What do liberals think about Trump's statement he was spied on now?

[mudwhistle]

https://nypost.com/2017/01/24/fbi-clears-michael-flynn-in-probe-linking-him-to-russia/

The FBI has reviewed intercepted phone calls between national security adviser Michael Flynn and the Russian ambassador to the US and has found no evidence of wrongdoing, it was revealed Monday.

The calls were made in late December and picked up as part of routine electronic surveillance of Russian officials. They did not reveal any illicit ties between Flynn and Russia, according to the Washington Post.

The review of the calls was part of a wider probe into Russia’s interference in the presidential election and hacking of the Democratic National Committee.​

This is old news, rightard. Flynn's conversation was intercepted because he was in communications with a Russian Ambassador who was lawfully under surveillance.

Yet another shining example of Trump NOT being spied on by Obama in Trump Tower.

But you guys said this stuff never happened!!!!

Come on....get your stories straight.

Ok, you're just fucking insane. There is no other explanation.

Post us saying the FBI never wiretaps foreign agents........

That's not the point.
The FBI used their surveillance of Russians as an excuse to spy on Trump.
They presented as much to the FISA court in July of 2016. Problem is....how did they find the evidence in the first place?
Because they were already spying on Trump.

Fumbducking ijit. That was in regard to the FBI's interest in Manafort and Page; neither of whom had anything whatsoever to do with the Russian Ambassador who was lawfully wiretapped. And both of who were of interest to the FBI for years.

You're literally a brain-dead sponge who piece meals together talking points in random order to construct a scandal where none exists beyond your pea brain.

No.....you claim that this was a Russian Ambassador who was wiretapped, but somehow Flynn was caught up in it. Who do you think collects data on foreign phone calls? The NSA.

The NSA Collects all of the data on these communications. How did the FBI get involved? Because Samanth Powers and Susan Rice got the Okay from Obama to unmask to expose his identity. Now we know from this article that he was doing nothing wrong. So why did the FBI get involved in it?

The FBI doesn't start an investigation and obtain a warrant just because a Russian is talking to an American.
They were spying on Trump by going around our laws and our right to be free from illegal search and seizure.

 

[del]

poor mud

 

[mudwhistle]

poor mud

Yeah...fuck you.

I point out facts and he responds with absurdities.

 

[Faun]

This is old news, rightard. Flynn's conversation was intercepted because he was in communications with a Russian Ambassador who was lawfully under surveillance.

Yet another shining example of Trump NOT being spied on by Obama in Trump Tower.

But you guys said this stuff never happened!!!!

Come on....get your stories straight.

Ok, you're just fucking insane. There is no other explanation.

Post us saying the FBI never wiretaps foreign agents........

That's not the point.
The FBI used their surveillance of Russians as an excuse to spy on Trump.
They presented as much to the FISA court in July of 2016. Problem is....how did they find the evidence in the first place?
Because they were already spying on Trump.

Fumbducking ijit. That was in regard to the FBI's interest in Manafort and Page; neither of whom had anything whatsoever to do with the Russian Ambassador who was lawfully wiretapped. And both of who were of interest to the FBI for years.

You're literally a brain-dead sponge who piece meals together talking points in random order to construct a scandal where none exists beyond your pea brain.

No.....you claim that this was a Russian Ambassador who was wiretapped, but somehow Flynn was caught up in it. Who do you think collects data on foreign phone calls? The NSA.

The NSA Collects all of the data on these communications. How did the FBI get involved? Because Samanth Powers and Susan Rice got the Okay from Obama to unmask to expose his identity. Now we know from this article that he was doing nothing wrong. So why did the FBI get involved in it?

The FBI doesn't start an investigation and obtain a warrant just because a Russian is talking to an American.
They were spying on Trump by going around our laws and our right to be free from illegal search and seizure.

Flynn was never the target of a wiretap. The Russian was. That will never change no matter how committed you are to your delusions.

Flynn was snared only because he was communicating with a Russian who was wiretapped. Not because Flynn, or Trump, were the targets.

 

[Faun]

poor mud

Yeah...fuck you.

I point out facts and he responds with absurdities.

LOLOLOLOL

Mud vomits disjointed logorrhea and thinks they're "facts."

 

[mudwhistle]

But you guys said this stuff never happened!!!!

Come on....get your stories straight.

Ok, you're just fucking insane. There is no other explanation.

Post us saying the FBI never wiretaps foreign agents........

That's not the point.
The FBI used their surveillance of Russians as an excuse to spy on Trump.
They presented as much to the FISA court in July of 2016. Problem is....how did they find the evidence in the first place?
Because they were already spying on Trump.

