Bombshell: Nunes Says There Was "Incidental Surveillance" Of Trump During Obama Administration PT.2

If you have pertinent information concerning the matters being investigated, you should bring it to the proper authorities.

 

The undeniable, irrefutable facts of Democrats colluding with russkies to subvert American democracy were known for many a year to everyone, not just to the US intelligence agencies. You're a man of many words, Natty Bumpo - why are these dirty deeds are not investigated, and the perpetrators not publicly condemned? Say it

 

I just did - I'm sure the authorities are closely monitoring this forum to obtain "pertinent" information. Here's some more for them and for you, for general education on how Democrats have subverted American democracy:

Remember when Ted Kennedy asked the Soviets for help defeating Reagan?
By Thomas Lifson

The Democrats are desperately diverting attention away from their rigging the nomination fight by charging that Russia is interfering in our election. But there was a time when going to Moscow to help defeat the other party didn’t seem to disturb Democrats. In fact, with the help of friendly media, the entire incident has been sent to the memory hole. Once upon a time it was revealed, but nobody outside of the conservative ghetto remembers.

But Betsy Newmark of Betsy’s Page remembers: (hat tip: Instapundit):

As the Democrats struggle to turn the story of the DNC hacks into an attack on Trump by arguing that the Russians are behind the hack and that Putin is trying to help Trump get elected, let's remember when a prominent Democrat actually went to the Soviets for help in defeating Reagan. In 1984 Ted Kennedy approached the Soviets who were then led by the former KGB head, Yuri Andropov, and tried to negotiate help in opposing Reagan. We found out about Kennedy's efforts when Yeltsin opened up the Soviet archives in 1991. Sean Davis links to the story as reported in Forbes.

Picking his way through the Soviet archives that Boris Yeltsin had just thrown open, in 1991 Tim Sebastian, a reporter for the London Times, came across an arresting memorandum. Composed in 1983 by Victor Chebrikov, the top man at the KGB, the memorandum was addressed to Yuri Andropov, the top man in the entire USSR. The subject: Sen. Edward Kennedy.

“On 9-10 May of this year,” the May 14 memorandum explained, “Sen. Edward Kennedy’s close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow.” (Tunney was Kennedy’s law school roommate and a former Democratic senator from California.) “The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov.”

Kennedy’s message was simple. He proposed an unabashed quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan. In return, the Soviet leader would lend the Democratic Party a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential election. “The only real potential threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations,” the memorandum stated. “These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign.”

This is open, self-initiated collaboration with a rival power, and there’s a name for that sort of thing, “treason.” But that word is not associated with any Kennedy (at least not since Joe was Ambassador to the UK) because of the studious ignoring of the story coming from the Soviet archives.

Compared this reliable evidence, the case against Trump is made of air. We don’t know who did the hacking, and the bits of code that supposedly incriminate the Russians could well be a false flag operation, as argued by intelligence expertMichael Ledeen. There is no evidence at all of any Trump business in Russia, and he has denied having any investments there. There is, in other words, nothing to connect Trump to the leaks, much less to Russia.

The amount of attention paid to the non-evidence of Trump versus the studied avoidance of the conclusive evidence of Ted Kennedy soliciting enemy collaboration against a domestic political rival is the epitome of our propaganda media.

 

Dutch: I'm pretty sure the rules here are that you remain ON TOPIC.

You've gone on at quite a length now OFF TOPIC. This thread is not about the long dead Ted Kennedy.

 

The FBI is conducting an investigation because Comey also relied upon Steele, and offered to PAY for additional dirt. Preferably dirt that could actually be substantiated. Comey is in up to his ears. The NSA has concuded the dossier is a sham. I've previously posted links on this thread which support my statements. So far, Flynn has been revealed as a Turkish lobbyist, and Manafort a lobbyist / huckster employed by Yanukovych a decade ago. So again what is collusion if DNC / FBI using foreign agents, to collect info from foreign agents, on political rivals, to influence elections, is not?

 

Because there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence. Because Trump has gone to great lengths to hide his financial dealings, conceal his business interests, and hide who he owes money to.
Because there is plenty of evidence that Trump had done business with Russian oligarchs associated with Putin.

Because Trump lies, in a fairly disingenuous way about all of this.

 

So far, investigators have found "no evidence of any wrongdoing."

Unless you've dug up some on your own.

