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.
I don't mean Manafort will rat out the Russians. We already know who they are anyway. He's (likely) going to be the first domino toward taking down others in the administration higher up the food chain.
everybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do
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.
I am curious, could legal "incidental collection" be related to what we have seen through the mass collection data legalized through the Patriot Act? The fear of such collection was that the government could pick and choose who to prosecute because all cyber activity was being stored and most people probably broke some online website agreement at some time throughout their lives. Might another fear be that everyone is technically having all communication "incidentally collected" or "wire tapped" as some others might call it and who might use that collected information. In an age where our phone cameras and microphones can be accessed even when turned off, how is it so hard to believe that someone might be covertly monitoring the conversations of any government official through those means? If Snowden was able to do this and is now potentially cooperating with Russians...who knows who might have the ability to do these types of things...Might Obama or Hillary still have loyal people with access to these data collection techniques on the inside leaking information about the current administration in an effort to undermine? It's not hard to believe that this might be going on. Seems like Trump always has his phone in his hand based on all the random Tweets...just saying. Maybe I've been watching too much Homeland, lol
White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters Wednesday the bill was picking up supporters and would pass the House, adding there is no “Plan B” if the proposal goes down.
“There is Plan A and Plan A,” said Spicer, who described Trump as “the closer” for the deal. “We’re going to get this done.”
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.
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.
SEE JONATHAN POLLARD. thanks Barry!
this belongs here, lol
Your anti-semitism doesn't belong anywhere
And I've never seen anyone bump their own post to a new page because they think it's so awesome.
In President Trump’s oft-changing world order, Roger J. Stone Jr., the onetime political consultant and full-time provocateur, has been one of the few constants — a loyalist and self-proclaimed “dirty trickster” who nurtured the dream of a presidential run by the developer-turned-television-star for 30 years.
But two months into the Trump presidency, Mr. Stone, known for his pinstripe suits, the Nixon tattoo spanning his shoulder blades, and decades of outlandish statements, is under investigation for what would be his dirtiest trick — colluding with the Russians to defeat Hillary Clinton and put his friend in the White House.
The white House will need to be fumigated after Trump is impeached. Or burned to the ground and rebuilt.
I am curious, could legal "incidental collection" be related to what we have seen through the mass collection data legalized through the Patriot Act? The fear of such collection was that the government could pick and choose who to prosecute because all cyber activity was being stored and most people probably broke some online website agreement at some time throughout their lives. Might another fear be that everyone is technically having all communication "incidentally collected" or "wire tapped" as some others might call it and who might use that collected information. In an age where our phone cameras and microphones can be accessed even when turned off, how is it so hard to believe that someone might be covertly monitoring the conversations of any government official through those means? If Snowden was able to do this and is now potentially cooperating with Russians...who knows who might have the ability to do these types of things...Might Obama or Hillary still have loyal people with access to these data collection techniques on the inside leaking information about the current administration in an effort to undermine? It's not hard to believe that this might be going on. Seems like Trump always has his phone in his hand based on all the random Tweets...just saying. Maybe I've been watching too much Homeland, lol
Hillary and Obama don't have to do a thing to undermine Trump's Administration. He's quite brilliant in doing that himself. All by himself but he does have help from his own appointees. 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.
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?
Haha. Now suggested doesn't mean proven? I thought we were all following the money? You are all over the place brosef.
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?
Haha. Now suggested doesn't mean proven? I thought we were all following the money? You are all over the place brosef.
And the money will be followed. Treasury always gets their man (men), comrade.
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.
Grasping at straws? Your whole post is based on a massive number of assumptions the first being that all this surveillance was on the up and up. Of course Obama is awesome and all the people in his administration is awesome and it is beyond all craziness to suggest that these awesome people who have already shown a history of bending the law to inappropriately spy on congressmen and journalists would do anything wrong with their intelligence powers. Every statement you have ever made on this issue has essentially been "well if their was surveillance then obviously it was legal and with good reason". Sorry buddy but that just ain't obvious and nobody should believe it. Also to suggest that I am hoping Obama gets caught up in this is plain ridiculous...who could hope for that? But to suggest it's impossible is also just as ridiculous. Let's not forget that the AMT used to be a place that was against this kind of surveillance. When Bush put many of these rules in place most here said "absolutely not!", "he's hitler", "he'll abuse this power and spy on citizens and/or his opponents!". We don't know what info Nunes has yet but we know for a fact that Flynn was spied on and that info pertaining to that was illegally leaked. That is an abuse of intelligence gathering power. Somebody in the Obama administration did that. Now it looks like there is more.
simple question to my Trump friends here... especially to my wacky weed buddy BS...
how can you take Trump serious about anything after years of the birther and birth certificate ridiculousness? seriously
I don't take him seriously. You still seem to be confused on my feeling towards him. I have a list of things he says and/or does that drives me absolutely crazy. That doesn't mean though that I don't think he is strategically smarter then most people give him credit for.
