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.
This type of reporting is getting old. This doesn't help us get to the facts, only further obfuscate them.
Sooner or later this will all unravel and some folks are going to look very foolish. Kudos for staying on top of your topic however!
originally posted by: Boadicea
"Nothing I could see today warranted a departure from the normal review procedures, and these materials should now be provided to the full membership of both committees. The White House has yet to explain why senior White House staff apparently shared these materials with but one member of either committee, only for their contents to be briefed back to the White House."
The New York Times reported Thursday that two White House officials helped Nunes acquire the information that he later used to brief Trump.
"The White House has yet to explain why senior White House staff apparently shared these materials with but one member of either committee, only for their contents to be briefed back to the White House," Schiff said Friday.
originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: The GUT
Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the senior director for intelligence at the National Security Council, and Michael Ellis, a lawyer who works on national security issues at the White House Counsel’s Office and formerly worked on the staff of the House Intelligence Committee.
This are supposedly the sources.
originally posted by: Boadicea
The two people reported yesterday in the New York Times report, by reporter Maggie Haberman, were not Nunes sources. Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the senior director for intelligence at the National Security Council, and Michael Ellis, a lawyer who works on national security issues at the White House Counsel’s Office, only helped Nunes navigate the intelligence. They were not the source.
That Cohen-Watnick and Michael Ellis were not the sources, leads further credence to the belief that their names were seeded to Katie Walsh as a canary operation to identify the White House leaker.
-- mostly because I've been suspecting some canary traps for a while now!
Schiff doesn't seem very concerned about the Constitution, eh?
I think he needs to be investigated---definitely a swamp thing that one.
I can only imagine how buried this would be if Devin didn't take it public. Congress hasn't had true oversight of the intelligence community for many a year. Maybe there will actually be some this time.
originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: Boadicea
Thanks, so up to now nobody had the names of the real sources, I wonder how long will take for the usual sites to get the leaks of the sources.
Occam’s Razor – Did NSA Admiral Mike Rogers Warn Trump On November 17th, 2016?
Sometimes the utilization of Timelines means you have to look at the new information with a keen awareness of specific events. In hindsight, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers may have notified Team Trump of Obama’s Intelligence Community (James Clapper and John Brennan) spying on their activity.
Co-host Joe Kernen pressed her further, “I mean you actually said that ‘I knew that there was more. I became very worried because not enough was coming out into the open, and I knew that there was more.’ And then, you actually said that that’s why you have all the leaking, to make sure we get it out. I mean, people are accusing you, Evelyn, of admitting that was surveillance, admitting that there was unmasking, and urging people, or, at least, saying that intelligence leaking, which could be a felony, is the way that it should get out. And you weren’t even part of the government at that point.”
Farkas doubled down and denied everything, “No, so, I was referring to the motivation. Because there had been a lot of discussion, in the media about why are people leaking. And, so I was trying to, but in a very short-hand fashion, explain, at the very end of that quote, that people were leaking because they were afraid of a cover-up. I do not, absolutely do not condone leaking. You know – it’s against the law. What I was doing was explaining, though, was why people might be motivated to do that.”
Sorkin followed up, “But just clarify, and just to put a fine point on it, and then we’re going to move on, when you said ‘if they found out how we know what we knew,’ that wasn’t a reference to the idea that you know that there was surveillance going on?”
Farkas continued to deny everything: “No! No. It’s sources and methods. It could be people. And people could get hurt, if people were giving us information.”
The following supposition is why I wonder if Mike Rogers was the "whistleblower." Of course he could have met with Prez Trump for any number of reasons and he was in consideration for DNI, but his unannounced visit apparently ticked off both Clapper & Brennan who subsequently called for his head.
Intelligence and House sources with direct knowledge of the disclosure of classified names told Fox News that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., now knows who is responsible -- and that person is not in the FBI.
...
“The main issue in this case, is not only the unmasking of these names of private citizens, but the spreading of these names for political purposes that have nothing to do with national security or an investigation into Russia’s interference in the U.S. election,” a congressional source close to the investigation told Fox News.