Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I will just say again
At this point HOW people's names were learned has not been proved to any certainty
I have heard some of the talk show people say that SOME of the outings of troublesome details involving WH people and others came from people inside the WH who were trying to get other people on Trump's team in trouble with the boss...
Meaning that Sean Spicer would comment on someone to gain cred w/Trump because the person he "outed" would get negative press...
Same with KellyAnne Conway running her mouth
I wouldn't put it past Bannon to be behind part of this because Bannon wants to create havoc ("Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war") as a way to undermine the principles of democracy...
It's all on mainstream media. That and more. Everybody's talking, no one knows.
Its easy for Nunes and President Trump to win the PR war, because the public is bored to death of Russia, especially since nobody can say how many votes were compromised by Russia.....
First of all, Nunes said he guessed the names of Trump and the team because he was actually on the team prior to (or perhaps as well as) chairing the House Intelligence Committee hearings tasked with investigating Trump and the team.
In the second place, to imagine that unmasking names (if it actually ever happened, which seems to be up in the air at the moment) on intelligence reports is anywhere close to Putin interfering in our elections is so crazy that one wonders if this is an idea that hasn't been thought all the way through or a deliberate lie to muddy the waters.
And in the third place, it is absolutely, night-of-Tequila crazy to think that our precious POTUS would be in cahoots with the Kremlin. (Speaking of which, why no official visit yet? Looking forward to that handshake. )
Surely, there's some explanation for all the meetings and phone calls where they talk of "nothing of consequence."
I couldn't agree more. That's about as kooky as having a white supremacist who runs an online conspiracy theory news site as an adviser on our national security council. Both could never happen under this administration. Just more fake news from crazy liberals.
For all the turmoil over this story and the number of pages in this thread, as far as I can tell it has progressed from total misinformation to utter confusion with an uncertain resolution date (if ever). Pretty dumb, huh?
The worst part is that no one even knows what it's about any more. Even TV anchors now mix up "Nunes" and "White House contacts" and "Russian investigation" all in one sentence when I'm *pretty* sure we're still on the Nunes -
playbook to justify Trump's tweets but still keep him as far away from Russia as he can.
It started with (Nunes, 22 March): “I have seen intelligence reports that clearly show the president-elect and his team were at least monitored and disseminated in what appears to be intelligence reporting channels,” said Mr. Nunes, who was part of the Trump transition team.
That Trump himself (or his team) was monitored was walked back almost immediately. For within two days, Nunes was telling reporters "he can't be sure" whether conversations among Trump or his aides were captured. For that, he would need the requested documents from the intelligence community that everyone seems to have forgotten about in all the brouhaha about his WH sources.
Who did the conversation participants finally turn out to be? Reportedly:
Quote:
Officials said the reports consisted primarily of ambassadors and other foreign officials talking about how they were trying to develop contacts within Mr. Trump's family and inner circle in advance of his inauguration.
Well, here Nunes wasn't fibbing. Nothing to do with Russia. Nothing illegal. All pretty innocuous. But he (or someone, certainly Spicer) alleges unmasked names. Anyone care to GUESS who the U.S. citizens referred to by the foreign officials might be? Nunes said he could guess. Well, me too ... I'll start: Donald Trump. Jared Kushner. Ivanka Trump ...
But if names are unmasked, WHO did it?
Didn't we just have an hearing that went on for hours about who could have unmasked Flynn's name - with no resolution? One would think there would be some sort of document trail back to the original. Trey Gowdy called it a "road map." But apparently not - or at least not one that all those intelligence officials could figure out.
The agencies that "consume" intelligence can request the "collectors" of that intelligence to unmask names for various reasons (that may or may not include context?). Agencies that collect information under a FISA include the NSA, FBI, CIA, DOJ (maybe more). Who has specific authority to unmask? About 20 individuals at the NSA, "many more" at the FBI.
Schiff actually met with Trump for about 10 minutes during his field trip to the WH on Friday and the House Intel says that it is committed to getting back into the hearing business.
Wonder if this will get much priority over at the Senate Intel?
