• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

House Intel chairman: Trump's personal communications may have been collected

tres borrachos said:
I'm sure all of our communications have been captured at some point. But I don't see anything in this article that backs up claims by Trump that Obama ordered a tap(p) on his wires/phones in October, or implies it, or would be related to it.
Click to expand...

Not to mention both the FBI and the NSA directly saying as much, under oath, two days ago....
 
jmotivator said:
Probably because disseminating it, especially without masking the names of those subject to incidental collection, is not.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Names can be included in the transcripts if it helps the reader to understand the import of the conversation.

Surveillance warrants only give you limited rights to collect and distribute data. If these people were not part of the warrant then disseminating the transcripts of their conversations is illegal.
Click to expand...

Wrong again. The fact that the people who were subjected to incidental collection (because they were not named in the warrant) get no protection from being named.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I don't know, but I do know that unmasking Flynn alone isn't the problem, it's the unmasking then releasing it to the public.
You're just trying to change the subject.

What happened is bad, regardless of Flynn's alleged behavior.
Click to expand...

I do not defend leaking of classified material in any way shape or form. Unmasking means recording his name as part of the intercept instead of keeping it anonymous. They were pretty clear under what kind of circumstances would warrant that.

But, putting Flynn on the NSC and keeping him there for weeks, despite being briefed that he was a foreign agent and potentially compromised by the Russians is far more of a threat to national security than leaking any classified material. Flynn was literally (and illegally) acting as a foreign agent.This is like putting a lobbyist from North Korea at the head of our national security.. except that Flynn was representing Turkey and Russia instead of just North Korea.

(oh look.. this is from last November Trump adviser linked to Turkish lobbying - POLITICO)
 
Cardinal said:
I'm confused. If the surveillance was legal why is he telling us?
Click to expand...

Nunes was a member of the trump transition team, has already previously compromised himself multiple times, and is part of the trump cover up team in congress, well beyond what we went through with Nixon .
 
Mithros said:
I do not defend leaking of classified material in any way shape or form.

But, putting Flynn on the NSC and keeping him there for weeks, despite being briefed that he was a foreign agent and potentially compromised by the Russians is far more of a threat to national security than leaking any classified material. Flynn was literally (and illegally) acting as a foreign agent.This is like putting a lobbyist from North Korea at the head of our national security.. except that Flynn was representing Turkey and Russia instead of just North Korea.

(oh look.. this is from last November Trump adviser linked to Turkish lobbying - POLITICO)
Click to expand...

What else do you want me to say?
If he broke the law, he should be charged and serve the time.
There is nothing else I can possibly say about this.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I don't know, but I do know that unmasking Flynn alone isn't the problem, it's the unmasking then releasing it to the public.
You're just trying to change the subject.
Click to expand...

No, releasing it was the solution to a problem - the problem of having a foriegn agent placed high up in the US govt

What happened is bad, regardless of Flynn's alleged behavior.
Click to expand...

No, it was a Good Thing, because of Flynns actual behavior
 
sangha said:
No, releasing it was the solution to a problem - the problem of having a foriegn agent placed high up in the US govt

No, it was a Good Thing, because of Flynns actual behavior
Click to expand...

I want full context.
Why leak only the single detail and not the transcripts?
It smells of nothing but a political hit.

Political hits leaked like that are bad, the big picture is that if this is normalized, it can be abused in all kinds of bad ways.
 
sangha said:
Wrong. Names can be included in the transcripts if it helps the reader to understand the import of the conversation.



Wrong again. The fact that the people who were subjected to incidental collection (because they were not named in the warrant) get no protection from being named.
Click to expand...




Actually you are incorrect.

"Except as provided below, foreign intelligence information, concerning U.S. persons must be disseminated in a manner which does not, identify the U.S. person"...

"A dissemination may include the identification of a U.S. person only if one of the following conditions is met and a determination is made by the appropriate approval authority that the recipier~t has a need for the identity for the performance of his official duties:

a. The U.S. personhas consented to the dissemination, or

b. The information of or concerning the U.S. person is publically
available, or

c. The identity of the U2S. person is necessary to understand the
foreign intelligence information or assess its importance, or

d. The identi~y of the U.S. person is reasonabiy believed to contain
evidence that a crime has been, is being; or is about to be committed,
provided that tl~e dissemination is for law elxforcement purposes."


So no you can't simply name people, and you can't illegally disseminate the information, especially if you haven't minimized the US Citizen.