Fumbducking ijit. That was in regard to the FBI's interest in Manafort and Page; neither of whom had anything whatsoever to do with the Russian Ambassador who was lawfully wiretapped. And both of who were of interest to the FBI for years.

You're literally a brain-dead sponge who piece meals together talking points in random order to construct a scandal where none exists beyond your pea brain.

No.....you claim that this was a Russian Ambassador who was wiretapped, but somehow Flynn was caught up in it. Who do you think collects data on foreign phone calls? The NSA.

The NSA Collects all of the data on these communications. How did the FBI get involved? Because Samanth Powers and Susan Rice got the Okay from Obama to unmask to expose his identity. Now we know from this article that he was doing nothing wrong. So why did the FBI get involved in it?

The FBI doesn't start an investigation and obtain a warrant just because a Russian is talking to an American.
They were spying on Trump by going around our laws and our right to be free from illegal search and seizure.

Flynn was never the target of a wiretap. The Russian was. That will never change no matter how committed you are to your delusions.

Flynn was snared only because he was communicating with a Russian who was wiretapped. Not because Flynn, or Trump, were the targets.

Liar.
Flynn did nothing wrong.
Flynn's identity should have been protected but Obama exposed him and allowed him to be unmasked.
You do understand what UNMASKING MEANS??? RIGHT??

The NSA collects data communications and writes reports taking care not to reveal the names of any US citizens involved.
Revealing the names is called UNMASKING.

What is 'unmasking?' How intelligence agencies treat U.S. citizens

WASHINGTON — The investigation into Russian interference in the presidential election — and President Trump's counterattack against surveillance and leaking — has brought a new term into the American political lexicon.

"Unmasking."

Until now, the process for revealing information about U.S. citizens in intelligence reports was almost completely obscure outside of the intelligence community.

But the issue has taken on new importance since House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes alleged that the Obama administration may have improperly identified Trump transition officials in classified reports he had access to — reports that later turned out to be provided to him by the Trump White House.

Here's what we know about the hows and whys of unmasking:

'Minimization' procedures
When U.S. spy agencies eavesdrop on terrorists or foreign agents, they often come across information about U.S. citizens who are not the target of their investigation. This "incidental collection" is not illegal or improper, but specially trained intelligence officers are required to go through an established procedure to protect the privacy of U.S. persons, known as "minimization."

(U.S. persons are defined as U.S. citizens and permanent residents, no matter where they are in the world.)

Identifying information about that person will generally be excluded in intelligence reports that are distributed throughout the intelligence community, including those that go to the White House. Instead, the reports will refer only to "U.S. Person One," "U.S. Person Two," etc.

Exceptions to the rule
But the intelligence community's policies on minimization are not absolute, and there are several exceptions. The National Security Agency, for example, will contain the names of U.S. persons in intelligence reports when:

► The information is available publicly, meaning "information that a member of the public could obtain on request, by research in public sources, or by casual observation."

► "The identity of the United States person is necessary to understand foreign intelligence information or assess its importance, e.g., the identity of a senior official in the executive branch."

► The intelligence indicates that the U.S. person may be "an agent of a foreign power."

Who can 'unmask?'
If a national security official who receives an intelligence report feels like he or she needs to know the identity of a U.S. person in an intelligence report, that official can make a request to "unmask."

The procedures for doing so are less well understood than the minimization process, but about 20 officials at the National Security Agency have the authority to approve an unmasking, NSA Director Michael Rogers told the House Intelligence Committee last month.

Especially sensitive requests would come to his attention personally. "I'm the senior-most of the 20 individuals. Requests will be pushed to my level, say 'Hey, sir, we just want to make sure that you're comfortable with this,'" he said.

Rogers said those officials all have specific training. "There are specific controls put in place in terms of our ability to disseminate information out of the databases associated with U.S. persons," he said.

Other intelligence agencies — including the CIA, FBI and the National Counterterrorism Center — have their own procedures for minimization and unmasking.

Susan Rice's unmasking requests
In an interview with MSNBC Tuesday, Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice denied making requests to unmask the names of Trump associates for political purposes. She described the process as routine, but declined to say specifically how often she made requests or for what purposes.

"There were occasions when I would receive a report in which a U.S. person was referred to. Name not provided, just a U.S. person," she said. "And sometimes in that context, in order to understand the importance of the report, and assess its significance, it was necessary to find out, or request the information, as to who the U.S. official was.

"So when that occurred, what I would do, or what any official would do, is to ask their briefer whether the intelligence community would go through its process — and there's a long-standing, established process — to decide whether that information as to who the identity of the U.S. person was could be provided to me. So they'd take that question back, they'd put it through a process, and the intelligence community made the determination as to whether or not the identity of that American individual could be provided to me."

Unmasking is not leaking
When the name of a U.S. person is unmasked, that information is provided only to the intelligence official who requested that unmasking, Rice said Tuesday. "There's no equivalence between so-called unmasking and leaking," she said.

Of course, the recipient of unmasked information could then illegally disclose it through a leak.

Rice denied leaking. "I leaked nothing to nobody, and never had and never would," she said.​

 

[mudwhistle]

So why do we know about this???
Because Susan Rice told Obama and the communication was leaked to the press.
How did he make sure this happened?
By spreading it all over the place so it was guaranteed to be leaked and no one person could be blamed for the leak.

 

[mudwhistle]

poor mud

Yeah...fuck you.

I point out facts and he responds with absurdities.

LOLOLOLOL

Mud vomits disjointed logorrhea and thinks they're "facts."

And you keep going back and repeating the same illogical talking-points.
And I keep throwing the facts in your face.

 

[radical right]

And you keep going back and repeating the same illogical talking-points.
And I keep throwing the facts in your face.

One fact you keep getting wrong, claiming Flynn did nothing wrong.
A multi-count indictment, and guilty pleading says Flynn did a ton of things wrong, and both the DOJ and Obama himself, warned Trump that Flynn was dirty.

 

[mudwhistle]

And you keep going back and repeating the same illogical talking-points.
And I keep throwing the facts in your face.

One fact you keep getting wrong, claiming Flynn did nothing wrong.
A multi-count indictment, and guilty pleading says Flynn did a ton of things wrong, and both the DOJ and Obama himself, warned Trump that Flynn was dirty.

Bullshit!!
Flynn plead guilty to lying to investigators.
That is a process crime.
A standard trick that the FBI pulls simply by confusing those they interrogate with several interrogations over several months.
Some of the investigators even admitted that Flynn never lied in the first place.
He simply took a plea deal to prevent having to sell his home to fund his defense.

 

[radical right]

Bullshit!!
Flynn plead guilty to lying to investigators.
That is a process crime.
A standard trick that the FBI pulls simply by confusing those they interrogate with several interrogations over several months.
Some of the investigators even admitted that Flynn never lied in the first place.
He simply took a plea deal to prevent having to sell his home to fund his defense.

Read the Flynn plea deal. Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his dirty deads. Ex: Flynn lied about violating the Logan Act,

Think of it like charging O.J. for lying about being innocent of two murders. The process crime is also proof.

 

[Faun]

Ok, you're just fucking insane. There is no other explanation.

Post us saying the FBI never wiretaps foreign agents........

That's not the point.
The FBI used their surveillance of Russians as an excuse to spy on Trump.
They presented as much to the FISA court in July of 2016. Problem is....how did they find the evidence in the first place?
Because they were already spying on Trump.

Fumbducking ijit. That was in regard to the FBI's interest in Manafort and Page; neither of whom had anything whatsoever to do with the Russian Ambassador who was lawfully wiretapped. And both of who were of interest to the FBI for years.

You're literally a brain-dead sponge who piece meals together talking points in random order to construct a scandal where none exists beyond your pea brain.

No.....you claim that this was a Russian Ambassador who was wiretapped, but somehow Flynn was caught up in it. Who do you think collects data on foreign phone calls? The NSA.

The NSA Collects all of the data on these communications. How did the FBI get involved? Because Samanth Powers and Susan Rice got the Okay from Obama to unmask to expose his identity. Now we know from this article that he was doing nothing wrong. So why did the FBI get involved in it?

The FBI doesn't start an investigation and obtain a warrant just because a Russian is talking to an American.
They were spying on Trump by going around our laws and our right to be free from illegal search and seizure.

Flynn was never the target of a wiretap. The Russian was. That will never change no matter how committed you are to your delusions.

Flynn was snared only because he was communicating with a Russian who was wiretapped. Not because Flynn, or Trump, were the targets.

Liar.
Flynn did nothing wrong.
Flynn's identity should have been protected but Obama exposed him and allowed him to be unmasked.
You do understand what UNMASKING MEANS??? RIGHT??

The NSA collects data communications and writes reports taking care not to reveal the names of any US citizens involved.
Revealing the names is called UNMASKING.

What is 'unmasking?' How intelligence agencies treat U.S. citizens

WASHINGTON — The investigation into Russian interference in the presidential election — and President Trump's counterattack against surveillance and leaking — has brought a new term into the American political lexicon.

"Unmasking."

Until now, the process for revealing information about U.S. citizens in intelligence reports was almost completely obscure outside of the intelligence community.

But the issue has taken on new importance since House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes alleged that the Obama administration may have improperly identified Trump transition officials in classified reports he had access to — reports that later turned out to be provided to him by the Trump White House.

