriously this damages your country.
I can comprehend that fully. The fact that he even won the nomination has damaged our country.
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
Proven right the he was wiretapped by Obama? Seems like we closed that book already.
The book was closed on the literal interpretation of the tweet but not on the substance that people within the Obama administration were conducting surveillance of the Trump administration via a backdoor of incidental collection and then selectively leaked said information illegally for nefarious purposes.
Most of you support this type of duplicitous game as members of the #resistance but rest assured it is watergate 2.0 if true. People don't seem to be comprehending how seriously this damages your country. With a new found hate for Putin members of the previous administration decided to act like him. When the story is finally told this will be the Obama and Democratic party legacy.
Addendum - What's crazy is that Trump had this information all along but he and Nunez waited for the massive over reach by the left post-Comey that they knew would come. Most of you just can't help yourselves. Brilliance.
Watergate 2.0.. you're drinking the crazy juice. Watergate was a break in, an ILLEGAL wiretap and a cover up. Using Director Comey's testimony as a source, which of those things happened to implicate Obama?
Well...
They didn't have digital data collection through the NSA back in the 70's but based on what we heard from Nunes today it could be heading that way. What we know is that the NSA has digital records of everything but the law prevents this information on Americans from being accessed and disseminated. Nunes just suggested that this information while collected legally through "incidental" means was not actually to be used or unmasked for unrelated intelligence reports. The illegal unmasking, usage, and sharing of the "incidental" info is the digital equivalent of an illegal wiretap. He or she who participated in this illegal usage and sharing is breaking the law and faces penalty of 10 years in prison. The next question is who ordered the usage and sharing? How high does this go? Were the reports Nunes mentioned presented to President Obama? What did he know and when did he know it? Watergate 2.0.
After more than three and a half years of service as the 13th U.S. Secretary of Energy, nuclear physicist Ernest J. Moniz has returned to his roots at MIT, the place where he served most of his professional career.
Nominated to the cabinet by President Barack Obama in March 2013 and confirmed by the Senate on May 16 in a unanimous vote — a rare occurrence in a polarized political atmosphere — Moniz left the office on Jan. 20, 2017, with the arrival of the Trump administration.
Now, he intends to build upon that experience by working on policy proposals for climate solutions through clean energy innovation, and in the area of nuclear security. In addition to serving in a part-time appointment at MIT as professor of physics post-tenure and special advisor to the president, and as a nonresident senior fellow at Harvard University’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, he also intends to do additional work in clean energy through a nonprofit organization of his own.
“Over the last few years, the United States and the world saw what we at MIT have known for decades: that Ernie Moniz is a brilliant scientist, a gifted leader, and a tireless advocate for positive change,” says MIT President L. Rafael Reif. “I am thrilled that the Institute will again benefit from his wisdom and experience as we continue our critical work to identify practical ways to achieve a sustainable energy future and address climate change. All of MIT is delighted to welcome him home.”
At the Department of Energy, Moniz led the implementation of President Obama’s commitment to an “all of the above” energy strategy, including the establishment of new programs to foster research on clean, renewable forms of energy and next-generation nuclear power. He also played a crucial role in the negotiations that led to a ground-breaking treaty with Iran to limit that country’s development of nuclear materials. He was often called the best-prepared of energy secretaries by members of both political parties.
“One of the things we really accomplished” during his term at the DOE, Moniz says, “was placing innovation at the center of climate solutions.” Finding ways to push that emphasis forward — encompassing innovation in policy and economic arenas as well as in technology — will continue to be a major focus of his work in coming years, he says. This emphasis echoes the “Mission Innovation” initiative that was adopted, with the help of a strong push by the Obama administration, at the Paris COP 21 climate conference in 2015.
The other area Moniz will be focusing on, nuclear security, also builds on the work he did at the DOE, both in his latest stint as secretary and earlier as undersecretary during the Clinton administration, when nuclear security, including controlling nuclear weapons materials after the collapse of the Soviet Union, was a major focus of his responsibilities. Most recently, Moniz served as one of the two lead negotiators, along with Secretary of State John Kerry, in hammering out the details of the nuclear agreement that has significantly delayed Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons and provided unique verification measures.