That said, the alarming rate of data collection of us citizens should be a major issue with Americans. but you all have been duped.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...b1b969b6322_story.html?utm_term=.7d9c78db80d9
https://www.nsa.gov/about/civil-liberties/reports/assets/files/UFA_SMPs_Nov_2015.pdf
 
sangha said:
Wrong. Names can be included in the transcripts if it helps the reader to understand the import of the conversation.
Click to expand...

You missed the part that these collected conversations were incidental, meaning not part of a warrant authorization. That alone makes the distribution illegal, and in cases where people are caught up in even conversations that are meaningful to a warrant, but their involvement is incidental, their names are required to be redacted. Based on what has been reported, these communications were incidental AND the names weren't redacted which means it would break two laws.

Wrong again. The fact that the people who were subjected to incidental collection (because they were not named in the warrant) get no protection from being named.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Those who are not part of a warrant are entitled to the right to privacy. If they have not been subjected to a legal warrant procedure then they have not received due process necessary to lose that right.
 
Here's Nunes' presser.

I watched it and it sounds like this info must have come from Adm Rogers because Nunes made a point stating he has not yet heard from Comey.



Interesting that none of the surveillance pertained to anything Russian.
All of it occurred during the Trump transition.
Several names were unmasked and the information sounds like it was freely dispersed throughout the agencies.
So this raises even more questions of why?
 
Last edited:
Harry Guerrilla said:
What else do you want me to say?
If he broke the law, he should be charged and serve the time.
There is nothing else I can possibly say about this.
Click to expand...

You said that someone unmasked Flynn's name for political purposes.

Unmasking is investigatory, not political. Because Flynn is under investigation or important to an investigation his name was included with the transcript. That transcript was passed around, and allegedly leaked. The leaking of the transcript and the "unmasking" of Flynn are almost certainly unrelated.

But again.... The single most important fact here is that Trump knew that Flynn was an agent of a foreign government at least as early as November. He was allegedly briefed on it upon taking office. He was briefed that Flynn lied... And yet Flynn stayed making decisions that directly affect the safety and security of the US. That is absurd.
 
NIMBY said:
Nunes was a member of the trump transition team, has already previously compromised himself multiple times, and is part of the trump cover up team in congress, well beyond what we went through with Nixon .
Click to expand...

Ahhhh, okay. So he's actually a subject of that surveillance, he's in charge of the investigation and on top of that he's meeting with Trump personally on this matter. From what I'm reading this is legally...inadvisable.
 
Cardinal said:
Oh, so in other words Nune's is trying to shift the narrative away from the investigation into possible collusion between Russia and Trump. Got it.
Click to expand...

Exactly--Nunes was part of the transition team and is now part of the coverup team .
 
Mithros said:
You said that someone unmasked Flynn's name for political purposes.

Unmasking is investigatory, not political. Because Flynn is under investigation or important to an investigation his name was included with the transcript. That transcript was passed around, and allegedly leaked. The leaking of the transcript and the "unmasking" of Flynn are almost certainly unrelated.

But again.... The single most important fact here is that Trump knew that Flynn was an agent of a foreign government at least as early as November. He was allegedly briefed on it upon taking office. He was briefed that Flynn lied... And yet Flynn stayed making decisions that directly affect the safety and security of the US. That is absurd.
Click to expand...

Then I'll correct, he was unmasked, which isn't necessarily an issue, but the bigger and somewhat frightening issue, is that it was leaked to the public.
IC data collection and release isn't supposed to be done this way, I already hate that they do it anyway, but when it gets leaked, in what seems like a political hit, its even worse.

The potential for blackmail, extortion, etc, is very high and very dangerous.
A quasi coup could be orchestrated, if these tools are abused.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I want full context.
Why leak only the single detail and not the transcripts?
It smells of nothing but a political hit.

Political hits leaked like that are bad, the big picture is that if this is normalized, it can be abused in all kinds of bad ways.
Click to expand...

Was it leaked by someone that was cleared to know? Or was it leaked by someone that wasn't cleared to know but "guessed" that it exists?

Was it leaked by the VP's office? When a leak happens immediately after someone finds out about something and it helps them politically... that's where I'd look.
 
Mithros said:
Was it leaked by someone that was cleared to know? Or was it leaked by someone that wasn't cleared to know but "guessed" that it exists?

Was it leaked by the VP's office? When a leak happens immediately after someone finds out about something and it helps them politically... that's where I'd look.
Click to expand...

I don't know (obviously), but again, if it were leaked in full context (including transcripts), I wouldn't be so worried.
I like transparency in government.
Just a partial (unknown context) leak seemed to want to feed the Russia hysteria and I think Flynn, incidentally got caught peddling influence.
 