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.
Grasping at straws? Your whole post is based on a massive number of assumptions the first being that all this surveillance was on the up and up. Of course Obama is awesome and all the people in his administration is awesome and it is beyond all craziness to suggest that these awesome people who have already shown a history of bending the law to inappropriately spy on congressmen and journalists would do anything wrong with their intelligence powers. Every statement you have ever made on this issue has essentially been "well if their was surveillance then obviously it was legal and with good reason". Sorry buddy but that just ain't obvious and nobody should believe it. Also to suggest that I am hoping Obama gets caught up in this is plain ridiculous...who could hope for that? But to suggest it's impossible is also just as ridiculous. Let's not forget that the AMT used to be a place that was against this kind of surveillance. When Bush put many of these rules in place most here said "absolutely not!", "he's hitler", "he'll abuse this power and spy on citizens and/or his opponents!". We don't know what info Nunes has yet but we know for a fact that Flynn was spied on and that info pertaining to that was illegally leaked. That is an abuse of intelligence gathering power. Somebody in the Obama administration did that. Now it looks like there is more.
Do we know the source of the leak, not specifically, but in general?
simple question to my Trump friends here... especially to my wacky weed buddy BS...
how can you take Trump serious about anything after years of the birther and birth certificate ridiculousness? seriously
I don't take him seriously. You still seem to be confused on my feeling towards him. I have a list of things he says and/or does that drives me absolutely crazy. That doesn't mean though that I don't think he is strategically smarter then most people give him credit for.
That's exactly the definition of taking him seriously though, isn't it?
I am curious, could legal "incidental collection" be related to what we have seen through the mass collection data legalized through the Patriot Act? The fear of such collection was that the government could pick and choose who to prosecute because all cyber activity was being stored and most people probably broke some online website agreement at some time throughout their lives. Might another fear be that everyone is technically having all communication "incidentally collected" or "wire tapped" as some others might call it and who might use that collected information. In an age where our phone cameras and microphones can be accessed even when turned off, how is it so hard to believe that someone might be covertly monitoring the conversations of any government official through those means? If Snowden was able to do this and is now potentially cooperating with Russians...who knows who might have the ability to do these types of things...Might Obama or Hillary still have loyal people with access to these data collection techniques on the inside leaking information about the current administration in an effort to undermine? It's not hard to believe that this might be going on. Seems like Trump always has his phone in his hand based on all the random Tweets...just saying. Maybe I've been watching too much Homeland, lol
This is exactly it. Data is constantly being mined and is available to be abused.
simple question to my Trump friends here... especially to my wacky weed buddy BS...
how can you take Trump serious about anything after years of the birther and birth certificate ridiculousness? seriously
I don't take him seriously. You still seem to be confused on my feeling towards him. I have a list of things he says and/or does that drives me absolutely crazy. That doesn't mean though that I don't think he is strategically smarter then most people give him credit for.
200 pages in and you sure do come across as a Trump supporter... maybe you just like to spar and play devils advocate?
simple question to my Trump friends here... especially to my wacky weed buddy BS...
how can you take Trump serious about anything after years of the birther and birth certificate ridiculousness? seriously
I don't take him seriously. You still seem to be confused on my feeling towards him. I have a list of things he says and/or does that drives me absolutely crazy. That doesn't mean though that I don't think he is strategically smarter then most people give him credit for.
200 pages in and you sure do come across as a Trump supporter... maybe you just like to spar and play devils advocate?
He's a neocon that identifies with Bannon's playbook. Trump is thus a puppet to implement a neocon agenda. But Trump don't do politics well.
Sounds like Nunes has shared info with the White House before it was shared in committee. That has caused Schiff to talk about an independent investigation. Nunes has really fucked this up, because people aren't buying his bullshit anymore. First he was more concerned about the leaks than the Trump/Russia collusion. Now he's actively subverting the process. And now Schiff is saying that the evidence they've seen for the collusion goes beyond circumstantial: "I don’t want to go into specifics, but I will say that there is evidence that is not circumstantial and is very much worthy of investigation." Fuck Trump.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Let me say this very clearly, for all of us to soak in for a second.
