Intelligence chairman accuses Obama aides of hundreds of unmasking requests

Yes, its an highly restricted action. Now got ANY proof at all that ANYONE in the Obama administration "leaked" a name they had requested by unmasked? ANY AT ALL?

Do you mean that Flynn's felony is self evident? It certainly wasn't a felony to record his conversations with russian nationals so I'm not sure what you mean.

As for No evidence of Donald Trump colluding with the russians, I agree there isn't any. HOWEVER, there is a load of evidence, ever expanding that senior campaign members DID. His son sure as hell did conspire to collude with what he knew to be russian government agents. Those same members have REPEATEDLY failed to reveal contacts with foreign agents. Hell his son in law was attempting to set up COVERT communications with Russians.

Given trumps performance to date, I suppose it iss possible he was entirely clueless of all of these contacts, overtures and foreshadowing. He certainly has adamantly sworn that there was no contact by him. He has adamantly REFUSED to accept the Russia interfered in a major way in the elections simply because he's do self involved about what it says about his "legitimacy" to comprehend the immensity of attack nor the world's astonishment at the limp wristed response from what was the world's only superpower. (a position that Trump is single handedly rapdily eroding).

But of course the trumpettes and the trolls and the pundits will attempt to project that the only collusion to be found is by the democrats. I suppose such brashness is to be expected when the hand is caught firmly in the cookie jar.

 

Nah, no games… semantic or otherwise. The investigation is ongoing, both criminal and counterintelligence. I do have a link to prove it is ongoing…

The counterintelligence investigation may continue even after Mueller is done with the criminal investigation, or morph into a different one. Russia will continue its misbehavior, will try new tactics, and will continue to try to compromise our people and systems. Typically counter-intelligence investigations go on for several years.

Wray has zero power over Mueller. He also testified under oath that he wouldn't tamper with Mueller.

 

Your links confirm Mueller is delving into financial crimes, but doesn't indicate any agency is doing counter intel. Wray states that he will not accept WH interference. No where does he claim he won't interact with Mueller. We'll have a much clearer picture in 2 weeks. Wray simply can't avoid the Mueller investigation, and I'd venture to say he's eager to dive right in.

 

______
That is only to the extent of what Wray knows at the present time. Once he is approved by Congress and reviews evidence that is within FBI files, he may change his mind.

 

Do you men like the leak as published in the NY Times? That "any at all?"
It is illegal to record conversations of incidental 3rd part American citizens under a FISA warrant unless there is substantial probable cause of illegality in the conservation.

 

The entire basis of this farcical investigation into Trump "colluding with the Russians" is nothing but slinging stuff against the wall.

There was never, and has never, been anything to even initiate an investigation into Trump "colluding" with Russia.

The bottom line is there is no way Trump could have helped Russia hack anyone, and there is no way Russia could affect a single vote in this country.

The only effect a foreign country would have is to cause infighting and paralyze our government, so if anyone is colluding it's these ridiculous and incredibly stupid democrats like Waters, Perez, Pelosi and others.

Trump has been in the public eye his whole life, and democrats turned over every rock to take him down. The best they came up with was him suggesting that when you're rich, women will let you touch them.

As far as "no one believes Muller to be compromised or have a conflict of interest", it seems you have your head in the sand on that one.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...cial-counsel-glenn-reynolds-column/102990890/

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2...isqualifying_conflict_of_interest_413380.html

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/b...ler-conflicted-in-trump-probe/article/2625638

http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/fmr-fbi-asst-director-mueller-huge-conflict-interest/

http://www.investors.com/politics/a...tigations-conflicts-of-interest-ibdtipp-poll/

http://www.oann.com/watch-muellers-team-is-rife-with-conflicts-of-interest/

Clearly, there are plenty of people who see the clear conflict of interest.

That you would ignore that fact is pretty telling.

 

Which NYT article are you referring to? did the article refer to the source of the leak?

as to your contention of illegality, I'm sorry but it isn't illegal to record a foreign national EVEN when talking to an american citizen.

The FISA warrant was for Carter Page AFTER FBI counter intell discovered he was a "subject of interest" for two Russian spies operating in the US.

Incidental recording is WHY there is a process called "MASKING" and is not illegal.

 

Yeah, a series of emails that clearly show that Donnie JR (with manafort and kushner's knowledge) entered into a CONSPIRACY to collude with agents of the Russian government to obtain dirt on Clinton, means there was not attempt at collusion what so ever.

Ignoring facts? Yes trump's defenders do that with great regularity. The idiotic insistence that the whole "trump russia" thing is nothing more than a democratic plot to thwart trump because they were sore election losers is a marvellous example of this. Unsurprising considering their track record and extensive experience in specious dot connection.

 

Which is no different than the "russian dossier". Democrats went to multiple foreign countries, INCLUDING Russia, to attempt to obtain information on President Trump.

Nothing in the opposition research meeting that Trump Jr. held was different, in any way, then everything that has come before.

The Russian lawyer in question was given special approval from fricking AG Lynch to remain in the country after VISA expiration.

Give the faux outrage and comical double standards a rest.

Nov 7th, 2016 : No foreign country can interfere in our elections, stop whining Mr. Trump.

Nov 8th, 2016: RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA

 

Well yes you do. If you are going to start seaking search warrants you have to have probable cause of a crime. If you are going to start putting people under oath under subpoena you better have probable cause of a crime to do so. We do have rights against law enforcement abuses.

 

Except they didn't enter into a conspiracy they turned it down. However the Democrats DID enter into the conspiracy and got something material, although fallacious, in return.

So that should be the top priority of any investigation into Russia trying to undermine the election.

 

I get that many people want to defend Trump, at all costs, it seems. That is a dangerous thing. If you can separate defending Trump from defending Russia, IMO, that would be a good thing. Defend Trump, if you like, but please don't defend Putin in doing so.

There is no doubt there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government representatives. Don Jr released the emails himself that were quite specific. The Russians have certainly attempted to compromise Trump campaign and Trump family members through that "adoption" meeting. Now, whether anything actually came of the Russians attempts has not been proven, although the timeline is quite suspicious. Please note that I didn't say Trump instigated the collusion. I do not know if Don Jr and Kushner were wittingly or unwittingly swept up in Russia trying to make a deal. I have some real suspicions about Manafort and Flynn though. You can believe as you like, but dismissing what those Russians did as nothing, gives them cover the for future elections. Ignoring facts makes it easier for them to repeat what was done this time.

There is also no doubt, whatsoever, that not only did Russians hack into the DNC email server, phish Podesta's emails, but they also hacked into the Lindsay Graham's campaign, Marco Rubio's campaign, and several states' voter registration data bases, an old RNC server, and state party emails and data bases. Some were published through Wikileaks and DC Leaks.

Then there was the 1000 strong troll army that was charged with spreading disinformation, propaganda, and "fake news," and amplifying the false claims using bots to repost the same information through social media like Facebook, Twitter, etc.

Additionally, there was targeted marketing on social media using algorithms and paid advertising to focus on certain critical areas, to susceptible people open to the message.

It would certainly help Russia do this again, if people continue to discount and reject the fact that they did these things. I hope those that reject what our own and our allies' intelligence agencies have found realize that soon, as we have more elections coming up in the near future, and those elections are vulnerable to Russia influence, as well. It's not like they haven't done this same thing in other places. They have. Each time they do it, they learn how to be more effective the next time.

As to your links, they prove nothing. They are all opinion pieces. By reputation, Mueller is held in high regard by people on both sides of the aisle in a strongly partisan environment. That is not an easy thing to accomplish, unless you put integrity above all. That is Mueller's reputation.

On a similar note, I didn't say "no one" believes Mueller is compromised or has a conflict of interest. I said ….No one other than Trump and Trump supporters believe that. Your post proved me correct. So, clearly there are people that believe Mueller is not what his bipartisan reputation is that led him to the position he now hold. However, those that are critical of Mueller, along that line, have a biased, partisan reason to hold that opinion. Those that claim Russia did nothing to sway the election may change their tune when Russia does this again, only against their candidate instead of for them. Russia and Putin don't care about Republicans and Democrats. Russia is trying to hurt the United States. Dismissing what they did helps Russia. Why any American would help a country that attacked our country with an act of cyber warfare is a mystery to me.

 

how do you know it was turned down? How do you know that was the only contact on the subject? Oh right you dont have a clue just like 99.9% of the rest of world in this regard. Do you think that might be a reason there are so many CRIMINAL and CONGRESSIONAL investigations going on?

