Breaking:House Intel Chair: Trump and team spied on during transition

[JohnnyApplesack]

this is getting really strange.........for sure the Dems will DEMAND a Special Prosecutor after the Chairman of the supposedly independent House Intel committee personally delivers an update to the WH, where the guy who's being investigated lives. now that's some classic GOP bullshit

Source: Mediaite

Following House Intelligence Committee Chair Devin Nunes’ press conference on his briefing of President Donald Trump over his finding of “incidentally collected” communications of Trump transition members, a former CIA chief of staff lit into the Republican lawmaker over his actions.

MSNBC security analyst Jeremy Bash noted that he served as counsel to the House Intelligence Committee in the past while pointing out that he “never heard of a chairman of an oversight committee going to brief the President of the United States about concerns he had about things he read in an intelligence report.”

“The job of the committee is to do oversight of the executive branch,” Bash exclaimed. “Not to bring them into their investigation or to tip them off to things they may be looking at.”

He continued, “I’ve gotta believe that other members of the committee are horrified at what they just witnessed. This is a chairman that’s supposed to be doing impartial, bipartisan investigations of the president’s inner circle and instead he basically goers and tells the president and his team everything he knows.”


Ex-CIA Chief of Staff: Other House Intel Committee Members Likely ‘Horrified’ Over Nunes’ Actions

 

[iamwhatiseem]

just listening to the EXPERTS on surveillance procedures on the news...

So you admit to knowing no more than anyone else, so you will for now on reserve such widespread conclusions before seeing the documents?
And will you have the courage to join in on the outrage and support legal and criminal punishment for ALL who took part?

 

[rightwinger]

Desperation but a FAIL by Republicans

Trumps claims

1 Obama is a bad man (sick)
2. Obama had my phone tapped and listened to my phone calls
3. This happened BEFORE the election

The Republicans vague evidence does nothing to prove that

 

[X.Onasis]

Responding obtusely? Is that what you call it when I am answering with some facts you don't care to discuss?

You can put me on ignore for all I care, but don't expect me not to strike back.

Hillary did, as well as her campaign team, and -transition- team. Did you ever question any of that? Have you ever looked at her emails and the collusion that occurred? Seen the pay for play? Seen where she did not report some of those things, because she agreed to not become involved while Secretary of State, yet did anyway? Don't think she has business dealings throughout the world?

Sept, 2016
Hillary Clinton Meets with Foreign Dignitaries on UNGA Sidelines

If you think a successful businessman that has properties throughout the world, doesn't know important people within foreign countries, I have a bridge to sell ya. Does that make them a traitor? No. And you can bet your booty if anything improper occurs it will immediately come to the forefront. Unlike it did with Hillary and was swept under the rug.
Unless you are suggesting only govt or community organizers should be able to run. Well, sorry. That will only brings us to our knees.

Here is one for you
A World of Advice for Obama on Foreign Policy

TY for that.

I don't have an issue with asking the same question and having the same thinking.

What did a non-government employee have to discuss with one or more officials of the Russian government? Did one or more of the conversation topics pertain to current or future U.S. policy re: Russia? If yes, I have a problem with that. If no, fine.​

I recognize, however, that the background circumstances pertaining to PEOTUS Trump and PEOTUS Obama are very different.

• Obama didn't have any former deals between himself/his closely held company and Russians.
• Obama didn't have a history of having had substantial cash flows from Russians.
• And more....click the link.
• Obama never made a point of hiding his financial interactions with anyone.

As noted earlier, a huge portion of the issue with Trump and Russians is Trump's refusal to fully disclose/demonstrate the nature, timing and extent of his financial dealings in an environment wherein we know he's had multiple multimillion dollar deals with Russians having close ties to the Russian state and its intelligence organs and we know he has a deal with one Russian oligarch that has merely been put on hold, but not cancelled. That Trump also refuses to relinquish control of Trump Organization compounds the appearance and plausibility of there being something untoward going on.

Look, if you are going to keep responding obtusely to me, I'm going to have to stop paying attention to you. Either establish a level of substantive comparability between Clinton's/Obama's situation and that of Trump's or stop trying to build a case on superficial points of ambiguous similarity.

I don't care to be trifled with -- it's very disrespectful -- and I don't do that to others, yet that's precisely what you're doing. I know I can't stop you from doing it, but I don't have to be party to it when you do it.

Responding obtusely? Is that what you call it when I am answering with some facts you don't care to discuss?

No. It's what I call it when you don't establish a level of substantive comparability between Clinton's/Obama's situation and that of Trump's and instead try to build your case based on superficial points of ambiguous similarity.

The only points of similarity you've established between Clinton (who wasn't even POTUS)/Obama is that they talked to foreign officials prior to assuming office. Have you established anything remotely resembling the level of entanglement described at the links I provided to corroborate my statements? No! Not even close. Why do you think I have included links in my posts? I put them there so you could click on them, read the content there (and the linked content) and understand the nature, as far as it's been disclosed, of Trump's interactions with Russians up to his being inaugurated. I put them there so you'd have ready access to the same information I have already read about Trump's involvements with Russians.

Too facty and rational. Keep that up and they'll ignore you.

 

[westwall]

You mean how the AG visited bill while "investigating" his wife? That sort of thing?

 

[Hossfly]

Desperation but a FAIL by Republicans

Trumps claims

1 Obama is a bad man (sick)
2. Obama had my phone tapped and listened to my phone calls
3. This happened BEFORE the election

The Republicans vague evidence does nothing to prove that

You don't see Trump's strategy? No damned liberal would dare bug him after this mess.

 

[BlindBoo]

The incidental collection was because they were talking to Russian agents. Perhaps not every conversation had to do with the tampering they were plotting.. Release the transcripts so we will know, then those fuks in DC can't play their fucking word games anymore.

Wrong. Nunes stated it had nothing to do with Russia or criminality.

You couldn't be more wrong. As the opening article says:

He said that "additional names" of Trump transition officials had been unmasked in the intelligence reports and indicated that Trump's communications may have been swept up as well.

Unmasking involves revealing the identity of an American caught on a FISA or NSA intercept of foreign nationals, or terrorists.

If Nunes says it wasn't Russians, that only leaves terrorists that the Trump folks were talking to.

Or other foreign nationals who were under surveillance? What other shady characters has Trumps associates been pal'ing around with? Nunes need to provide the documents to the rest of the committee.

 

[Dschrute3]

I think it's pretty clear the Democrats did engage in surveillance on the opposition's Candidate for President. Personally, i feel it's Watergate ten-fold. It was a very dangerous egregious attack on our Democratic Process.

 

[BlindBoo]

We don't jail political opponents based on nonsensical hearsay.

Trump said during the presidential debates, that if he was elected, he would have the attorney general investigate Hillary. And added, if he was president, Hillary would be in jail. True story.

Terrible Ted said he'd be dead or in jail right now too. I don't believe anything I hear and only half of what I see.

 

[tycho1572]

I knew it was just a matter of time before Trump was proven right about this.
Obama was always a POS who wouldn't think twice about stooping that low to further his agenda.

You have just described yourself and your lack of moral character. Trump is not proven right in any of this surveiling.

Considering everything we now know about Obama, you'd have to be a delusional moron to think he wouldn't do that.

 

[Care4all]

just listening to the EXPERTS on surveillance procedures on the news...

So you admit to knowing no more than anyone else, so you will for now on reserve such widespread conclusions before seeing the documents?
And will you have the courage to join in on the outrage and support legal and criminal punishment for ALL who took part?

i have no idea what you are upset about? What do you think or imagine in your head, was done wrong? speak English this time....

 

[Lewdog]

You mean how the AG visited bill while "investigating" his wife? That sort of thing?

So you're saying if one party screws the pooch it's ok for the other party to screw the pooch? So then I guess that means the Democrats can now screw the pooch next saying it is ok because what Nunes did?

