• 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!

Adam Schiff's Attack On The Free Press

An outright violation of the 4th Amendment. Pelosi is trying to become a dictator.
 
So, hang on, is Schiff supposed to psychically know that a reporter called someone before he subpoena'd the records, or are we claiming releasing 1"a reporter called a person" is somehow an attack on the concept of free speech?
 
Deuce said:
So, hang on, is Schiff supposed to psychically know that a reporter called someone before he subpoena'd the records, or are we claiming releasing 1"a reporter called a person" is somehow an attack on the concept of free speech?
Click to expand...

Whether the subpoena was justified or not isn't the issue. Unmasking the names is.
 
TheDoctorWasIn said:
Why shouldn't he have "unmasked" the names?
Click to expand...

Because the target of his investigation is Trump and Giuliani. If he presented cause to believe that Nunes, Solomon and others were co-conspirators in the scheme he unearthed then he should have presented those findings as well. If he didn't have that proof then he should have left the names redacted until he did have something to tie them to the bribery, extortion and character assassination plot that Trump had concocted.
 
Lutherf said:
Because the target of his investigation is Trump and Giuliani. If he presented cause to believe that Nunes, Solomon and others were co-conspirators in the scheme he unearthed then he should have presented those findings as well. If he didn't have that proof then he should have left the names redacted until he did have something to tie them to the bribery, extortion and character assassination plot that Trump had concocted.
Click to expand...

The phone records are themselves "cause" to believe that Nunes, Solomon, Toesing and diGenova are all involved.

You must be able to see that.
 
ludin said:
Do you honestly think these nut jobs care?
Click to expand...

No. Sorry if I gave you the impression that they cared. I know they don't. But, I do love to point out their hypocrisy.
 
TheDoctorWasIn said:
The phone records are themselves "cause" to believe that Nunes, Solomon, Toesing and diGenova are all involved.

You must be able to see that.
Click to expand...

Schiffty doesn't have the authority to subpoena the phone records.

If there was a crime, Schiffty might have ****ed things up by illegally obtaining the phone records.
 
TheDoctorWasIn said:
The phone records are themselves "cause" to believe that Nunes, Solomon, Toesing and diGenova are all involved.

You must be able to see that.
Click to expand...

If you believe that you're a hammer then, I suppose, everything else must look like a nail.
 
apdst said:
Schiffty doesn't have the authority to subpoena the phone records.

If there was a crime, Schiffty might have ****ed things up by illegally obtaining the phone records.
Click to expand...

Of course he does. This is well-settled law, no matter how many times you just simply refuse to acknowledge it.

Unless he personally hacked into AT&T's servers - or ordered someone else to do so - there's basically no way he could have obtained these records "illegally".
 
apdst said:
Schiffty doesn't have the authority to subpoena the phone records.

If there was a crime, Schiffty might have ****ed things up by illegally obtaining the phone records.
Click to expand...

Isn't he just following along in Obama's footprint? I remember Obama taping reporters phones and raiding their homes for information.

Funny how we never hear about that.
 
apdst said:
That damned ol' 4th Amendment.
Click to expand...

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Don't see anything there about "unmasking"...
 
Lutherf said:
If you believe that you're a hammer then, I suppose, everything else must look like a nail.
Click to expand...

And if you believe that those phone calls were all just friends having a nice chat, then I suppose everything looks like rainbows and unicorns.
 
Jake said:
Boomers making up fantasy in sad effort to support Trump misbehavior. Fantasy is very common among boomers. Maybe early onset dementia?
Click to expand...

What on Earth are you talking about? Why are you talking about boomers?
 
TheDoctorWasIn said:
The phone records are themselves "cause" to believe that Nunes, Solomon, Toesing and diGenova are all involved.

You must be able to see that.
Click to expand...

Criminals and their supporters argue process. It's all they've got.
 
If you want to blame someone for Nunes' problem. Blame Nunes!

...Nunes consistently fought any and all efforts to restrain the authority of the National Security Agency (NSA) to secretly, warrantlessly collect Americans' call records and metadata. He wasn't quiet about this support for domestic surveillance. When Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan (then a Republican, now an independent) tried to restrain the feds' ability to access American call records, Nunes didn't just vote against Amash's legislation; he attacked Amash loudly and publicly. In 2014, one of Amash's efforts prompted Nunes to call the congressman "Al Qaeda's best friend in the Congress." Nunes even donated $5,000 to Amash's primary opponent.

Now this surveillance apparatus that Nunes has long supported has happily provided his political opponents with information that could destroy his career. The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (which Nunes used to chair, and where he is now the ranking minority member) just published its impeachment report. It shows calls between Nunes and Rudy Giuliani in 2016, as Giuliani was making the media rounds arguing that Ukrainian officials colluded to help Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. This information will most certainly be used to argue that Nunes is not just a defender of Trump but also an active participant in Giuliani's Ukrainian push.

But there's no reason to assume that Schiff was specifically targeting Nunes, and it's unlikely that any laws were broken here. Nunes' name and calls came up in the metadata of the impeachment's investigation targets. What is happening to the California congressman right now is an easily foreseeable consequences of the surveillance system Nunes supports.
Click to expand...

Devin Nunes Supports Secret Surveillance of Americans, Finds Himself Under Surveillance
 
Lutherf said:
Because the target of his investigation is Trump and Giuliani. If he presented cause to believe that Nunes, Solomon and others were co-conspirators in the scheme he unearthed then he should have presented those findings as well. If he didn't have that proof then he should have left the names redacted until he did have something to tie them to the bribery, extortion and character assassination plot that Trump had concocted.
Click to expand...

Ok, but that's a far cry from the original claim that this was an "attack on the free press."
 
Lutherf said:
Whether the subpoena was justified or not isn't the issue. Unmasking the names is.
Click to expand...

So the party whose leader asked Russia if you're listening if you commit cyber espionage on my opponents you have my blessing, the party that cackled with glee at the release of Democrat stolen emails is whining about what now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom