• 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!

Nunes: There Was NO OFFICIAL INTELLIGENCE USED to Start DOJ Spying on Trump[W:895]

Re: Nunes: There Was NO OFFICIAL INTELLIGENCE USED to Start DOJ Spying on Trump

Atomic Kid said:
Yeah like I'm sure you will inform me all about it.:lamo
Click to expand...

They talked repeatedly about issues being leaked that they knew about beforehand, including the timing of the leaks. They weren't removed for the affair, they were removed for the emails. It revealed animus about subjects under investigation. It revealed that everything they were doing was being relayed, through channels to the White House. It revealed they knew when leaks were about to happen. They also showed favoritism towards Clinton:
"She might be our next president. The last thing you need us going in there loaded for bear," Page said in a discussion on February 25, 2016, about personnel involved in the investigation.
"Agreed," replied Strzok.
Click to expand...
https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/31/politics/strzok-fbi-comey-clinton-letter/index.html

A smiley emote isn't a substitute for knowledge of the subject matter. You have now been informed.
 
Howard the Duck said:
There didn't need to be. All they had to do was establish probable cause. The bar was set very low. But hey, I didn't set it. I opposed the Patriot act.
Click to expand...

The question is what justification was used to set probable cause.. After all, we are talking about a counter-intelligence operation against an American citizen who is also a Presidential candidate. That's not something you start because of some rumor you heard.

Nunes is trying to find out what the justification is. Normally, that justification would be official intelligence information and it would be in the EC that the CIA presented to the FBI. We now know it wasn't that.
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
This is exactly what Nunes said and he also said he's continuing his investigation...turning toward the State Department.



And this is where you go off into your never-never-land of some ulterior motive on the part of Nunes. And it really isn't as complicated as you are trying to make it.

Something was used to justify, in the FBI's mind, a counter intelligence investigation against Trump and his people. Nunes intends to find out what was used. It's as simple as that.

Heck, don't YOU want to find out? Then you won't have to speculate.
Click to expand...

You're right. Something was used to justify the counter-intelligence investigation against Trump and his people concerning possible collusion with the Russians. The question is what? Answer can be found in the Nunes memo (See my post #760).

Seems you're now conceding it wasn't electronic communications. That's good...you're starting to see a bit more clearly through the fog of lies and deception Nunes is trying to peddle. "DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE...OR in this case "ALTERNATIVE FACTS".
 
Objective Voice said:
You're right. Something was used to justify the counter-intelligence investigation against Trump and his people concerning possible collusion with the Russians. The question is what? Answer can be found in the Nunes memo (See my post #760).

Seems you're now conceding it wasn't electronic communications. That's good...you're starting to see a bit more clearly through the fog of lies and deception Nunes is trying to peddle. "DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE...OR in this case "ALTERNATIVE FACTS".
Click to expand...

The Papa stuff is flimsy. It's not enough. Nunes is looking for what else there was. I suspect he'll find more.

I also suspect that's what people are afraid of...including you.

Anyway, I'm not conceding anything. Nunes already said that there was no official intelligence to justify the investigation. That, alone, is a problem.
 
Mycroft said:
The Papa stuff is flimsy. It's not enough. Nunes is looking for what else there was. I suspect he'll find more.

I also suspect that's what people are afraid of...including you.

Anyway, I'm not conceding anything. Nunes already said that there was no official intelligence to justify the investigation. That, alone, is a problem.
Click to expand...

:lamo I'm in no way afraid that Rep. Nunes will find anything to support his own perception of events. Whatever he discovers won't have an impact on me personally, professionally, financially or even politically. I'd really like him to find the truth. I just would rather he leave his partisanship out of it and stop playing games.

The only reason he said there was no "official intelligence" in the electronic communications is because he knows the information he sought wasn't in said communications. Moreover, as I've previously stated that information very likely DID NOT come from our intelligence community. I probably came from the STATE DEPARTMENT. That's what I keep trying to tell you. Nunes IS NOT going to find the information he seeks through normal intelligence channels because it's very likely that's NOT how the information came to us. He's only bringing up FVEY because he knows the information came from a FVEY client of ours. He mentioned "spying on our allies/citizens" in the context of FVEY because he knows it's something we don't do with our FVEY partners. Moreover, per FVEY rules, the information isn't released to third party entities without the host country's permission. Even having this knowledge (which I'm sure Nunes does posses) it still hasn't doesn't stop him from conflating the issue.

Nonetheless, I hope he does get to some truth-telling (on his part). It would be refreshing.

With that, I'm done. There's really nothing more to say on this matter except "to be continued...".
 
Last edited:
Objective Voice said:
:lamo I'm in no way afraid that Rep. Nunes will find anything to support his own perception of events. Whatever he discovers won't have an impact on me personally, professionally, financially or even politically. I'd really like him to find the truth. I just would rather he leave his partisanship out of it and stop playing games.

