And you're more of a fucking idiot then you were then...

The reports I saw say Nunes went to Paul Ryan first and was instructed by Ryan to tell Trump. They're saying that move made Ryan a complicit co-conspirator.

The Republicans were desperate, They were under immense pressure to get the bill through, Trumps influence was greatly diminished from self caused wounds, Trump looked shady for his wiretapping lie, They needed to get that cloud out from over his head to give him more credibility & leverage to force the bill through.

So Nunes meets Ryan, they come up with a bullshit unproveable lie to vindicate Trump & giving him the cred to force the bill through and diverting attention from healthcare sausage making to this lie from Nunes. Sound about right?

https://www.palmerreport.com/opinion...p-russia/2029/

Trump transition members had information 'incidentally collected,' House Intelligence chair says

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".

The reports I saw say Nunes went to Paul Ryan first and was instructed by Ryan to tell Trump. They're saying that move made Ryan a complicit co-conspirator.

Sure sure. The Republican party is investigating it. So it's safe to assume we'll have eight investigations about this over the next four years, RIGHT?

I do not recall what James Rosen has to do with Trump's campaign. Rosen was a reporter, not a member of Trump's campaign.

What? What was done to Trump?

Why are ranting on about CNN? I pull my news from a news feed. A quick scan of my feed shows one out thirty articles right now are about CNN.

Trump says "things are forgotten"? Huh? I honestly have no idea what you are talking? Trump is right about what?

I've been at Phoenix Forum the past four days... Did I miss something? Was Trump proven to be right about accusing Obama of ordering wire taps on his phones? That's strange. I am pretty sure if there was any evidence about this it would front page news and... It's not. In fact, a search of the news only repeats that Trump was completely out of line about Obama ordering wire tapping on Trump.

Donald Trump Wiretap Claim Against Obama Falls Apart | Time.com

Are you perhaps having a few drinks and then looking at some silly site that is trying to connect conspiracy dots? I have no idea what you are even talking about.

Seems to me like Trump is having a really bad week. First he was shot down by the director of the FBI saying there was no wire tap on Trump, and then after seven years of promising to take down Obamacare Trump failed to make it happen. His approval rating continues to slide downward.

Meanwhile, Trump is playing golf for the 13th time in the past two months. LOL.

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.

I agree.

You already see what is happening. The are trying to cover everything up. The CIA and the NSA and the NRO (does anyone even know who they are?) and everyone else knows exactly what happened. Most likely Trump's people were conspiring at some level with the Russian government and or Wikileaks.

This will be bigger than Watergate.

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 Trump'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..

He is from Vegas.

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!

There you go Rochard!

Look at the person you are disagreeing with (me). Think about what you know about me.

Now look at the person you just quoted who you are in agreement with. Think about that for a minute.

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.
"A man is known by the company he keeps"

And on GFY...you are politically in bed with a group of people that you are so far above in intelligence, life, and just as a man.

Makes you look bad brother.

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.

No the key point is Nunes hasn't even "seen" the report yet. He's just speculating based on what someone told him. He has requested the report from the FBI, but he doesn't have it so in reality he has no fucking clue what is in it.

You are just making shit up.. Nunes hasn't even seen the damn report yet. He is speculating based on what some undisclosed person has told him. You can keep repeating non-sense and lying but it will not make it true.

The only failure going on is with the Trump administration. Although they completely control the government yet they failed to secure a healthcare law. They had seven years to prepare for this moment, they controlled Congress, and failed.

Robbie, we are two months in and this administration is under investigation for the highest crimes we can imagine.

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.

I don't know Nunes from atom and I don't trust him at all after he cancelled this week's public hearing. I was willing to trust him with the bullshit story he gave about "unknown info that may or may not be bad" The same bullshit Comey pulled last minute with Clinton's emails, but now that he's purposely cancelling public hearings to withhold information from the public it's clear he's corrupt and obstructing justice because he dry fucks Trumps shitty ass every morning he can fuck off as far as I'm concerned I hope they rip him apart :thumbsup

Now there's something we can agree on Bladewire.

You shouldn't trust Nunes. He's a politician who has worked his way through the system enough in his lifetime to play on the big stage in D.C.
I wouldn't trust anyone who has ever made it past city dog-catcher.

