Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You mean like Peter Strozk, Andrew McCabe and Bruce Ohr?It's the same career intel people at the agencies through administrations, dope.ROFL! Only a true dope would believe it was legal because the unmasker filled out some form.I gave you the answer.Do you really believe some low level functionary is going to deny such a request to Obama administration appointees? You don't even know what the application process is.
Yes, the NSA is complicit in the conspiracy, moron. The entire Obama administration was complicit. You're willingless to trust Obama flacks is unbelievable.
So you have no clue. You're simply just dumping shit.
Obviously no one who isn't authorized to see unmasked intel would be approved to do so, dope.
I don't need to know the exact application process to know this.
Now tell us which career employee at the NSA is in the bag for the Obama admin.
No, you have no clue. Your belief that what they did must have been legal because they filled out some form is absurd. Your belief that Democrat politicians are honest is also incredibly naive.
You claim that "no one who isn't authorized to see unmasked intel would be approved to do so" is obviously wrong. How was Samantha Powers "authorised" to unmask general Flynn? What was her legitimate purpose? You keep avoiding an answer to that question.
Obviously she was authorized if her application was approved,dope.
Do you imagine that somehow the process was different under the Obama admin than in the prior or subsequent admins?
Of course not, dope.
You're a truly deluded gullible moron. The process isn't any different. In both cases it relied on people with integrity. Obama hacks have no integrity.
Post your evidence that shows the process being different or otherwise tainted during the Obama admin, loser.
More than that is required for a legal unmasking, moron.Having a security clearance doesn't mean you have access to every classified document in the government.You just answered your own question. That's standard. Why does Kelly Craft have security clearance?Why would Samantha powers be reading classified intelligence reports? She was an ambassador to the U.N.Duh...Now you're getting it, dope.Having a security clearance doesn't mean you have access to every classified document in the government.
Having a request granted means they had the requisite access and clearance.
36 people asked for Flynn's identity to be unmasked, and the vast bulk of them had no legitimate purpose for doing so. That's all the proof needed.It's the same career intel people at the agencies through administrations, dope.ROFL! Only a true dope would believe it was legal because the unmasker filled out some form.I gave you the answer.Do you really believe some low level functionary is going to deny such a request to Obama administration appointees? You don't even know what the application process is.
Yes, the NSA is complicit in the conspiracy, moron. The entire Obama administration was complicit. You're willingless to trust Obama flacks is unbelievable.
So you have no clue. You're simply just dumping shit.
Obviously no one who isn't authorized to see unmasked intel would be approved to do so, dope.
I don't need to know the exact application process to know this.
Now tell us which career employee at the NSA is in the bag for the Obama admin.
No, you have no clue. Your belief that what they did must have been legal because they filled out some form is absurd. Your belief that Democrat politicians are honest is also incredibly naive.
You claim that "no one who isn't authorized to see unmasked intel would be approved to do so" is obviously wrong. How was Samantha Powers "authorised" to unmask general Flynn? What was her legitimate purpose? You keep avoiding an answer to that question.
Obviously she was authorized if her application was approved,dope.
Do you imagine that somehow the process was different under the Obama admin than in the prior or subsequent admins?
Of course not, dope.
You're a truly deluded gullible moron. The process isn't any different. In both cases it relied on people with integrity. Obama hacks have no integrity.
Post your evidence that shows the process being different or otherwise tainted during the Obama admin, loser.
I gave you the answer.Do you really believe some low level functionary is going to deny such a request to Obama administration appointees? You don't even know what the application process is.
Yes, the NSA is complicit in the conspiracy, moron. The entire Obama administration was complicit. You're willingless to trust Obama flacks is unbelievable.
So you have no clue. You're simply just dumping shit.
Obviously no one who isn't authorized to see unmasked intel would be approved to do so, dope.
I don't need to know the exact application process to know this.
Now tell us which career employee at the NSA is in the bag for the Obama admin.
No, you have no clue. Your belief that what they did must have been legal because they filled out some form is absurd. Your belief that Democrat politicians are honest is also incredibly naive.
You claim that "no one who isn't authorized to see unmasked intel would be approved to do so" is obviously wrong. How was Samantha Powers "authorised" to unmask general Flynn? What was her legitimate purpose? You keep avoiding an answer to that question.
Obviously she was authorized if her application was approved,dope.
Do you imagine that somehow the process was different under the Obama admin than in the prior or subsequent admins?
Of course not, dope.
They didn't have the need to know.........unless they are counter terrorism officials investigating a crime.................they violated the FISA courts on a regular basis.........so much so that private investigating contractors were BANNED from getting information anymore.Why would Joe Biden be on the list? Samantha Powers? White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough?You obviously silly faux outrage, when there is nothing to be outraged about. Seems like you don't understand the mundane nature of this. The people on this list are the people you would expect to see on this list. They have to read the intelligence reports. They, unlike yourself, were actually taking the Russian interference seriously and were reading about these sensitive investigations. yes, when the incoming NSA is a foreign agent having discussions with Russians about giving their spyhouses back to them after the inauguration, it's kind of important. Important people need to know these things.So what part of not knowing what unmasking is are you referring to?
Thirty-nine people in total are listed, ranging from White House officials to diplomats and Treasury Department officials.
That's a shameless lie you just made up. Sorry liar, i ignored the rest of your horseshit. Go babble at somebody else dumb enough to buy what you are selling.Mueller admitted he found no evidence of collusion
Wrong.They didn't have the need to know.........unless they are counter terrorism officials investigating a crime
Mueller found no crime NO CRIME, get that straight you MORON. He found NOTHING to substantiate the claims made by the left and he illegally held his results until after the election.That's a shameless lie you just made up. Sorry liar, i ignored the rest of your horseshit. Go babble at somebody else dumb enough to buy what you are selling.Mueller admitted he found no evidence of collusion
Of course he did. Obstruction is a crime.ueller found no crime NO CRIME
He found no obstruction dumb ass. Or perhaps you can explain why the House did not charge that in their Impeachment?Of course he did. Obstruction is a crime.ueller found no crime NO CRIME
See Trump and his ongoing rivalry with the intel community.
There was no obstruction, moron.Of course he did. Obstruction is a crime.ueller found no crime NO CRIME
Wrong.He found no obstruction
LOL ya right they supposedly had evidence according to you of an impeachable offense BUT didn't use it, instead using something they had no proof of, sure thing you MORON.Wrong.He found no obstruction
The house did not impeach because impeachment is a political process. The politics of the ukraine event were more stark. There were several other impeachable events they could have included.
Your cult leader is shielded by his office. That could end in january. Then watch out....
Correct. Same goes for a few other things too. You kow, sitting there and cackling like a moron isn't really support for your cultish nonsense.they supposedly had evidence according to you of an impeachable offense BUT didn't use it
So you are claiming the democrats were so fucking stupid they did not charge a provable charge bit went with an unproven one they had no witnesses for? Ya I agree democrats and stupid but not that stupid.Correct. Same goes for a few other things too. You kow, sitting there and cackling like a moron isn't really support for your cultish nonsense.they supposedly had evidence according to you of an impeachable offense BUT didn't use it
Then why do you do it?Correct. Same goes for a few other things too. You kow, sitting there and cackling like a moron isn't really support for your cultish nonsense.they supposedly had evidence according to you of an impeachable offense BUT didn't use it
See Trump and his ongoing rivalry with the intel community.
See Obama and how he used the intel community to try to overthrow the government of the United States.
LOL...Derp....See Obama and how he used the intel community to try to overthrow the government of the United States.
That's generally how coups work.See Trump and his ongoing rivalry with the intel community.
See Obama and how he used the intel community to try to overthrow the government of the United States.LOL...Derp....See Obama and how he used the intel community to try to overthrow the government of the United States.
So a sitting president attempted to overthrow the govt he presided over?
That's some seriosly CON-voluted thinking.
