It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Donald Trump has just directly accused Obama of wiretapping Trump residence.

page: 350
158
<< 347  348  349    351  352  353 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: UKTruth




It was not legal to unmask this information and then broadly share it.

How do you know that?
Nunes doesn't seem to say that anything illegal was done.


He said the surveillance may have been legal.

It's the use of the unmasking of names and the sharing, then the leaking.




posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: MysticPearl
Well what do you know, fake news MSM and lefties caught with their pants down again.


More like an egregious breach of the Separation of Powers by a former Trump associate (Nunes).

And of course, the very predictable crowing of the ATS Echo Chamber.


It's not a breach of separation of powers when this isn't related to the Russia investigation.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: UKTruth




It was not legal to unmask this information and then broadly share it.

How do you know that?
Nunes doesn't seem to say that anything illegal was done.


He said the surveillance may have been legal.

It's the use of the unmasking of names and the sharing, then the leaking.


Ahhh ... that explains why the sudden emphasis on "unmasking" popped up earlier today ...




posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: MysticPearl

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: MysticPearl
Well what do you know, fake news MSM and lefties caught with their pants down again.


More like an egregious breach of the Separation of Powers by a former Trump associate (Nunes).

And of course, the very predictable crowing of the ATS Echo Chamber.


It's not a breach of separation of powers when this isn't related to the Russia investigation.


It's a breach of powers when the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee makes an announcement intended to grab headlines and runs to inform Mr. Trump rather than briefing members of his own Committee.

Yes, that is an OBVIOUS breach of protocol if not the separation of powers ... but it's politics as usual for the Republicans and Trump Administration.

So, who's surprised, really?



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

I'm going to do a very quick drive-by here and then return later, but I keep going back to that interview Trump did with Jesse Watters (Fox News) last week where he confidently predicted that a lot of evidence to corroborate his claims would come out before the end of the month -- I believe he used the term "next couple weeks".

This Nunes statement moves the needle on this issue Big League, IMHO.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth




It's the use of the unmasking of names and the sharing, then the leaking.

Is unmasking illegal? Is sharing information among intelligence agencies illegal?

We know that the leaking is illegal. Yes. That was covered in the hearing quite throughly. Is that what you are talking about? Or are you saying that providing Nunes with these reports was illegal?



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: SBMcG
a reply to: UKTruth

I'm going to do a very quick drive-by here and then return later, but I keep going back to that interview Trump did with Jesse Watters (Fox News) last week where he confidently predicted that a lot of evidence to corroborate his claims would come out before the end of the month -- I believe he used the term "next couple weeks".

This Nunes statement moves the needle on this issue Big League, IMHO.



It does indeed.

I would speculate - very important to say that - that someone intended to use existing surveillance to collect details about Trump and his team and then unmasked the information and leaked. This is based on the fact that the unmasked conversations are not related to Russia. The net appears to have been cast wide.

Someone , or some people, are very nervous tonight.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: UKTruth




It's the use of the unmasking of names and the sharing, then the leaking.

Is unmasking illegal? Is sharing information among intelligence agencies illegal?

We know that the leaking is illegal. Yes. That was covered in the hearing quite throughly. Is that what you are talking about? Or are you saying that providing Nunes with these reports was illegal?



Depends who saw the information and also, importantly, that 'intelligence products' are supposed to be minimised to exclude US Citizens. It appears that no masking took place and the reports shared "widely". Then of course there is also a leak to the press.
edit on 22/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Let's just document the tactics being used here ...

Foment non-existent anxiety, churn up more confusion and inspire another couple of media cycles of pointless speculation.

Nunes is even contradicting himself ... he mentions that whatever it was that he saw was "incidental collection" and then opines that it could be the result of intentional surveillance.

Just remember what Trump (and his team, including Nunes) believes: no press is bad press.

Apparently the tragedy in London was too distracting for the liking of some.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Let's just document the tactics being used here ...

Foment non-existent anxiety, churn up more confusion and inspire another couple of media cycles of pointless speculation.

Nunes is even contradicting himself ... he mentions that whatever it was that he saw was "incidental collection" and then opines that it could be the result of intentional surveillance.

Just remember what Trump (and his team, including Nunes) believes: no press is bad press.

Apparently the tragedy in London was too distracting for the liking of some.


Nunes is the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.
If you are not going to listen to him then why bother getting involved?

Nunes says he is "bothered" after being questioned on whether 'political opponents' could have been involved.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Lol, CNN now saying this type of surveillance happens a lot and it's no surprise that Trump and his team had their calls listened to


Talk about spinning a different story to a few days ago.

I can almost hear them changing their article history as we speak.

Oh, Nunes also said that mulitple FISA warrants exist.
edit on 22/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Notice that throughout the conversations here on this thread and on ATS today ... there have been focus terms that cropped up ... like "unmasking" ... in many different postings.

Notice also that the phrase "who knew and when did they know it" (used by Nunes in his pressers) has ALSO been cropping up here today.

Interesting, ain't it?



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: UKTruth

Spicer also brings up Paul Manafort and gives the limited influence with the campaign and also the distant associations with Russia going back decades ...


Yeah hear that - Manafort did some work for Russia a decade ago.
Nothing to do with the campaign.


He was/is secretly working as a foreign agent for Russia...and hid the fact through shell corporations and public denials.

It is unknown if he is/was working for Russia in 2016/2017..

It is known that he continues to have contact with Trump and that Manafort and Trump worked to rewrite the RNC position on Ukraine etc. etc.