Anyone who has been in politics long enough to have made it to D.C. has already long ago sold-out and given up all their original principles and ideals.

I would like to point out that my feelings also extend to all Democrat politicians and especially the spy agency's.

It doesn't take but a few minutes of research to look at the history of these agency's and how many times they've been wrong (WMD's in Iraq?) and how many people they have killed).

I know it fits the narrative of the media to praise these agency's just because it makes Trump look bad...but goddamn, "liberal" media and politicians are damaging their "brand" beyond repair in my eyes by sucking up to the worst of the worst of our govt.: Spy's.

Are spy's needed by the govt.? Yes, up to a point.
But just like history shows time and time again...you have to keep a tight reign on them or they go rogue.

You see....those statements are exactly why you should understand the subject or at least watch the news or google things up before you post. :)

First sentence: You don't know or understand what or why masking is done on these conversations. READ THE CONSTITUTION. KNOW THE LAW. I'll leave it there for you because I'm going further in the next part of this post.

Rochard, you can NOT "wire tap" a U.S. citizen without a FISA court order. A Judge has to issue that.
However...even though the media and Democrats try to say that refugees in other countries have the same constitutional rights as we do (they don't)...the govt. is NOT required to get any kind of court oversight to spy on anyone else in the entire world.

The "Masking" is required by law if a U.S. citizen is captured on audio during the spying. That U.S. citizen does NOT have a court order allowing him/her to be spied on.
According to what spy's have been saying on the news...this happens multitudes of times every hour on the hour.

Emails, phone calls, etc. all being captured by spy agencys. And yeah...YOU have been recorded most likely "incidentally". Could have been at any industry show you have been to when you spoke to anybody from another country.
Or at your work when you email or phone someone from any country.

All of that data is "masked" for the U.S. citizen. It is then ANALYZED by the agency that "collected" it (spied on you). Then IF it has any relevance to national security...a report of the analysis is sent up the chain of command with U.S. citizens names "masked".
THEN if the head of the agency decides it is important...it is sent to the other appropriate agencys.

In these dozens of cases in question...that was NOT done. The names were left unmasked. And then the RAW data was sent out to all the agency's.
Totally ILLEGAL and unconstitutional.

This is a major case of someone using our spy agency's to hurt their political opponent. Third world country shit.
It's very, very dangerous and there needs to be accountability for it.

And "no", it's not "whistle-blowing". There was nothing illegal in any of the transcripts that Nunes was allowed to see. EXCEPT the very fact that the reports existed and had unmasked names and were leaked to the media in the first place.

This is dangerous stuff Rochard. This is like handing over the inner workings of our intelligence agencys to our enemies.

Vladimir Putin was a KGB Foreign Intelligence Officer for 16 years, rising to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. The last two most viable opponents to his presidency were shot and killed, as well as outspoken media opponents, leaders of protests etc.

Strange how Giuliani had all those juicy FBI leaks about Clinton and Republicans ate it up along with emails stolen by Russian foreign inteligence but when it comes to leaks about Trump we can't trust these corrupt agencies. Peculiar. I hope you continue not to Trust Nunes. Nunes has been in office 13 years, he's a swamp lifer. Trump chose Nunes the swamp dweller for his transition team, why?

Yep Putin was a KGB agent. Bad man.
Also the guy who is the leader of the second most powerful military in the world.

We have two choices...antagonize him and keep tensions high OR work with him and try to keep him on our side.

Pres. Clinton worked with him in his last year in office. Bush worked with him. Obama worked with him (remember Hillary and the ridiculous plastic red "reset" button).
Now Trump wants to work with him.

What do you suggest? Would you like to see the U.S. put more sanctions on Russia and put even more military in place in Eastern Europe (boy the big military industrial complex would LOVE that), and get tensions for WW3 running at an all-time high?

Seriously. Is that how far you and the Democrat party are willing to take it because they are so angry over Hillary losing the Presidency?

Think about it.

And while we gear up for war with Russia...the extreme Islamists are laughing their asses off as they watch the two "Great Satans" destroy each other.

