House intelligence committee clears the president of accusations of treason with Russia

originally posted by: queenofswords
From the OP's article:

The contents of the transcript of the wiretapped phone call between Flynn and Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyac were made public through leaks to The Washington Post earlier this month.

These calls were FISA-warranted communications. Remember, Obama had just kicked out 35 Russian diplomats. That is a big deal, so any foreign diplomat associated with Russia would naturally be wire-tapped by US Intelligence. Flynn had to have known this with all his intelligence background.

In order to pass any information on to The Washington Post since it was obtained under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,a mechanism had to be used to remove that information and give it to a reporter at WaPo.

That is big time illegal!! There should be a record of who had access and how they removed and dispensed this confidential information.

Two things:

Are there "columns" within our Intelligence Agencies stealing and leaking national security information.

WHO REALLY IS WaPo?? Why are they being handed over secret info? Are they getting secrets some other way?

Remember, Jeff Bezos, who is not a fan of Donald Trump, owns WaPo AND Amazon. Amazon Web Services has received a $600million dollar contract from the CIA (Oct. 2014) to provide Cloud service to the CIA along with 17 other US intelligence agencies!!


Who approved this deal?
Who within the intelligence community is slipping them info?
Or, are they taking the info?
Who, at Amazon Web Services (AWS) has security clearances to maintain the Cloud for Intelligence?

There is a separate gov cloud.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Until you realise the that the House Intelligence Committee is a group of politicians, not investigators, law enforcement professionals, intelligence operatives, or anyone capable of making an assessment about anything at all. Its just a room full of unqualified people.

Excuse me?

Did you just refer to Trey Gowdy as unqualified?

WTF. I don't normally say this but, maybe you should stick to criticizing people within your own government before you toss ill informed insults across the pond. Just a suggestion.

a reply to: WTAtennisfan

This is a lie. The House hasn't cleared Trump yet, Nunes is just saying he hasn't seen any evidence.

What a waste of taxpayer money, chasing after Fake News stories that are created by political hacks only to get totally cleared as bunk.

originally posted by: WTAtennisfan
thehill.com...

Keep in mind this investigation has been more than a year in the making. www.nytimes.com...

#1 - Your title is very misleading. The investigation is still ongoing and,

#2 - Your first reference states that Nunes hasn't been given any intelligence YET that shows constant contact with Trump campaign. Again, this is an ongoing investigation.

#3 - Your second reference is from October, 2016, BEFORE this current investigation. It is not a valid source to prove your point.

So, NO, he has not been "cleared" of "treason" or anything else. I think "treason" is stretching it as an accusation to begin with, but really, you've proved nothing other than Nunes hasn't heard any intelligence yet that demonstrates constant contact. He does NOT say the investigation is final.

This thread demonstrates one thing, and one thing only.


People don't generally look at links in an OP.

a reply to: Tempter

There is a separate gov cloud.

??? Please explain. Do you mean separate from Amazon Web Services or technologically within AWS?

AWS has the contract to provide the Cloud services to CIA and 17 other intelligence agencies. Help me understand how that would work when you say separate gov cloud.

a reply to: AboveBoard

That's for sure. Confirmation bias rules the land.

I would like to remind everybody of something to add to the subject of my post on this thread:

Washington Post assigns army of 20 to dig into 'every phase' of Trump's life



Washington Post --- Jeff Bezos --- Amazon Web Services --- $600million Contract with CIA

I smell a frame in the works.

So they have reviewed the 'initial' information. If there was something good...why would they not just give it to them? No need to wait for more evidence that will not appear.

Bezos reminds me of a comic or action movie bad guy.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: WTAtennisfan

This is a lie. The House hasn't cleared Trump yet, Nunes is just saying he hasn't seen any evidence.

lol...So you got nothing. What exactly do you have to stand on?

originally posted by: AboveBoard

So, NO, he has not been "cleared" of "treason" or anything else. I think "treason" is stretching it as an accusation to begin with, but really, you've proved nothing other than Nunes hasn't heard any intelligence yet that demonstrates constant contact. He does NOT say the investigation is final.

Treason is a pretty serious charge considering YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE.

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: WTAtennisfan

This is a lie. The House hasn't cleared Trump yet, Nunes is just saying he hasn't seen any evidence.

lol...So you got nothing. What exactly do you have to stand on?

originally posted by: AboveBoard

So, NO, he has not been "cleared" of "treason" or anything else. I think "treason" is stretching it as an accusation to begin with, but really, you've proved nothing other than Nunes hasn't heard any intelligence yet that demonstrates constant contact. He does NOT say the investigation is final.

Treason is a pretty serious charge considering YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE.

Not having evidence yet doesn't mean the investigation is over and trump has been cleared. Plus that is just one investigation. The senate disagrees.

Nunes’s statements go well beyond what his Republican colleagues in the Senate have signaled when talking about a parallel probe, which Nunes suggested Monday would basically be conducted separately. The Senate Intelligence Committee — headed by Richard Burr (R-N.C.) — has promised to thoroughly investigate any contacts between Trump aides and the Kremlin. And it has pledged to specifically probe ousted national security adviser Michael Flynn’s talk late last year with the Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak.