Fact: Donald Trump (The President) and many key members of his circle are currently under FBI investigation for possible collusion with a foreign government to undermine our Presidential Election.
Hawks should be foaming at the mouth, instead they are rolling over like puppies to get their belly scratched.
Sounds like Nunes has shared info with the White House before it was shared in committee. That has caused Schiff to talk about an independent investigation. Nunes has really fucked this up, because people aren't buying his bullshit anymore. First he was more concerned about the leaks than the Trump/Russia collusion. Now he's actively subverting the process. And now Schiff is saying that the evidence they've seen for the collusion goes beyond circumstantial: "I don’t want to go into specifics, but I will say that there is evidence that is not circumstantial and is very much worthy of investigation." Fuck Trump.
The coverup begins. And this is what will ultimately get Trump impeached. Sure hope the White House is preserving evidence. Does Trump plan on holding a news conference to clear the air? Maybe preemptively release the last ten years of his tax returns? The White House petition for him to do so is over a million. Where's the transparency?
Let me say this very clearly, for all of us to soak in for a second.
Fact: Donald Trump (The President) and many key members of his circle are currently under FBI investigation for possible collusion with a foreign government to undermine our Presidential Election.
Hawks should be foaming at the mouth, instead they are rolling over like puppies to get their belly scratched.
Hawks or ostriches?
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Let me say this very clearly, for all of us to soak in for a second.
Fact: Donald Trump (The President) and many key members of his circle are currently under FBI investigation for possible collusion with a foreign government to undermine our Presidential Election.
Hawks should be foaming at the mouth, instead they are rolling over like puppies to get their belly scratched.
Sounds like Nunes has shared info with the White House before it was shared in committee. That has caused Schiff to talk about an independent investigation. Nunes has really fucked this up, because people aren't buying his bullshit anymore. First he was more concerned about the leaks than the Trump/Russia collusion. Now he's actively subverting the process. And now Schiff is saying that the evidence they've seen for the collusion goes beyond circumstantial: "I don’t want to go into specifics, but I will say that there is evidence that is not circumstantial and is very much worthy of investigation." Fuck Trump.
simple question to my Trump friends here... especially to my wacky weed buddy BS...
how can you take Trump serious about anything after years of the birther and birth certificate ridiculousness? seriously
I don't take him seriously. You still seem to be confused on my feeling towards him. I have a list of things he says and/or does that drives me absolutely crazy. That doesn't mean though that I don't think he is strategically smarter then most people give him credit for.
That's exactly the definition of taking him seriously though, isn't it?
Hmmm...not exactly but maybe. I guess what I mean is that I still think he makes up a lot of shit as he goes along. He always has but seems to do it fearlessly with the idea that with enough time he can figure out what the correct play is in any situation. I also still don't see him as an ideologue from a right/left perspective even though he seems to be governing to the right for now. So when I hear him blather in a debate or in a press conference or in a tweet I don't take him seriously but I also believe there is method to the madness.
Example: Immigration Most of the campaign I thought his rhetoric on the issue was ridiculous but I recognized how that would help him to the nomination. Specifically he was even harsh on the "dreamers" which I never took seriously because most people don't want to punish kids. In the long run that position is not serious. Now fast forward to his Presidency which was clearly benefited by his tough talk on immigration and what does he do? He still pushes the wall. He pushes the travel ban. But he leaves DACA in place and makes no move on the dreamers. He has convinced his base that he is the toughest SOB on immigration and yet got the hardcore right to move towards the middle on both the "dreamers" and "normalization" for those already in the US. You can see the Art of the Deal at play in the lead up to comprehensive immigration reform. If the right believes that he will prevent the next 14 million illegal immigrants then they will accept normalization of the current illegals provided they have not been convicted of a crime. I never took him seriously because his rhetoric was foolish and I don't think he had a master plan BUT he used his rhetoric to his advantage and is now making something out of it. His bill won't be any different then the gang of 8's but it will be accepted based on security first.
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.
