Head of House ethics panel finds evidence of abuse in US government surveillance

a reply to: soberbacchus

and he was cleared and reentered the russia probe as chair of the committee. He only recused himself because Democrats claimed he provided classified information to the President (a bs charge by Democrats).

Congressional committees are not criminal investigators but merely oversight. Anything they find has to be referred to the DOJ / FBI for investigation and charges if warranted.

In this case / what is known is certain individuals used their position to unmask the names of US citizens. The issue is some of the people had no authorization to do so (UN Ambassador Samantha Powers, who claims someone used her name for the unmasking). In addition when the requests are made the person is required to give a detailed explanation as to the reason for the unmask request. Many of the requests in question are missing that info.

The requirements put in place to perform an unmasking were ignored by Obama admin people. The purpose of the unmasking dont meet the requirements to request an unmasking.

IE abuse occurred and their is evidence to support that claim / charge.

It is up to a judge / jury to determine if it was criminal or not.

originally posted by: soberbacchus
Head of House ethics panel finds evidence of abuse in US government surveillance

“I believe there's evidence that abuses have occurred," Nunes said

A) The headline is not supported by the content. Believing something exists and actually "finding" it are two different things.

B) Nunes is a joke that was so thoroughly publicly shamed for burying his head up Trump's butt that he was forced to recuse himself from the Russia probe.

Yeah, I bet Nunes was totally humiliated when the ethics panel cleared him of any wrongdoing.

When he said “I believe there's evidence that abuses have occurred," that means that Nunes has seen what he considers to be evidence of these abuses. Compare and contrast this to the committees investigating Trump, where even the Democrats have admitted (however reluctantly) that they've seen no evidence of collusion between him and Russia.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: soberbacchus
Head of House ethics panel finds evidence of abuse in US government surveillance

“I believe there's evidence that abuses have occurred," Nunes said

A) The headline is not supported by the content. Believing something exists and actually "finding" it are two different things.

B) Nunes is a joke that was so thoroughly publicly shamed for burying his head up Trump's butt that he was forced to recuse himself from the Russia probe.

Yeah, I bet Nunes was totally humiliated when the ethics panel cleared him of any wrongdoing.

You mean the GOP decided not to sanction a GOP mouthpiece? Shocking!! Then he must be clean as a whistle!

When he said “I believe there's evidence that abuses have occurred," that means that Nunes has seen what he considers to be evidence of these abuses.

How does that logic work?
If he has "seen" evidence that abuses had occurred then he would say "I have SEEN evidence that abuses have occurred".
"Believing" and "seeing" are two different things.