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.

 

Full Clapper: 'No Evidence' of Collusion Between Trump and Russia

page: 1
34
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+17 more 
posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:13 AM
link   
It's time to put this whole delusion of Trump-Russia collusion to bed.

From NBC News:

Full Clapper: 'No Evidence' of Collusion Between Trump and Russia

In an exclusive interview with Meet the Press, Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper says that there wasn't evidence of collusion between Russia and Trump earlier this year.


As noted, James Clapper was the Director of National Intelligence under Obama and during the 2016 presidential campaigns. Mr. Clapper knows exactly what was found -- and NOT found -- by their spying. No one knows better than Mr. Clapper. If there was collusion, Clapper would know.

Clapper says there was no such evidence found. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Despite the best (and unprecedented) efforts to find such evidence of the DOJ and the entire intelligence community.

Russiagate has run its course and there is no "there" there. Now it's time to focus on Spygate and take a good long hard look at these efforts in the bright light of day -- the who, what, when, where, why and how -- and particularly what they did with the information they did find after the fact.... the good, the bad, and the ugly. Hence, the House Intelligence Committee hearings.

Give us the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth -- and then let the chips fall where they may!!!




posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

No evidence that they found. Why would Flynn ask for immunity?

Why is the house intelligence committee cancelling certain people's scheduled hearings to testify?

And what's ironic here is that if he'd said there was evidence, Trump supporters would just say ' Oh well he worked for Obama, of course he's going to say that, he's a fake news democrat'.

But as soon as he says something that sounds even like the littlest bit of support for Trump's cause, he becomes the single authority on the issue.

How quaint.

~Tenth
edit on 4/4/2017 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: Boadicea

No evidence that they found.


And??? What are you saying? That Clapper and every other intelligence agency didn't have enough time or resources to find the evidence?


Why would Flynn ask for immunity?


You'll have to ask Flynn that.


Why is the house intelligence committee cancelling certain people's scheduled hearings to testify?


You would be speaking to the hearings about Spygate? (Not Russiagate) Well, according to reports, because the Dems are refusing to let Comey and Rogers testify in a closed session, and for some reason Nunes wants those two to testify before Yates, Clapper and Brennan. I have no inside knowledge, but my best guess is that Nunes believes Comey and/or Rogers have important information that needs to be known in order to properly and competently question the others.

Why are the Dems refusing to let certain people testify?


And what's ironic here is that if he'd said there was evidence, Trump supporters would just say ' Oh well he worked for Obama, of course he's going to say that, he's a fake news democrat'.


Okay... people say lots of things. Doesn't matter for these purposes. It was in fact and in deed Mr. Clappers responsibility to investigate, analyze and evaluate exactly this information. He says there is no evidence.



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

Isn't this the same lying dingus who went before Congress and said the NSA wasn't metadata harvesting? I frankly would question his veracity if he announced that the sky is blue.



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

The media made such a big deal out of nothing that those who had faith in this nothing will still be the most adamant about it being something, finding "evidence" anywhere they can, like those who burned witches.



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower

Well, lawyers seem to think its a smart move.


Flynn and his lawyers may actually think that he has a rather low chance of being successfully prosecuted. There are a number of reasons why that could be so. And if that is right, Flynn's actions might be best understood as a smart play by someone seeking a clear win, rather than a desperate attempt to minimize losses.


Link

Whats ironic is that the relentless coverage by the media and all of their leaks from "sources with knowledge on the matter", yet the "investigation" has been going on for over a year and there isn't a single shred of evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia.



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Boadicea

Isn't this the same lying dingus who went before Congress and said the NSA wasn't metadata harvesting? I frankly would question his veracity if he announced that the sky is blue.


Fair enough... lying liars are lying liars.

So are you saying that he did find evidence and he's withholding it because... well... he's just a lying liar?



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
Fair enough... lying liars are lying liars.

So are you saying that he did find evidence and he's withholding it because... well... he's just a lying liar?


I'm saying I wholly discount anything this ass tard says because he has a demonstrated history of being highly untruthful. I want a second source even if he said water was wet.



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


I'm saying I wholly discount anything this ass tard says because he has a demonstrated history of being highly untruthful. I want a second source even if he said water was wet.


So... Trump's guilty until proven innocent because the one responsible for investigating such is a lying liar?



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

Don't think it'll go away, it's the only crap that libtards have against Trump, and all America will see the blatant corruption on them



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower


No evidence that they found. Why would Flynn ask for immunity?


for any charges that might stem from not registering as a foreign agent, and from any deals that he his self may made.

remember he didn't resister until after he resigned.



