Reply With Quote
lol acting like you dont take spurstalk seriouslyspurstalk legacy
lol spending 10 hours a day here and god knows how many hours on 4chan for a joke that you dont actually believe
lol your pathetic lonely life
lol acting like you dont take spurstalk seriouslyspurstalk legacy
lol spending 10 hours a day here and god knows how many hours on 4chan for a joke that you dont actually believe
lol your pathetic lonely life
Got Manafort out.
I guess a thank you letter from Trump is in order.
I guess the Putin stuff... Is true?
LMAO nuked!
His life is really that pathetic.
You know it's bad when even Alex Jones admitted to pizzagate being fake and apologizing for it.
Bombs Article by CBS
CBS News has learned that U.S. investigators are looking into whether Trump campaign representatives had a role in helping Russian intelligence as it carried out cyberattacks on the Democratic National Committee and other political targets in March 2016.
This new information suggests that the FBI is going back further than originally reported to determine the extent of possible coordination. Sources say investigators are probing whether an individual or individuals connected to the campaign intentionally or unwittingly helped the Russians breach Democratic Party targets.”
So the first thing that seems new is that the FBI is going further back in time, and the next bit of news, “helped the Russians breach Democratic Party targets.”
So they are looking at potential help in the hacking or maybe a mole in the DNC, which does come up in the dossier written by Christopher Steele.
The next bit of news is this:
“Now, one year after the Russian operation began, sources say the FBI’s investigation is nowhere near over.
It involves dozens of agents in Washington, New York and London. The NSA and CIA are also gathering intelligence from inside Russia.”
So we are working directly with London and inside of Russia. This is a huge ass investigation. This gives us insight.
They would not assign this much manpower to an investigation if they didn’t have some solid leads. And we’ve all heard the rumors that foreign Intel has offered help. Now we have London as one source.
Also in the story, the number of paid operatives, 15,000. Holy , that’s huge. And...they’re trying to figure out who paid them.
Sources also say that money may have been the motivator for all of this but they want to get the investigation right before coming forward. This is actually a bombs of an article put out today.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/3...article-by-cbs
Trash and his entourage will soon by road kill.
More and more Repug politicians are abandoning him, distancing from him.
The votes to impeach and convict will be there.
So Trump's run spawned a massive intervention by Russia, which then caused Ukraine to try its luck on a small level? Looks like this administration not only leaks, but is a swamp of self serving traitors. We got a self filling leaky swamp of treason for 4 years? Great article. I will now take Hillary.
Now Trump is tagging the FBI in his tweetsmeltdown
Now Trump is tagging the FBI in his tweets
obama team is gangsta.
Why do you keep posting yt with misleading les?
never said spying, for one. And 2, she said the investigation started in 2015. From the FBI.
He's his own source? He says it's turning out to be true while not pointing to any evidence.
You keep talking about djohn's tweets but your youtubes and links are mega re ed.
You are right. I shouldn't have posted that one.He's his own source? He says it's turning out to be true while not pointing to any evidence.
.
I noticed you didn't comment on Bloomberg article.
Allegedly
"But they were far less concerted or centrally directed than Russia’s alleged hacking and dissemination of Democratic emails."
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...ackfire-233446
White House lawyers last month learned that the former national security adviser Susan Rice requested the iden ies of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.
The pattern of Rice's requests was discovered in a National Security Council review of the government's policy on "unmasking" the iden ies of individuals in the U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose communications are collected incidentally. Normally those names are redacted from summaries of monitored conversations and appear in reports as something like "U.S. Person One."
====
Rice herself has not spoken directly on the issue of unmasking. Last month when she was asked on the "PBS NewsHour" about reports that Trump transition officials, including Trump himself, were swept up in incidental intelligence collection, Rice said: "I know nothing about this," adding, "I was surprised to see reports from Chairman Nunes on that account today."
Ok, I will now then.
The intelligence reports were summaries of monitored conversations -- primarily between foreign officials discussing the Trump transition, but also in some cases direct contact between members of the Trump team and monitored foreign officials.This is what is at the core of the article. Foreign officials are subject to getting monitor. It's par for the course as it pertains to National security.Rice's requests to unmask the names of Trump transition officials does not vindicate Trump's own tweets from March 4 in which he accused Obama of illegally tapping Trump Tower. There remains no evidence to support that claim.
The other bit, someone ought to tell the trump s not to be dumb enough to be caught meeting and talking with foreign officials which I will guess were russians.
You're welcome.
anonymous sources when convenient
In all honesty I don't have much of a problem with a news outlet keeping sources anonymous unless they have a track record of fabricating them or misattributing quotes. Just laughing at inconsistency
Anonymous sources have been a fundamental asset in journalism since the invention of the printing press. People should practice caution and healthy skepticism towards them, particularly in a time where insiders seem to be taking advantage of their positions to fight internal rumor battles in the press, but overall anonymous sources are necessary to the free press. Without the expectation that your anonymity can be protected, very few people are willing to stick their necks out with information the public may need to know about.
djohn2oo8 need your FISA expertise.