The only reason he said there was no "official intelligence" in the electronic communications is because he knows the information he sought wasn't in said communications. Moreover, as I've previously stated that information very likely DID NOT come from our intelligence community. I probably came from the STATE DEPARTMENT. That's what I keep trying to tell you. Nunes IS NOT going to find the information he seeks through normal intelligence channels because it's very likely that's NOT how the information came to us. He's only bringing up FVEY because he knows the information came from a FVEY client of ours. He mentioned "spying on our allies/citizens" in the context of FVEY because he knows it's something we don't do with our FVEY partners. Moreover, per FVEY rules, the information isn't released to third party entities without the host country's permission. Even having this knowledge (which I'm sure Nunes does posses) it still hasn't doesn't stop him from conflating the issue.

Nonetheless, I hope he does get to some truth-telling (on his part). It would be refreshing.

With that, I'm done. There's really nothing more to say on this matter except "to be continued...".
Click to expand...

Your errors in thinking...

1. Nunes has no "own perception of events". He is simply investigating and reporting.

2. He has no partisanship and he's not playing games. He is simply investigating and reporting.

3. The only reason he said there was no "official intelligence" in the EC is because he looked at it and found no official intelligence.

4. You are correct...just as Nunes confirmed...that whatever was used to justify the Trump investigation came from other sources. That's what he's investigating now. I'm sure he'll report what he finds.

5. If it was "Five Eyes" intelligence it would be in the EC. It's not. That means any of your blathering about Five Eyes is an irrelevant distraction.

Yes...you can be sure the House Intelligence Committee will continue in their investigation.
 
2. He has no partisanship and he's not playing games. He is simply investigating and reporting.
Click to expand...

That's hilarious! There's no way you could have kept a straight face while typing that out.
 
Mycroft said:
The question is what justification was used to set probable cause.. After all, we are talking about a counter-intelligence operation against an American citizen who is also a Presidential candidate. That's not something you start because of some rumor you heard.

Nunes is trying to find out what the justification is. Normally, that justification would be official intelligence information and it would be in the EC that the CIA presented to the FBI. We now know it wasn't that.
Click to expand...

You will never know what the answer to your question is. Nunes knows that. His soul is the wholly owned property of Foolish Donald's, not unlike that of his bogus Manhattan doctor.

Most Americans don't buy the shenanigans of John Miller or David Dennison. Much of it is betrayed by Trump's poor grammar. For instance, there is no chance those 49 questions leaked yesterday came from the prosecutor. They were leaked by Dubious Don himself.
 
Howard the Duck said:
You will never know what the answer to your question is. Nunes knows that.

~snipped the irrelevant nonsense~
Click to expand...

You are wrong.

Nunes is investigating. He will get the answers to the question. He will pass it on to the public. That's what he has been doing and he'll continue.

We already know more than we did a year ago thanks, in part, to the efforts of Nunes and, thanks to the efforts of him and others we'll keep learning more about what the corrupt Obama administration has done.

You don't want to know, but too bad.


yoda-big-ugly.webp
 
Mycroft said:
Your errors in thinking...

1. Nunes has no "own perception of events". He is simply investigating and reporting.

2. He has no partisanship and he's not playing games. He is simply investigating and reporting.

3. The only reason he said there was no "official intelligence" in the EC is because he looked at it and found no official intelligence.

4. You are correct...just as Nunes confirmed...that whatever was used to justify the Trump investigation came from other sources. That's what he's investigating now. I'm sure he'll report what he finds.

5. If it was "Five Eyes" intelligence it would be in the EC. It's not. That means any of your blathering about Five Eyes is an irrelevant distraction.

Yes...you can be sure the House Intelligence Committee will continue in their investigation.
Click to expand...

Right, that's the point - Nunes blathering about Five Eyes intelligence is an irrelevant distraction. Why would information from a drunk at a bar, talking to a diplomat, come thru five eyes channels? Is that "official intelligence?" Who the hell knows because the term is made up.
 
Mycroft said:
Your errors in thinking...

1. Nunes has no "own perception of events". He is simply investigating and reporting.

2. He has no partisanship and he's not playing games. He is simply investigating and reporting.

3. The only reason he said there was no "official intelligence" in the EC is because he looked at it and found no official intelligence.

4. You are correct...just as Nunes confirmed...that whatever was used to justify the Trump investigation came from other sources. That's what he's investigating now. I'm sure he'll report what he finds.

5. If it was "Five Eyes" intelligence it would be in the EC. It's not. That means any of your blathering about Five Eyes is an irrelevant distraction.

Yes...you can be sure the House Intelligence Committee will continue in their investigation.
Click to expand...

LOL.:lamo...wow.....this guy gotta get back to milking his cows instead of the minds of Conservatives. One thing is certain the election of Trump and the cronies he has in place to kiss his arse has revealed just how full of crap most Conservatives really are. So Mr Trump thank you for that and the House Investigation will be in full swing come Jan 1st
 
JasperL said:
Right, that's the point - Nunes blathering about Five Eyes intelligence is an irrelevant distraction. Why would information from a drunk at a bar, talking to a diplomat, come thru five eyes channels? Is that "official intelligence?" Who the hell knows because the term is made up.
Click to expand...