The part Moniz played in the Iran agreement negotiations and implementation over the course of two years, in which his Iranian counterpart was an MIT alumnus — a factor that helped to facilitate the negotiations — was “a really novel role,” unlike anything previously undertaken by a cabinet member, he says. The fact that the negotiating team for an international treaty included two cabinet members on each side (including Kerry and himself) was “unprecedented,” he says.
“It was a good time to be Secretary of Energy,” he says, “because the president showed successful global personal leadership in both these areas” of climate change and nuclear security. The Paris climate agreement — the most sweeping, global agreement on the subject to date — “would not have happened without [Obama’s] leadership,” Moniz says.
Continuing that progress, he says, will require not just more research but better communications. He’s concerned that momentum for dealing with this issue, which grew during the previous administration, could prove insufficient, especially in a changed political atmosphere. “We could be slowed down in our needed response to the climate risks if we don’t do a better job of bringing everyone along,” he says. That work, he emphasizes, “is not on a one-year timescale. It’s more like two or three decades. We must — we will — head toward really significant carbon emissions reduction, well beyond those of the Paris targets.”
And while opponents of measures to combat climate change claim that any such action will damage the U.S. economy, Moniz says it’s clear that “ultimately, this will be a net good for the economy.” However, in order to offset impacts on certain sectors of the workforce, he says, it’s paramount that “a focus will be on workers, at national, regional, and state levels.”
What’s needed, he says, is a concentration on “how we can most aggressively march toward the low-carbon future that we need.” Toward that end, he intends to convene a varied group of specialists at MIT, Harvard, and elsewhere, including economists and political scientists as well as scientists and engineers. “It’s got to be a broad-based, multidisciplinary group,” he says. Together, these experts will work toward developing a set of concrete policy proposals over the next few years, keyed to the needs of specific areas. “A regional focus is the only way to eventually get there,” he says, because both the problems and the opportunities of addressing climate change vary so much by location.
While researchers have clear ideas as to the kinds of carbon-free energy sources and policies needed to forestall the most devastating impacts of a changing climate, he says, “the question is how we get there, through a focused effort looking at jobs and centers for innovation.”
“Few have served with greater distinction to this country,” Institute Professor John Deutch, a chemist who specializes in energy research and who has also served in government positions in Washington, says of Moniz. About his return to the campus, Deutch advises, “Welcome him back and enjoy his wit and wisdom, as I certainly shall.”
Before this service in Washington, Moniz was the founding director of the MIT Energy Initiative (MITEI), which was established in 2006 by then-MIT President Susan Hockfield. Under his leadership, MITEI supported almost 800 research projects at the Institute, had 23 industry and public partners supporting research and analysis, and engaged 25 percent of the MIT faculty in its projects and programs.
Moniz received a BS in physics from Boston College, a PhD in theoretical physics from Stanford University, and eight honorary doctorates. He is a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the Humboldt Foundation, the American Physical Society, and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. He was awarded the Grand Cross of the Order of Makarios III and of Prince Henry the Navigator, and the Distinguished Public Service Medal of the Department of Defense.
“Ernie’s career is the blueprint for how science can be used as an essential tool to inform policy,” says Maria Zuber, MIT’s vice president for research. “It’s great to have him back and challenging all of us to develop and enhance this important skill.”
To Rick Perry. Yea, this administration is damaging to our country. I wonder how Rick's lassoing practice is progressing?
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
Proven right the he was wiretapped by Obama? Seems like we closed that book already.
The book was closed on the literal interpretation of the tweet but not on the substance that people within the Obama administration were conducting surveillance of the Trump administration via a backdoor of incidental collection and then selectively leaked said information illegally for nefarious purposes.
Most of you support this type of duplicitous game as members of the #resistance but rest assured it is watergate 2.0 if true. People don't seem to be comprehending how seriously this damages your country. With a new found hate for Putin members of the previous administration decided to act like him. When the story is finally told this will be the Obama and Democratic party legacy.
Addendum - What's crazy is that Trump had this information all along but he and Nunez waited for the massive over reach by the left post-Comey that they knew would come. Most of you just can't help yourselves. Brilliance.
