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 wire tapping trump residence part two

page: 16
16
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 08:36 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


The author seems to have been very comprehensive, so there is a good chance he;s not missed anything.


Except, of course, for the classified sources that the intelligence community used to reach its conclusions. Meanwhile, keep whistling in the dark.




posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 08:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


The author seems to have been very comprehensive, so there is a good chance he;s not missed anything.


Except, of course, for the classified sources that the intelligence community used to reach its conclusions. Meanwhile, keep whistling in the dark.


LOL, no evidence and you think I am whistling in the dark.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 09:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


The author seems to have been very comprehensive, so there is a good chance he;s not missed anything.


Except, of course, for the classified sources that the intelligence community used to reach its conclusions. Meanwhile, keep whistling in the dark.


LOL, no evidence and you think I am whistling in the dark.


Well, again readers here might ask you ... what exactly do you have evidence of "UK"?

I mean you keep talking about it but the standards seem to change for you.

Do you have evidence of Mr. Obama surveilling Mr. Trump, or not?



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66


The only intention here among many is disinfo and spin (and post count for some reason). It's gotten quite evident.


I have my theories on this.

For some, I would wager they are sharing it on their facebook and / or twitter even though some clearly shouldn't even be involved in this aspect of US politics since some seem to have more than their share of problems, personally and politically.

I wouldn't worry too much about it though because you can see a lot of the sentiment changing within this very thread from some who are deciding to forego aggrandization for the more level-headed aspect of serious issues.

Some men though, you just cant reach....



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone

Yep. Agree 100%.

But it's hard to argue philosophical distinctions with a sap to the back of the skull, LOL.




posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 09:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: alphabetaone

Yep. Agree 100%.

But it's hard to argue philosophical distinctions with a sap to the back of the skull, LOL.



As tempting as it may be...



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 09:43 AM
link   
As to the credibility of Congressman Nunes (and why he may have scurried off to the White House on Friday looking so scared and rattled)

I ran across this reference in another thread. It's from a Turkish online newspaper ... from January 18, 2017.




Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu met with designated U.S. National Security adviser Rt. Gen. Mike Flynn on Wednesday at Trump Hotel in Washington. "Met with General Flynn, who will assume the position of National Security Advisor, and other officials at a working breakfast in Washington D.C.," Çavuşoğlu tweeted.

The meeting marks a first direct reachout between the President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan administration and the incoming Donald Trump administration, other than a phone call between two leaders last November.

House Intelligence Committee Congressman Devin Nunes, a Republican heavyweight, also attended the breakfast. An aide of the foreign minister didn't provide additional details on the meeting, but said that Çavuşoğlu was the only foreign leader at the breakfast and the topics on the U.S.-Turkish agenda were discussed by the attendees.

A invitation letter for the breakfast, obtained by Daily Sabah, said the breakfast would be a small event for about 50-60 guests. It also said White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus might join the meeting. It was not immediately clear whether he attended. An official at the Trump Organization, and two other fundraisers were presented as co-hosts, according to the letter.


The Daily Sabah - January 18, 2017

Nunes and Flynn working the Turkish Foreign Minister together?

That can't be good. Does the Congressman also need to register, belatedly, as a foreign agent?

ETA: Also, see this write-up in the Palmer Report.
edit on 26-3-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

You can deny reality along with anyone you choose, but the statement that the 17 members of the American Intelligence Community made a public statement that the Russian government has attacked the American election process is an unquestionable fact.

The report is available online: Google it.


Help me out here because if I google it the only thing that comes up is the crowdstrike report and one from DHS/ODNI. In order to convince me of a reality where each of the 17 agencies investigated and came to the same conclusion I'll need some evidence. But thats just me. Open to the evidence if you can help find it. I'll even recant if appropriate!



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mike.Ockizard

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

You can deny reality along with anyone you choose, but the statement that the 17 members of the American Intelligence Community made a public statement that the Russian government has attacked the American election process is an unquestionable fact.

The report is available online: Google it.


Help me out here because if I google it the only thing that comes up is the crowdstrike report and one from DHS/ODNI. In order to convince me of a reality where each of the 17 agencies investigated and came to the same conclusion I'll need some evidence. But thats just me. Open to the evidence if you can help find it. I'll even recant if appropriate!


Friend, I need no recanting from you. As you say, I'm interested in the evidence.

Intelligence Report on Russian Hacking - provided at the NYT (This is the de-classified version of the report from CIA/NSA/FBI I suggested to you)

Beyond that, this is the announcement from the 17 agencies in October 2016:

Joint Statement from the Department Of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Election Security




The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.


This is the clarification from DNI Clapper:

Intelligence Chiefs 'Stand More Resolutely' Behind Finding Of Russia Election Hacking - NPR



Intelligence agency leaders repeated their determination Thursday that only "the senior most officials" in Russia could have authorized recent hacks into Democratic National Committee and Clinton officials' emails during the presidential election. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper affirmed an Oct. 7 joint statement from 17 intelligence agencies that the Russian government directed the election interference — and went further. "We stand more resolutely on that statement," Clapper said during a Senate Armed Services hearing with the intelligence chiefs into the politically charged issue.

edit on 26-3-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard


If you would also like something that others can't claim as "FAKE NEWS", I'm sure you know what I mean by that, check here.



A small preview of that report



I think where some of the confusion may lie on this, is that when a claim is made that "all 17 agencies" conclude....when the ODNI releases a statement as such, all 17 agencies fall under the umbrella of the USIC...not all 17 agencies need to be actively involved in investigations, for it to be reported that all 17 agencies draw the same conclusion. It's somewhat hyperbolic, I will agree to that, but it's not inaccurate.
edit on 26-3-2017 by alphabetaone because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

This is a interesting side note to the story

The former director of the CIA under Clinton, James Woolsey, went to the Wall Street Journal and offered some information (likely some true and some false) on the former General Flynn and the lobbying businesses he was involved in. Woolsey is an arch-neoconservative. He had worked on the transition team of Trump but got fired over "growing tensions over Trump’s vision for intelligence agencies." Flynn is the former National Security Advisor of Trump who later also got fired. Woolsey was a board member of Flynn's former lobbying company FIG.

Woolsey claims: In September 2016 he took part in a meeting between Flynn and high level Turkish officials, including the Turkish foreign minister and the energy minister who is the son of the Turkish president Erdogan. During the meeting, Woolsey claims, a brainstorming took place over how the Turkish cult leader Fethullah Gülen could -probably by illegal means- be removed from the U.S. and handed over to Turkey. Gülen is accused by the Erdogan mafia of initiating a coup attempt against it. The U.S. claims officially that there is no evidence for such an accusation and that Gülen can therefore not be rendered to Turkey. Gülen is an old CIA asset that helped the U.S. deep state to control Turkey. Erdogan divorced from the Gülen organization after it became useless for his neo-Ottoman project.
www.moonofalabama.org... on.html#comments



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 10:58 AM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone

It's merely a rhetorical dodge to claim that the DNI doesn't "speak for" the members of the American IC.

And those trying to do that understand that.

I admire your restraint, however.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

This is the CrowdStrike report. I Only see three agencies mentioned, DNI, CIA and NSA. Where are the other 14? If you tell me they were using this for attribution and or evidence of a Russian hack, I'm afraid the evidence is less than compelling. I do security audits as well as rapid response to attacks and If I placed blame with the evidence they present, I'd be unemployed. There are pages and pages of discussion on things like RT being an arm of the Russian propaganda machine. While this may be true, It says nothing about the alleged hack.

It could well be that 17 agencies signed off on this report. According to Clapper they did but I'd really be interested to see something official from each of the 17 stating they do indeed agree with its findings.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mike.Ockizard
a reply to: Gryphon66

This is the CrowdStrike report. I Only see three agencies mentioned, DNI, CIA and NSA. Where are the other 14? If you tell me they were using this for attribution and or evidence of a Russian hack, I'm afraid the evidence is less than compelling. I do security audits as well as rapid response to attacks and If I placed blame with the evidence they present, I'd be unemployed. There are pages and pages of discussion on things like RT being an arm of the Russian propaganda machine. While this may be true, It says nothing about the alleged hack.

It could well be that 17 agencies signed off on this report. According to Clapper they did but I'd really be interested to see something official from each of the 17 stating they do indeed agree with its findings.



When you consider that the 17 agencies of USIC include Coast Guard Intelligence, The Marine Corps Intelligence, The 25th Air Force, The Office of Naval Intelligence, and The Military Intelligence Corps, any person willing to put aside partisanship would realise that not all 17 agencies would have been involved in the analysis of a hack into the DNC.

It's a soundbite and nothing more which has been used ad infinitum. There were only 3 agencies mentioned in the report and the report itself contains nothing resembling any evidence to support the claims. Even basic server logs were not included. We also know from Comey that the IC did not even have access to the hacked server.


edit on 26/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone

A month before the election they were desperate to regain voter confidence in Clinton.




posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

Yes, the published report is signed off on by CIA, NSA and FBI. There's no doubt of that.

I linked you to Joint Statement made by DHS and the DNI. There's no doubt of that.

I linked you to the confirmation of the Joint Statement made by DNI Clapper. There's no doubt of that.

"The evidence is less than compelling"? What evidence is that? The material that is non-classified?

Does your job doing security audits involve classified material? If not, there's no comparison.

You'd like to see something from each of the 17 agencies? You did.

The DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE reported on the matter.

These are national security concerns we're discussing. You don't have to "believe" anything, but you can't deny the facts.

But, fair enough, you don't believe there was Russian hacking. It doesn't matter that there are decades of this world-wide, that we've traced them doing it before, etc. etc. It doesn't matter that the only source that you or I or ANYONE in this country has had for actual INTELLIGENCE MATERIAL are these agencies, but suddenly, because the results don't match up with whatever narrative you're following ... you demand classified material or you won't believe it? And when you get it, if it doesn't match your beliefs you'll reject it?

Fair enough. You don't believe it.

/shrug

edit on 26-3-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

BS.

What anyone knows is that these 17 agencies were directed by the Commander in Chief to find an answer, and if they had any, they gave them. If they didn't have any, they signed off on the agencies that DID have intel. Have the heads of ANY of those Agencies disagreed?

The only ones pushing disinfo and propaganda are the ones denying this very obvious fact.


edit on 26-3-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

I actually understand and appreciate your trepidation in ascribing "all 17 agencies" as having written off on the report. And frankly it would be folly to assume that they did, but in contrast it would also be folly to assume they were not part and parcel to it as well.


The truth of the matter is though, that it is hardly of much concern if they did or did not. In the National Security Act of 1947, Section 102a Part 2 Subpart B, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence is given:





ACCESS TO INTELLIGENCE.—Unless otherwise directed by the President, the Director of National Intelligence shall have access to all national intelligence and intelligence related to the national security which is collected by any Federal department, agency, or other entity, except as otherwise provided by law or, as appropriate, under guidelines agreed upon by the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence.





Which is stating that all, one, or any number of agencies involved in a National Security Intelligence investigation speak as a single entity, that being the ODNI who is the only one authorized to speak on behalf of National Security concerns.

However, as I said before and has been noted, to used it in a tagline, is really nothing more than a soundbyte.

edit on 26-3-2017 by alphabetaone because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: alphabetaone

A month before the election they were desperate to regain voter confidence in Clinton.



I fail to see the same desperation that you seem to be loosely alluding to.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 03:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: burntheships

Next week.

Unless Nunes does something stupid. Again.


Manafort is going to ask for closed door hearings...Followed by a whole lot of.."..at the advice of counsel I am going to invoke my right as guaranteed by the 5th amendment"..




top topics



 
16
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join