Here's what we know about the hows and whys of unmasking:

'Minimization' procedures
When U.S. spy agencies eavesdrop on terrorists or foreign agents, they often come across information about U.S. citizens who are not the target of their investigation. This "incidental collection" is not illegal or improper, but specially trained intelligence officers are required to go through an established procedure to protect the privacy of U.S. persons, known as "minimization."

(U.S. persons are defined as U.S. citizens and permanent residents, no matter where they are in the world.)

Identifying information about that person will generally be excluded in intelligence reports that are distributed throughout the intelligence community, including those that go to the White House. Instead, the reports will refer only to "U.S. Person One," "U.S. Person Two," etc.

Exceptions to the rule
But the intelligence community's policies on minimization are not absolute, and there are several exceptions. The National Security Agency, for example, will contain the names of U.S. persons in intelligence reports when:

► The information is available publicly, meaning "information that a member of the public could obtain on request, by research in public sources, or by casual observation."

► "The identity of the United States person is necessary to understand foreign intelligence information or assess its importance, e.g., the identity of a senior official in the executive branch."

► The intelligence indicates that the U.S. person may be "an agent of a foreign power."

Who can 'unmask?'
If a national security official who receives an intelligence report feels like he or she needs to know the identity of a U.S. person in an intelligence report, that official can make a request to "unmask."

The procedures for doing so are less well understood than the minimization process, but about 20 officials at the National Security Agency have the authority to approve an unmasking, NSA Director Michael Rogers told the House Intelligence Committee last month.

Especially sensitive requests would come to his attention personally. "I'm the senior-most of the 20 individuals. Requests will be pushed to my level, say 'Hey, sir, we just want to make sure that you're comfortable with this,'" he said.

Rogers said those officials all have specific training. "There are specific controls put in place in terms of our ability to disseminate information out of the databases associated with U.S. persons," he said.

Other intelligence agencies — including the CIA, FBI and the National Counterterrorism Center — have their own procedures for minimization and unmasking.

Susan Rice's unmasking requests
In an interview with MSNBC Tuesday, Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice denied making requests to unmask the names of Trump associates for political purposes. She described the process as routine, but declined to say specifically how often she made requests or for what purposes.

"There were occasions when I would receive a report in which a U.S. person was referred to. Name not provided, just a U.S. person," she said. "And sometimes in that context, in order to understand the importance of the report, and assess its significance, it was necessary to find out, or request the information, as to who the U.S. official was.

"So when that occurred, what I would do, or what any official would do, is to ask their briefer whether the intelligence community would go through its process — and there's a long-standing, established process — to decide whether that information as to who the identity of the U.S. person was could be provided to me. So they'd take that question back, they'd put it through a process, and the intelligence community made the determination as to whether or not the identity of that American individual could be provided to me."

Unmasking is not leaking
When the name of a U.S. person is unmasked, that information is provided only to the intelligence official who requested that unmasking, Rice said Tuesday. "There's no equivalence between so-called unmasking and leaking," she said.

Of course, the recipient of unmasked information could then illegally disclose it through a leak.

Rice denied leaking. "I leaked nothing to nobody, and never had and never would," she said.​

Moron, if any of that were true, it would Obama’s people facing jail time, not Trump’s.

 

[Illya. K. Makrus]

They continue to dismiss it, like before.
Folks in this country have been living two realities. Most of the times, they can both convince themselves that the others are pretty darn stupid, until the inevitable and objective facts kick in, something like election results, which strengthen the faith of some and bewilder the others. Unfortunately, it usually doesn't take long for the bewildered to convince themselves that they simply missed a few details and their realities are just fine.

 

[mudwhistle]

That's not the point.
The FBI used their surveillance of Russians as an excuse to spy on Trump.
They presented as much to the FISA court in July of 2016. Problem is....how did they find the evidence in the first place?
Because they were already spying on Trump.

Fumbducking ijit. That was in regard to the FBI's interest in Manafort and Page; neither of whom had anything whatsoever to do with the Russian Ambassador who was lawfully wiretapped. And both of who were of interest to the FBI for years.

You're literally a brain-dead sponge who piece meals together talking points in random order to construct a scandal where none exists beyond your pea brain.

No.....you claim that this was a Russian Ambassador who was wiretapped, but somehow Flynn was caught up in it. Who do you think collects data on foreign phone calls? The NSA.

The NSA Collects all of the data on these communications. How did the FBI get involved? Because Samanth Powers and Susan Rice got the Okay from Obama to unmask to expose his identity. Now we know from this article that he was doing nothing wrong. So why did the FBI get involved in it?

The FBI doesn't start an investigation and obtain a warrant just because a Russian is talking to an American.
They were spying on Trump by going around our laws and our right to be free from illegal search and seizure.

Flynn was never the target of a wiretap. The Russian was. That will never change no matter how committed you are to your delusions.