Watergate 2.0.. you're drinking the crazy juice. Watergate was a break in, an ILLEGAL wiretap and a cover up. Using Director Comey's testimony as a source, which of those things happened to implicate Obama?
Well...
They didn't have digital data collection through the NSA back in the 70's but based on what we heard from Nunes today it could be heading that way. What we know is that the NSA has digital records of everything but the law prevents this information on Americans from being accessed and disseminated. Nunes just suggested that this information while collected legally through "incidental" means was not actually to be used or unmasked for unrelated intelligence reports. The illegal unmasking, usage, and sharing of the "incidental" info is the digital equivalent of an illegal wiretap. He or she who participated in this illegal usage and sharing is breaking the law and faces penalty of 10 years in prison. The next question is who ordered the usage and sharing? How high does this go? Were the reports Nunes mentioned presented to President Obama? What did he know and when did he know it? Watergate 2.0.
You really think Obama, a constitutional law professor from Harvard, is as stupid as Trump? Suggested doesn't mean proven. I believe treason results in a life sentence. What did we hear from Nunes today again? Other than he has no evidence to support his or Trump's claims?
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
Proven right the he was wiretapped by Obama? Seems like we closed that book already.
The book was closed on the literal interpretation of the tweet but not on the substance that people within the Obama administration were conducting surveillance of the Trump administration via a backdoor of incidental collection and then selectively leaked said information illegally for nefarious purposes.
Most of you support this type of duplicitous game as members of the #resistance but rest assured it is watergate 2.0 if true. People don't seem to be comprehending how seriously this damages your country. With a new found hate for Putin members of the previous administration decided to act like him. When the story is finally told this will be the Obama and Democratic party legacy.
Addendum - What's crazy is that Trump had this information all along but he and Nunez waited for the massive over reach by the left post-Comey that they knew would come. Most of you just can't help yourselves. Brilliance.
Watergate 2.0.. you're drinking the crazy juice. Watergate was a break in, an ILLEGAL wiretap and a cover up. Using Director Comey's testimony as a source, which of those things happened to implicate Obama?
Well...
They didn't have digital data collection through the NSA back in the 70's but based on what we heard from Nunes today it could be heading that way. What we know is that the NSA has digital records of everything but the law prevents this information on Americans from being accessed and disseminated. Nunes just suggested that this information while collected legally through "incidental" means was not actually to be used or unmasked for unrelated intelligence reports. The illegal unmasking, usage, and sharing of the "incidental" info is the digital equivalent of an illegal wiretap. He or she who participated in this illegal usage and sharing is breaking the law and faces penalty of 10 years in prison. The next question is who ordered the usage and sharing? How high does this go? Were the reports Nunes mentioned presented to President Obama? What did he know and when did he know it? Watergate 2.0.
Give me a fucking break, you are seriously grasping and hoping that Obama is implicated but knowing what we know after 8 years of ongoing investigations into his administration by the GOP... I'd say those chances are pretty slim. You may disagree with his politics but it's hard to impune his integrity.
Onto the the nuanced part.. yes the unmasking should be investigated, but that's a double edged sword. Any testimony that details that a Trump Transition employee was picked up in the incidental collection will have to deal with who that transition employee was talking to.. and therefore why was that person under surveillance? And according to Nunes, it wasn't about Russia. So therefore... the Trump team was talking to someone that some intelligence service had reason to believe needed to be watched and received a FISA warrant to do such. Not your everyday Joe I'm sure.
Second, here's the fun part. Let's take Flynn for example. If he was picked up in monitoring then no evidence in that monitoring could be used in a prosecution or further investigation. That's a 4th amendment violation... HOWEVER, information collected in that monitoring about OTHERS can absolutely be used. For example, if Flynn said "Jared Kushner needs to move a million off shore into a Russian account because he doesn't want to pay taxes", then that's a high enough standard to create a wiretap warrant on Kushner.
So once information starts to get revealed, it will get ugly for everyone frankly, other than Obama. First, he's out of office. Second, Nunes was very clear it was legal. Case closed on the Obama side. Let's see how long Trump wants this story to run, as it continues to overshadow his SCOTUS story.
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
Proven right the he was wiretapped by Obama? Seems like we closed that book already.
