Moiraine Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/22/politics/devin-nunes-trump-communications/index.html House Intel chairman: Trump's personal communications may have been collected All of his answers to everything are extremely vague. And he was a member of Trump's transition team from November thru January. He should NOT be part of the Russian ties investigation. He claimed he hasn't heard of Roger Stone. I feel like we're going to eventually have movies made about all of this. 3 Link to comment
NM11046 Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 The great part of this Nunes story is that the drones will lock in on "communications collected" and not read that IF it happened (and this guy "thinks" he uncovered it in a bunch of documents - which I think he was likely scouring because he is worried about himself) it was collected during legal monitoring going on with other individuals. Just wait for the outrage. This guy is still working for Trump. His opening statements pretty much said all this as well. Link to comment
GM_Tood Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 The great part of this Nunes story is that the drones will lock in on "communications collected" and not read that IF it happened (and this guy "thinks" he uncovered it in a bunch of documents - which I think he was likely scouring because he is worried about himself) it was collected during legal monitoring going on with other individuals. Just wait for the outrage. This guy is still working for Trump. His opening statements pretty much said all this as well. The outrage would not be because of legal FISA gathering of intelligence, it will be over the gathering of the intelligence that included US citizens (still legal) but those US citizens names being leaked....which is against the law. Link to comment
Danny Bateman Posted March 22, 2017 Author Share Posted March 22, 2017 No sh*t there may have been incidental surveillance of Trump. US intelligence was monitoring his campaign members because they were monitoring the shady Russian individuals they were dealing with. Is it a stretch at ALL to say that may have also included Trump?Nunes is simply carrying Trump's water on this one. It's disgusting how impartial he is. Could there BE a worse choice to head the investigation of Trump short of Chaffetz? At least Chaffetz wasn't a member of his transition team. Link to comment
NM11046 Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Once the dam breaks there are going to be a LOT of people dismissed from their jobs - either legally or by their constituents. If you think about it, tough as this time is I think its going to usher out an entire generation of career politicians and give others who perhaps have different life experiences and overall priorities to get involved in government. Link to comment
schriznoeder Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Preach it, Rep. Schiff! 2 Link to comment
schriznoeder Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 "Don't mind me. I'm just gonna go tell the suspect what kind of evidence we have against him..." 1 Link to comment
NM11046 Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Preach it, Rep. Schiff! I like how this guy handled himself during day one of the hearings, and I'm digging this statement a ton. Professional, takes the gravity of the situation seriously, concise. Big fan. Link to comment
Moiraine Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Hmmm interesting.... https://twitter.com/foxnews/status/844656510076518400 And they found that there were contacts with the Russians. This isn't new news. And as I already posted, the guy saying this was part or Trump's transition team. Hmmm interesting.... The revelations do not appear to support Trump's claims, debunked by FBI Director James Comey, that he was wiretapped by his predecessor President Barack Obama. Rather, they appear to relate to conversations between Trump or associates and people who were targeted by FISA warrants. Link to comment
Apathy Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 David Clarke for FBI Director Link to comment
NM11046 Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 I'll take a stab at that ... Cuz you usually don't go tell a suspect what evidence you have on them. Edit: unless you have some sort of past relationship with said suspect and think perhaps his getting in trouble may implicate you in some way ... then those people "brief" the president. Link to comment
Recommended Posts