Yates and Clapper Testimony Begins

a reply to: GuidedKill

Unmasked in conversations with Russian officials? That is hugh.
But I thought they said trump or his campaign.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't get the dismissive attitude some have about Russian hacking. It's kind of a big deal.

I think we're all just tired of hearing about it for a year with no proof. The FBI was never allowed to look at the DNC servers and Podesta was a moron who fell for a phishing scam. There's literally more verifiable proof you could connect Hillary to Russia with than there is for Trump. This is seems more like a year long temper tantrum than a legitimate investigation.

Clapper said he did unmask but didn't reveal who . Only that it was trumps campaign.

a reply to: Sillyolme

I don't think Russia was mentioned in that question.

There had been testimony in previous hearings revealing that there was unmasking not related to foreign nationals. That is what is huge. Because it could mean there was intentional spying on political opponents.

Comey already stated multiple times that you can't use the media as a credible source. Is Feinstein senile or what?

originally posted by: PepeTalk

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't get the dismissive attitude some have about Russian hacking. It's kind of a big deal.

I think we're all just tired of hearing about it for a year with no proof. The FBI was never allowed to look at the DNC servers and Podesta was a moron who fell for a phishing scam. There's literally more verifiable proof you could connect Hillary to Russia with than there is for Trump. This is seems more like a year long temper tantrum than a legitimate investigation.

Says who? You? Since when do you have access to all the evidence the investigation has?

a reply to: BlueAjah

There had been testimony in previous hearings revealing that there was unmasking not related to foreign nationals. That is what is huge. Because it could mean there was intentional spying on political opponents.

Without justification it will be nothing more than a technologically advanced watergate.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: GuidedKill

Unmasked in conversations with Russian officials? That is hugh.
But I thought they said trump or his campaign.

No that Trump or people with his campaign were unmasked by someone in the US Gov and that they both had viewed those names which would be a contradiction to what the previous admin has said they done all a long. Mr. Clapper said that he knew of no active intelligence gathering against Trump but did view his name or his associates name unmasked in briefings. That would suggest someone other that members of the intelligence community actively tapped President Trump and his associates without the intelligence community approval or involvement...

That is YUUUUGGEEEE

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: Sillyolme

I don't think Russia was mentioned in that question.

There had been testimony in previous hearings revealing that there was unmasking not related to foreign nationals. That is what is huge. Because it could mean there was intentional spying on political opponents.

Thanks for the commons sense back up....I thought that was the obvious part.

This is pointless.

Susan Rice needs to be questioned.

originally posted by: stosh64
This is pointless.

Susan Rice needs to be questioned.

Yea cause she's gonna actually show up......

She'll just be pleading the fif the whole time....

How can yates sit next to clapper and claim flynn was "their number one priority" when clapper released a report that said there was no evidence of collusion or crime?

Lol Yates got whipped.

What is Cornyn doing? Her refusing to enforce Trumps EO has nothing to do with why she's there. She should refuse to answer.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
How can yates sit next to clapper and claim flynn was "their number one priority" when clapper released a report that said there was no evidence of collusion or crime?

Easy....she is a sociopathic liar who is obsessed with being in a position of power and can't stand the fact that she was fired and is now on the unemployment line.....

Muslim travel ban come on. What an idiot.

a reply to: Kali74

Maybe he is revealing her prejudices?
He said she ruled on the EO just because she did not agree with the policy.
If she is ruling based on her own views, that could affect her decisions in these other cases.

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: GuidedKill

Unmasked in conversations with Russian officials? That is hugh.
But I thought they said trump or his campaign.

No that Trump or people with his campaign were unmasked by someone in the US Gov and that they both had viewed those names which would be a contradiction to what the previous admin has said they done all a long. Mr. Clapper said that he knew of no active intelligence gathering against Trump but did view his name or his associates name unmasked in briefings. That would suggest someone other that members of the intelligence community actively tapped President Trump and his associates without the intelligence community approval or involvement...

That is YUUUUGGEEEE

This

Ted Cruz with the punt...

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't get the dismissive attitude some have about Russian hacking. It's kind of a big deal.

Because define hacking. Did they hack the election machines? No. Is there even a little bit of proof of anything? No. Its basically "we had our password set to 'password' and someone magically got into our email... so it must be the russians."
I mean, forget that there's ACTUAL proof the DNC colluded to manipulate the primary election, the debates, and that MSM helped... That's totally cool.
I guess if you're going to get disturbed about something, maybe start with the thing that has proof behind it.