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.
no fool you need a warrant on the US side of that.
yes you do fool. fking learn something.no fool you need a warrant on the US side of that.
NOPE. Since there is no way of knowing who will be on the other side of the conversation. You don't know if the Ambassador is calling Putin, or calling Flynn. So FISA grants them permission to record the conversation independent of who the primary target speaks to.
Without a warrant for Flynn no one could legally know he was on that call, and there was no warrant for Flynn, so some one in Obama's intelligence services or Justice Department illegally breached the security of the NSA's database to use this information for political purposes.well again, it needed a warrant like you were already told. one didn't exist. can't you fking understand anything?
There was a FISA warrant, either continuous of a renewal on the Russian embassy and or Russian personal within the embassy.
and guess where flynn was? yep trump towers. wiretapped.Without a warrant for Flynn no one could legally know he was on that call, and there was no warrant for Flynn, so some one in Obama's intelligence services or Justice Department illegally breached the security of the NSA's database to use this information for political purposes.well again, it needed a warrant like you were already told. one didn't exist. can't you fking understand anything?
There was a FISA warrant, either continuous of a renewal on the Russian embassy and or Russian personal within the embassy.
No would have known Flynn had had that communication with the Russian ambassador if they had illegally not violated the security of the NSA database.
and guess where flynn was? yep trump towers. wiretapped.
That's not true. The identity of Americans caught on intercepts are immediately masked and can be unmasked legally only with a surveillance warrant. If the unidentified American says something on the intercept that is particularly worrisome, the FBI can seek a surveillance warrant to unmask his identity, but they cannot surveil him to see if there is a reason to surveil him as you claim.No would have known Flynn had had that communication with the Russian ambassador if they had illegally not violated the security of the NSA database.
The NSA documents everybody someone under primary surveillance communicates with, to see if they should get a warrant to monitor them too. So either NSA and or DOJ has a list of everybody the Russian Ambassador talked to, and someone would have seen Flynn was on that list, without knowing anything about the conversation.
At no point does the article make the assertion that Obama “ordered” a wiretapping of Trump or that any such surveillance took place at Trump Tower in New York.The New York times reported that it was wiretapped.....why don't they just reveal their sources....?
Responsibility to whom?Trump has a responsibility to tell the truth for once in his miserable lifeso? who fking cares. he has no alliance with them. you still haven't figured that out yet have you Einy?Where exactly does that headline say that Tramp's Tower was wiretapped?
Here is what the NY Times article actually said about the location of the wiretaps:
"Mr. Manafort has done business in Ukraine and Russia. Some of his contacts there were under surveillance by the National Security Agency for suspected links to Russia’s Federal Security Service, one of the officials said."
Felony highlighted for the Progs
"WASHINGTON — American law enforcement and intelligence agencies are examining intercepted communications and financial transactions as part of a broad investigation into possible links between Russian officials and associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump, including his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, current and former senior American officials said.What does anything have to do with the"left"? Trump made the allegation and the Republican congress demanded proof. You know, just as I do, that he has noneso, it won't change anything, in fact, if I were trump I'd just tweet it again. and then what will happen from the left's pretendland politics?I heard that the committee at the end of the 7 days, would release a report. And if they received no evidence from Trump or the DOJ to support Trumps claim, the report would conclude that the claim was false.
LOLYou must not be paying attention to the news. Under the law, no one in the Justice Department or the WH should have had access to his identity on the intercept. Clearly laws were broken and questions have been raised about the security of the NSA database.The first I heard of it was when the White House asked him to resign over his Russian connection.There clearly was illegal surveillance of Flynn. When an American is recorded in an intercept, by law, his identity must be masked. The purpose of masking the identities of Americans on these intercepts is to protect the NSA searchable database on which these intercepts are stored from being in violation of the Constitutional rights of Americans. Our intelligence agencies employ a work around to spy on Americans when they can't get a surveillance warrant. It is called backdoor surveillance (Google it), and it has been under fire for years from privacy advocates because they claimed, and the Obama administration proved in the case of Flynn, that it can be so easily misused for political purposes. Some one had to breach the security of the NSA database to unmask Flynn's identity and make this highly classified information public. This is not just another leak. This shows just how vulnerable a key element of our national security apparatus is to misuse by unscrupulous politicians such as Obama.I'm saying you are too stupid to understand what he said. Nunes said there was no evidence of a wiretap on Trump Tower, he did not say there was no evidence of illegal surveillance of Trump and his associates. In fact we know there was as we have seen in the case of Mike Flynn.
There was no illegal Flynn surveillance, there was LEGAL surveillance on the Russian embassy, in which Flynn was caught talking to the Russian Ambassador.
No, you don't know that either. Without knowing who actually divulged the information, all you can do is guess.And yet we know Obama holdovers in the Justice Department or the intelligence agencies breached the security of the NSA database of intercepted communication in order to use Flynn's communications with the Russian ambassador for political purposes.Not the case at all. There's absolutely zero evidence Obama did any such thing. That should be clear to you since the administration keeps changing its story; going from wiretapped phones to surveiled servers, to the NSA to British intelligence; going from inside Trump Tower to outside Trump Tower.In other words, for you the important issue is not whether Obama corrupted our national security apparatus to illegally surveil the Trump campaign and Trump transitional government but whether Trump should have used the word, surveil, rather than wiretap.Umm... Trump's claim was that Trump Tower was wiretapped. We now know he was full of shit.I'm saying you are too stupid to understand what he said. Nunes said there was no evidence of a wiretap on Trump Tower, he did not say there was no evidence of illegal surveillance of Trump and his associates. In fact we know there was as we have seen in the case of Mike Flynn.So your saying republican senator Nunes committee chairman of senate intelligence is lying?
They're all over the place because they're trying to cover for Trump's idiotic tweets which were based off of rightwing media. Because he can't control his temperament, he made a fucking ass of himself by using Twitter to make some outrageous charges about a former president. The administration knows it so they're trying to mitigate the damage by just throwing out any bullshit they can think of, hoping something will stick.
Regrettably for Trump, it's all flying back in his face. But then, he has a history of disparaging Obama. It was fine when he wasn't president, but now, whether he realizes it or not, he's being held to a higher standard. Something he really doesn't seem to grasp.
why though? based on what exactly? I've yet to see the evidence.At no point does the article make the assertion that Obama “ordered” a wiretapping of Trump or that any such surveillance took place at Trump Tower in New York.The New York times reported that it was wiretapped.....why don't they just reveal their sources....?
Instead, the Times story speaks to a broader FBI investigation of possible links between unnamed Russian officials and Trump associates.
Clearly we do have enough evidence since there is no way anyone would have known about Flynn's identity on that intercept without breaking the law, but to Obama supporters, as with Obama himself, it's politics that counts, not policy and not even national security.LOLYou must not be paying attention to the news. Under the law, no one in the Justice Department or the WH should have had access to his identity on the intercept. Clearly laws were broken and questions have been raised about the security of the NSA database.The first I heard of it was when the White House asked him to resign over his Russian connection.There clearly was illegal surveillance of Flynn. When an American is recorded in an intercept, by law, his identity must be masked. The purpose of masking the identities of Americans on these intercepts is to protect the NSA searchable database on which these intercepts are stored from being in violation of the Constitutional rights of Americans. Our intelligence agencies employ a work around to spy on Americans when they can't get a surveillance warrant. It is called backdoor surveillance (Google it), and it has been under fire for years from privacy advocates because they claimed, and the Obama administration proved in the case of Flynn, that it can be so easily misused for political purposes. Some one had to breach the security of the NSA database to unmask Flynn's identity and make this highly classified information public. This is not just another leak. This shows just how vulnerable a key element of our national security apparatus is to misuse by unscrupulous politicians such as Obama.I'm saying you are too stupid to understand what he said. Nunes said there was no evidence of a wiretap on Trump Tower, he did not say there was no evidence of illegal surveillance of Trump and his associates. In fact we know there was as we have seen in the case of Mike Flynn.
There was no illegal Flynn surveillance, there was LEGAL surveillance on the Russian embassy, in which Flynn was caught talking to the Russian Ambassador.
You don't possess enough evidence to factually state laws were clearly broken.
what exactly? why doesn't the press shut up about russia after the intelligence agencies all said no russia anything? why can't we get that first since it has been a headline for seven months now.Responsibility to whom?Trump has a responsibility to tell the truth for once in his miserable lifeso? who fking cares. he has no alliance with them. you still haven't figured that out yet have you Einy?Felony highlighted for the Progs
"WASHINGTON — American law enforcement and intelligence agencies are examining intercepted communications and financial transactions as part of a broad investigation into possible links between Russian officials and associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump, including his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, current and former senior American officials said.What does anything have to do with the"left"? Trump made the allegation and the Republican congress demanded proof. You know, just as I do, that he has noneso, it won't change anything, in fact, if I were trump I'd just tweet it again. and then what will happen from the left's pretendland politics?
Every American citizen.
We know exactly who it was who divulged the information, Sally Yates, but we don't know if she was the one who illegally breached the NSA database or if she was the one who illegally passed around this highly classified information.No, you don't know that either. Without knowing who actually divulged the information, all you can do is guess.And yet we know Obama holdovers in the Justice Department or the intelligence agencies breached the security of the NSA database of intercepted communication in order to use Flynn's communications with the Russian ambassador for political purposes.Not the case at all. There's absolutely zero evidence Obama did any such thing. That should be clear to you since the administration keeps changing its story; going from wiretapped phones to surveiled servers, to the NSA to British intelligence; going from inside Trump Tower to outside Trump Tower.In other words, for you the important issue is not whether Obama corrupted our national security apparatus to illegally surveil the Trump campaign and Trump transitional government but whether Trump should have used the word, surveil, rather than wiretap.Umm... Trump's claim was that Trump Tower was wiretapped. We now know he was full of shit.I'm saying you are too stupid to understand what he said. Nunes said there was no evidence of a wiretap on Trump Tower, he did not say there was no evidence of illegal surveillance of Trump and his associates. In fact we know there was as we have seen in the case of Mike Flynn.
They're all over the place because they're trying to cover for Trump's idiotic tweets which were based off of rightwing media. Because he can't control his temperament, he made a fucking ass of himself by using Twitter to make some outrageous charges about a former president. The administration knows it so they're trying to mitigate the damage by just throwing out any bullshit they can think of, hoping something will stick.
Regrettably for Trump, it's all flying back in his face. But then, he has a history of disparaging Obama. It was fine when he wasn't president, but now, whether he realizes it or not, he's being held to a higher standard. Something he really doesn't seem to grasp.
Moron, the Russian embassy was wiretapped, not Trump Tower.and guess where flynn was? yep trump towers. wiretapped.Without a warrant for Flynn no one could legally know he was on that call, and there was no warrant for Flynn, so some one in Obama's intelligence services or Justice Department illegally breached the security of the NSA's database to use this information for political purposes.well again, it needed a warrant like you were already told. one didn't exist. can't you fking understand anything?
There was a FISA warrant, either continuous of a renewal on the Russian embassy and or Russian personal within the embassy.
LOLOLClearly we do have enough evidence since there is no way anyone would have known about Flynn's identity on that intercept without breaking the law, but to Obama supporters, as with Obama himself, it's politics that counts, not policy and not even national security.LOLYou must not be paying attention to the news. Under the law, no one in the Justice Department or the WH should have had access to his identity on the intercept. Clearly laws were broken and questions have been raised about the security of the NSA database.The first I heard of it was when the White House asked him to resign over his Russian connection.There clearly was illegal surveillance of Flynn. When an American is recorded in an intercept, by law, his identity must be masked. The purpose of masking the identities of Americans on these intercepts is to protect the NSA searchable database on which these intercepts are stored from being in violation of the Constitutional rights of Americans. Our intelligence agencies employ a work around to spy on Americans when they can't get a surveillance warrant. It is called backdoor surveillance (Google it), and it has been under fire for years from privacy advocates because they claimed, and the Obama administration proved in the case of Flynn, that it can be so easily misused for political purposes. Some one had to breach the security of the NSA database to unmask Flynn's identity and make this highly classified information public. This is not just another leak. This shows just how vulnerable a key element of our national security apparatus is to misuse by unscrupulous politicians such as Obama.There was no illegal Flynn surveillance, there was LEGAL surveillance on the Russian embassy, in which Flynn was caught talking to the Russian Ambassador.
You don't possess enough evidence to factually state laws were clearly broken.
what exactly? why doesn't the press shut up about russia after the intelligence agencies all said no russia anything? why can't we get that first since it has been a headline for seven months now.
We are talking about breaching an NSA database, you moron, not eavesdropping on conversations. Sally Yates was acting AG when she received the information on Flynn, so she knew without a warrant it couldn't have been obtained legally, yet she used it anyway to get Flynn fired instead of seeking to indict the person who illegally unmasked Flynn's identity.LOLOLClearly we do have enough evidence since there is no way anyone would have known about Flynn's identity on that intercept without breaking the law, but to Obama supporters, as with Obama himself, it's politics that counts, not policy and not even national security.LOLYou must not be paying attention to the news. Under the law, no one in the Justice Department or the WH should have had access to his identity on the intercept. Clearly laws were broken and questions have been raised about the security of the NSA database.The first I heard of it was when the White House asked him to resign over his Russian connection.There clearly was illegal surveillance of Flynn. When an American is recorded in an intercept, by law, his identity must be masked. The purpose of masking the identities of Americans on these intercepts is to protect the NSA searchable database on which these intercepts are stored from being in violation of the Constitutional rights of Americans. Our intelligence agencies employ a work around to spy on Americans when they can't get a surveillance warrant. It is called backdoor surveillance (Google it), and it has been under fire for years from privacy advocates because they claimed, and the Obama administration proved in the case of Flynn, that it can be so easily misused for political purposes. Some one had to breach the security of the NSA database to unmask Flynn's identity and make this highly classified information public. This is not just another leak. This shows just how vulnerable a key element of our national security apparatus is to misuse by unscrupulous politicians such as Obama.
You don't possess enough evidence to factually state laws were clearly broken.
You don't even know who may have leaked the information. The law does allow for exceptions. Without knowing who divulged it, you don't know that the law was violated.
(2)(a)(i) It shall not be unlawful under this chapter for an operator of a switchboard, or an officer, employee, or agent of a provider of wire or electronic communication service, whose facilities are used in the transmission of a wire or electronic communication, to intercept, disclose, or use that communication in the normal course of his employment while engaged in any activity which is a necessary incident to the rendition of his service or to the protection of the rights or property of the provider of that service, except that a provider of wire communication service to the public shall not utilize service observing or random monitoring except for mechanical or service quality control checks.
We are talking about breaching an NSA database, you moron, not eavesdropping on conversations. Sally Yates was acting AG when she received the information on Flynn, so she knew without a warrant it couldn't have been obtained legally, yet she used it anyway to get Flynn fired instead of seeking to indict the person who illegally unmasked Flynn's identity.