Ummmm Republicans overwhelmingly support sanctions on Putin, for years now. As a matter of fact they've created a bill to stop Trump from removing sanctions without their approval it's The Russia Sanctions Review Act of 2017. In 2015 they did the same thing to Obama for the Iran deal.

Putin fucked up by interfering in our election the way he did. I'd feel exactly the same if it was Trump, because I don't like Putin, he's a dictator. I don't like how he sponsor conspiracy and misinformation operations like Infowars & the rest, it's an insidious mindset to the core.

You understand that tensions are high because Russia invaded and occupied a foreign country, right?

LOL that pretty much sums it up so far.. the only thing he has managed to do is go play golf 12 times so far and go on vacations every single weekend. Here is yet another kicker... One out of every three days Trump has been in the White House, he has visited a Trump property at expensive of the US tax payers..

Just think about that.. 1 out of 3 days he has cost US tax payers unnecessary expense by visiting one of his properties which he lied to US citizens and said he'd have nothing at all to do with his business while in office.

Of course that's no big deal for Robbie you know Robbie the guy who whined endlessly about govt spending under Obama.. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh


Personally I hope I'm 100% wrong about this topic. I hope Trump turns out top be the best POTUS ever and he fixes all sort of shit we need fixed. I hope he isn't impeached and I hope he's not a traitor who dealt with the Russians to secure his election. I really hope it's all fake news, because I care more about my country than about how much Republicans suck...

But sadly I'm betting this will all come true as everything is currently pointing in that direction and yes of course we already know Republicans suck..

That totally slipped his mind, you know because somehow it's really all Obama's fault.. :1orglaugh

Can you show me exactly where in the Constitution it uses the term "masking" or "unmasking"?

No US citizen was wiretapped. This is where the term "incidental surveillance" comes into play.

The United States government (and all other governments) constantly monitor, listen in on, wire tap, intercept communications, of all foreign agents in the US and overseas. This has been done constantly since the end of WWII.

You understand it was the Russian ambassador that was wiretapped, right?

This is incorrect and you are making assumptions here.

If I call someone in Russia, and they determine it was a routine business call or a personal call they mask or hide my information. This information may or may not be passed to other agencies. Being as no crime has been committed, there is no reason to retain such information, and it would be an invasion of my privacy to have my private conversation and assigned to me for no reason.

However, if I call someone in Russia and plot against the United States government, they open up an investigation. They surely don't mask information at that point.

When routine surveillance takes place they mask names because no crimes have taken place. However, when surveillance leads to a crime, they open an investigation and no one's name is masked.

I did some research on this....

IS IT ILLEGAL TO UNMASK AN AMERICAN'S NAME?

No.

"There is nothing inappropriate about unmasking when it is appropriate to unmask," said Benjamin Wittes, a senior Brookings Institution fellow and editor-in-chief of the Lawfare blog.

In the context of the Flynn example, Wittes said, the U.S. is surveilling a foreign target ? in this case Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak. The target, Kislyak, is contacted by an American who is the incoming national security adviser in the new administration ? Michael Flynn ? and that American is discussing the future administration's policy.

Wittes says it is easy to see where identifying this American is important to foreign intelligence.

"I don't think there's anything surprising that it got unmasked," Wittes said.

They wire tapped the Russian spy's phone and picked up multiple calls. If these calls were friendly and they only wished each other a Merry Christmas, the names would have been masked and thus forgotten. If they decide a crime has taken place they open up an investigation. They cannot have an investigation if they cannot reveal who they are investigating.

It's not illegal, and it's not unconstitutional.

No, this is not a case of someone using our spy agency to hurt their political opponent. There is no proof of this. You can try to argue Obama opened the flood gates before he left office, but in the same exact breath you can argue Obama believes our (then) future president worked with the Russian government to steal the election. Your argument doesn't even make sense - Trump is not a political opponent; He is the President.

No, it's not whistle blowing. It's an investigation.

It's more like our government investigating into the highest office in the land has been handed over to our enemies.

If ANY of this is remotely true then the President of the United States has opened himself up to blackmail by a foreign power.

Are you fucking serious? :(

This is like talking to a fence post.
The REASON THAT US CITIZENS ARE MASKED IN INCIDENTAL SURVEILLANCE IS BECAUSE THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A FISA COURT WARRANT TO UNMASK THE OR PUT THEM UNDER SURVEILLANCE IN ANY WAY.