But circling back to what we DO know about his past work for Putin...Manafort can be charged with failure to register as a foreign agent.


Can you source his recent contacts with Trump?




MANAFORT PITCHING THE RUSSIANS
"We are now of the belief that this model can greatly benefit the Putin Government if employed at the correct levels with the appropriate commitment to success," Manafort wrote in the 2005 memo to Deripaska. The effort, Manafort wrote, "will be offering a great service that can re-focus, both internally and externally, the policies of the Putin government."

....

as part of his work in Ukraine "at the highest levels of the U.S. government — the White House, Capitol Hill and the State Department," according to the documents. He also said he had hired a "leading international law firm with close ties to President Bush to support our client's interests," but he did not identify the firm. Manafort also said he was employing unidentified legal experts for the effort at leading universities and think tanks, including Duke University, New York University and the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Manafort did not disclose details about the lobbying work to the Justice Department during the period the contract was in place.



He got 10 M a year from them for that and other efforts for Putin...



Manafort and his associates remain in Trump's orbit. Manafort told a colleague this year that he continues to speak with Trump by telephone. Manafort's former business partner in eastern Europe, Rick Gates, has been seen inside the White House on a number of occasions. Gates has since helped plan Trump's inauguration and now runs a nonprofit organization, America First Policies, to back the White House agenda.

LINK

Paul Manafort Is Back and Advising Donald Trump on Cabinet Picks
www.thedailybeast.com...

Ousted campaign chief Paul Manafort seeks to shape Trump transition
www.cnn.com...

Reports: Manafort Is Back And Heavily Involved In Trump's Transition
talkingpointsmemo.com...

I could provide a dozen more links...

But of course someone could get Trump on record and ask him directly the last time he spoke with Paul Manafort..




Can you source where Manafort worked with Trump to rewrite the Republican platform?


????

Are you suggesting that Paul Manafort had the Republican National Committees policy position on Ukraine watered down and edited...all on his own...before Trumps acceptance at the convention? THAT would be strange...The Nominee is the only one who had authority to do that...Manafort was Trumps representative and the Ukraine passage was the only edit that was demanded.

Either way...the way it unfolded was bizzare..

Trump Campaign Changed Ukraine Platform, Lied About It
www.thedailybeast.com...

Now that the investigation is picking up speed..
It looks like another Trump adviser has significantly changed his story about the GOP's dramatic shift on Ukraine


Trump's apparent involvement in steering the language change — Gordon reportedly told CNN that "this was the language Donald Trump himself wanted and advocated for back in March [2016]" — is also at odds with what Gordon told Business Insider in January, when he said "neither Mr. Trump nor Mr. Manafort were involved in those sort of details, as they've made clear."


www.businessinsider.com...

Why are so many people lying about it if it was not a big deal..



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:30 PM
link   
To quote Rep. Nunes ... it's "incidental surveillance."

Even more interesting ... if Trump's identity and the identities of other Trump associates has indeed been "unmasked" ... one of the suggestions is that the on-going investigation has already revealed those identities ... that they progressed from being incidental to "critical" to the investigation.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth




Talk about spinning a different story to a few days ago.


Different from this:

How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!
Yes, indeed.
Did Nunes say this happened during the election?
Did Nunes say that Trump's phones were tapped?
Did Nunes say that anything illegal was done?



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: UKTruth




It was not legal to unmask this information and then broadly share it.

How do you know that?
Nunes doesn't seem to say that anything illegal was done.


He said the surveillance may have been legal.

It's the use of the unmasking of names and the sharing, then the leaking.


He also said it did not happen during the campaign but during transition..

So...the question is...Why were Trump campaign Staff caught up in "legal" counter-espionage surveillance?



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Notice that throughout the conversations here on this thread and on ATS today ... there have been focus terms that cropped up ... like "unmasking" ... in many different postings.

Notice also that the phrase "who knew and when did they know it" (used by Nunes in his pressers) has ALSO been cropping up here today.

Interesting, ain't it?



Yeah, I have a hot line to Nunes and knew what he was going to say


Basically i was right about the key focus and what the House Intelligence Committee are focused on. They are not getting sidetracked by parsing words in tweets. They are interested in whether calls were recorded, who ordered the unmasked details of those recordings, who it was shared with and who leaked it.

The other focus is as we know on investigating coordination between Russians and the Trump campaign and Russian interference.

Now we now Trump was being spied on for sure, the follow up questions seem obvious.
edit on 22/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth




Now we now Trump was being spied on for sure

I didn't hear Nunes say that.


Nunes also was unsure if then President-elect Trump was captured by the surveillance, which occurred in November, December and January.

www.foxnews.com...
edit on 3/22/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: UKTruth




It was not legal to unmask this information and then broadly share it.

How do you know that?
Nunes doesn't seem to say that anything illegal was done.


He said the surveillance may have been legal.

It's the use of the unmasking of names and the sharing, then the leaking.


He also said it did not happen during the campaign but during transition..

So...the question is...Why were Trump campaign Staff caught up in "legal" counter-espionage surveillance?


Maybe you did not hear. Nunes said much of it had little to no foreign intelligence value and not even related to Russia.
Sounds like all existing surveillance was being sifted for Trump and his campaign team.
edit on 22/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage




Did Nunes say that Trump's phones were tapped?


AT 9:00 he has no evidence of wire tap.





top topics



 
158
<< 347  348  349    351  352  353 >>

log in

join