The book was closed on the literal interpretation of the tweet but not on the substance that people within the Obama administration were conducting surveillance of the Trump administration via a backdoor of incidental collection and then selectively leaked said information illegally for nefarious purposes.
Most of you support this type of duplicitous game as members of the #resistance but rest assured it is watergate 2.0 if true. People don't seem to be comprehending how seriously this damages your country. With a new found hate for Putin members of the previous administration decided to act like him. When the story is finally told this will be the Obama and Democratic party legacy.
Addendum - What's crazy is that Trump had this information all along but he and Nunez waited for the massive over reach by the left post-Comey that they knew would come. Most of you just can't help yourselves. Brilliance.
Watergate 2.0.. you're drinking the crazy juice. Watergate was a break in, an ILLEGAL wiretap and a cover up. Using Director Comey's testimony as a source, which of those things happened to implicate Obama?
Well...
They didn't have digital data collection through the NSA back in the 70's but based on what we heard from Nunes today it could be heading that way. What we know is that the NSA has digital records of everything but the law prevents this information on Americans from being accessed and disseminated. Nunes just suggested that this information while collected legally through "incidental" means was not actually to be used or unmasked for unrelated intelligence reports. The illegal unmasking, usage, and sharing of the "incidental" info is the digital equivalent of an illegal wiretap. He or she who participated in this illegal usage and sharing is breaking the law and faces penalty of 10 years in prison. The next question is who ordered the usage and sharing? How high does this go? Were the reports Nunes mentioned presented to President Obama? What did he know and when did he know it? Watergate 2.0.
For someone who is critical of people in here rushing to conclusions, you seem eager to rush to your own.
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
Proven right the he was wiretapped by Obama? Seems like we closed that book already.
The book was closed on the literal interpretation of the tweet but not on the substance that people within the Obama administration were conducting surveillance of the Trump administration via a backdoor of incidental collection and then selectively leaked said information illegally for nefarious purposes.
Most of you support this type of duplicitous game as members of the #resistance but rest assured it is watergate 2.0 if true. People don't seem to be comprehending how seriously this damages your country. With a new found hate for Putin members of the previous administration decided to act like him. When the story is finally told this will be the Obama and Democratic party legacy.
Addendum - What's crazy is that Trump had this information all along but he and Nunez waited for the massive over reach by the left post-Comey that they knew would come. Most of you just can't help yourselves. Brilliance.
Hahaha after all the international embarrassments, this is the thing you hang your hat on for being damaging to the US?? That's funny.
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
You hear that? That's the sound of the other shoe dropping.
"Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community."
We don't have all the facts yet. I think we can all agree on that.
Exactly. That is the whole point. Trump might still be proven right on surveillance.
Proven right the he was wiretapped by Obama? Seems like we closed that book already.
The book was closed on the literal interpretation of the tweet but not on the substance that people within the Obama administration were conducting surveillance of the Trump administration via a backdoor of incidental collection and then selectively leaked said information illegally for nefarious purposes.
Most of you support this type of duplicitous game as members of the #resistance but rest assured it is watergate 2.0 if true. People don't seem to be comprehending how seriously this damages your country. With a new found hate for Putin members of the previous administration decided to act like him. When the story is finally told this will be the Obama and Democratic party legacy.
Addendum - What's crazy is that Trump had this information all along but he and Nunez waited for the massive over reach by the left post-Comey that they knew would come. Most of you just can't help yourselves. Brilliance.
Watergate 2.0.. you're drinking the crazy juice. Watergate was a break in, an ILLEGAL wiretap and a cover up. Using Director Comey's testimony as a source, which of those things happened to implicate Obama?
Well...
They didn't have digital data collection through the NSA back in the 70's but based on what we heard from Nunes today it could be heading that way. What we know is that the NSA has digital records of everything but the law prevents this information on Americans from being accessed and disseminated. Nunes just suggested that this information while collected legally through "incidental" means was not actually to be used or unmasked for unrelated intelligence reports. The illegal unmasking, usage, and sharing of the "incidental" info is the digital equivalent of an illegal wiretap. He or she who participated in this illegal usage and sharing is breaking the law and faces penalty of 10 years in prison. The next question is who ordered the usage and sharing? How high does this go? Were the reports Nunes mentioned presented to President Obama? What did he know and when did he know it? Watergate 2.0.