Under what cir stances can US persons caught up in incidental collection be unmasked and disseminated?
The totally phony Susan Rice story, explained
The former national security advisor’s surveillance activity is neither illegal or unethical.
But the reports, which originated from the far-right, fringe corners of the internet, do not reveal any illegal activity or violation of privacy laws.
They also provide no support for President Trump’s still entirely-unsubstantiated claim that the Obama administration’s surveillance targeted Trump officials.
Funneled from the far right
Susan Rice’s involvement in the unmasking was first reported by far-right extremist Mike Cernovich,
Cernovich, a white nationalist, misogynist, and a key figure in the Pizzagate controversy, has been called the “meme mastermind of the alt-right.”
Within hours, headlines highlighting Rice’s involvement appeared across the conservative internet on sites including
Breitbart News,
the Daily Caller,
the Washington Times,
the Washington Examiner,
the New York Post,
and
Gateway Pundit.
On Fox News,
No legal or privacy issue
The names of unidentified Americans are masked in intelligence reports to protect the iden y of third-parties. When someone with credentials to request the classified information asks that they become public, the process is known as unmasking.
The unmasking of unidentified Americans in intelligence reports is within the scope of the job of a national security advisor like Rice. According to Kate Martin, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, Rice’s actions are likely legal and probably do not even raise privacy concerns if the individuals were part of the Trump transition team.
When an American’s iden y in a classified intelligence report is unmasked, only those who have a security clearance and the authority to view the classified information may see the unmasked report,
The information may not be shared with individual members of Congress,
Given Russia’s involvement in the U.S. election, it’s not surprising that Rice would look at intelligence reports on Russia, including conversations by Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. If those conversations were with Americans, it follows that Rice would ask for the names to understand more about the conversation.
“There is no legal issue, and if the conversations were by official members of the presidential transition team conducting government business, it is hard to even see what privacy interest those individuals had in such conversations,”
Brookings Ins ution fellow Susan Hennessey expressed a similar skepticism at the validity of the “bombs ” reports on Rice’s unmasking.
Hennessey also wrote that
“what we’re seeing here is US officials doing jobs to respond to what had markers of a counterintelligence threat: the Trump campaign.”
https://thinkprogress.org/susan-rice...d-1a72785b100e
The totally phony Susan Rice story, explained
The former national security advisor’s surveillance activity is neither illegal or unethical.
But the reports, which originated from the far-right, fringe corners of the internet, do not reveal any illegal activity or violation of privacy laws.
They also provide no support for President Trump’s still entirely-unsubstantiated claim that the Obama administration’s surveillance targeted Trump officials.
Funneled from the far right
Susan Rice’s involvement in the unmasking was first reported by far-right extremist Mike Cernovich,
Cernovich, a white nationalist, misogynist, and a key figure in the Pizzagate controversy, has been called the “meme mastermind of the alt-right.”
Within hours, headlines highlighting Rice’s involvement appeared across the conservative internet on sites including
Breitbart News,
the Daily Caller,
the Washington Times,
the Washington Examiner,
the New York Post,
and
Gateway Pundit.
On Fox News,
No legal or privacy issue
The names of unidentified Americans are masked in intelligence reports to protect the iden y of third-parties. When someone with credentials to request the classified information asks that they become public, the process is known as unmasking.
The unmasking of unidentified Americans in intelligence reports is within the scope of the job of a national security advisor like Rice. According to Kate Martin, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, Rice’s actions are likely legal and probably do not even raise privacy concerns if the individuals were part of the Trump transition team.
When an American’s iden y in a classified intelligence report is unmasked, only those who have a security clearance and the authority to view the classified information may see the unmasked report,
The information may not be shared with individual members of Congress,
Given Russia’s involvement in the U.S. election, it’s not surprising that Rice would look at intelligence reports on Russia, including conversations by Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. If those conversations were with Americans, it follows that Rice would ask for the names to understand more about the conversation.
“There is no legal issue, and if the conversations were by official members of the presidential transition team conducting government business, it is hard to even see what privacy interest those individuals had in such conversations,”
Brookings Ins ution fellow Susan Hennessey expressed a similar skepticism at the validity of the “bombs ” reports on Rice’s unmasking.
Hennessey also wrote that
“what we’re seeing here is US officials doing jobs to respond to what had markers of a counterintelligence threat: the Trump campaign.”
https://thinkprogress.org/susan-rice...d-1a72785b100e
djohn2oo8 has gone MIA so I'll ask for your FISA expertise. Under what cir stances can US persons caught up in incidental collection be unmasked and disseminated?
There are currently 5 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 5 guests)
Posting Permissions