Flynn was snared only because he was communicating with a Russian who was wiretapped. Not because Flynn, or Trump, were the targets.

Liar.
Flynn did nothing wrong.
Flynn's identity should have been protected but Obama exposed him and allowed him to be unmasked.
You do understand what UNMASKING MEANS??? RIGHT??

The NSA collects data communications and writes reports taking care not to reveal the names of any US citizens involved.
Revealing the names is called UNMASKING.

What is 'unmasking?' How intelligence agencies treat U.S. citizens

WASHINGTON — The investigation into Russian interference in the presidential election — and President Trump's counterattack against surveillance and leaking — has brought a new term into the American political lexicon.

"Unmasking."

Until now, the process for revealing information about U.S. citizens in intelligence reports was almost completely obscure outside of the intelligence community.

But the issue has taken on new importance since House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes alleged that the Obama administration may have improperly identified Trump transition officials in classified reports he had access to — reports that later turned out to be provided to him by the Trump White House.

Here's what we know about the hows and whys of unmasking:

'Minimization' procedures
When U.S. spy agencies eavesdrop on terrorists or foreign agents, they often come across information about U.S. citizens who are not the target of their investigation. This "incidental collection" is not illegal or improper, but specially trained intelligence officers are required to go through an established procedure to protect the privacy of U.S. persons, known as "minimization."

(U.S. persons are defined as U.S. citizens and permanent residents, no matter where they are in the world.)

Identifying information about that person will generally be excluded in intelligence reports that are distributed throughout the intelligence community, including those that go to the White House. Instead, the reports will refer only to "U.S. Person One," "U.S. Person Two," etc.

Exceptions to the rule
But the intelligence community's policies on minimization are not absolute, and there are several exceptions. The National Security Agency, for example, will contain the names of U.S. persons in intelligence reports when:

► The information is available publicly, meaning "information that a member of the public could obtain on request, by research in public sources, or by casual observation."

► "The identity of the United States person is necessary to understand foreign intelligence information or assess its importance, e.g., the identity of a senior official in the executive branch."

► The intelligence indicates that the U.S. person may be "an agent of a foreign power."

Who can 'unmask?'
If a national security official who receives an intelligence report feels like he or she needs to know the identity of a U.S. person in an intelligence report, that official can make a request to "unmask."

The procedures for doing so are less well understood than the minimization process, but about 20 officials at the National Security Agency have the authority to approve an unmasking, NSA Director Michael Rogers told the House Intelligence Committee last month.

Especially sensitive requests would come to his attention personally. "I'm the senior-most of the 20 individuals. Requests will be pushed to my level, say 'Hey, sir, we just want to make sure that you're comfortable with this,'" he said.

Rogers said those officials all have specific training. "There are specific controls put in place in terms of our ability to disseminate information out of the databases associated with U.S. persons," he said.

Other intelligence agencies — including the CIA, FBI and the National Counterterrorism Center — have their own procedures for minimization and unmasking.

Susan Rice's unmasking requests
In an interview with MSNBC Tuesday, Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice denied making requests to unmask the names of Trump associates for political purposes. She described the process as routine, but declined to say specifically how often she made requests or for what purposes.

"There were occasions when I would receive a report in which a U.S. person was referred to. Name not provided, just a U.S. person," she said. "And sometimes in that context, in order to understand the importance of the report, and assess its significance, it was necessary to find out, or request the information, as to who the U.S. official was.

"So when that occurred, what I would do, or what any official would do, is to ask their briefer whether the intelligence community would go through its process — and there's a long-standing, established process — to decide whether that information as to who the identity of the U.S. person was could be provided to me. So they'd take that question back, they'd put it through a process, and the intelligence community made the determination as to whether or not the identity of that American individual could be provided to me."

Unmasking is not leaking
When the name of a U.S. person is unmasked, that information is provided only to the intelligence official who requested that unmasking, Rice said Tuesday. "There's no equivalence between so-called unmasking and leaking," she said.

Of course, the recipient of unmasked information could then illegally disclose it through a leak.

Rice denied leaking. "I leaked nothing to nobody, and never had and never would," she said.​

Moron, if any of that were true, it would Obama’s people facing jail time, not Trump’s.

Nope. If you can read you'd know that they claimed that nobody broke the law till Flynn's name was leaked to the press. Something Obama made sure of when he spread the so-called intel all over the intelligence community....assuring it would be leaked. There's the crime. Obama made sure that nobody could be fingered.
Obama was supposed to protect Flynn's identity....but instead he turned it into well known secret that would then be leaked to the press. This is the reason for spreading it around the various branches of the intelligence community.