LOL!!

Here we go again...

I suggest you go back about 80 pages and rehash "official intelligence" all over again.

I'll pass.
 
Mycroft said:
LOL!!

Here we go again...

I suggest you go back about 80 pages and rehash "official intelligence" all over again.

I'll pass.
Click to expand...

My main point was about the Five Eyes stuff - it's a distraction, created by Nunes, so don't be surprised when people mention the distraction created by Nunes and point out that it's bogus.
 
JasperL said:
My main point was about the Five Eyes stuff - it's a distraction, created by Nunes, so don't be surprised when people mention the distraction created by Nunes and point out that it's bogus.
Click to expand...

The only point Nunes made was that Five Eyes Intel is considered official intelligence...and there was none in the EC.

Sorry if you consider that a distraction.
 
Mycroft said:
The only point Nunes made was that Five Eyes Intel is considered official intelligence...and there was none in the EC.

Sorry if you consider that a distraction.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's a distraction because a diplomat talking to a drunk guy at a bar isn't the kind of thing that would need to come through "Five Eyes" channels.
 
JasperL said:
Yes, it's a distraction because a diplomat talking to a drunk guy at a bar isn't the kind of thing that would need to come through "Five Eyes" channels.
Click to expand...

Nobody said it was.

Five Eyes is more than Australia, you know.
 
Mycroft said:
Nobody said it was.
Click to expand...

That's why it's a distraction, created by Nunes.....:roll:

Five Eyes is more than Australia, you know.
Click to expand...

Yes, thank you, I'm aware of the significance of the "Five" in "Five Eyes." If it was just Australia and the U.S. perhaps we'd call it the "Two Eyes" alliance.
 
JasperL said:
That's why it's a distraction, created by Nunes.....:roll:



Yes, thank you, I'm aware of the significance of the "Five" in "Five Eyes." If it was just Australia and the U.S. perhaps we'd call it the "Two Eyes" alliance.
Click to expand...

I don't think I ever heard Nunes say that the Papa nonsense did or should have come through the Five Eyes. Why do you think he said that?
 
Mycroft said:
I don't think I ever heard Nunes say that the Papa nonsense did or should have come through the Five Eyes. Why do you think he said that?
Click to expand...

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/04/politics/devin-nunes-electronic-communication/index.html

Nunes had already been offered time to review a copy of the electronic communication formally authorizing the FBI's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, but he had publicly demanded to see what was behind certain blacked out lines.
Facing the growing pressure, and outrage from President Donald Trump, Rosenstein finally relented in early April -- and granted Nunes and Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina access to the document with only minimal redactions to protect the name of a foreign country and agent, along with all members of the House Intelligence Committee.

But when the pair arrived at the Justice Department to review the electronic communication, officials were caught off-guard by his next move. Nunes -- sitting with a copy of the document in an unopened folder directly in front of him -- opted not to read it, according to four sources with knowledge of the situation.
Click to expand...

Well, that explains a lot.
 
Atomic Kid said:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/04/politics/devin-nunes-electronic-communication/index.html



Well, that explains a lot.
Click to expand...

I see one of two things happening here:

1. Normal CNN fake news.

2. Numerous people who should lose their jobs for leaking what goes on in a SCIF.

In any case, do you think this news indicated that Nunes doesn't know anything about what was in the EC? I think you would be stupid to think that.

So no...it doesn't explain anything and it's not even relevant to my point.

Try again or go away.
 
Mycroft said:
I see one of two things happening here:

1. Normal CNN fake news.

2. Numerous people who should lose their jobs for leaking what goes on in a SCIF.

In any case, do you think this news indicated that Nunes doesn't know anything about what was in the EC? I think you would be stupid to think that.

So no...it doesn't explain anything and it's not even relevant to my point.

Try again or go away.
Click to expand...

Of course that is what you would see. Maybe you would care to explain how Nunes could know that there was no 'official' intelligence since he never bothered to read any of it after making such a stink about it. Which BTW is the same as what he did with the classified information that his memo was about as well. It's just another illustration of how Nunes is wielding his power to attack his political enemies and to give cover to Trump. It would appear that you have no point.
 
Atomic Kid said:
Of course that is what you would see. Maybe you would care to explain how Nunes could know that there was no 'official' intelligence since he never bothered to read any of it
Click to expand...

He's not the only one who got to read the EC.
 
Mycroft said:
He's not the only one who got to read the EC.
Click to expand...

I repeat, Nunes did not read the EC evidence he requested. Why are most conservatives so reading comprehension challenged?
 
Atomic Kid said:
I repeat, Nunes did not read the EC evidence he requested. Why are most conservatives so reading comprehension challenged?
Click to expand...

He didn't need to read it to know what's in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom