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.

 

Nunes Says Source is Executive Branch?

page: 8
27
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 01:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

S.C.I.F. ~S.ensitive C.ompartmented I.nformation F.acility

When spoken it sounds like "skiff" a small boat used rarely taken into choppy or heavy seas to avoid or prevent capsizing. Whereas a vessel typically has no issue in such water.

The fellow being interviewed is said to have many of these S.C.I.F.'s as connections to go between the whitehouse, house, and senate to bring things to light or basically decompartmentalize on capital hill between all of them.

So congress has not been let in on documents deemed sensitive saying that is the problem in getting the information out of being compartmentalized, except the information it is has been distributed fully through the executive branch for three months.

Since, the executive branch had yet to decompartmentalize then the fellows hands were tied as a SCIF to bring the information to the house intelligence commitee or basically debrief them on the information. Since such had not occured within three months of the executive branch knowing... a request to decompartmentalize the information to the House; was made.

The information itself seems to be a list of Americans; made from June, July, August, September, October, November, December, and January or basically some compiled list of Americans collected for 8 months.

And soon the information or names of all of those collected over that 8 month period will be released through the NSA so that the House Intelligence Committee can go over the data.

But for now; they feel it is important to protect the names of the people in that "Incidental Collection" that occured for 8 months. Saying that basically whatever information was gathered and the individuals connected that it is part of House rules to protect such things and people in oversight... that may or has occured... basically to make sure whatever occured was constitutionally legal for those 8 months.

Seeing how the term unmasked was used? It was likely meant to figure out or find out and compile data on who certain individuals of interest are behind some factor of anonymity... that the NSA was directed to collect a list of for 8 months.

Well, there's my decoding beyond the jargon of compartmentalization...

Seems we have been given a mystery; and the root of collections started in June; although the directive to collect whatever information that is may have come a month previous... depending on fast agencies can get their S.C.I.F.'s together in mobilizing a task... if marked top priority then it would be doubtful that there would have been more than a week or two between the directive of "Incidental Collection" so what sort of incidents were asked to be flagged and collected I wonder?

So yes, curiouser and curiouser.

Edit to add: Abit of digging around June brought up something called "NSPD-12" 19 Secret Orders So perhaps this is in connection with whatever "NSPD-12" is...

Edit to add yet again... a bit more digging NSPD-12 had to do with Americans as hostages an d got superceded... more digging through presidential memoranda's only one I saw in regard to list compilation as a directive; as hostages would already be known, so their names would not need collecting just the hostages physically collected: Presidential Memoranda's This is more in line with all of the current controversy occuring in the news...


edit on 28-3-2017 by BigBrotherDarkness because: edit to add




posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 06:58 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

if it is classified data then yes . he can't just let the masses of congress see it some of them might not have a high enough security clearance to read the documents whereas numes did. and no they couldn't jyust shoot it too him as an email it might have been intercepted thus they called him in to see it.. yes obama might have talked a judge into giving a warrant to obtain this info but once they got the info why did they leak it to press that is where criminal intent started.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 07:07 AM
link   
a reply to: angeldoll



This is nothing but another diversion. A diversion that shows Nunes is not suited to lead this investigation. He's too sidetracked with what seems to be protecting Trump.

All they can talk about is Nunes and Trump. Anything but Russia and Collusion.


Anything but Russia and Collusion. Could that be the point?



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 07:21 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

No it never was.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 08:31 AM
link   
nevermind
edit on 28/3/2017 by shooterbrody because: no longer worth my time



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Having trouble finding that?
Yeah I looked . I could have forgotten.
Nope. I didn't discuss SCIF at any time on here. Not until yesterday.
Sorry Charlie



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

www.abovetopsecret.com...
Discussed in detail from may to october



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 11:36 AM
link   
From your OP:

The CNN article has been updated, and its title changed. The first version strongly implied that the information was provided to Nunes by the White House. We do not know if that is the case.


Yes, CNN do that a lot. Launch with a fake headline and then over write their story as time passes.
Nunes was reviewing Executive branch documents at a SCIF on the Whitehouse grounds.
We don't know who told him about those documents, or who facilitated his viewing time.

By the way, even if it was Trump himself welcoming him at the gate to walk him in, there would be no problem whatsoever with that.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 01:00 PM
link   
The fact that Nunes needed to review the info at a SCIF means we can be 99% certain that Nunes' source is within the intelligence community. Someone in either the CIA or NSA is providing the info to him. I like the idea that it might be copies of Obama's daily intelligence briefings.

And the fact that Democrats are damn-near having a neurotic breakdown trying to stop Nunes suggests that this info is probably true, and they know it. If it was all made-up garbage, they would be ignoring Nunes.
edit on 28-3-2017 by AndyFromMichigan because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
The fact that Nunes needed to review the info at a SCIF means we can be 99% certain that Nunes' source is within the intelligence community. Someone in either the CIA or NSA is providing the info to him. I like the idea that it might be copies of Obama's daily intelligence briefings.

And the fact that Democrats are damn-near having a neurotic breakdown trying to stop Nunes suggests that this info is probably true, and they know it. If it was all made-up garbage, they would be ignoring Nunes.


Democrats do seem to be trying everything to stop Nunes going where the evidence is taking him.. I wonder why...



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 01:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
Democrats do seem to be trying everything to stop Nunes going where the evidence is taking him.. I wonder why...

I'm seriously starting to believe that it is not a coincidence that Barack Obama (without Michelle or the girls) is currently taking an extended vacation in the South Pacific. He's afraid that there's a chance this might lead to him being indicted for Nixon-esque crimes, so he's positioned himself to go into hiding outside the US if the # does hit the fan.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Democrats are simply pissed that Nunes got the disclosure first, and exclusively. They want to know what kind of storm is coming, and he won't spill the beans.

Nunes is a member of the Gang of Eight, and is perfectly entitled to this data. If fact, one can argue that this disclosure to Nunes is appropriate AND encouraged. Especially considering the Snowden / WikiLeaks fiasco.

Schumer's call for Nunes to step down is as hilarious as it is stupid. What do you think Old Chuck would have done with this scoop had it been delivered to him exclusively? He would have binned it for certain....Guess what democrats? You're not the only one's on the inside with access and the ability to leak. Except this time it was legal and appropriate.....

Nunes probably had to go to the WH to gain access to a JWICS terminal........



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 01:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pyros2017
a reply to: UKTruth

Democrats are simply pissed that Nunes got the disclosure first, and exclusively. They want to know what kind of storm is coming, and he won't spill the beans.

Nunes is a member of the Gang of Eight, and is perfectly entitled to this data. If fact, one can argue that this disclosure to Nunes is appropriate AND encouraged. Especially considering the Snowden / WikiLeaks fiasco.

Schumer's call for Nunes to step down is as hilarious as it is stupid. What do you think Old Chuck would have done with this scoop had it been delivered to him exclusively? He would have binned it for certain....Guess what democrats? You're not the only one's on the inside with access and the ability to leak. Except this time it was legal and appropriate.....

Nunes probably had to go to the WH to gain access to a JWICS terminal........



Here is the really funny thing... when Trump made his claim, Democrats lined up to tell the world that he was President and if he had any information then he just had to ask his intelligence community to provide it.

So let's make the leap to the scenario that Trump did give Nunes the information and let's take the two broad options.

1) It was about the Russian investigation - well done Trump for handing over information to the Chairman of the committee even though it might show information about his staff being discussed or talking to Russians

2) If it was not about Russia, then Trump has handed the Chairman of the Committee exactly what Democrats said he should provide them, having got the information from the IC.

Democrats are smearing and changing the angle of their attacks as the need arises. It's the usual strategy of throwing so much mud at an individual who might be a problem for their narrative and hoping enough sticks to mute their message.


edit on 28/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage



The first version strongly implied that the information was provided to Nunes by the White House. We do not know if that is the case.


What if it indeed was not the case? What if he never did have any new info in his possession?

What if it was a stunt to "vindicate" Trump? That might explain POTUS's tepid response when asked if he felt vindicated: “I somewhat do”.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

With CNN I am not surprised they lied in their original title to make Trump look bad.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
Here is the really funny thing... when Trump made his claim, Democrats lined up to tell the world that he was President and if he had any information then he just had to ask his intelligence community to provide it.

I found it hilarious that CNN kept saying Trump just needs to ask and he will be given access, so if he can't get it then it doesn't exist.

Nunes gives it to him.

CNN goes crazy saying you can't give this info to Trump because of the investigation.

Ahhh what? Hypocrisy much.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 02:34 PM
link   
Well, ya gota give the boy credit for trying.
His MD is in Agriculture and not a J.D.
And, he was born in the Tulare dust.




Buck



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 03:06 PM
link   
So who didn't show today for the meeting with the Intelligence Committee? Was it just the NSA director and the FBI director?

Nunnes said no phone call even! that is shocking and pretty rude, that is a bad sign.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 03:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: desert

That might explain POTUS's tepid response when asked if he felt vindicated: “I somewhat do”.

I think Trump's comment has more explanatory value as, "Wait'll you get a load of what's coming, THEN I'll feel vindicated." Makes more sense to me that way but mileage, of course and always, may vary.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 04:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: UKTruth
Democrats do seem to be trying everything to stop Nunes going where the evidence is taking him.. I wonder why...

I'm seriously starting to believe that it is not a coincidence that Barack Obama (without Michelle or the girls) is currently taking an extended vacation in the South Pacific. He's afraid that there's a chance this might lead to him being indicted for Nixon-esque crimes, so he's positioned himself to go into hiding outside the US if the # does hit the fan.
it's no coincidence, that's for sure. In fact, it's EXTREMELY telling. For as much as I don't like what he did to this nation, he IS/WAS a good family man. I find it odd he's vacationing for such a long time without his family.

The guy knows what he's done.

Can you imagine having to extradite him? Would he hole up like Asante at an embassy?



new topics




 
27
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join