You seem to love the ol' "my bad isn't as bad as your bad, so there" argument.

Perhaps a little more information on the Democrat collusion story might help you understand the difference in situations.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/07/russia-trump-ukraine-clinton/533394/

 

Prove otherwise. Whatbisbthe other collusion you are claiming and be specific. We have the text messages and the fact they walked out on the meeting. What came of it? We DO know what became kmofbthe Democrat collusion, an attempt tobunsermine the election. That should take top prioirty of any investigation intobcollusion don't you think?

 

Wow. YOu sure do like to conflate, equivocate and misrepresent.

The russian lawyer was given special approval from the AG? that is simply wrong, but of course that doesn't concern you in the least but it does cast chaff and makes for yet another marvellously specious connect the dots bullcrap accusation from the usual sources.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/this-is-why-natalia-veselnitskaya-was-in-new-york

As to interfering in the election, gee, I guess those investigations not to mention the intel community are simply a bunch of anti-trump sore losers. Yeah, that's it. Its all about being sore losers.

 

What say you about this @Sandy Shanks?

 

Yes, she was given a special consideration by Lynch's office, that's a fact.

It's also a fact that the "russian dossier" creation is far more an example of "collusion" than Jr.'s meeting, which nothing came out of.

http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...sian-lawyer-into-us-before-she-met-with-trump

 

And I get that many people want to take Trump down, at all cost. That is a dangerous thing.

I didn't even mention Putin, so I'm not sure what part of your imagination you pulled that out of.

Having a meeting to do opposition research, even with a foreign government, is not a crime, nor is it collusion.

We do however have an actual example of people working with Russia, the UK, and Ukraine in developing opposition research on Trump, which unlike Jr.'s meeting, did result in tangible garbage used against the POTUS.

Sure there is targeted marketing. It happens every day in every way imaginable. The US has engaged in it internally as well as externally.

Case in point are the democrats, the DNC, the media, and others colluding in the coronation of Hillary Clinton. That particular collusion is far more dangerous than some Facebook post by RT. Yet, some people seem to think Russia is the real problem. They ignore and downplay the attempted internal takeover of our democracy and focus on a potential actor that has little to zero internal control over our democracy.

Mueller will only be held in high regard by democrats if he delivers something on Trump.

If not, Mueller will be just another deplorable, just like Comey was awesome, then trash, then awesome, then trash.

These people have no morals, they are only concerned with power.

Clearly, other people than Trump and Trump "supporters" believe there is a conflict of interest, since the conflict of interest is black and white.

Comey had a long personal and profesional relationship with Mueller, Comey is intrinsic to the investigation, therefore a clear conflict of interest exists. You don't have to support Trump, you just have to be able to read.

The Democrat party is far more dangerous to this country than Russia, as they are the ones far more capable of damaging it with their behavior.

The Russian "damage" to this countries election, even if taken at face value, was in revealing what Democrats were doing, pure and simple.

 

I get it. Trump dindunuffin, and therefore Russia is all made-up(*big sigh*)… well, until we get to the end of Mueller's investigation. We'll see what happens then.

I freely admit that I am not now, nor was I ever a fan of Trump. However, feel free to check my posting history, where I took some hits here, for giving him a chance, after the election. It didn't last long, since he never pivoted to become Presidential, as so many said he would.

I can read and have advanced degrees. There is no conflict of interest when it comes to Mueller. There is a campaign to undermine his reputation though, and it comes from one place. It comes from the same place that all this "illegal unmasking of innocent Americans" comes from.

Rant on about Democrats as much as you like. I am not a Democrat. However, I find accusations of Democrats being immoral and only concerned with power to be quite hypocritical following 7 years of "repeal and replace" to get a majority and then failing to anything to fix health care.

 

Of course he didn't do anything. He wasn't capable of doing anything.

Trump could have, in no way, assisted Russia (assuming it was Russia) in hacking the DNC or anything else.

Russia could have, in no way, affected a single vote in the US.....unless you consider criminal activities leaked from DNC emails to be Russian culpability.

None of which has ever been proven, since neither the FBI nor the DHS has ever been allowed to look at the DNC servers.

Our intelligence agencies are working from information obtained from a single source: CrowdStrike. All of their "conclusions" are based on information obtained from a DNC employee.