You really think Obama, a constitutional law professor from Harvard, is as stupid as Trump? Suggested doesn't mean proven. I believe treason results in a life sentence. What did we hear from Nunes today again? Other than he has no evidence to support his or Trump's claims?
Actually punishable by death... unless AIPAC is behind you. IF that is the case you can steal under cover of title as a United states navy intelligence analyst , then transfer top secret nuclear bomb information to a foreign country through spy intermediaries. then take your case to trial instead of pleading out, on;y to get convicted by a jury of your peers and then sentenced to life instead of the death penalty, and walk outa prison after serving only 3 dimes. Only in America kid.
Comments
“I have seen intelligence reports that clearly show that the president-elect and his team were, I guess, at least monitored,” Nunes told reporters. “It looks to me like it was all legally collected, but it was essentially a lot of information on the president-elect and his transition team and what they were doing.”
Nunes described the surveillance as most likely being “incidental collection.” This can occur when a person inside the United States communicates with a foreign target of U.S. surveillance. In such cases, the identities of U.S. citizens are supposed to be kept secret — but can be “unmasked” by intelligence officials under certain circumstances.
He also said he did not know yet whether the Trump transition team members who were unmasked were communicating from Trump Tower. Earlier this month, Trump claimed in a series of Tweets that former President Barack Obama ordered a wiretap of the phones at Trump Tower — something Nunes reiterated on Wednesday he had no evidence of.
FBI Director James Comey appeared before the panel on Monday and confirmed that the FBI launched a counterintelligence investigation in July into Russia’s election meddling, including possible coordination with the Trump campaign.
More like the sound of a felt slipper falling gently to a carpeted floor in the basement. Nice try though.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Like I stated earlier, we don't have all of the facts. That being said, based on what we know, this doesn't look good for Trump and/or his administration/transition team/whateveryouwantocallthem. Manafort went from being a "key part of the campaign & transition" to being a nobody overnight. Why? SPIN & DEFLECTION.
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
http://freebeacon.com/politics/obama-admin-loyalists-government-insiders-sabotage-trump-white-house/
Most of you support this type of duplicitous game as members of the #resistance but rest assured it is watergate 2.0 if true. People don't seem to be comprehending how seriously this damages your country. With a new found hate for Putin members of the previous administration decided to act like him. When the story is finally told this will be the Obama and Democratic party legacy.
Addendum - What's crazy is that Trump had this information all along but he and Nunez waited for the massive over reach by the left post-Comey that they knew would come. Most of you just can't help yourselves. Brilliance.
Instead, the story delivered was: "How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!"
Whether true or not, the man uses ambiguity and timing to control messages brilliantly. The omission of context (if this is, in fact, the context he was referring to) and the accusation of malice attributed directly to Obama, are highly effective means of controlling the perception of an event. Trump has managed to frame a controversial and potentially damaging story (my team and I were in contact with foreign agents being monitored by security agencies) as one where they are victims (I've been spied on by my own government). If Trump knew that this information would come to light, there's little doubt in my mind that his action (making an ambiguous statement involving conspiracy, shock value, discrediting of the establishment) was the most effective damage control available. Best case scenario, he gave people a meaningless and unimpeachable topic to distract them while he continues with the topics people have serious objection to (like a poor attempt at a Health Care Bill). Worst case scenario, he loses a handful of supporters for a re-election he likely has no concern about, and is no further away or closer to accomplishing what he'd like to.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
1) There is so much evidence through surveillance that Trump is colluding with Russia!
2) Trump is a liar on "wire tapping"! Obama's administration wasn't spying on him! This is outrageous!
3) Well of course he was under surveillance! He was colluding with Russia for fuck sakes!
This has been the basics of HalifaxToTheMaxineWatters since inauguration. It is why I spend most of the time laughing at you. It is funny.