AND NO NO NO NO...NUNES SAID THE TRANSCRIPTS HE READ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR

Holy fucking shit man.

Yes. Show me exactly where in the Constitution where it discusses masking or unmasking.

This is how it works. I do research that backs up my position and provide links, and you... Just ask if I am serious.

So, show me where in the Constitution it discusses masking or unmasking.

So show him where in the Constitution is says trafficking cocaine is illegal.

You understand there are these things called Laws right?

You're aware of their existence? At all?

You are quite literally the dumbest person on this board. Day in and day out, you put it on display with a sort of misplaced pride.

Richard that is the dumbest thing you have ever said.
Yes, you are protected by the constitution from illegal search.
Yes, the Supreme Court ruled long ago that it's unconstitutional for the govt. to wiretap citizens without a warrant. Yes, if you accidentally pick up a citizen while spying it is unconstitutional and illegal to show their names even to the head of the spy agency.

I asked if you were serious because I wanted to believe you knew that. 😑

Can you show me where this is a law?

If incidental surveillance turns up a potential crime, it becomes an investigation. At that point they do not mask names. The only reason there is any masking of names is protect privacy. When an investigation takes place, there is much less of a need to protect privacy. In very simple terms, if I am under investigation, there is not need to protect my privacy in reports.

You do not seem to understand the difference between incidental surveillance and an investigation. Allow me to explain it to you again.

If I call Russia and the NSA listens in, and they discover it is a routine business call they mask my name only because there is no reason to risk an invasion of my privacy when no crime was committed.

However, in the event of incidental surveillance that turns up a crime.... They don't mask anything because they are investigating a crime. They cannot investigate a crime if they cannot record the name of the person they are investigating.

This story broke while I was at Phoenix Forum, so I am not sure what he said. Or what he saw. From what I've read he hasn't told us what he read or what he saw.

Here is exactly what he said:

First, I recently confirmed that on numerous occasions, the intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition. Details about persons associated with the incoming administration, details with little apparent foreign intelligence value were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting. Third, I have confirmed that additional names of Trump transition team members were unmasked. And fourth and finally, I want to be clear, none of this surveillance was related to Russia, or the investigation of Russian activities, or of the Trump team.

This really doesn't tell us anything. We don't know who collected it, we don't know what was collected, who it was collected on, we don't know why it was collected, or what the information contained.

The statement itself doesn't even make sense and it contradicts itself. He said it involved "U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition" but then said "none of this surveillance was related to..... The Trump team".

This could be something as simple as someone on the Trump team made a phone call to China, it was caught up in incidental surveillance, and was unmasked for one of a dozen reasons.

We should have an investigation into this. It seems he viewed this classified information at the White House. Why was he allowed to see this information, who gave him access to it, who is handing out unmasked classified information, and why did this all happen at the White House?

Oh lord.

Yes, The Constitution protects us from illegal searches. However, if they legally have wiretapped someone (such someone who works for the Russian government) and through Incidental surveillance they discover a crime takes place, it is clearly legal for them to investigate.

I am still waiting for you to show me where it is illegal to unmask names in such cases. They mask names to protect privacy when no crime has been committed. This way my name isn't in a database 260 times for no reason when no crime has been committed. When they discover a crime has been committed through Incidental surveillance there is zero reason for them to mask anything.

You still haven't shown me any links about the legality of unmasking names. I am waiting for your research.

Here is something else to think about....

The person in charge of investigating the Trump campaign and resulting transition team is Nunes. Turns out Nunes was on the transition team. Nunes is technically in charge of investigating himself.

He needs to be completely removed from this investigation.

Surprise surprise..you're wrong...as usual. Any more predictions Nostradamus?

Someone's pussy is hurt...


Sorry dumbass, how could I or anyone have know how corrupt the Republican party has become.

Hurt? lol Your dumb ass hasn't been right about a single fucking thing yet. It's comedy watching you unhinged losers lose every day over and over.

↑↑↑ Foreigner says he lives in America, hates America, hates Europe, hates muslims, hates jews, hates minorities, hates dogs, licks Putins shithole & nibbles Trump's nushroom.