Nunes’s hard-line stance is also at odds with comments by some House Republicans — including former House Oversight and Government Reform chairman Darrell Issa (Calif.), who said over the weekend that a special prosecutor should investigate Russia’s alleged interference in the U.S. elections

This isn't over yet was my entire point.

And what exactly was Russia's "alleged" interference?

There was a hack into the Democratic National Committee's computer system that they blamed on Russia. That information wound up on WikiLeaks exposing the Democrat leadership for what they are....lying, back-stabbing, dishonest, vulgar, idiots, that nominated the worst candidate possible while screwing poor old Bernie.

That is the so-called interference.

I don't think it was Russia. I think it was an inside job and the person that could tell us all about it was murdered in the early morning hours of July 10, 2016.

originally posted by: queenofswords
And what exactly was Russia's "alleged" interference?

There was a hack into the Democratic National Committee's computer system that they blamed on Russia. That information wound up on WikiLeaks exposing the Democrat leadership for what they are....lying, back-stabbing, dishonest, vulgar, idiots, that nominated the worst candidate possible while screwing poor old Bernie.

That is the so-called interference.

I don't think it was Russia. I think it was an inside job and the persona that could tell us all about it was murdered in the early morning hours of July 10, 2016.

If they did what they're accused of, which they didn't, then all they did was expose the DNC as a corrupt organisation. Which it is, and it is also knowledge the American Public should have when casting their vote.

a reply to: TheBulk

Here's the thing. You can't say there is "no evidence." We do not know that yet.

There may be "no evidence" of any kind of wrongdoing whatsoever - I fully grant that as a possibility.

As to treason, I will reiterate that it is an extremely serious charge that would not be levied except for the most extreme of actions. I doubt he would be charged with that particular thing, to be honest.

The entire point trying to be made here is that the OP has jumped the gun. There have been no "charges" from which he could be "cleared." There is an ongoing investigation regarding the dossier presented by the former MI6 agent, Christopher Steele, as well as some financial investigations, and continued threads being tracked regarding the hacking as to who was communicating with whom when and why.

If it all comes to nothing, if it has been thoroughly looked at and no reason for indictment or impeachment or whatever is found, then that's that. I hope they do have an independent investigation, though, as I think it's findings would be better accepted.

a reply to: Ohanka

It blows my mind how Brits such as yourself are more awake then some Americans about this issue, and many other issues in general.

What is your secret?

originally posted by: TheBulk
So Trump and his administration were right all along when they called the media fake news for reporting this with ZERO evidence? I wonder if they'll be as energetic in reporting this news? They don't call them the "drive-by" media for nothing.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: brutus61

These accusations will likely die as fast as hillary's email scandels that amounted to nothing.
In other words we will hear about it for the next year.

They didn't amount to nothing. As Comey said, any other person would have been "disciplined" for what she did. It also amounted to proof she was completely incompetent.

We all know she's as guilty as you can get.
But you let me know when she sees the inside of a courtroom.
Until then, it amounted to nothing.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Maybe that is actually where all this is leading.

______

The man that authored that now famous dossier on Trump was actually being paid by two sources and another that was planning on paying him, but stopped when its existence became public knowledge. When somebody is paying you $$$ to find dirt, by gosh, you are going to get that dirt even if you have to make it up!!

~One of those paying this man was a Washington research firm hired by Hillary Clinton supporters.
~The other one paying this man was an anonymous Republican opposed to Donald Trump's candidacy.
~The other one that had planned to hire him but didn't was the FBI. I don't know who within the FBI planned this.

a reply to: queenofswords

What I find interesting is Christopher Steele is FORMER MI6, but he was NOT in intel when he made the dossier. He was a private citizen and he was unaccountable to anyone. Who's to say he didn't simply make up a fake dossier?

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: Bluntone22

Maybe that is actually where all this is leading.

______

The man that authored that now famous dossier on Trump was actually being paid by two sources and another that was planning on paying him, but stopped when its existence became public knowledge. When somebody is paying you $$$ to find dirt, by gosh, you are going to get that dirt even if you have to make it up!!

~One of those paying this man was a Washington research firm hired by Hillary Clinton supporters.
~The other one paying this man was an anonymous Republican opposed to Donald Trump's candidacy.
~The other one that had planned to hire him but didn't was the FBI. I don't know who within the FBI planned this.

He was also so concerned about his findings that after making discoveries, he worked for free. He provided British Intelligence with the dossier as well as the US. He was the expert in Russia for MI6 while he was in the service. He had legitimate contacts and was considered a highly credible source.

In addition, and this is brand new information, the FBI was prepared to pay Christopher Steele to work with them after seeing the dossier:

a matter of weeks before the election the Bureau reached an agreement with Mr Steele to carry on with his work.

Even though eventually no money changed hands, the very existence of the agreement will be seen as evidence that the authorities in the United States believed in the credibility of Mr Steele, who was seen as one of MI6’s leading experts on Russia for 20 years.

Link: FBI reached agreement to pay Christopher Steele, former MI6 officer...