This is why I fucking hate political parties... they can never, ever take personal responsibility for their OWN actions. It's always about, "But they did it mommy so why can't I???"

 

[JakeStarkey]

I knew it was just a matter of time before Trump was proven right about this.
Obama was always a POS who wouldn't think twice about stooping that low to further his agenda.

You have just described yourself and your lack of moral character. Trump is not proven right in any of this surveiling.

Considering everything we now know about Obama, you'd have to be a delusional moron to think he wouldn't do that.

Chuckles, we are talking about presidents. Obama did not have the power to order a tap on Trump. Ever. Do you not understand?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

just listening to the EXPERTS on surveillance procedures on the news...

So you admit to knowing no more than anyone else, so you will for now on reserve such widespread conclusions before seeing the documents?
And will you have the courage to join in on the outrage and support legal and criminal punishment for ALL who took part?

i have no idea what you are upset about? What do you think or imagine in your head, was done wrong? speak English this time....

I didn't know I was upset.
What was done wrong?
1) We KNOW that the intelligence community released data and findings to the media. No one is arguing this, the proof is in the headlines of the very stories they leaked.
But what the left on committee is doing is trying to cloud the issue by this whole argument of "masking" and "unmasking", as well as to point fingers at the chairman IF he shared the info with Trump. But no mention of the community SHARING THE INFO TO THE PRESS. In other words Dems are "outraged" by the possibility the house chair shared into with Trump...but not outraged that the data was released to the PRESS in the first place!! Nor that the information even exist!!

 

[tycho1572]

I knew it was just a matter of time before Trump was proven right about this.
Obama was always a POS who wouldn't think twice about stooping that low to further his agenda.

You have just described yourself and your lack of moral character. Trump is not proven right in any of this surveiling.

Considering everything we now know about Obama, you'd have to be a delusional moron to think he wouldn't do that.

Chuckles, we are talking about presidents. Obama did not have the power to order a tap on Trump. Ever. Do you not understand?

It's looking like you're clueless about how the chain of command works.

 

[Rob37]

You guys areally so lame. It was like 4 threads started 20 min ago trying the same bait and switch.

Tap phones means general surveillance.
Trump Tower means anywhere on earth.
And when you say Trump and your link says transition membees that too is the same thing.

Basically whatever the news is Trump was right if you can switch around words and their meaning.

Forests and trees, dufus. You cannot coverup Obama's dirt with semantics.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Rob37]

Mud tries to change meanings by changing the words. Where does it say Obama wire tapped Trump?

"Members of the Donald Trump transition team, possibly including Trump himself, were under U.S. government surveillance following November’s presidential election, House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) told reporters Wednesday."

Who was the O.I.C., Jake? The man with the pen and the phone and the rubber stamp.

Comey said very clearly to the commitee that "no President can order a wire tap."

Hoss, you know what we have for a president: a megalomaniac in character.

He is dangerous to our republic.

I am quite sure you would rather have Pence as president, as I do.

No, but someone in Obama's corrupt DoJ can sign an affidavit to procure a warrant from the FISA court, moron.

Starkey is trying to Jake-off on everyone again.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Rob37]

I knew it was just a matter of time before Trump was proven right about this.
Obama was always a POS who wouldn't think twice about stooping that low to further his agenda.

You have just described yourself and your lack of moral character. Trump is not proven right in any of this surveiling.

Unfortunately, Starkey, your opinion means nothing.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[TNHarley]

Must have learned from Lynch

 

[Rob37]

I knew it was just a matter of time before Trump was proven right about this.
Obama was always a POS who wouldn't think twice about stooping that low to further his agenda.

You have just described yourself and your lack of moral character. Trump is not proven right in any of this surveiling.

Considering everything we now know about Obama, you'd have to be a delusional moron to think he wouldn't do that.

Chuckles, we are talking about presidents. Obama did not have the power to order a tap on Trump. Ever. Do you not understand?

Starkey, you are either being intentionally misleading or you are dumber than a Closed Caption. If the president wants a warrant from FISA, then he can get a warrant.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com