 

Why not try to focus on the fact that there is unexplainable surveillance and names illegally unmasked and released to the public which would be a crime. Dont you believe that is a VERY serious matter and we need to find out who was involved?

 

The FBI is doing its job. It's an open criminal case.

No presumptions should be made either was as the investigation continues.

 

Go read his FEC financial disclosure. Now what dows that have to do with the matter of people in the transition team communications being caught in surveillance and their names and conversations being disclosed?

 

Since large parts of the dossier have been confirmed, calling it fake is a questionable proposition.

The Counterpunch article does not prove that the NSA does not know who the hackers were or what they took. All it does is throw sand into the mix by suggesting that the qualifiers that many officials have used suggest that they don't.

But officials are likely to qualify and obfuscate when they know what the facts are, and know that the facts will eventually be the subject of an investigation, particularly if it is a select commitee or a special prosecutor, as is becoming ever more likely. They all know that any definitive comments they may make could well prejudice a grand jury.

 

And when it comes down to it, the consumer-in-chief's fans do not want the truth nor do they care about the truth. IMO, they are perfectly aware that he is a fraud and gangster and it's quite alright by them. Only Benghazi was worthy of twenty two hearings (I thought it was 13 but I was mistaken) but this Trump/Russian thing is not even worthy of one.

 

Because opinions are not facts.

Anyway, that whole "gone in less than 200 days" turned out to be yet another prog wash.

 

What presumptions the MSM has been reporting these leaks for months. We know Obama drastically changed the rules as tj who had access to the intercepts. We know the names were unmasked by someone if not multiple persons. We knkw that information was illegally leaked.
The question is how high up it went and how many years they serve in jail.

 

Still pretending the there is not miles and miles of documented evidence that proves how the birther-in-chief has swindled people throughout his lifetime? Silly you...lol

 

IYO, as you said.

 

Nunes feed you good.

 

Some of these folks are proud, gold star graduates of Trump University.

 

Donald Trump Agrees To Pay $25 Million To Settle
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-university-fraud-settlement_us_582f65fbe4b058ce7aab0907

Trump has settled a lawsuit with more than 100 investors who lost millions of dollars when a luxury condominium project in Baja California failed
http://www.sandiegored.com/noticias/61460/Donald-Trump-s-Baja-Scam/

Donald Trump Settled a Real Estate Lawsuit, and a Criminal Case Was Closed
https://www.datalounge.com/thread/1...estate-lawsuit-and-a-criminal-case-was-closed

Donald Trump Says 'I Don't Settle,' But We Found 13 Times He Did
https://thinkprogress.org/donald-trump-says-i-dont-settle-but-we-found-13-times-he-did-3a7ae4678b22

I'm done here. You can spin like a top and deny to your hearts content but the consumer-in-chief's shills are boring me at this point.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/itt-tech/ I've previously provided links for DeVries, Brown Mackie, Remmington. Over $250 million awarded for fraud. 90% of students stood to default on federal student loans, leaving taxpayers to foot the bill.

 

"They" never found Jimmy Hoffa either, doesn't mean he wasn't killed.

I think if you woke up one morning and read in your morning paper about a conversation that you had a few nights back in the privacy of your living room, or office, you'd be pretty certain you were being "listened to" and that it was "leaked".

Dems can parse words or re-frame it any way they want, but it was a crime of the Obama White House. And everyone knows it.

 

You call KGB archives "circumstantial evidence" Of course you do, how can you not to?

 

Rumours abound, ideological entertainment media pander to hyper-partisans, and hyper-partisans cling to whatever imaginative confections serve their agenda.

Meanwhile, it would serve the interests of the nation if a special prosecutor were appointed, the matter thoroughly investigated, and the truth exposed - if possible.

The guilty could still walk, but that's no excuse not to pursue justice.

What must be scrupulously ignored are the vested interests with a lack of knowledge, desperately trying to spin a yarn that suits them.

 

What a rich tapestry of convoluted hyperbole you've woven. Lush with vagaries and conjecture. Likely you've reviewed the aforementioned links I've provided to corroborate my facts. You sir, have not provided any. Nor have you even tried to define collusion.

 

Did you know it were Democrats who turned to the russkies for help with denying Ronald Reagan his second term?

Read again.

Did you know it were Democrats who turned to the russkies for help with denying Ronald Reagan his second term? A well documented fact.

Now, please tell me how many hearings were conducted to get to the bottom of this outrage?