Lots of links to Mainstream Media being posted here. I've only read a couple of them, but they only provide bits and pieces. Here's what he said:

1.) …”On numerous occasions the [Obama] intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition.”

2.) “Details about U.S. persons associated with the incoming administration; details with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting.”

3.) “Third, I have confirmed that additional names of Trump transition members were unmasked.”

4.) “Fourth and finally, I want to be clear; none of this surveillance was related to Russia, or the investigation of Russian activities, or of the Trump team.
Click to expand...

And, more significant...at least from the Democrat's viewpoint, maybe...

“The House Intelligence Committee will thoroughly investigate surveillance and its subsequent dissemination, to determine a few things here that I want to read off:”

“Who was aware of it?”
“Why it was not disclosed to congress?”
“Who requested and authorized the additional unmasking?”
“Whether anyone directed the intelligence community to focus on Trump associates?”
“And whether any laws, regulations or procedures were violated?”

“I have asked the Directors of the FBI, NSA and CIA to expeditiously comply with my March 15th letter -that you all received a couple of weeks ago- and to provide a full account of these surveillance activities.”

https://theconservativetreehouse.co...-under-surveillance-by-obama-intel-community/
Click to expand...

Get ready for some delay, obstruction and obfuscation from a LOT of people...though, not necessarily from the Trump administration. If I were Obama, I'd be worried.
 
Cardinal said:
Ahhhh, okay. So he's actually a subject of that surveillance, he's in charge of the investigation and on top of that he's meeting with Trump personally on this matter. From what I'm reading this is legally...inadvisable.
Click to expand...

trump lackey Nunes is giving another presser right now.

Looks like DEMs will have to have their own presser since Nunes isn't including DEMs .
 
Mycroft said:
Lots of links to Mainstream Media being posted here. I've only read a couple of them, but they only provide bits and pieces. Here's what he said:
And, more significant...at least from the Democrat's viewpoint, maybe...
Get ready for some delay, obstruction and obfuscation from a LOT of people...though, not necessarily from the Trump administration. If I were Obama, I'd be worried.
Click to expand...

If I were Nunes, I'd be worried .
 
Mithros said:
Michal Flynn the foreign agent.....

But it is really really bad that someone unmasked the name... It's bad for Flynn. Because it means that the people conducting the investigation thought the fact that naming foreign agent Michale Flynn name was vital to the investigation. It's confirmation that he's a potential target.
Click to expand...

What universe are you living in? His name isn't out there because it was vital to the investigation. His name is out there because someone illegally released it in a leak.
 
Cardinal said:
Ahhhh, okay. So he's actually a subject of that surveillance, and on top of that Nunes is meeting with Trump on this matter. From what I'm reading this is legally inadvisable.
Click to expand...

Both Nunes and Burr have previously met with White House officials and been told to contact friendly Breitbart type reporters to knock down Russia ties in late February. Nunes has now cut the ranking member out of the loop .
 
Erod said:
Yes, let's call it like it is.

You guys got freaked out of your minds, and now it looks like you were wrong. Now, you're deflecting as fast as you can.

The media will do the same, and it'll be like this never happened.
Click to expand...

it's like a page right out of the Trump Book.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I want full context.
Why leak only the single detail and not the transcripts?
It smells of nothing but a political hit.

Political hits leaked like that are bad, the big picture is that if this is normalized, it can be abused in all kinds of bad ways.
Click to expand...

Regardless of motive, we avoided having a foriegn agent placed in a high position in our govt. That may have been the motive.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Actually you are incorrect.

"Except as provided below, foreign intelligence information, concerning U.S. persons must be disseminated in a manner which does not, identify the U.S. person"...

"A dissemination may include the identification of a U.S. person only if one of the following conditions is met and a determination is made by the appropriate approval authority that the recipier~t has a need for the identity for the performance of his official duties:

a. The U.S. personhas consented to the dissemination, or

b. The information of or concerning the U.S. person is publically
available, or

c. The identity of the U2S. person is necessary to understand the
foreign intelligence information or assess its importance, or

d. The identi~y of the U.S. person is reasonabiy believed to contain
evidence that a crime has been, is being; or is about to be committed,
provided that tl~e dissemination is for law elxforcement purposes."


So no you can't simply name people, and you can't illegally disseminate the information, especially if you haven't minimized the US Citizen.
Click to expand...

You just corroborated what I said (see section c), thinking it contradicted me :lamo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom