Originally Posted by crockett

You mean like you speculated for years Obama was a Muslim and Hillary caused Benghazi?

Originally Posted by Rochard

This is a legal issue now being investigated by the FBI. This will not be quick; It will drag on for years.

Read up about Watergate. It started with a single crime - a break in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate office complex in Washington DC, and it took two full years from the break in itself to when Nixon resigned. Sixty-nine people were indicted, with forty-eight of them being found guilty of crimes. A President was impeached and resigned in disgrace.

It's pretty obvious that there was some connection between the Trump campaign and Russian government. Everyone has seen the evidence when Roger Stone said "Trust me, it will soon be Pedesta's time in the barrel". This is direct evidence of direct knowledge of what information Wikileaks had in advance, which means they were working either with the Russians or at least working with Wikileaks.

The connections between Trump and the Russians are staggering and impossible to ignore.

My favorite is Jeff Sessions. During his confirmation he was asked what he would do if he found out anyone in the Trump campaign was affiliate with the Russians. Instead of answering the question he gave the following statement: “I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians.” He claimed that this was a "routine meeting" involving his work with the Senate Armed Services Committee. Oddly enough, there are twenty-six members of this committee, but only Sessions had meet with the Russian ambassador in the past year. Can someone please explain to me why anyone on the Senate Armed Forces Committee would fly out of Washington DC to secretly meet with the Russian ambassador behind closed doors? Wouldn't it be routine for anyone in Congress (or the US government for that matter) to file a report with the CIA or the FBI, or at the very least the State Department detailed their meeting and what was discussed? Sessions lied under oath about a secret meeting with the Russians.

Then we have Micheal Flynn. Does anyone believe Flynn lied to Pence - and Trump - about his conversations with the Russians? Flynn was one of the few people who had a direct line into Trump; He took orders directly from Trump. Of course Trump knew about this. It's fucking impossible that everyone in his campaign was having direct contacts with the Russians and or Wikileaks without Trump knowing directly about it in advance.

At some point in time we will start putting people under oath and asking them questions. The CIA and the FBI knows what was said, and what was done. When faced with the evidence, they will either lie under oath or roll over and tell us everything. With Watergate they charged sixty-nine people with crimes, and more than half of them were found guilty. These people do not want to go to prison over this. The truth will come out.

A lot of people have said Trump will be impeached, and Pence will become President. It's time for us to give some thought to the line of succession because Pence will be impeached also. Pence will be guilty of the same exact crimes.

I knew having Trump as President was going to be entertaining but this is so much more entertaining than I had ever imagined.

Originally Posted by Robbie

Yep only one President in my lifetime was given articles of impeachment: Pres. Bill Clinton.

But facts and research aren't big in Rochard's posting style.

Originally Posted by Robbie

If all that speculation is true...then why do you guys keep posting it over and over?
Seems to me you should be kicked back happy and satisfied.

Instead it's a lot of posts full of vitriol and pure wishful thinking.

Just relax. If you are correct, then all of your dreams are gonna come true.

If not, there's absolutely nothing you can do anyway.

Me? I know what I voted for. The economy and jobs.
I'm a happy Drumpf voter and looking forward to the future.

Originally Posted by onwebcam

He is and both her and Obama did.

Originally Posted by Steve Rupe

President Nixon was not impeached, he resigned before he was impeached.

Originally Posted by Robbie

Yep only one President in my lifetime was given articles of impeachment: Pres. Bill Clinton.

But facts and research aren't big in Rochard's posting style.

Originally Posted by Rochard

No. Trump says or does something stupid, and then the next week it's forgotten.

Trump accused a former US President of a very serious crime, was proven wrong, and we have just glossed over it like nothing happened. Everyone is saying "Well, that's just Trump being Trump". Bullshit.

Why isn't Congress taking action against this?

Originally Posted by Rochard

So please feel free to call me out when you think I am wrong and when you think I didn't research something.

Originally Posted by Bladewire

Clinton was impeached for lying about a blowjob under oath.

Can't wait until Drumpf is under oath and asked about Russia & his lie about Obama's wiretapping him

Ever notice how, when asked about Russian ties, he always says "in Russia" not "Russians"? He never says "I have no ties with Russians". That's not an accident.

Trump is corrupt to the core and you are on his team.

Originally Posted by Bladewire

The conclusions of all the Bengahzi investigations prove you wrong just as reality proves your Muslim paranoia wrong.

You should have more integrity with what you throw out there. Being a white nationalist isn't easy but it's the choice you made so stand on firm ground and stop being a pussy about it throwing conspiracies and lies out there.

Originally Posted by Robbie

Congress is taking action...they are investigating it.
And since you don't follow the news much...reporter James Rosen (the one that Obama put under surveillance a few years ago...you probably "forgot" about that as well) has said that he now has a "smoking gun" source that shows Pres. Obama DID have full knowledge of the Trump campaign being under surveillance.

Rochard...what was done to Trump is a HUGE attack on our Democracy.

And the reason that the things Trump says are "forgotten" by CNN is because he keeps turning out to be right. And CNN is embarrassed because (like you) they make proclamations that Trump is lying and make fun of him.

He truly is making CNN look bad. Real bad. And they hate it.

And yes...every time that the facts come out and prove Trump correct...CNN drops that particular story like a hot potato.

And they LOVE to say that "Trump never apologizes".
But you NEVER hear CNN do a retraction on Trump. Instead they double down with nonsense.

For instance...for weeks on end, CNN openly ridiculed Trump over his allegation that he had been spied on. They dropped all pretense of being journalists and just openly mocked the President Of The United States 24 hours a day on CNN.

And now that it turned out to be true? They spent 3 full days saying over and over that Trump STILL is wrong because he used the words "wire tapped" instead of "surveillance".

THAT my friend is BULLSHIT on the part of CNN. And once they failed to convince people of that...well, they simply "forgot" about the story.

They are about to be REMINDED of it in a big way if James Rosen's report comes out and proves to be a smoking gun.

Originally Posted by Robbie

Congress is taking action...they are investigating it.
And since you don't follow the news much...reporter James Rosen (the one that Obama put under surveillance a few years ago...you probably "forgot" about that as well) has said that he now has a "smoking gun" source that shows Pres. Obama DID have full knowledge of the Trump campaign being under surveillance.

Rochard...what was done to Trump is a HUGE attack on our Democracy.

And the reason that the things Trump says are "forgotten" by CNN is because he keeps turning out to be right. And CNN is embarrassed because (like you) they make proclamations that Trump is lying and make fun of him.

He truly is making CNN look bad. Real bad. And they hate it.

And yes...every time that the facts come out and prove Trump correct...CNN drops that particular story like a hot potato.

And they LOVE to say that "Trump never apologizes".
But you NEVER hear CNN do a retraction on Trump. Instead they double down with nonsense.

For instance...for weeks on end, CNN openly ridiculed Trump over his allegation that he had been spied on. They dropped all pretense of being journalists and just openly mocked the President Of The United States 24 hours a day on CNN.

And now that it turned out to be true? They spent 3 full days saying over and over that Trump STILL is wrong because he used the words "wire tapped" instead of "surveillance".

THAT my friend is BULLSHIT on the part of CNN. And once they failed to convince people of that...well, they simply "forgot" about the story.

They are about to be REMINDED of it in a big way if James Rosen's report comes out and proves to be a smoking gun.

Originally Posted by onwebcam

No conspiracy. It was a gun running operation gone bad plain and simple.

CIA 'running arms smuggling team in Benghazi when consulate was attacked' - Telegraph

The "conclusions" of the investigations are just for show. These people work work the government. They aren't going to put on live TV "Oh we were arming "rebels" via the consulate" but that wasn't the reason it was attacked.

Originally Posted by crockett

Sometimes the future is not clear.. I knew there would be blown head gaskets, but who would of ever thought it would be from so much winning..

MAGA literally any day now..

Originally Posted by crockett

I knew there would be blown head gaskets, but who would have ever thought it would be from so much of my whining.

Originally Posted by Robbie

I have! Many times. lol
And I would be happy if you are researching stuff before you post. That has been your weakness in the past when supporting your argument.

I personally have had to make sure that I don't use any links to any "conservative" sites. Because if you do...then the information is deemed false by the GFY fake liberals.

Having said that...make sure you don't fall into the trap of only finding the things you WANT to find that back up your original idea.
That's easy to do without meaning to.

I try (and don't always succeed...I'm only human) to keep an open mind and search for as unbiased a report on a given subject as I can find. It's awfully tempting to just find one that agrees with me 100%, but I try to keep looking and reading.

It's getting harder and harder to find unbiased "news" these days. You almost have to get a Fox News story, a CNN story, and an MSNBC story and then piece them together like Frankenstein to find what the real "truth" is.

And you definitely have to read the FULL story on each one.
Many times they will have some crazy headline click-bait like "Drumpf Kills Babys"
And then you have to read the story to the very last sentence where it will say: "CNN has no proof that this ever happened" lol

Originally Posted by onwebcam

No conspiracy. It was a gun running operation gone bad plain and simple.

CIA 'running arms smuggling team in Benghazi when consulate was attacked' - Telegraph

The "conclusions" of the investigations are just for show. These people work work the government. They aren't going to put on live TV "Oh we were arming "rebels" via the consulate" but that wasn't the reason it was attacked.

Originally Posted by Steve Rupe

There is zero proof of the Donald being "wire tapped" or that he was under surveillance. There has been testimony by the Director of the FBI, and the NSA that there is zero proof of this happening. I have told you this before and yet you keep repeating the same misinformation.

Originally Posted by Robbie

Oh, well if the FBI director and other Spy agencies said so then it must be true. heh-heh
Funny how Nunes came forward a week later and said he saw the documents with names UNMASKED in classified reports.

No, Steve...what the FBI and other spies said was that there had been no FISA warrant brought by the Obama Administration to put surveillance on Trump Tower.

There was a lot of very careful wording in their statements.
I guess you can say that Nunes is a liar. And Trump is lying. That's your prerogative. And oh yeah...James Rosen is lying.

Or you could say that the people who are PAID TO LIE (the intelliegence agency's) just might not be telling the whole truth of the matter.

If this blows out and Nunes and Rosen have their facts straight...there will be a lot of those spy's going to jail. Think about that for a second. If you were the guy who listened in on Trump and then unmasked his name and submitted a report that President Obama then changed the regulations to allow that RAW data to be distributed freely to every agency...well, I think you'd be scurrying to cover your ass too.

Originally Posted by Steve Rupe

You are also misstating what Nunes said. He stated that he did not have any evidence to show that the Donald had been directly or indirectly surveilled and that all of the surveillance that he knows about was perfectly legal. He is concerned that names were unmasked that should not have been unmasked during a perfectly legal surveillance of others and he wants to investigate to learn who did the unmasking. There is zero proof or indication that the Donald or any of his team were directly or indirectly surveilled. There is proof that names were unmasked that maybe should not have been unmasked and that is the concern of Nunes.

Originally Posted by Robbie

You might be hearing it the way you want to. What I heard him say was that the Trump team was caught up in "incidental surveillance" that had nothing to do with the supposed "Russian" investigation and that surveillance ended up with names ILLEGALLY "unmasked" and THEN disseminated to 16 different agency's as Pres. Obama made a change in the way information is handled during the last few days of his administration.

The obvious question is: Who ordered the surveillance? And who unmasked those names. And who's decision was it to put those conversations that were "wire tapped" into official intelligence reports even though they had no reason to be there based on their value to national security, and what was the motive for Pres. Obama to change the regulations and allow that kind of raw data to be distributed to EVERY agency?

That's a whole lot of moving parts there to make sure that info was leaked with Trump and his team to make them look really bad.

There's a reason that all of the anti-Trump media outlets were able to get all of this intel that is supposed to be classified.
I do believe that Pres. Obama was looking for a little payback on Trump.

Why else would he decide to change the rules right before he left office? And why would he decide in his last few days to put sanctions on Russia?

I would ask you this: Do you think he would have done either of those things if Hillary had won?
I don't. That's why he waited until the last minute for the sanctions when he claimed he had intel saying that the Russians were trying to influence the election (you know, like they do EVERY election) way back last summer.

He didn't do anything because he didn't want to saddle Hillary with hyped up tensions between the U.S. and Russia for her presumed Presidency.

I'd say Obama stuck it to Trump hard.

But in this intel stuff...his underlings may have went too far. I think there will be jail time for several of them...and Pres. Obama had better hope that James Rosen is wrong and the "bombshell" he is saying he is about to finish up investigating doesn't put HIM in jail too.

That would be a nightmare.
But these days with politics? Nothing would surprise me.

Originally Posted by Rochard

...the new Commerce Secretary is none other than Wilbur Ross who ran the Bank Of Cyprus. Surprise, surprise, surprise.

Originally Posted by Steve Rupe

You seem to be mixing speculative "news" reports into the mix. I am not using news reports at all. I am using what I have seen and heard come from the mouths of the leading players in all of this, including Nunes. I take every thing reported by the "news" media with a grain of salt and when the "news" makes a report and uses the words "a source or my sources" I place zero credibility in that report.

Originally Posted by thommy

there is not much to prove. he is crashing against his own brainwall on every corner.

islam ban - fucked twice
money for his wall ? - NO WAY
kicking obamacare ? - also no way - it is on ice already because even his own party will not vote for his fuck.
russian help him to get president? not proved but also not unproved yet
taxreturns - not on the table
in 62 days sitting on the president chair only 2 days were he did not say a PROVEN LIE (on some day it have been 4-5 lies)
international partners - he fucked all including britain
unemplyment rate - NADA - the last numbers of first uneplyoments heavy above prognoses
house sales - 30% less as pronoses (a sign that the new real estate crisis is already in people´s minds)

so what can be a reason to let him go on like that ?

Originally Posted by Robbie

Yep only one President in my lifetime was given articles of impeachment: Pres. Bill Clinton.

But facts and research aren't big in Rochard's posting style.

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

You live in a dream world.

Originally Posted by Robbie

Oh, well if the FBI director and other Spy agencies said so then it must be true. heh-heh
Funny how Nunes came forward a week later and said he saw the documents with names UNMASKED in classified reports.

No, Steve...what the FBI and other spies said was that there had been no FISA warrant brought by the Obama Administration to put surveillance on Trump Tower.

There was a lot of very careful wording in their statements.
I guess you can say that Nunes is a liar. And Trump is lying. That's your prerogative. And oh yeah...James Rosen is lying.

Or you could say that the people who are PAID TO LIE (the intelliegence agency's) just might not be telling the whole truth of the matter.

If this blows out and Nunes and Rosen have their facts straight...there will be a lot of those spy's going to jail. Think about that for a second. If you were the guy who listened in on Trump and then unmasked his name and submitted a report that President Obama then changed the regulations to allow that RAW data to be distributed freely to every agency...well, I think you'd be scurrying to cover your ass too.

Originally Posted by Robbie

Well, Nunes is saying that he was shown the transcripts by a "source". But at least he is demanding the FBI to provide the transcripts so that ALL the committee (including Democrats) can see for themselves.

As I said earlier...you can choose to just say that Trump is lying, Nunes is lying, and James Rosen is lying.

I have no idea (and neither do you).
But I do know for a fact that our spy agencies all lie to the American people. It's what they do for a living. They spy on us, they lie to us, and they keep secrets from us (as well as kill people, assassinate leaders, and illegally overthrow foreign govt.'s).

And I see too many things all falling into line. As I also said before...I think Pres. Obama wanted some "payback" on Trump and fucked him pretty good in his last couple of weeks.

Somebody's head is going to roll for the unmasking of names if not the actual surveillance itself which at this point appears to have been done just to spy on Trump.
We'll see how far these politicians are actually willing to take it. Since I kind of think that they are all the same and the whole "Republican vs. Democrat" storyline is purely fiction...it will be surprising to me if they actually hold the spy agency's accountable.

But maybe for once they actually will.

Originally Posted by crockett

Only 4 months left and it's looking more and more like it everyday.. The funny thing is Trump has yet to be vindicated for anything related to Russia. He hasn't been able to disprove anything and every week it just goes deeper.. They are now saying Trump worked directly with the Russians to best time the release of the Hillary email dumps.

6 months I said.. He would be impeached with-in 6 months of taking office. 2 months in and the shit is getting deeper.. It's only a matter of time at this point before the death nail is struck..

Originally Posted by crockett

This is not true.. Nunes went directly to Trump and briefed him on the info, but he's yet to even tell the committee what he has or what he saw.. You are stretching and trying to make things what they are not.

If Nunes had the info to share with Trump, he has/had the info to share with the House committee.. end of story.

Originally Posted by Robbie

Lawrence O'Donnell is probably one of the worst "journalists" on television today.

I was watching the Sunday morning media show today and they were showing footage of him as he was saying...in a somber tone...that the HealthCare Bill not going to a vote was the day that the "Presidency of Donald Trump ENDED"

They were laughing at him and wondering if MAYBE he was being a little overdramatic.

Remember...if you are depending on O'Donnell for your information, you are using a TALK SHOW instead of a news report.

O'Donnell's show is total biased OPINION. No different than watching "Hannity" on Fox News from the other side of the coin.

At least Hannity openly admits he's a talk show host with strong conservative bias.
O'Donnell tries to pretend he's actually reporting the news. Which he is not.
But as you can see...it's convincing enough to fool people IF you are searching out a "news" item that confirms your pre-determined belief.

Anyway...we were all laughing this morning at O'Donnell when they played that clip of him and said "Maybe it's a little over-dramatic after only 64 days in office".

You would never have seen Walter Cronkite or Huntley & Brinkley make those kinds of opinionated conjectures. They were actually reporting the news...and not trying to shove their bias down your throat while pretending to be a real "journalist".

Originally Posted by Robbie

Congress is taking action...they are investigating it.

Originally Posted by Robbie

And since you don't follow the news much...reporter James Rosen (the one that Obama put under surveillance a few years ago...you probably "forgot" about that as well) has said that he now has a "smoking gun" source that shows Pres. Obama DID have full knowledge of the Drumpf campaign being under surveillance.

Originally Posted by Robbie

Rochard...what was done to Trump is a HUGE attack on our Democracy.

Originally Posted by Robbie

And the reason that the things Trump says are "forgotten" by CNN is because he keeps turning out to be right. And CNN is embarrassed because (like you) they make proclamations that Trump is lying and make fun of him.

He truly is making CNN look bad. Real bad. And they hate it.

And yes...every time that the facts come out and prove Trump correct...CNN drops that particular story like a hot potato.

Originally Posted by Robbie

For instance...for weeks on end, CNN openly ridiculed Trump over his allegation that he had been spied on. They dropped all pretense of being journalists and just openly mocked the President Of The United States 24 hours a day on CNN.

And now that it turned out to be true? They spent 3 full days saying over and over that Trump STILL is wrong because he used the words "wire tapped" instead of "surveillance".

Originally Posted by Robbie

You might be hearing it the way you want to. What I heard him say was that the Drumpf team was caught up in "incidental surveillance" that had nothing to do with the supposed "Russian" investigation and that surveillance ended up with names ILLEGALLY "unmasked" and THEN disseminated to 16 different agency's as Pres. Obama made a change in the way information is handled during the last few days of his administration.

Originally Posted by romeo22

Time will show

Originally Posted by Rochard

There seems to have been no surveillance on Trump at all. However, if you call someone who works for the Russian government, or the Russian intelligence agencies, yes, your call will most likely be listened in on.

Allow me to explain this better. It's reasonably safe to assume my phone is not tapped. However, if I call up the top Russian spy in the United States that call will most likely be listened in on - because his phone is tapped.

We've only been doing this for the, gee, I don't know, the past forty of fifty years?

I am not sure what you rambling on about when you are talking about the unmasking of names and I don't really care. Are you saying reports were sent out to 16 different agencies and they contained the names involved? Um, wouldn't that be standard? I mean.... If I call the top Russian spy in the United States and discuss illegal things, wouldn't the CIA write up a report and send it to Homeland Security and the FBI and a dozen other agencies... right? If this happened, why would my name be required to be "masked" or hidden? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of the reports?

You are taking what is routine surveillance done by counter intelligence specialists and trying to make it into something wrong. But, mkay. Let's have an investigation. In fact, let's have eight of them. Let's find out who talked who, and more importantly, let's find out exactly what they discussed. I mean... We had multiple investigations into Hillary's emails and read tens of thousands of emails and found.... No wrong doing. (Well, no wrong doing except for the child sex traffic ring at the pizza place.)

This is routine surveillance of Russian agents. We've been doing this for forty years. If Trump's people got caught up in this, it's no one's fault except for their own.

Originally Posted by crockett

"what was done to Drumpf" Clear proof Robbie is a conspiracy nutter. First he argued Obama wasn't born in the US and was a Muslim, Then it was Hillary gave stand down orders at Benghazi.. Now it's Obama wire tapped Trump.. It's already "fact" with no evidence in Robbie's world..

Seriously, what do they put in the water in AZ? It seems like all the crazy nutters come from AZ.. Maybe it's just so fucking hot they can't ever go outside to breathe fresh air, just sit around watching Fox news 24/7..

Originally Posted by crockett

The best part of Robbie's logic, is it's all based on pure speculation with zero evidence. Nunes the guy who started all these claims hasn't even seen any of the unmasking info. Basically someone told him some names in Drumpf's transition team were unmasked but he hasn't even seen "who" or what the circumstances were.

It might not even be because it was a call that involved any of Trump's transition team, it could of been 2 completely unrelated parties that mentioned the names of Trump guys in a conversation. There is no way to know and Nunes doesn't even know..

Nunes was told about it and before he got any "real" info he ran off to tattle-tale to Trump. Trump then starts tweeting about it and calling his Brietfart fan club and that's how it all got into the media. Trump of course is trying to play it off as proof of his wiretap lies which is exactly why Nunes told him. So he's have some ammo for his alt-right news club..

There is no proof of this that anyone has seen aside from the FBI, because the FBI is yet to release it. It's all 100% speculation at this point, yet Robbie is 100% convinced it was all Obama, Obama, Obama..

btw Nunes had already started back tracking on this by Friday..

Also.. the most likely reason the names were unmasked, is because as we learned Trump's team is under investigation by the FBI, so the names are obviously unmasked because it's important to their investigation..

Originally Posted by Rochard

This is just hysterical.

What we have here is nothing more then Keystone cops - amateurs. Amateurs in the White House, and thus running the most powerful country in the world. It is utterly mind blowing that no one in the Trump campaign thought that any phone call to the Russian government would be tapped. What is even worse is that they think they can cover it up after the fact?

So Nunes saw a classified report that claims our intelligence agencies "incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Drumpf transition". Mkay. Isn't this common knowledge at this point?

So.... Nunes, a Republican, who happens to be in charge of this investigation into Trump, just admitted that there is classified information about communications between Trump's campaign and the Russians. Well, I guess we will have to have an investigation into what what said. I mean, it's very common for such campaigns to have contact with the Russian government, right? No problem, we'll just clear this up when they release what was said. I mean, we read tens of thousands of Clinton's emails, and there was nothing damaging in them, so if Trump's campaign has nothing to worry about then all they need to do is release this information to the public. I mean, this is routine discussions, right? No laws were broken, right?

I fully understand what Robbie is excited about now. Now that Nunes has confirmed there is further information about Trump's communications with the Russians, all they need to do is release them to the public and this will clear Trump and all of his people.

No problem!

Originally Posted by Robbie

By the way Rochard...you are 100% wrong on what Nunes said.

He stated VERY clearly that the intelligence reports with unmasked names revealed had absolutely NOTHING to do with the Russians.
THAT is why he was bothered by what he saw. It appears to be collecting intelligence on Trump's campaign for no reason other than to hurt Trump.

THAT is the whole bombshell.

I have no idea if it's true or not. As I said, you can just say that Nunes is a liar. And if/when he gets the FBI to give those documents to Congress...that will be proven or dis-proven.

Originally Posted by Robbie

I really have no idea why you are so hellbent on being in ideological lockstep with failure.
You belong on the team that succeeds in life.

Originally Posted by Robbie

By the way Rochard...you are 100% wrong on what Nunes said.

He stated VERY clearly that the intelligence reports with unmasked names revealed had absolutely NOTHING to do with the Russians.
THAT is why he was bothered by what he saw. It appears to be collecting intelligence on Drumpf's campaign for no reason other than to hurt Trump.

THAT is the whole bombshell.

I have no idea if it's true or not. As I said, you can just say that Nunes is a liar. And if/when he gets the FBI to give those documents to Congress...that will be proven or dis-proven.

Originally Posted by Rochard

We do not know what Nunes saw or what happened.

The only things we seem to know is that this was "incidental surveillance unrelated to the Russian investigation". This does not mean that their phones were tapped, or that Obama ordered it. This might mean something as simple as someone in the Trump campaign calling someone in China's government and got caught up in the usual and standard surveillance we've been doing for the past forty years.

You are jumping to conclusions based on a very limited information.

There is no doubt in my mind this goes all the way to the top. My guess is that Trump knows Putin, and has had direct conversations with him on a regular basis. You don't think so? Think about this for a minute... Didn't Trump's daughter go on vacation with Putin's daughter? This goes all the way to the top.

Originally Posted by Rochard

I am not sure what you rambling on about when you are talking about the unmasking of names and I don't really care.

Are you saying reports were sent out to 16 different agencies and they contained the names involved? Um, wouldn't that be standard? I mean.... If I call the top Russian spy in the United States and discuss illegal things, wouldn't the CIA write up a report and send it to Homeland Security and the FBI and a dozen other agencies... right? If this happened, why would my name be required to be "masked" or hidden? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of the reports?