Follow the money, from Russia with love, all the way to impeachment. That'll be the real brilliance.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
They didn't have digital data collection through the NSA back in the 70's but based on what we heard from Nunes today it could be heading that way. What we know is that the NSA has digital records of everything but the law prevents this information on Americans from being accessed and disseminated. Nunes just suggested that this information while collected legally through "incidental" means was not actually to be used or unmasked for unrelated intelligence reports. The illegal unmasking, usage, and sharing of the "incidental" info is the digital equivalent of an illegal wiretap. He or she who participated in this illegal usage and sharing is breaking the law and faces penalty of 10 years in prison. The next question is who ordered the usage and sharing? How high does this go? Were the reports Nunes mentioned presented to President Obama? What did he know and when did he know it?
Watergate 2.0.
After more than three and a half years of service as the 13th U.S. Secretary of Energy, nuclear physicist Ernest J. Moniz has returned to his roots at MIT, the place where he served most of his professional career.
Nominated to the cabinet by President Barack Obama in March 2013 and confirmed by the Senate on May 16 in a unanimous vote — a rare occurrence in a polarized political atmosphere — Moniz left the office on Jan. 20, 2017, with the arrival of the Trump administration.
Now, he intends to build upon that experience by working on policy proposals for climate solutions through clean energy innovation, and in the area of nuclear security. In addition to serving in a part-time appointment at MIT as professor of physics post-tenure and special advisor to the president, and as a nonresident senior fellow at Harvard University’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, he also intends to do additional work in clean energy through a nonprofit organization of his own.
“Over the last few years, the United States and the world saw what we at MIT have known for decades: that Ernie Moniz is a brilliant scientist, a gifted leader, and a tireless advocate for positive change,” says MIT President L. Rafael Reif. “I am thrilled that the Institute will again benefit from his wisdom and experience as we continue our critical work to identify practical ways to achieve a sustainable energy future and address climate change. All of MIT is delighted to welcome him home.”
At the Department of Energy, Moniz led the implementation of President Obama’s commitment to an “all of the above” energy strategy, including the establishment of new programs to foster research on clean, renewable forms of energy and next-generation nuclear power. He also played a crucial role in the negotiations that led to a ground-breaking treaty with Iran to limit that country’s development of nuclear materials. He was often called the best-prepared of energy secretaries by members of both political parties.
“One of the things we really accomplished” during his term at the DOE, Moniz says, “was placing innovation at the center of climate solutions.” Finding ways to push that emphasis forward — encompassing innovation in policy and economic arenas as well as in technology — will continue to be a major focus of his work in coming years, he says. This emphasis echoes the “Mission Innovation” initiative that was adopted, with the help of a strong push by the Obama administration, at the Paris COP 21 climate conference in 2015.
The other area Moniz will be focusing on, nuclear security, also builds on the work he did at the DOE, both in his latest stint as secretary and earlier as undersecretary during the Clinton administration, when nuclear security, including controlling nuclear weapons materials after the collapse of the Soviet Union, was a major focus of his responsibilities. Most recently, Moniz served as one of the two lead negotiators, along with Secretary of State John Kerry, in hammering out the details of the nuclear agreement that has significantly delayed Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons and provided unique verification measures.
The part Moniz played in the Iran agreement negotiations and implementation over the course of two years, in which his Iranian counterpart was an MIT alumnus — a factor that helped to facilitate the negotiations — was “a really novel role,” unlike anything previously undertaken by a cabinet member, he says. The fact that the negotiating team for an international treaty included two cabinet members on each side (including Kerry and himself) was “unprecedented,” he says.
“It was a good time to be Secretary of Energy,” he says, “because the president showed successful global personal leadership in both these areas” of climate change and nuclear security. The Paris climate agreement — the most sweeping, global agreement on the subject to date — “would not have happened without [Obama’s] leadership,” Moniz says.
Continuing that progress, he says, will require not just more research but better communications. He’s concerned that momentum for dealing with this issue, which grew during the previous administration, could prove insufficient, especially in a changed political atmosphere. “We could be slowed down in our needed response to the climate risks if we don’t do a better job of bringing everyone along,” he says. That work, he emphasizes, “is not on a one-year timescale. It’s more like two or three decades. We must — we will — head toward really significant carbon emissions reduction, well beyond those of the Paris targets.”