Good. Since you are clearly able to read and comprehend advanced subjects, you can clearly see in the statute that defines the conflict of interest that:

a. Comey and Mueller have a close personal and professional relationship
b. Comey is an integral part of the investigation based on the claim he was fired for investigating

Therefore, a clear and undeniable conflict of interest exists.

As far as the healthcare issue, I agree. There are many in DC who are self-serving loyal to no one but themselves, or who only ran as republicans to get elected in the first place.

Government is infested by these types: the same people who actively worked with the DNC to decide who the POTUS would be, instead of the individual american voter.

 

Trump is in charge of lots of parts of the government. He's fired plenty and can fire more. If the government is infested with people that can't do their job, he needs to get rid of them. Of course, some of them are his appointees and his family, so there's that. Those he doesn't have the ability to get rid of, then he needs to find a way to make it work otherwise. Most Presidents try to pull the country and both political sides together after a divisive election. Trump didn't. He made his bed. Now he has to sleep in it.

Keep on keeping on, vman. We're not going to agree on this topic. I trust Mueller to get to the bottom of the Russian incursion into our election. I suspect you're going to have a change of heart eventually like I did with Nixon. I liked Nixon and was sorely disappointed to find out that he was not what I thought he was. I know there were people that defended him right up to the point he resigned in disgrace, and even afterwards… but he did what he did and took responsibility for it eventually, when he had no other choice. I see Trump moving along the same path.

 

He can do so in the Executive branch, but that's the extent of his ability.

Those in Congress are up to us to evaluate.

Trump is not the first Republican attacked and smeared and referred to as Hitler at every turn. It's been happening since the 80's with Republican presidents, SCOTUS nominee's and everything else.

It doesn't matter what Trump does, no one in the Democrat party is going to work with him. That was evident from the beginning with the booing and hissing in his first address to Congress and the country.

Watergate led to Nixon based on an actual crime.

Trump's crime was winning the election and defeating the DNC's plan to crown Clinton.

Again, there was nothing Trump could have given or done to allow Russians or any other foreign power to hack the DNC.

The entire basis of the investigation is preposterous.

 

Jimmy Carter had some strong detractors before Reagan. Detractors come with the job of President. Most of them don't belabor the point they are there.

Reagan nominated Bork to the Supreme Court… the person that fired Archibald Cox for Nixon, after two other resigned because they wouldn't fire Cox. It was outrageous for Reagan to nominate him and not expect huge pushback.

Trump was the head birther against Obama. Did you really expect Democrats to work with him after that?

Mueller is charged with finding actual crimes, not playing partisan games. He's the former head of the FBI, for crying out loud. Trump has played hard and loose with rules all his life. If he did so with Russia, he should have never run for President. Trump has a Republican Congress. It will take a crime to get him an impeachment as well. That's why most people are willing to let Mueller do his work and then see what that work turns up. If Trump did nothing criminal, then his pushback against the investigation is stupid. It makes him look guilty, whether he is or isn't. Why give someone that can prove you are innocent of anything criminal such a hassle? Makes no sense. You really are going to have to get over the notion that Trump's only problem was he won, when we know Russia was actively working to help him win. There were many, many Republicans running in the primary, but even then, Russia was working for Trump. You don't have to be curious as to why that was so, but most people wonder why Putin was so high on Trump, if his main objective was the defeat of Clinton.

As to your last point, with all due respect, the investigation isn't over and you don't know what evidence there is that Trump's campaign coordinated, colluded, or conspired with Russia, other than Don Jr's email chain. No one except the investigators know.

The basis of the investigation is how much cooperation there was between Russia and the Trump campaign. There wouldn't be a Special Counsel if Trump hadn't fired the head investigator. At that point, IMO, it became a case of obstruction of justice, but there may eventually be stronger charges. I have a real problem with Trump leaving Flynn in place and with access to national security classified information knowing he was acting simultaneously as an agent for the Turkish government, while claiming a travel ban was keeping the country safe.

 

Some Democrats need to go to prison for their attacks on other citizens and sedition against the government.

 

I see you immediately convict Lynch herself of dastardly intent for an action of her "office" when you really mean the justice department and the results of a departmental process. How machiavellian of you. You should apply the same rigor to trumpian campaign member malfeasence in light of what so far has been revealed.





You mean this dossier?

We are way way beyond that dossier now. Why else do you think donnie is trying to kill Meuller? Because he's innocent?