Former National Security Adviser Mike Flynn has registered with the Justice Department as a foreign agent for his lobbying work linked to the Turkish government, according to paperwork filed Tuesday. Just weeks after Flynn was ousted from the Trump administration, the early Trump supporter and campaign adviser registered with the Justice Department’s Foreign Agent Registration Unit for lobbying that his firm—Flynn Intel Group Inc.—did on behalf of Inovo BV, a Dutch consulting company owned by a Turkish businessman with ties to Turkey President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Former National Security Adviser Flynn Registered as a Foreign Agent for Turkey Work During Trump Campaign




edit on 4-4-2017 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: Boadicea

No evidence that they found. Why would Flynn ask for immunity?

~Tenth


Well, if you ask actual layers and not the hyperbolistic media, it is fairly standard, and just a sign the attorney is doing his job.




On the LawNewz blog, run by ABC chief legal affairs correspondent Dan Abrams, writer Rachel Stockman polled various well-known criminal defense attorneys, and the general verdict was that the immunity request was a simply evidence that Flynn's attorney knows what he's doing.

The request was "fairly standard," white collar criminal defense attorney Elkan Abramowitz told her. "I can't imagine if I were his lawyer that I wouldn't ask for immunity regardless of whether he did anything illegal or not," said attorney Mark Zaid, who specializes in government whistleblower cases.

CNBC


So, yeah..



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: Boadicea

No evidence that they found. Why would Flynn ask for immunity?

Why is the house intelligence committee cancelling certain people's scheduled hearings to testify?

And what's ironic here is that if he'd said there was evidence, Trump supporters would just say ' Oh well he worked for Obama, of course he's going to say that, he's a fake news democrat'.

But as soon as he says something that sounds even like the littlest bit of support for Trump's cause, he becomes the single authority on the issue.

How quaint.

~Tenth


Think about it, Trump wants Flynn to testify and get immunity. Why? Because Flynn actually won't be saying anything that will hurt the Trump administration. Actually the immunity he will be getting is from lying to the VP and for not getting the proper permits for his business dealings.

Why would Trump want him to testify if they had done something wrong?

There is nothing here, Flynn testifying would actually benefit the Trump administration, why do you think congress doesn't want to make a deal with Flynn. Flynn won't get much for the crimes he committed anyway, a slap on the hands. It isn't worth it, they already know that there is nothing there, why even go there.



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
So... Trump's guilty until proven innocent because the one responsible for investigating such is a lying liar?


James Clapper is not the one investigating these claims, that would be the FBI.



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Boadicea

Isn't this the same lying dingus who went before Congress and said the NSA wasn't metadata harvesting? I frankly would question his veracity if he announced that the sky is blue.

But I'll bet you'd believe him in a nano second if he claime there was evidence against Trump...
edit on 1532017-04-04T09:57:53-05:0020172017Tuesday by Iscool because: corrected a misspelled word...



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Iscool
But I'll bet you'd believe him in a nano second if he claime there was evidence against Trump...


Would I? I just said I think the guy is a serial liar and want a second source. Try again.



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea


And??? What are you saying? That Clapper and every other intelligence agency didn't have enough time or resources to find the evidence?


They weren't really investigating the issue outside of the intelligence reports produced by the NSA and the CIA. The FBI wasn't involved at the stage if we are to believe what Comey has stated so far.


You would be speaking to the hearings about Spygate? (Not Russiagate) Well, according to reports, because the Dems are refusing to let Comey and Rogers testify in a closed session, and for some reason Nunes wants those two to testify before Yates, Clapper and Brennan. I have no inside knowledge, but my best guess is that Nunes believes Comey and/or Rogers have important information that needs to be known in order to properly and competently question the others.


The better question is why aren't they allowing them to testify in public? Closed door sessions is only going to serve to fuel the idea that Nunez is a White House shill.

Which leads me to another interesting point about all this.

Why did Nunez 'brief' the POTUS about information he received from the white house in the first place? I like how Trump doesn't complain about leaks when they benefit him.


Okay... people say lots of things. Doesn't matter for these purposes.


Yes it does, you can't have your cake and eat it to. Agreeing for the sake of agreeing is nonsense. This creates a political echo chamber where nobody can know what the truth is.

Lots of folk have been gaslighting the HELL out of American politics in the last 18 months. SO much so, that some people on both sides, don't even care about real facts, they only care about how it makes them look.

~Tenth



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


I'm saying I wholly discount anything this ass tard says because he has a demonstrated history of being highly untruthful. I want a second source even if he said water was wet.


So... Trump's guilty until proven innocent because the one responsible for investigating such is a lying liar?


It gets complicated when liars are investigating liars.

www.latimes.com...
edit on 4-4-2017 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


James Clapper is not the one investigating these claims, that would be the FBI.


Okay...



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 09:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
Okay...


Exactly.




top topics



 
34
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join