Yep. Here’s Chaffetz back in October when everyone thought Clinton would win:
1 Like
Duh. You are not allowed to wire tap any American without a subpoena, so why was the Flynn conversation recorded? That is absolutely illegal surveillance. First, they just admitted to bugging the Russian Embassay which you can be sure, now that they know, will be found and removed. Second, they have to stop recording when Americans are involved, technically, unless they are investigating a crime, which they were not.
And if they were investigating something, its absolutely illegal to leak it.
And you read Salon? That’s the left wing equivalent of Breitbart. It’s not a credible source for anything. Even classic left wing liberals like Bill Maher and Sam Harris regard it a completely fictitious rag. The land of Glenn Greenwald and his commie minions.
If you are going to source, get credible ones. But now, I know where you get your misinformation. Salon…lol
What facts? The whole problem has and is there is a whole lot of noise and no facts. Show me the facts…
Jesus Christ.
1 Like
Lol omfg.
The amount of stupid here is going to melt this whole fucking place to the ground.
1 Like
Did they wiretap his phone too?
With the FISA courts you can wiretap anyone. The NSA/CIA ignore the FISA courts and do whatever they want. That was the point of the Snowden leaks.
The leaks are part of the narrative. So they are relevant. If you have partisan hacks leaking information just because they don’t like the guy, it plays into the whole narrative of distrust. If the president cannot trust the intelligence departments for fear of them leaking info, that’s a problem. Both need to work together which means the moles need to be smoked out and dealt with appropriately.
Should be easy enough. Pass a fake juicy story through the ranks that nobody else could possibly know about and if it gets leaked, at least you know the general area of the organization as to where it’s happening.
-
You don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about.
-
You don’t know Flynn isn’t himself the subject of a warrant, and there’s good reason to believe he is.
-
Minimization would not require Flynn’s name to be stripped from the transcript even if no warrant names Flynn.
-
I was commenting on Pat’s (mis)use of the term “subpoena.”
-
You don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about.
No, I am not saying it didn’t happen, just that the scale of leaks is way different.
This is absurd. Our allies have recordings of their calls. Pretty much any call with someone in Russia is going to be intercepted. And Flynn is a fool for not actually knowing this.
It’s funny how concerned the Trump supporters are with the source of the leaks rather than the content now. It seems like it was the opposite not too long ago.
You have evidence for this?
And yes, American officials do have a reasonable expectation of privacy to where the contents of their calls and business not be leaked to the public. Such type calls are not unusual, by any measure.
I was actually defending your position. You’re going to strain your neck SMH so damn hard.
The US has access to every phone call or email that they want to have access to and they don’t need a warrant to get it (operationally, legally may be another matter).
Also Flynn is fired for being an idiot, good. Why do we care about the leak at this point? Well to @Tyler23 point the only reason the source of the leak matters is because someone at CIA/FBI/NSA is giving away classified information on ongoing investigations and breaking the chain of command. Who’s to say this same mole doesn’t leak something later that gets people killed?
That’s not how it’s supposed to work. If Flynn broke the law charge him with a crime.
From a political damage standpoint it hurts Trump way more if Flynn gets charged and convicted. Then CNN gets to feature the trial for months.
So, suppose a rank-and-file officer had absolute evidence that a high-ranking member of the admin was profoundly compromised, but the admin was sitting on the info (for obvious reasons). You would want the rank-and-file spook to shrug her shoulders and say nothing?
It is my understanding that Flynn’s conversations were captured because of routine surveillance of the Russians on the other end of the line. In other words, Flynn was not being wiretapped.
Would you like to retract your ‘duh’?
1 Like
No, that isn’t my position, so you can’t be defending my position.
The USIC has legal access to the phone call in question and even if Flynn isn’t named in a warrant – which is far from certain – minimization procedures would not force excision of his name from the transcript.
The leak was illegal. The surveillance was not.
Well there you go. Evidence.
That would mean that the higher admin was also compromised. It would also have to be a compromise through multiple agencies.
It’s not like there aren’t multiple channels to go through if something like this actually happened Before going to the press.
Lets say an analyst with the CIA has what you describe. Theres the FBI, congressional over site, the DOJ, all take priority over the NYT, Washington Post, or Buzzfeed.
Funny you note that the republicans promise to investigate Clinton for years yet you do not acknowledge the substance of “the game”.
Odd
I didn’t say he was being wire tapped. I said because he cannot be wire tapped, because that would be illegal without a subpoena it means we were bugging a.k.a. surveilling the russian embassy he was contacting. Thus revealing that surveillance to the Russians.
I don’t know what this has to do with anything. It would warrant an investigation, not a leak to the NY Times.