 

[mudwhistle]

Bullshit!!
Flynn plead guilty to lying to investigators.
That is a process crime.
A standard trick that the FBI pulls simply by confusing those they interrogate with several interrogations over several months.
Some of the investigators even admitted that Flynn never lied in the first place.
He simply took a plea deal to prevent having to sell his home to fund his defense.

Read the Flynn plea deal. Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his dirty deads. Ex: Flynn lied about violating the Logan Act,

Think of it like charging O.J. for lying about being innocent of two murders. The process crime is also proof.

Flynn wasn't convicted of violating the Logan Act. He was just charged with lying.

 

[Faun]

Fumbducking ijit. That was in regard to the FBI's interest in Manafort and Page; neither of whom had anything whatsoever to do with the Russian Ambassador who was lawfully wiretapped. And both of who were of interest to the FBI for years.

You're literally a brain-dead sponge who piece meals together talking points in random order to construct a scandal where none exists beyond your pea brain.

No.....you claim that this was a Russian Ambassador who was wiretapped, but somehow Flynn was caught up in it. Who do you think collects data on foreign phone calls? The NSA.

The NSA Collects all of the data on these communications. How did the FBI get involved? Because Samanth Powers and Susan Rice got the Okay from Obama to unmask to expose his identity. Now we know from this article that he was doing nothing wrong. So why did the FBI get involved in it?

The FBI doesn't start an investigation and obtain a warrant just because a Russian is talking to an American.
They were spying on Trump by going around our laws and our right to be free from illegal search and seizure.

Flynn was never the target of a wiretap. The Russian was. That will never change no matter how committed you are to your delusions.

Flynn was snared only because he was communicating with a Russian who was wiretapped. Not because Flynn, or Trump, were the targets.

Liar.
Flynn did nothing wrong.
Flynn's identity should have been protected but Obama exposed him and allowed him to be unmasked.
You do understand what UNMASKING MEANS??? RIGHT??

The NSA collects data communications and writes reports taking care not to reveal the names of any US citizens involved.
Revealing the names is called UNMASKING.

What is 'unmasking?' How intelligence agencies treat U.S. citizens

WASHINGTON — The investigation into Russian interference in the presidential election — and President Trump's counterattack against surveillance and leaking — has brought a new term into the American political lexicon.

"Unmasking."

Until now, the process for revealing information about U.S. citizens in intelligence reports was almost completely obscure outside of the intelligence community.

But the issue has taken on new importance since House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes alleged that the Obama administration may have improperly identified Trump transition officials in classified reports he had access to — reports that later turned out to be provided to him by the Trump White House.

Here's what we know about the hows and whys of unmasking:

'Minimization' procedures
When U.S. spy agencies eavesdrop on terrorists or foreign agents, they often come across information about U.S. citizens who are not the target of their investigation. This "incidental collection" is not illegal or improper, but specially trained intelligence officers are required to go through an established procedure to protect the privacy of U.S. persons, known as "minimization."

(U.S. persons are defined as U.S. citizens and permanent residents, no matter where they are in the world.)

Identifying information about that person will generally be excluded in intelligence reports that are distributed throughout the intelligence community, including those that go to the White House. Instead, the reports will refer only to "U.S. Person One," "U.S. Person Two," etc.

Exceptions to the rule
But the intelligence community's policies on minimization are not absolute, and there are several exceptions. The National Security Agency, for example, will contain the names of U.S. persons in intelligence reports when:

► The information is available publicly, meaning "information that a member of the public could obtain on request, by research in public sources, or by casual observation."

► "The identity of the United States person is necessary to understand foreign intelligence information or assess its importance, e.g., the identity of a senior official in the executive branch."

► The intelligence indicates that the U.S. person may be "an agent of a foreign power."

Who can 'unmask?'
If a national security official who receives an intelligence report feels like he or she needs to know the identity of a U.S. person in an intelligence report, that official can make a request to "unmask."

The procedures for doing so are less well understood than the minimization process, but about 20 officials at the National Security Agency have the authority to approve an unmasking, NSA Director Michael Rogers told the House Intelligence Committee last month.

Especially sensitive requests would come to his attention personally. "I'm the senior-most of the 20 individuals. Requests will be pushed to my level, say 'Hey, sir, we just want to make sure that you're comfortable with this,'" he said.

Rogers said those officials all have specific training. "There are specific controls put in place in terms of our ability to disseminate information out of the databases associated with U.S. persons," he said.

Other intelligence agencies — including the CIA, FBI and the National Counterterrorism Center — have their own procedures for minimization and unmasking.

Susan Rice's unmasking requests
In an interview with MSNBC Tuesday, Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice denied making requests to unmask the names of Trump associates for political purposes. She described the process as routine, but declined to say specifically how often she made requests or for what purposes.

"There were occasions when I would receive a report in which a U.S. person was referred to. Name not provided, just a U.S. person," she said. "And sometimes in that context, in order to understand the importance of the report, and assess its significance, it was necessary to find out, or request the information, as to who the U.S. official was.

"So when that occurred, what I would do, or what any official would do, is to ask their briefer whether the intelligence community would go through its process — and there's a long-standing, established process — to decide whether that information as to who the identity of the U.S. person was could be provided to me. So they'd take that question back, they'd put it through a process, and the intelligence community made the determination as to whether or not the identity of that American individual could be provided to me."

Unmasking is not leaking
When the name of a U.S. person is unmasked, that information is provided only to the intelligence official who requested that unmasking, Rice said Tuesday. "There's no equivalence between so-called unmasking and leaking," she said.

Of course, the recipient of unmasked information could then illegally disclose it through a leak.

Rice denied leaking. "I leaked nothing to nobody, and never had and never would," she said.​

Moron, if any of that were true, it would Obama’s people facing jail time, not Trump’s.

Nope. If you can read you'd know that they claimed that nobody broke the law till Flynn's name was leaked to the press. Something Obama made sure of when he spread the so-called intel all over the intelligence community....assuring it would be leaked. There's the crime. Obama made sure that nobody could be fingered.
Obama was supposed to protect Flynn's identity....but instead he turned it into well known secret that would then be leaked to the press. This is the reason for spreading it around the various branches of the intelligence community.

Moron, what you’re describing is illegal. If it happened as you delude, people would have been indicted. No one’s even been charged.

 

[Syriusly]

LOL- sorry- that is just too funny

View attachment 189796

The only 'one' of them 'led away in handcuffs' are these Trumpsters:

View attachment 189797
View attachment 189798

I don't see any of them being led away in handcuffs.
Guess you're lying again.
But what else is new.

LOL- poor little Trumpster- language is complicated for you- isn't it?

The only 'one' of them 'led away in handcuffs' are these Trumpsters:

Notice the punctuation.

And to get back on topic-

Still no evidence that Donald Trump was wiretapped.

Trumpsters just keep lying about it though.

https://nypost.com/2017/01/24/fbi-clears-michael-flynn-in-probe-linking-him-to-russia/

The FBI has reviewed intercepted phone calls between national security adviser Michael Flynn and the Russian ambassador to the US and has found no evidence of wrongdoing, it was revealed Monday.

The calls were made in late December and picked up as part of routine electronic surveillance of Russian officials. They did not reveal any illicit ties between Flynn and Russia, according to the Washington Post.

The review of the calls was part of a wider probe into Russia’s interference in the presidential election and hacking of the Democratic National Committee.​

Wow- you just found out about this?

You left out the part where Flynn lied to the FBI about those conversations.

Jesus Fucking Christ!!!!

What have I been trying to knock into your thick skull about?

I told you that the Obama Administration was spying on Trump and his associates.
It doesn't matter what they revealed because not only did they spy on Flynn but everyone in the Trump campaign.
And they spied on Trump after he took office.
The proof showed up in the Washington Post article I posted earlier.

Jesus Fucking Christ(why do you want to fuck Jesus?)

You keep repeating your lies like if you repeat them more times they become 'truthier'.

The point of the OP is the claim that Trump was correct in that he was being spied upon- that has been shown over and over to be false. Trump was not wiretapped. Not spied upon. Trump lied- just like you are lying.

The Obama administration didn't 'spy' on the Trump administration- ever.

The Obama administration did spy on the Russians- and because our spies were keeping track of what the Russians were doing- they heard what Flynn was saying to the Russians- and because of that Flynn was caught up in his lies.

Oh- and they didn't spy on anyone in the Trump campaign either.

But be like your Dear Leader- lie, lie, and lie some more.

 

[Syriusly]

LOL- poor little Trumpster- language is complicated for you- isn't it?

The only 'one' of them 'led away in handcuffs' are these Trumpsters:

Notice the punctuation.

And to get back on topic-

Still no evidence that Donald Trump was wiretapped.

Trumpsters just keep lying about it though.

https://nypost.com/2017/01/24/fbi-clears-michael-flynn-in-probe-linking-him-to-russia/

The FBI has reviewed intercepted phone calls between national security adviser Michael Flynn and the Russian ambassador to the US and has found no evidence of wrongdoing, it was revealed Monday.

The calls were made in late December and picked up as part of routine electronic surveillance of Russian officials. They did not reveal any illicit ties between Flynn and Russia, according to the Washington Post.

The review of the calls was part of a wider probe into Russia’s interference in the presidential election and hacking of the Democratic National Committee.​

This is old news, rightard. Flynn's conversation was intercepted because he was in communications with a Russian Ambassador who was lawfully under surveillance.

Yet another shining example of Trump NOT being spied on by Obama in Trump Tower.

But you guys said this stuff never happened!!!!

Come on....get your stories straight.

Ok, you're just fucking insane. There is no other explanation.

Post us saying the FBI never wiretaps foreign agents........

That's not the point.
The FBI used their surveillance of Russians as an excuse to spy on Trump.
They presented as much to the FISA court in July of 2016. Problem is....how did they find the evidence in the first place?
Because they were already spying on Trump.

LOL- is that what the voices in your head are telling you or is it the talking points from Rush Limbaugh?

The FBI used their surveillance of the Russians to duh- spy on the Russians- Flynn got caught because of it.

The evidence they found in the first place was a Trump campaign member drunkenly bragging about the Russians having dirt on Clinton.

And still no evidence- at all- that Trump was ever spied upon.

Gullible Trumpsters

 

[Syriusly]

LOL- poor little Trumpster- language is complicated for you- isn't it?

The only 'one' of them 'led away in handcuffs' are these Trumpsters:

Notice the punctuation.

And to get back on topic-

Still no evidence that Donald Trump was wiretapped.

Trumpsters just keep lying about it though.

https://nypost.com/2017/01/24/fbi-clears-michael-flynn-in-probe-linking-him-to-russia/

The FBI has reviewed intercepted phone calls between national security adviser Michael Flynn and the Russian ambassador to the US and has found no evidence of wrongdoing, it was revealed Monday.

The calls were made in late December and picked up as part of routine electronic surveillance of Russian officials. They did not reveal any illicit ties between Flynn and Russia, according to the Washington Post.

The review of the calls was part of a wider probe into Russia’s interference in the presidential election and hacking of the Democratic National Committee.​

Wow- you just found out about this?

You left out the part where Flynn lied to the FBI about those conversations.

Jesus Fucking Christ!!!!

What have I been trying to knock into your thick skull about?

I told you that the Obama Administration was spying on Trump and his associates.
It doesn't matter what they revealed because not only did they spy on Flynn but everyone in the Trump campaign.
And they spied on Trump after he took office.
The proof showed up in the Washington Post article I posted earlier.

Great, then post proof of it. Flynn was not being spied on. A Russian Ambassador was.

You fail again because you're a failure.

How did they know the Russian Ambassador was talking to Flynn?
Because he was the target. Obama okayed their unmasking.

They knew Flynn was talking to the Russian Ambassador because Flynn was caught on the wiretap of the Russian Ambassador.

And I am glad someone okayed the unmasking of Flynn in that conversation- since he lied to the FBI about the conversation.

 

[Syriusly]

Ok, you're just fucking insane. There is no other explanation.

Post us saying the FBI never wiretaps foreign agents........

That's not the point.
The FBI used their surveillance of Russians as an excuse to spy on Trump.
They presented as much to the FISA court in July of 2016. Problem is....how did they find the evidence in the first place?
Because they were already spying on Trump.

Fumbducking ijit. That was in regard to the FBI's interest in Manafort and Page; neither of whom had anything whatsoever to do with the Russian Ambassador who was lawfully wiretapped. And both of who were of interest to the FBI for years.

You're literally a brain-dead sponge who piece meals together talking points in random order to construct a scandal where none exists beyond your pea brain.

No.....you claim that this was a Russian Ambassador who was wiretapped, but somehow Flynn was caught up in it. Who do you think collects data on foreign phone calls? The NSA.

The NSA Collects all of the data on these communications. How did the FBI get involved? Because Samanth Powers and Susan Rice got the Okay from Obama to unmask to expose his identity. Now we know from this article that he was doing nothing wrong. So why did the FBI get involved in it?

The FBI doesn't start an investigation and obtain a warrant just because a Russian is talking to an American.
They were spying on Trump by going around our laws and our right to be free from illegal search and seizure.

Flynn was never the target of a wiretap. The Russian was. That will never change no matter how committed you are to your delusions.

Flynn was snared only because he was communicating with a Russian who was wiretapped. Not because Flynn, or Trump, were the targets.

Liar.
Flynn did nothing wrong.

Flynn plead guilty of breaking the law-

Why do Trumpsters think breaking the law is not wrong?

Michael Flynn Pleads Guilty to Lying to the F.B.I. and Will Cooperate With Russia Inquiry
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, pleaded guilty on Friday to lying to the F.B.I. about conversations with the Russian ambassador last December, becoming the first senior White House official to cut a cooperation deal in the special counsel’s wide-ranging inquiry into election interference.

Mr. Flynn’s discussions with Sergey I. Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, were part of a coordinated effort by Mr. Trump’s aides to create foreign policy before they were in power, documents released as part of Mr. Flynn’s plea agreement show.