Surveillance story blowing up in con artist's face

[someoneyouknow]

Washington (CNN) After a review of the same intelligence reports brought to light by House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes, both Republican and Democratic lawmakers and aides have so far found no evidence that Obama administration officials did anything unusual or illegal, multiple sources in both parties tell CNN.

Their private assessment contradicts President Donald Trump's allegations that former Obama national security adviser Susan Rice broke the law by requesting the "unmasking" of US individuals' identities. Trump had claimed the matter was a "massive story."
. . . . .
One congressional intelligence source described the requests made by Rice as "normal and appropriate" for officials who serve in that role to the president.

And another source said there's "absolutely" no smoking gun in the reports, urging the White House to declassify them to make clear there was nothing alarming in the documents.

When asked about these revelations, Devin Nunes replied, "I tried my best to provide cover and keep the fake story alive."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/11/politics/intelligence-contradicts-nunes-unmasking-claims/index.html

 

[phrodeau]

Trump called it a "massive story," which can be defined as a "big lie."

 

[Boxlicker101]

Washington (CNN) After a review of the same intelligence reports brought to light by House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes, both Republican and Democratic lawmakers and aides have so far found no evidence that Obama administration officials did anything unusual or illegal, multiple sources in both parties tell CNN.

Their private assessment contradicts President Donald Trump's allegations that former Obama national security adviser Susan Rice broke the law by requesting the "unmasking" of US individuals' identities. Trump had claimed the matter was a "massive story."
. . . . .
One congressional intelligence source described the requests made by Rice as "normal and appropriate" for officials who serve in that role to the president.

And another source said there's "absolutely" no smoking gun in the reports, urging the White House to declassify them to make clear there was nothing alarming in the documents.

When asked about these revelations, Devin Nunes replied, "I tried my best to provide cover and keep the fake story alive."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/11/politics/intelligence-contradicts-nunes-unmasking-claims/index.html

It's my impression that bugging foreign officials is SOP. When American citizens are involved, either as subjects or participants, their ID is redacted. In the case of Trump and his minions, this did not happen, which may or may not be illegal. I'm sure there was no court order to bug them, which is probably contrary to the Constitution.

ETA: This isn't proof, but it is evidence: https://www.usnews.com/news/nationa...rump-is-absolutely-right-about-wiretap-claims

 

[someoneyouknow]

It's my impression that bugging foreign officials is SOP. When American citizens are involved, either as subjects or participants, their ID is redacted. In the case of Trump and his minions, this did not happen, which may or may not be illegal. I'm sure there was no court order to bug them, which is probably contrary to the Constitution.

Keep the lies going no matter how many times you've been told you're wrong.

A) The FBI doesn't willy-nilly start investigating people. They have to have some evidence and then they get a warrant. Such as they have done with Carter Page who is apparently still under investigation for his possible collusion with Russia.

B) "Unmasking" of U.S citizens identities is routine in situations where the context of the conversation is needed to be understood. Every intelligence official from multiple administrations have said the same thing.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/surveillance-experts-swat-down-susan-rice-unmasking-hysteria

C) Stop trying to sound like you're a lawyer by mentioning the Constitution. You're not. There are many court orders such as this one:

The FBI obtained a secret court order last summer to monitor the communications of an adviser to presidential candidate Donald Trump, part of an investigation into possible links between Russia and the campaign, law enforcement and other U.S. officials said.​

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-obtained-fisa-warrant-to-monitor-former-trump-adviser-carter-page/2017/04/11/620192ea-1e0e-11e7-ad74-3a742a6e93a7_story.html?utm_term=.226c6f5cc98a

ETA: This isn't proof, but it is evidence: https://www.usnews.com/news/nationa...rump-is-absolutely-right-about-wiretap-claims

So you're citing a source who left because Bush, a Republican, violated the Constitution by ordering warrantless wiretaps? How ironic.

I'm sure you were up in arms when he did this, right?

 

[Boxlicker101]

It's not the FBI' it's the NSA. We all know how widespread their operations have been since 9-11.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

That is not true.

Where is your proof that Trump officials were not redacted?

They were, like all Americans on incidental collections.

They can be unmasked, like anyone, through official channels if deemed necessary to understand the Intel.

What is your proof of otherwise?

It's my impression that bugging foreign officials is SOP. When American citizens are involved, either as subjects or participants, their ID is redacted. In the case of Trump and his minions, this did not happen, which may or may not be illegal. I'm sure there was no court order to bug them, which is probably contrary to the Constitution.

ETA: This isn't proof, but it is evidence: https://www.usnews.com/news/nationa...rump-is-absolutely-right-about-wiretap-claims

 

[Rightguide]

Actually, it's blowing up in Democrat faces.

 

[sr71plt]

Actually, it's blowing up in Democrat faces.

I can feel the fear and dread in you for feeling compelled to post this ridiculous comment. Good.

 

[phrodeau]

Actually, it's blowing up in Democrat faces.

http://www.mediaite.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/trump-7.jpg

 

[AnAmericanDarling]

Washington (CNN) After a review of the same intelligence reports brought to light by House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes, both Republican and Democratic lawmakers and aides have so far found no evidence that Obama administration officials did anything unusual or illegal, multiple sources in both parties tell CNN.

Their private assessment contradicts President Donald Trump's allegations that former Obama national security adviser Susan Rice broke the law by requesting the "unmasking" of US individuals' identities. Trump had claimed the matter was a "massive story."
. . . . .
One congressional intelligence source described the requests made by Rice as "normal and appropriate" for officials who serve in that role to the president.

And another source said there's "absolutely" no smoking gun in the reports, urging the White House to declassify them to make clear there was nothing alarming in the documents.

When asked about these revelations, Devin Nunes replied, "I tried my best to provide cover and keep the fake story alive."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/11/politics/intelligence-contradicts-nunes-unmasking-claims/index.html

So you're saying - and the article is saying - that Susan Rice "broke the law". But was it necessary - and legal - for Trump to sexually harass those women? I don't mean the "locker talk", I mean his harassment - was that right of him? Face it, politics are dirty and don't be a wimp. Both sides have done their wrongdoings, and while I favor the more intelligent side (not your side by the way, my friend), buck up and get over it.

 

[someoneyouknow]

So you're saying - and the article is saying - that Susan Rice "broke the law". But was it necessary - and legal - for Trump to sexually harass those women? I don't mean the "locker talk", I mean his harassment - was that right of him? Face it, politics are dirty and don't be a wimp. Both sides have done their wrongdoings, and while I favor the more intelligent side (not your side by the way, my friend), buck up and get over it.

No law was broken. It's part of the job to understand, in context, who is saying what when dealing with foreign agents.

The intelligence agencies are asked, not demanded, to unmask parts. They decide if it's necessary. If they say no, Rice, and everyone else in her position is out of luck.

But keep trying to justify sexual assault with monitoring foreign agents and their collusion with a presidential candidate.