Grasping at straws? Your whole post is based on a massive number of assumptions the first being that all this surveillance was on the up and up. Of course Obama is awesome and all the people in his administration is awesome and it is beyond all craziness to suggest that these awesome people who have already shown a history of bending the law to inappropriately spy on congressmen and journalists would do anything wrong with their intelligence powers. Every statement you have ever made on this issue has essentially been "well if their was surveillance then obviously it was legal and with good reason". Sorry buddy but that just ain't obvious and nobody should believe it. Also to suggest that I am hoping Obama gets caught up in this is plain ridiculous...who could hope for that? But to suggest it's impossible is also just as ridiculous. Let's not forget that the AMT used to be a place that was against this kind of surveillance. When Bush put many of these rules in place most here said "absolutely not!", "he's hitler", "he'll abuse this power and spy on citizens and/or his opponents!". We don't know what info Nunes has yet but we know for a fact that Flynn was spied on and that info pertaining to that was illegally leaked. That is an abuse of intelligence gathering power. Somebody in the Obama administration did that. Now it looks like there is more.
I'm using Nunes own words as the basis of my argument. He said it was legal and incidental. That's the assumption I'm starting from..
simple question to my Trump friends here... especially to my wacky weed buddy BS...
how can you take Trump serious about anything after years of the birther and birth certificate ridiculousness? seriously
I don't take him seriously. You still seem to be confused on my feeling towards him. I have a list of things he says and/or does that drives me absolutely crazy. That doesn't mean though that I don't think he is strategically smarter then most people give him credit for.
200 pages in and you sure do come across as a Trump supporter... maybe you just like to spar and play devils advocate?
No. I wouldn't waste my time with that. I certainly wanted Trump to beat Hillary because I thought he was the piece of shit with more potential upside in this shitty world but I am not sure if that should be considered full throated support. He was my last choice of all the republican candidates but I completely new he was going to win the primary the minute he went down that escalator and I was pretty sure he was going to beat Hillary even during his darkest days. Now that he is President things are going for the most part as I expected...just like his campaign it is a mess but a mess with potential for success. Top that all off with conservative governance and I am generally satisfied even though I still think the world is going to hell in a handbasket. I thought it was always going that way. Trump is the Hail Mary pass and for some reason the democrats would rather sack him then see him throw a completion.
Comments
for the least they could possibly do
https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/house-republican-health-care-plan-set-to-face-key-hurdle-before-floor-vote/2017/03/22/2dceefdc-0ef4-11e7-9b0d-d27c98455440_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_obamacare-820a:homepage/story&utm_term=.9e5f8b203065
White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters Wednesday the bill was picking up supporters and would pass the House, adding there is no “Plan B” if the proposal goes down.
“There is Plan A and Plan A,” said Spicer, who described Trump as “the closer” for the deal. “We’re going to get this done.”
Bhahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/roger-stone-the-‘trickster’-on-trump’s-side-is-under-fbi-scrutiny/ar-BByydZH?ocid=iehp
In President Trump’s oft-changing world order, Roger J. Stone Jr., the onetime political consultant and full-time provocateur, has been one of the few constants — a loyalist and self-proclaimed “dirty trickster” who nurtured the dream of a presidential run by the developer-turned-television-star for 30 years.
But two months into the Trump presidency, Mr. Stone, known for his pinstripe suits, the Nixon tattoo spanning his shoulder blades, and decades of outlandish statements, is under investigation for what would be his dirtiest trick — colluding with the Russians to defeat Hillary Clinton and put his friend in the White House.
The white House will need to be fumigated after Trump is impeached. Or burned to the ground and rebuilt.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Sweet mother of little baby jesus
http://www.snopes.com/roger-stone-nixon-tattoo/
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Fact: Donald Trump (The President) and many key members of his circle are currently under FBI investigation for possible collusion with a foreign government to undermine our Presidential Election.
Hawks should be foaming at the mouth, instead they are rolling over like puppies to get their belly scratched.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
Example:
Immigration
Most of the campaign I thought his rhetoric on the issue was ridiculous but I recognized how that would help him to the nomination. Specifically he was even harsh on the "dreamers" which I never took seriously because most people don't want to punish kids. In the long run that position is not serious. Now fast forward to his Presidency which was clearly benefited by his tough talk on immigration and what does he do? He still pushes the wall. He pushes the travel ban. But he leaves DACA in place and makes no move on the dreamers. He has convinced his base that he is the toughest SOB on immigration and yet got the hardcore right to move towards the middle on both the "dreamers" and "normalization" for those already in the US. You can see the Art of the Deal at play in the lead up to comprehensive immigration reform. If the right believes that he will prevent the next 14 million illegal immigrants then they will accept normalization of the current illegals provided they have not been convicted of a crime. I never took him seriously because his rhetoric was foolish and I don't think he had a master plan BUT he used his rhetoric to his advantage and is now making something out of it. His bill won't be any different then the gang of 8's but it will be accepted based on security first.