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.
originally posted by: TheBulk
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: TheBulk
I find these hysterics mind boggling coming from the left seeing as how it was Democrats and their media who were fawning over Castro when he died. It's left wingers and Democrats carrying around hammer and sickle flags at protests. It's left wingers and Democrats who subscribe to communism.
Confused...ignoring the bizarre conflation of Democrats and Castro..What does that have to do with the topic?
So...Democrats should be pro-Russian espionage and election interference in the USA?
Or are you saying you are?
Castro + Democrats?
So Russian interference in US elections = Good?
???
You need to improve your derail/straw-man BS.
Go ahead and explain how Russia interfered in the election. Do you consider the public knowing about Democrat corruption as interference in the election?
originally posted by: [post=21963449]Indigo5
You need to improve your derail/straw-man BS.
No one is talking about this but you.
That's because the investigation is still developing. These things don't happen all at once you know?
originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Krazysh0t
So am I to take that answer as you are ok with the ic being used against american citizens in the usa?
Last I heard from the msm this investigation has been going on since 2015. This investigation is why some of the people advising trump during his campaign are no longer around. Manafort,Page, and Stone all left trumps campaign because of this investigation.
In addition to holding ANYONE in trumps campaign, cabinet ect accountable for ANY wrongdoing with respect to russia, I hope the scope, authority, and direction for this investigation into AN OPPOSING political party DURING AN ELECTION is released.
originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: Indigo5
Also here for those that trust no one but Fox News..
Sessions, Russian ambassador spoke twice during presidential campaign
www.foxnews.com...
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Indigo5
I may have missed it, so I wouldn't mind being set straight here, but what did Sessians say about the 2016 election to the Russians?
Officials said Sessions did not consider the conversations relevant to the lawmakers’ questions and did not remember in detail what he discussed with Kislyak.
In a statement late on Wednesday, he said he had never discussed campaign details with any Russian officials.
“superficial comments about election-related news,” but it wasn’t the substance of the discussions, the official said.
originally posted by: carewemust
originally posted by: IamALWAYSright
originally posted by: carewemust
Not disclosing is not the same thing as LYING. If Sessions wasn't ASKED, there's no need of him disclosing every contact he had with officials of other nations. Democrats need to focus on 2018 and 2020. The months are ticking by...
Sessions was asked clearly and directly, UNDER OATH. He LIED.
Transcript or video?
originally posted by: yuppa
originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: Indigo5
Also here for those that trust no one but Fox News..
Sessions, Russian ambassador spoke twice during presidential campaign
www.foxnews.com...
Considering it was part of his job to speak to diplomats this is another non story.
originally posted by: amfirst1
a reply to: Indigo5
President Obama and John Kerry talked to the Russian ambassador many times and I'm sure thousands of other Americans. This doesn't prove anything. So it is a crime now to speak to anyone Russian? Why not make it a crime to speak to any Chinese people. More red herring from the dying Democrat Race Bating and Warmongering party.
originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody
Oh just make it up as you go along. Ok ill bite where in the law does it state that if in the course of monitoring a known spy a United States citizen is heard they must not record his or her half of the conversation?
Domestic wiretapping[edit] The bill allowed the monitoring of all electronic communications of "Americans communicating with foreigners who are the targets of a U.S. terrorism investigation" without a court's order or oversight, so long as it is not targeted at one particular person "reasonably believed to be" inside the country.
Foreign wiretapping[edit] The Act removed the requirement for a FISA warrant for any communication which was foreign-related, even if the communication involved a U.S. location on the receiving or sending end of communication; all foreign-foreign communications were removed from warrant requirements, as well.[10] Experts claimed that this deceptively opened the door to domestic spying, given that many domestic U.S. communications passed via non-US locations, by virtue of old telephony network configurations
Data monitoring[edit] In the bill, the monitoring of data related to Americans communicating with persons (U.S citizens and non-citizens) outside the United States who are the targets of a U.S. government intelligence information gathering efforts was addressed. The Protect America Act differed from the FISA in that no discussion of actions or character judgment of the target was required for application of the statute (i.e., to receive a FISA surveillance warrant, a FISC foreign agent definition was required). This data could be monitored only if intelligence officials acted in the context of intelligence information gathering