Intelligence community shared details into investigation of Trump with Hillarys campaign

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Grambler

However, why is the standard so hi for looking at the exact specifics of what Trumps says by the media, but Mook claim here can be written off as a misstatement.

Red herring. How you think people interpret Trump is not even remotely part of this issue.

Mook said, very clearly that we know that the Russians were wiretapped because it has been widely reported, and it has been, for months.

Occam's Razor applies.

It was you who said he misspoke.

Hang on... no, it was Introvert.

I said he may have misspoke is using the term "us".

That is all. I believe he may have used it in a general sense.

Okay, I'm not a Fox News expert, I will admit.

Would they have a official transcript of the interview? I carefully transcribed the bits I posted, but we should have an official source.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

The media has reported on this issue for quite some time now, using sources within the IC as the basis for their reporting.

At worst, what we can say is that Mook may have misspoke and in no way did he imply that the IC was communicating with the campaign directly.

It is possible he was trying to spread propaganda by using words that were more definitive than he just heard it from the press.. but he should be questioned to find out, because his statements are specific.

Can you please provide me with a specific statement he made that brings up an issue that has not been reported on by the press?

The press have never said any of what Mook said. They have always claimed that sources told them. Mook was definitive. He was stating the meetings, frequency and meetings beyond the Russian Ambassador as fact as I pointed out with his specific quotes earlier.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

The media has reported on this issue for quite some time now, using sources within the IC as the basis for their reporting.

At worst, what we can say is that Mook may have misspoke and in no way did he imply that the IC was communicating with the campaign directly.

It is possible he was trying to spread propaganda by using words that were more definitive than he just heard it from the press.. but he should be questioned to find out, because his statements are specific.

Can you please provide me with a specific statement he made that brings up an issue that has not been reported on by the press?

The press have never said any of what Mook said. They have always claimed that sources told them. Mook was definitive. He was stating the meetings, frequency and meetings beyond the Russian Ambassador as fact as I pointed out with his specific quotes earlier.

You didn't seem to source those quotes. What's the source you used?

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

The media has reported on this issue for quite some time now, using sources within the IC as the basis for their reporting.

At worst, what we can say is that Mook may have misspoke and in no way did he imply that the IC was communicating with the campaign directly.

It is possible he was trying to spread propaganda by using words that were more definitive than he just heard it from the press.. but he should be questioned to find out, because his statements are specific.

Can you please provide me with a specific statement he made that brings up an issue that has not been reported on by the press?

The press have never said any of what Mook said. They have always claimed that sources told them. Mook was definitive. He was stating the meetings, frequency and meetings beyond the Russian Ambassador as fact as I pointed out with his specific quotes earlier.

You didn't seem to source those quotes. What's the source you used?

The video posted, along with the specific quotes in the content underneath.

a reply to: bmullini

Great post!

It's just so counter-intuitive to me to believe someone as smart and cagey as Donald Trump would continue an activity he knew to be highly-illegal when he also knew it was being investigated.

This, to me, forever puts to bed the already-goofy claim that "the Russians" were conspiring with the Trump Campaign to influence the 2016 election.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Grambler

However, why is the standard so hi for looking at the exact specifics of what Trumps says by the media, but Mook claim here can be written off as a misstatement.

Red herring. How you think people interpret Trump is not even remotely part of this issue.

Mook said, very clearly that we know that the Russians were wiretapped because it has been widely reported, and it has been, for months.

Occam's Razor applies.

I admit how we look at Trumps statements is a red herring. Just making a point.

But you are right, it does not weigh in to mook statement.

But I think you are wrong about Mook saying he new about it because it was reported.

He is making two points.

He is saying he knows this because the intelligence community told "us", AND it was widely reported. If he meant only that it was reported he would have said he knew because it was widely reported, and not mentioned anything about the intelligence community saying anything.

And a person would never say IC told us based on reading anonymous reports in newspapers.

For example, there were stories reported in papers that said anonymous people from the NYPD had evidence of sex crimes and were ready to make arrests. You would never say based on this that "The NYPD has told us that they were going to make arrests for sex crimes in the weiner case"

That would be absurd because there was no official statement from the NYPD. The only reason you would make that statement is if you personally met with the NYPD and they said that.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Clinton's source was Slate Magazine.

If so, how do you explain her time stamp being
before the article was published then?

Slate article shows 5:36 PM

Clinton's tweet shows 5:36 PM. (Viewed on Gateway Pundit site, can link if needed.)

You think liberal-biased Slate might have provided an advance of the article to Clinton?

Naughty Slate.

Why would she have been interested in that particular bit of fake news?

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

The media has reported on this issue for quite some time now, using sources within the IC as the basis for their reporting.

At worst, what we can say is that Mook may have misspoke and in no way did he imply that the IC was communicating with the campaign directly.

It is possible he was trying to spread propaganda by using words that were more definitive than he just heard it from the press.. but he should be questioned to find out, because his statements are specific.

Can you please provide me with a specific statement he made that brings up an issue that has not been reported on by the press?

The press have never said any of what Mook said. They have always claimed that sources told them. Mook was definitive. He was stating the meetings, frequency and meetings beyond the Russian Ambassador as fact as I pointed out with his specific quotes earlier.

You didn't seem to source those quotes. What's the source you used?

The video posted, along with the specific quotes in the content underneath.

Okay, I was hoping you had a transcript.

Those quotes you used then ... does Mook say that any of that was reported to the campaign?

a reply to: UKTruth

These quotes?

"Trump aides were caught talking to Russian agents, and those conversations were captured because the intelligence community regularly taps the phone lines of those Russian agents," Mook said.

That's nothing new.

"The whole situation is very bizarre that American campaign operatives would be going back and forth so much, not only with the Russian ambassador but other Russian agents as well,"

That's nothing new and part is his opinion.

"The whole reason we are having this conversation is [because] the Trump campaign was talking to the Russians a lot. That's how this got picked up. We need to understand why this was happening."

That's his opinion.

Still not seeing anything damning here.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Gosh, that intel must not have been part of the security briefings then.

Do you have any proof of what the Candidates received in their briefings?

The briefings will not include information about U.S. intelligence sources and methods or current covert operations, both officials added.

www.reuters.com...

Methods, such as wiretaps, would not be discussed.

So you know what wasn't in the briefings ... information on wiretaps.

LIke I said (and you quoted) "that intel must not have been part of the security briefings then."

Yeah I think we are in agreement on this.

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Clinton's source was Slate Magazine.

If so, how do you explain her time stamp being
before the article was published then?

Slate article shows 5:36 PM

Clinton's tweet shows 5:36 PM. (Viewed on Gateway Pundit site, can link if needed.)

You think liberal-biased Slate might have provided an advance of the article to Clinton?

Naughty Slate.

Why would she have been interested in that particular bit of fake news?

Are you serious?

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth

"Trump aides were caught talking to Russian agents, and those conversations were captured because the intelligence community regularly taps the phone lines of those Russian agents," Mook said.

That's nothing new.

"The whole situation is very bizarre that American campaign operatives would be going back and forth so much, not only with the Russian ambassador but other Russian agents as well,"

That's nothing new and part is his opinion.

"The whole reason we are having this conversation is [because] the Trump campaign was talking to the Russians a lot. That's how this got picked up. We need to understand why this was happening."

That's his opinion.

Still not seeing anything damning here.

Except he is stating facts. Propaganda at best, but given his language he should answer further. Perhaps he will be called as part of the investigation. That would seem sensible to clear it up.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Okay, I'm not a Fox News expert, I will admit.

Would they have a official transcript of the interview? I carefully transcribed the bits I posted, but we should have an official source.

I couldn't find one but your transcript was very good (I double checked you lol)

Okay.

Let's turn this around, Mooks use of the pronoun "us" ... why do you think he was referring to the Clinton campaign?

Particularly given that in response to a specific question that the female interviewer (again, I don't know her name) on F&F asked "What did Hillary Clinton know and when did she know it" he responded that the information had come from Slate.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Okay, I'm not a Fox News expert, I will admit.

Would they have a official transcript of the interview? I carefully transcribed the bits I posted, but we should have an official source.

I couldn't find one but your transcript was very good (I double checked you lol)

Good. I'm glad you did.

originally posted by: Grambler

I am sure that both teams were updated about Russia hacking, but this does not mean they were told about having Trumps people on wiretaps.

Right. That would be my assumption.

There is another possibility...

What if the FBI had already recorded conversations between Team Trump and "the Russians" before the briefing and DIDN'T reveal the investigation to Trump for that reason?

a reply to: Grambler

insider.foxnews.com...

"Trump aides were caught talking to Russian agents, and those conversations were captured because the intelligence community regularly taps the phone lines of those Russian agents," Mook said. He said the real question that needs to be asked is why were Trump aides talking to Russia so much. Mook added that the Clinton campaign was informed by the intelligence community that wiretaps of Russian agents did in fact take place. "The whole situation is very bizarre that American campaign operatives would be going back and forth so much, not only with the Russian ambassador but other Russian agents as well," Mook said. "The whole reason we are having this conversation is [because] the Trump campaign was talking to the Russians a lot. That's how this got picked up. We need to understand why this was happening.

"thats how this got picked up"

Mook added that the Clinton campaign was informed by the intelligence community that wiretaps of Russian agents did in fact take place.

This is not what Robbie Mook said anywhere in the interview on Fox and Friends.

a reply to: shooterbrody

It is not against any law for trumps aids to talk to russians
it is against the law for the ic to use american citizens data picked up in such a manor