Mainly, though, I wonder what the subject will be.
Last edited by EveryLady; 04-01-2017 at 01:07 AM..
Its easy for Nunes and President Trump to win the PR war, because the public is bored to death of Russia, especially since nobody can say how many votes were compromised by Russia.....
Russiagate is a nothingburger hissy fit by the losers of the last election (ie the Main Stream Media and their Democrat lapdogs)....nothing more and nothing less.
News organizations, journalists -- people -- all think with bias, more or less to some extent...
We should not dismiss sources of bias either way, especially those sources that seem to report what we don't like to believe, because ultimately the truth is more likely to come from where you don't want to get it. Most importantly is the processing of information from all credible sources, multiple news sources, a process I call "triangulating for the truth."
Right. That takes time and objective critical thinking. Who has time or interest in that?
"News organizations, journalists -- people -- all think with bias, more or less to some extent...
We should not dismiss sources of bias either way"
EXCEPT the NY Times does NOT even try to hide their over the top bias and have "reporting" things and later have had to retract what they CLAIMED originally.
They DON'T check info out anymore. If they hear something negative about Trump they make it headlines.
True enough. In the wake of 9/11 there was another wave of reactionary impulse that in hindsight might have been curbed some with stronger/better leadership, but we passed the Patriot Act, Ds & Rs together. We bombed the Hell out of Afghanistan even though Osama and his gang were essentially Saudis. We invaded Iraq based on what our intelligence made clear then too, those WMD, still not found, but they said so! Ds and Rs (except one) all followed GW's lead. All true.
And what do we learn?
"True enough. In the wake of 9/11 there was another wave of reactionary impulse"
You keep telling how "smart" you are and you use "logic" etc., etc., etc. BUT, you either DON"T KNOW history or are ignoring it.
Bill CLINTON, NOT W. Bush, signed the Regime Change of Iraq.
We have the quotes form all those dems about Iraq and Saddam BEFORE W. Bush ever came on to the scene.
Do you want me to post them, AGAIN, for the hundredth time?
"even though Osama and his gang were essentially Saudis"
This is the lefts excuse and LACK of "logic", you so often claim you use.
So, I will ask you, if 10 American civilians go, to say, Australia and hijack a plane and ram it into a building, is America responsible? Or are the PEOPLE who did it?
"And what do we learn?"
The anti-dems (dems that are AGAINST anything a repub does or says) learned NOTHING.
The rest of us learned that when you go to war FINISH THE JOB and do NOT pull out until the job is finished.
To do so on is a waste of American military lives.
It shows you have NO respect for what they did.
During the W, Bush term we had RECORD numbers of re-enlistment and men volunteering to go BACK 2, 3 a 4 times to finish the job.
Obama did NOT win. No "surrender" document were signed, No photo-op of the "looser" signing them.
He, just like spoiled little brat, took his ball and went home.
All those live LOST for NOTING.
Last edited by Quick Enough; 04-01-2017 at 06:18 AM..
First of all, Nunes said he guessed the names of Trump and the team because he was actually on the team prior to (or perhaps as well as) chairing the House Intelligence Committee hearings tasked with investigating Trump and the team.
In the second place, to imagine that unmasking names (if it actually ever happened, which seems to be up in the air at the moment) on intelligence reports is anywhere close to Putin interfering in our elections is so crazy that one wonders if this is an idea that hasn't been thought all the way through or a deliberate lie to muddy the waters.
And in the third place, it is absolutely, night-of-Tequila crazy to think that our precious POTUS would be in cahoots with the Kremlin. (Speaking of which, why no official visit yet? Looking forward to that handshake. )
Surely, there's some explanation for all the meetings and phone calls where they talk of "nothing of consequence."
The week of Nunes midnight visit to the White House Schiff reacted in anger when asked what proof they had of Russian intervention since it was just circumstantial. Schiff stated that there wasn't only circumstantial evidence, there was direct evidence of collusion. He really shouldn't have made that statement but I tend to believe him, he has been very fair and even handed up to that point.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) 