And while opponents of measures to combat climate change claim that any such action will damage the U.S. economy, Moniz says it’s clear that “ultimately, this will be a net good for the economy.” However, in order to offset impacts on certain sectors of the workforce, he says, it’s paramount that “a focus will be on workers, at national, regional, and state levels.”
What’s needed, he says, is a concentration on “how we can most aggressively march toward the low-carbon future that we need.” Toward that end, he intends to convene a varied group of specialists at MIT, Harvard, and elsewhere, including economists and political scientists as well as scientists and engineers. “It’s got to be a broad-based, multidisciplinary group,” he says. Together, these experts will work toward developing a set of concrete policy proposals over the next few years, keyed to the needs of specific areas. “A regional focus is the only way to eventually get there,” he says, because both the problems and the opportunities of addressing climate change vary so much by location.
While researchers have clear ideas as to the kinds of carbon-free energy sources and policies needed to forestall the most devastating impacts of a changing climate, he says, “the question is how we get there, through a focused effort looking at jobs and centers for innovation.”
“Few have served with greater distinction to this country,” Institute Professor John Deutch, a chemist who specializes in energy research and who has also served in government positions in Washington, says of Moniz. About his return to the campus, Deutch advises, “Welcome him back and enjoy his wit and wisdom, as I certainly shall.”
Before this service in Washington, Moniz was the founding director of the MIT Energy Initiative (MITEI), which was established in 2006 by then-MIT President Susan Hockfield. Under his leadership, MITEI supported almost 800 research projects at the Institute, had 23 industry and public partners supporting research and analysis, and engaged 25 percent of the MIT faculty in its projects and programs.
Moniz received a BS in physics from Boston College, a PhD in theoretical physics from Stanford University, and eight honorary doctorates. He is a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the Humboldt Foundation, the American Physical Society, and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. He was awarded the Grand Cross of the Order of Makarios III and of Prince Henry the Navigator, and the Distinguished Public Service Medal of the Department of Defense.
“Ernie’s career is the blueprint for how science can be used as an essential tool to inform policy,” says Maria Zuber, MIT’s vice president for research. “It’s great to have him back and challenging all of us to develop and enhance this important skill.”
To Rick Perry. Yea, this administration is damaging to our country. I wonder how Rick's lassoing practice is progressing?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
#STRAWSGRASPING
Onto the the nuanced part.. yes the unmasking should be investigated, but that's a double edged sword. Any testimony that details that a Trump Transition employee was picked up in the incidental collection will have to deal with who that transition employee was talking to.. and therefore why was that person under surveillance? And according to Nunes, it wasn't about Russia. So therefore... the Trump team was talking to someone that some intelligence service had reason to believe needed to be watched and received a FISA warrant to do such. Not your everyday Joe I'm sure.
Second, here's the fun part. Let's take Flynn for example. If he was picked up in monitoring then no evidence in that monitoring could be used in a prosecution or further investigation. That's a 4th amendment violation... HOWEVER, information collected in that monitoring about OTHERS can absolutely be used. For example, if Flynn said "Jared Kushner needs to move a million off shore into a Russian account because he doesn't want to pay taxes", then that's a high enough standard to create a wiretap warrant on Kushner.
So once information starts to get revealed, it will get ugly for everyone frankly, other than Obama. First, he's out of office. Second, Nunes was very clear it was legal. Case closed on the Obama side. Let's see how long Trump wants this story to run, as it continues to overshadow his SCOTUS story.
Next thing you'll tell me Trump is brilliant and the Russia story is going away.
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
but you know what I REALLY love? watching republican political careers going up in flames because of allegiance to the spray tanned dipshit
popcorn futures
for the least they could possibly do
how can you take Trump serious about anything after years of the birther and birth certificate ridiculousness? seriously
That's when the real fun will start.
That's funny.
for the least they could possibly do
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
unless AIPAC is behind you. IF that is the case you can steal under cover of title as a United states navy intelligence analyst , then transfer top secret nuclear bomb information to a foreign country through spy intermediaries. then take your case to trial instead of pleading out, on;y to get convicted by a jury of your peers and then sentenced to life instead of the death penalty, and walk outa prison after serving only 3 dimes. Only in America kid.
SEE JONATHAN POLLARD.
thanks Barry!