House issues 7 Subpeonas Related to Unmasking / Russia

The House Intelligence Committee issued seven subpoenas on Wednesday, in a sign that its investigation into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election is ramping up in scope and intensity, according to people familiar with the matter.

The Republican-led committee issued four subpoenas related to the Russia investigation. Three subpoenas are related to questions about how and why the names of associates of President Donald Trump...

If anyone has a subscription to WSJ it would be nice to be able to read the full article if you could post it.

Not sure what this means besides hopefully this will all be wrapping up sooner than later.
WSJ link

I home they impeach him over this

originally posted by: FauxMulder

The House Intelligence Committee issued seven subpoenas on Wednesday, in a sign that its investigation into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election is ramping up in scope and intensity, according to people familiar with the matter.

The Republican-led committee issued four subpoenas related to the Russia investigation. Three subpoenas are related to questions about how and why the names of associates of President Donald Trump...

If anyone has a subscription to WSJ it would be nice to be able to read the full article if you could post it.

Not sure what this means besides hopefully this will all be wrapping up sooner than later.
WSJ link

The "source" seems to be "Masked" !!

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
I home they impeach him over this

I home they do two.

a reply to: xuenchen

Haha! Aren't all anonymous sources?!

a reply to: FauxMulder

If it's related to unmasking, then it's probably a criminal probe into the leaks, and likely not collusion with Russia.

100% certain.....

according to people familiar with the matter

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
I home they impeach him over this

Perhaps you will be the one to explain this to me.

What impeachable offenses has Trump done to date?

thanks in advance.

a reply to: network dude

If trump has been found to have been collaborating with the Russians during the election to help him win and has tried to keep this from the public.

He should be impeached.

Do you not agree with this??

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: network dude

If trump has been found to have been collaborating with the Russians during the election to help him win and has tried to keep this from the public.

He should be impeached.

Do you not agree with this??

If he was, and it's an impeachable offence, then yes. But to say he needs to be impeached without any evidence seems a bit silly. Are you in favor of Justice?

And as with some new news, if Obama illegally unmasked Trump campaign members for political reasons during the election process, do you think Obama should go to jail?

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: network dude

If trump has been found to have been collaborating with the Russians during the election to help him win and has tried to keep this from the public.

He should be impeached.

Do you not agree with this??

Yes, he should be impeached if he is found guilty of collaborating with the Russians.

Now, more importantly, and for the public record, will you accept the findings of the House Intel Committee if they find no wrong doing on behalf of Trump and/or his subordinates?

Just a simple yes or no.

originally posted by: Sublimecraft

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: network dude

If trump has been found to have been collaborating with the Russians during the election to help him win and has tried to keep this from the public.

He should be impeached.

Do you not agree with this??

Yes, he should be impeached if he is found guilty of collaborating with the Russians.

Now, more importantly, and for the public record, will you accept the findings of the House Intel Committee if they find no wrong doing on behalf of Trump and/or his subordinates?

Just a simple yes or no.

In principle yes I would agree so long as ther is not any funny business.

This is not going to end well for the former Obama Regime and its henchmen.

Obama has a long history of spying on American citizens, reporters, and even foreign allies. He weaponized the IRS against conservative groups (which is being investigated again, thankfully).

And he either instructed his deputies to lie about scandals like Fast and Furious and Benghazi, or he was so clueless as to what was going on all these massive debacles took place right under his nose.

And this is just the beginning...

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

It's kind of like Maxine Waters screaming Trump needs to be impeached, yet she has no evidence or clue as to what rules he has actually broken.

I think most folks here on the right will be fully on board with things if Trump turns out to be in bed with Russia, but so far, it sure looks like this was a "vast left wing conspiracy" cooked up by Hillary to account for why her party was filled with such slimy, underhanded folks.

I just wonder where this will end. If the Russia thing doesn't pan out, I doubt very much that Hillary and Obama with their newly formed alliance, would just give up and let Trump be president. And then at some point, even folks like you would have to look at it without the rose colored glasses, or at least one would hope.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: Sublimecraft

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: network dude

If trump has been found to have been collaborating with the Russians during the election to help him win and has tried to keep this from the public.

He should be impeached.

Do you not agree with this??

Yes, he should be impeached if he is found guilty of collaborating with the Russians.

Now, more importantly, and for the public record, will you accept the findings of the House Intel Committee if they find no wrong doing on behalf of Trump and/or his subordinates?

Just a simple yes or no.

so long as ther is not any funny business.

Almost like what Trump said when asked the same question about accepting the election results during the final debate.

It's quite difficult to leave a simple Yes or No isn't it? Disclaimers are a get-out-of-jail-free-card for later on down the track so I suppose it's my fault as I should have said:

"Now, more importantly, and for the public record, will you accept the findings of the House Intel Committee if they find no wrong doing on behalf of Trump and/or his subordinates and that the committee will be honest and have 3rd party independent oversight to ensure they are not lying and covering up for Trump

originally posted by: Sublimecraft

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: Sublimecraft

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: network dude

If trump has been found to have been collaborating with the Russians during the election to help him win and has tried to keep this from the public.

He should be impeached.

Do you not agree with this??

Yes, he should be impeached if he is found guilty of collaborating with the Russians.

Now, more importantly, and for the public record, will you accept the findings of the House Intel Committee if they find no wrong doing on behalf of Trump and/or his subordinates?

Just a simple yes or no.

so long as ther is not any funny business.

Almost like what Trump said when asked the same question about accepting the election results during the final debate.

It's quite difficult to leave a simple Yes or No isn't it? Disclaimers are a get-out-of-jail-free-card for later on down the track so I suppose it's my fault as I should have said:

"Now, more importantly, and for the public record, will you accept the findings of the House Intel Committee if they find no wrong doing on behalf of Trump and/or his subordinates and that the committee will be honest and have 3rd party independent oversight to ensure they are not lying and covering up for Trump

Yes but will you....?

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: Sublimecraft

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: network dude

If trump has been found to have been collaborating with the Russians during the election to help him win and has tried to keep this from the public.

He should be impeached.

Do you not agree with this??

Yes, he should be impeached if he is found guilty of collaborating with the Russians.

Now, more importantly, and for the public record, will you accept the findings of the House Intel Committee if they find no wrong doing on behalf of Trump and/or his subordinates?

Just a simple yes or no.

In principle yes I would agree so long as ther is not any funny business.

You mean like Hillary's famous "with a cloth statement?" It's still unbelievable that people fell for that.

a reply to: FauxMulder

These subpoenas are regarding the illegal unmasking of civilian names.

House Intelligence Committee sends subpoenas to intel agencies

each of the three demands for documents explicitly naming three top officials of the Obama administration: Susan Rice, who served as President Obama’s White House national security adviser; former CIA Director John Brennan; and former U.N. ambassador Samantha Power.

The three subpoenas, among a total of seven signed by panel chairman Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), were served on the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency, and all three explicitly referenced “unmasking” – a signal that the House panel is intensifying its investigation into allegations that Obama-era aides improperly demanded the “unmasking” of names of associates of President Trump that had appeared, in coded form, in classified intelligence reports, then leaked the data to news media organizations.

The inclusion of Power’s name on the subpoenas marks the first appearance of the former U.N. ambassador in the controversy surrounding the Obama administration’s use of unmasking. Capitol Hill sources told Fox News they are devoting increasing scrutiny to Power – a former historian and winner of the Pulitzer Prize who worked as a foreign policy adviser in the Senate office of Barack Obama before joining his administration – because they have come to see her role in the unmasking as larger than previously known, and eclipsing those of the other former officials named.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: Sublimecraft

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: Sublimecraft

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: network dude

If trump has been found to have been collaborating with the Russians during the election to help him win and has tried to keep this from the public.

He should be impeached.

Do you not agree with this??

Yes, he should be impeached if he is found guilty of collaborating with the Russians.

Now, more importantly, and for the public record, will you accept the findings of the House Intel Committee if they find no wrong doing on behalf of Trump and/or his subordinates?

Just a simple yes or no.

so long as ther is not any funny business.

Almost like what Trump said when asked the same question about accepting the election results during the final debate.

It's quite difficult to leave a simple Yes or No isn't it? Disclaimers are a get-out-of-jail-free-card for later on down the track so I suppose it's my fault as I should have said:

"Now, more importantly, and for the public record, will you accept the findings of the House Intel Committee if they find no wrong doing on behalf of Trump and/or his subordinates and that the committee will be honest and have 3rd party independent oversight to ensure they are not lying and covering up for Trump

Yes but will you....?

a reply to: network dude

As truly dumb as Maxine Waters is -- and she's among the dumbest of all time to be sure, she's no doubt been informed by her handlers that Congress can impeach a president for absolutely any reason.

That's why this ditz Waters keeps waddling around telling everyone who will listen that Trump -- even though he is a man of good character with a spotless background record (unlike Bill Clinton's wife), needs to be "impeached" and no one can challenge her on the legality of that action.

Of course, the fact that the leftists are a little short in both the House and the Senate, and even most Dem's are not talking about "impeachment", doesn't stop Maxine from doin' her thang.