Russia Gate! Spy Gate! Oh me! Oh my!

originally posted by: SeekingAlpha
This is the only description fit to describe people in the GOP now are right wingers. Or, would you rather have me call you fundamentalists or better yet, useful idiots.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: SeekingAlpha

Right wingers...

Just can't find your way out of that left/right paradigm, eh?

Okay. I won't try to disabuse you of your notions.

a reply to: Boadicea

No, I didn't change anything. The only edits I made were to add the second paragraph.

I mean/meant the same thing all along. Your "source" made the claim that somehow the revisions Crowdstrike made somehow cast doubt on ... what was it?

CrowdStrike has revised and retracted statements it used to buttress claims of Russian hacking during last year's American presidential election campaign.

They didn't. The article reference by Crowdstrike had nothing to do with the DNC hacks, but on Russian artillery.

If anything, their revision showed "further support" that Fancybear was indeed an arm of GRU.

Your source seriously misleads and paints the Crowdstrike revision as somehow casting doubt over whether Fancybear was involved in the DNC hacks, which it doesn't. It's intentionally misleading, and lying.

And if you persist in personally attacking me, I'll have to report you to the people running the site. I think only the mudpit is where ad-hom attacks are allowed. Unlike some people here, I've actually read through the T&C (and recently) after being temporarily banned several months ago for doing exactly what you are attempting to do.

a reply to: SeekingAlpha

This is the only description fit to describe people in the GOP now are right wingers. Or, would you rather have me call you fundamentalists or better yet, useful idiots.

LOL! Call me whatever you want... I don't care. Says more about you than me. I'm not a right winger... I'm not a Republican... I'm not even a Trump supporter and never was.

I am equally contemptuous of both parties -- and pretty much every one of the critters in DC -- and I hope this takes down both sides so we can rebuild from the ground up.

a reply to: Kettu

And if you persist in personally attacking me, I'll have to report you to the people running the site.

My apologies and I promise to never ever do it again... and please do what you gotta do.

Regardless, please post whatever additional links and quotes you wish to bolster your claim with my blessing, and I will let your comments stand on their own merit without rebuttal (at least by me).

a reply to: Kettu

There is still no damning evidence that the Russian government had a hand in the DNC hacks.

And if you persist in personally attacking me, I'll have to report you to the people running the site.

Grow up!

originally posted by: Kettu

And if you persist in personally attacking me, I'll have to report you to the people running the site. I think only the mudpit is where ad-hom attacks are allowed. Unlike some people here, I've actually read through the T&C (and recently) after being temporarily banned several months ago for doing exactly what you are attempting to do.

We called that "tattling" in grade school and most of us would never want to be a tattler. Most of us. Besides I can't see where Boadicea attacked you---just pointed out your faulty understanding and incorrect post.

So, knowing Crowdstrike lies for political purposes doesn't make you suspect of their report?

I completely forgot to add all the drama with Sally Yates, former Attorney General for Obama... The story was initially broken by the Washington Post --

...the Justice Department notified Yates earlier this month that the administration considers her possible testimony — including on the ouster of former national security adviser Michael Flynn for his contacts with the Russian ambassador — to be off-limits in a congressional hearing because the topics are covered by attorney-client privilege or the presidential communication privilege.

-- and quickly picked up by others --

The turmoil surrounding the House Intelligence Committee's investigation into Russia's interference with the 2016 election deepened Tuesday, with the disclosure that former acting Attorney General Sally Yates was warned last week that her testimony could contain privileged communications involving the White House that might be barred, a official familiar with matter said.

Source: Former acting attorney general Yates warned that testimony could be barred

Ms. Yates' attorney provides further details:

...attorney David O’Neil said he understood the Justice Department was invoking “further constraints” on testimony Yates could provide at a committee hearing that had been scheduled for Tuesday. He said the department’s position was that all actions she took as deputy attorney general were “client confidences” that could not be disclosed without written approval.

"We believe that the Department’s position in this regard is overbroad, incorrect, and inconsistent with the Department’s historical approach to the congressional testimony of current and former senior officials."

But according to Sean Spicer:

White House officials deny such claims and say the administration never sought to block Yates from testifying.

White House press secretary Sean Spicer called the assertion "100 percent false" during Tuesday's press briefing.

Read the letters on Sally Yates's potential congressional testimony on Russia

I don't really think this is all about Sally Yates and her testimony, which is supposed to be confined to Michael Flynn... Nope, I think it's about whatever Comey and Rogers were supposed to testify about in closed session on Tuesday, until it was cancelled:

In a news conference last week, in which he claimed based on still-unknown sources that information on Trump affiliates may have been incidentally collected by U.S. intelligence agencies, committee Chair Devin Nunes (R-CA) announced that Comey and Rodgers would address a closed session of the committee.

He also canceled an open hearing of that committee with former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former CIA Director John Brennan and former deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, which would have taken place the same day. “Director Comey and Adm. Rogers could not come in tomorrow as we’d hoped, so the Committee will continue to try to schedule a time when they can meet with us in closed session,” Jack Langer, the committee’s director of communications, told TPM in an email Monday.

FBI, NSA Directors Postpone House Intelligence Committee Closed Session

I think for some reason Nunes wants that closed-door testimony from Comey and Rogers BEFORE Clapper, Brennan and Yates take the stand...

originally posted by: Boadicea

I think for some reason Nunes wants that closed-door testimony from Comey and Rogers BEFORE Clapper, Brennan and Yates take the stand...

FBI, NSA Directors Postpone House Intelligence Committee Closed Session

After looking at it, that was my take as well. Needed certain answers on record before deposing those three, but couldn't get some of them answered in open hearing when so many questions were declined using national security.

a reply to: The GUT

After looking at it, that was my take as well. Needed certain answers on record before deposing those three, but couldn't get some of them answered in open hearing when so many questions were declined on national security.

Good. So I'm not the only one who saw it that way....

Are we seeing the lines drawn between the intelligence agencies here? Comey's FBI and Rogers' NSA vs Clapper's DNI, Brennan's CIA, and Yates' DOJ?

a reply to: Boadicea

I'm still trying to pin down what exactly Sally Yates could testify to that is of consequence. Obviously there is something or all this late night todo wouldn't have happened, no?

Perhaps there is evidence of Flynn still dabbling with his business buddies after July 2016.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Boadicea

I'm still trying to pin down what exactly Sally Yates could testify to that is of consequence.

That's a good question -- and I don't get it myself! As far as I know, she's only going to testify regarding the mistruths Michael Flynn told about his business with Russian interests. For example, that he did business with RT, which the govt has labeled a govt entity, but didn't report it as such. So I don't get it. Flynn is gone and that's old news.

Maybe she does know something else -- something big. Or maybe it's really not about her at all, but about Brennan and Clapper's testimony, and she's just a red herring to deflect. I'm thinking it's something to do with whatever it is that Rogers wants to share but Clapper doesn't want him to share:

Report: NSA Ready To Share Intel Docs With Congress But DNI Blocking Transfer

a reply to: Boadicea

Perhaps. This is the timeline I'm looking at.

Flynn, along with son Michael G. Flynn, runs Flynn Intel Group, which provides intelligence services for business and governments

Flynn retired from the U.S. Army with 33 years of service on August 7, 2014

Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump's former national security adviser, was paid more than $33,750 by Russia's state-run broadcaster RT TV-Russia for a speech in Moscow in December 2015, a top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee has learned.

"I didn't take any money from Russia," Flynn told Yahoo News in July.(2016)

According to the documents, Flynn also received $11,250 from a Russian charter cargo airline and $11,250 from a Russia-based cybersecurity corporation, though neither of those companies were state-owned.

So Cummings is making his stance based upon a military standard that no longer applied to Flynn?
www.cnn.com...
en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: Boadicea

Are we seeing the lines drawn between the intelligence agencies here? Comey's FBI and Rogers' NSA vs Clapper's DNI, Brennan's CIA, and Yates' DOJ?

Rogers has me confused for sure. He could be the sleeper that's helping crack this open, but the signals so far are conflicting.

I'm pretty sure we're gonna get a pretty good peek behind the curtain. Not all of it, but much more than we've ever had.

Like you, I believe it will cause great tragedy--for all of us--before it's played out. It's time though I'm thinking.

"And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not."

a reply to: JinMI

Thank you for sharing your timeline... that is how I understand it too...

So Cummings...

Yup -- Cummings... says a lot right there, eh?

...is making his stance based upon a military standard that no longer applied to Flynn?

It would seem so, but I did note "retired military" once in the article. Maybe there are legal standards for retirement.

What I find maddening is that while Hillary wasn't held accountable for her breaches of the legal standard because she didn't mean to donchaknow, Flynn obviously didn't realize he was violating any legal standard and yet he was sure held accountable and dragged through the mud.

a reply to: Boadicea

Yes, I'm well aware of Cummings bloviating. Squeaky wheels n all!

Doesn't make sense. Either I'm missing some info or as I stated earlier, just grandstanding.

a reply to: The GUT

Rogers has me confused for sure. He could be the sleeper that's helping crack this open, but the signals so far are conflicting.

I prefer to just think the worst of everyone! Here's the thing: I think everyone who knows anything in DC is already compromised one way or another. They either sold out to the highest bidder, or they've been blackmailed, or they're afraid of being persecuted as a whistleblower, or they've been set up/framed -- or they just don't have a soul and are the ones coercing the others. And the more they know, the more precarious their position. Everyone's walking on thin ice.

Including Rogers. We'll just have to know these critters by the fruits of their labor.

I'm pretty sure we're gonna get a pretty good peek behind the curtain. Not all of it, but much more than we've ever had.

We'll never know the whole story. And we'll probably have to grant a lot of folks immunity to get whatever we do get. But I expect once the floodgates open, there won't be any stopping it. The stories... the unauthorized biographies... the documentaries... folks will be talking for decades to come.

Like you, I believe it will cause great tragedy--for all of us--before it's played out. It's time though I'm thinking.

"And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not."

It is time. And it's gotta happen. Every ending is a beginning, and when we know better, we do better. So I'm optimistic for our future. We will power through and we will rebuild with the lessons we've learned. We can do this.

a reply to: JinMI

I can go with grandstanding!

But there's obviously a coordinated effort to pick at anything and everything Trump, to create the public perception that he cannot do anything right -- big or little or anything in between. Constantly drummed into the public's heads...

It's survival for these critters. We probably have no idea how much they have to lose if the whole truth were known.

a reply to: Boadicea

That is just it, they stand to lose everything. Their career, their credibility and their perks and of course comfortable paycheck. Not to mention great healthcare!

They all know it and from my view, looks like they will step on anyone and tow any line to keep it.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Boadicea

That is just it, they stand to lose everything. Their career, their credibility and their perks and of course comfortable paycheck. Not to mention great healthcare!

They all know it and from my view, looks like they will step on anyone and tow any line to keep it.

Not to mention their family and friends and their freedom. We may see critters fleeing the country soon... perhaps to a nice tropical island with no extradition. I'd probably be just as happy to let em stay in exile. It would sure save us some much needed and deserved hard earned bucks.

Listen to Levin's take on what Farkas spilled out.

Not much is being covered of this, only Hannity so far in the mainstream.

The Morning Joe bozos just blew by it, of course.

Can't tell me obama didn't know anything about the surveillance.