Criminal 'coordination' vs. Felony gov. leaking (Trump/Russia vs. Gov./Trump)

[KeiserC]

Lots of ideological partisanship out there between these two issues and there seems to be a lot of muddying of the waters twixt the two. How do y'all think the hearing went yesterday with the peppering of questions / statements from the committee members who sometimes seemed to be more interested in scoring political points "on the record" knowing that they were going to get the "can't comment on that" answer....

- We've got the criminal investigation into gov. leaking of FISA generated, NSA 'unmasked' raw data. (automatic felony)

- Then we have the criminal investigation/probe ongoing into team Trump coordinating with the Russians.

Knowing that Comey can't offer incomplete evidence before fully collating it, what do his "no evidence to support tapping claims" mean to you? Do you take it as 'that is the final answer' Trump is not validated by the evidence? Do you take it as there is documented FISA / NSA illegality in 'unmasking' Trump's raw data and the investigation is only starting on this and can't be commented on in an open Congressional hearing?

Thoughts, comments and smart remarks....

 

[JoeMoma]

So the Russians hacked the DNC because Trump made a deal with them, not just because interfering with the political process of other countries is what the Russians like to do anyway?

 

[depotoo]

He was clear during another FBI investigation several years ago. This is nothing more than a smear campaign.

 

[JohnnyApplesack]

Lots of ideological partisanship out there between these two issues and there seems to be a lot of muddying of the waters twixt the two. How do y'all think the hearing went yesterday with the peppering of questions / statements from the committee members who sometimes seemed to be more interested in scoring political points "on the record" knowing that they were going to get the "can't comment on that" answer....

- We've got the criminal investigation into gov. leaking of FISA generated, NSA 'unmasked' raw data. (automatic felony)

- Then we have the criminal investigation/probe ongoing into team Trump coordinating with the Russians.

Knowing that Comey can't offer incomplete evidence before fully collating it, what do his "no evidence to support tapping claims" mean to you? Do you take it as 'that is the final answer' Trump is not validated by the evidence? Do you take it as there is documented FISA / NSA illegality in 'unmasking' Trump's raw data and the investigation is only starting on this and can't be commented on in an open Congressional hearing?

Thoughts, comments and smart remarks....

you nor I have the classified information, the investigation 9 months old and still underway, maybe for quite a while per Comey

, and do you have a link for a FISA leak investigtion?

 

[depotoo]

Full Clapper: 'No Evidence' of Collusion Between Trump and Russia
Former acting CIA director sees no Trump-Russia conspiracy
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html

Lots of ideological partisanship out there between these two issues and there seems to be a lot of muddying of the waters twixt the two. How do y'all think the hearing went yesterday with the peppering of questions / statements from the committee members who sometimes seemed to be more interested in scoring political points "on the record" knowing that they were going to get the "can't comment on that" answer....

- We've got the criminal investigation into gov. leaking of FISA generated, NSA 'unmasked' raw data. (automatic felony)

- Then we have the criminal investigation/probe ongoing into team Trump coordinating with the Russians.

Knowing that Comey can't offer incomplete evidence before fully collating it, what do his "no evidence to support tapping claims" mean to you? Do you take it as 'that is the final answer' Trump is not validated by the evidence? Do you take it as there is documented FISA / NSA illegality in 'unmasking' Trump's raw data and the investigation is only starting on this and can't be commented on in an open Congressional hearing?

Thoughts, comments and smart remarks....

you nor I have the classified information, the investigation 9 months old and still underway, maybe for quite a while per Comey

, and do you have a link for a FISA leak investigtion?

 

[KeiserC]

Rogers, Comey said plenty about the general logistics of "the leaks" investigation going forward. I have the info you have. As per my thread I'm just interested in hearing about the varied response to the two basic investigations that seem to be concurrently entangled (though in reality they are starkly separate)

tangentially I'm curious as to why Comey and Rogers weren't asked the requisite question of whether they were the source of the leak. This is integral to 'laying a legal foundation'

Also why weren't there questions about DNC hacking of Sanders, the collusion of HRC and the DNC, very pertinent in the broader issue of Russia and Trump 16 election meddling.

 

[JohnnyApplesack]

Full Clapper: 'No Evidence' of Collusion Between Trump and Russia
Former acting CIA director sees no Trump-Russia conspiracy
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html

Lots of ideological partisanship out there between these two issues and there seems to be a lot of muddying of the waters twixt the two. How do y'all think the hearing went yesterday with the peppering of questions / statements from the committee members who sometimes seemed to be more interested in scoring political points "on the record" knowing that they were going to get the "can't comment on that" answer....

- We've got the criminal investigation into gov. leaking of FISA generated, NSA 'unmasked' raw data. (automatic felony)

- Then we have the criminal investigation/probe ongoing into team Trump coordinating with the Russians.

Knowing that Comey can't offer incomplete evidence before fully collating it, what do his "no evidence to support tapping claims" mean to you? Do you take it as 'that is the final answer' Trump is not validated by the evidence? Do you take it as there is documented FISA / NSA illegality in 'unmasking' Trump's raw data and the investigation is only starting on this and can't be commented on in an open Congressional hearing?

Thoughts, comments and smart remarks....

you nor I have the classified information, the investigation 9 months old and still underway, maybe for quite a while per Comey

, and do you have a link for a FISA leak investigtion?

Clapper says in the interview he's not aware of any links as of his leaving office

so what's your point?

 

[JohnnyApplesack]

Rogers, Comey said plenty about the general logistics of "the leaks" investigation going forward. I have the info you have. As per my thread I'm just interested in hearing about the varied response to the two basic investigations that seem to be concurrently entangled (though in reality they are starkly separate)

tangentially I'm curious as to why Comey and Rogers weren't asked the requisite question of whether they were the source of the leak. This is integral to 'laying a legal foundation'

Also why weren't there questions about DNC hacking of Sanders, the collusion of HRC and the DNC, very pertinent in the broader issue of Russia and Trump 16 election meddling.

I'm curious as to why Comey and Rogers weren't asked the requisite question of whether they were the source of the leak.

when y'all start going off the deep end with your endless conspiracies the discussion is over

say hello to Alex for me please

 

[KeiserC]

No one actually thinks Rogers leaked raw NSA data or Comey the 'unmasked' NSA data... The point in a congressional hearing is to lay a proper legal foundation and in doing so the question should be asked of both...

 

[depotoo]

He had been investigated for at least 7 months under Clapper and nothing found. You real think that in 2 months something was suddenly found? He was cleared in 2014 of any ties as well.
Your guys wish to make it look so, doesn't make it so. And in the end, you all will lose any credibility you had left, completely. Think you've lost seats and governorships now? Just wait.

Full Clapper: 'No Evidence' of Collusion Between Trump and Russia
Former acting CIA director sees no Trump-Russia conspiracy
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html

Lots of ideological partisanship out there between these two issues and there seems to be a lot of muddying of the waters twixt the two. How do y'all think the hearing went yesterday with the peppering of questions / statements from the committee members who sometimes seemed to be more interested in scoring political points "on the record" knowing that they were going to get the "can't comment on that" answer....

- We've got the criminal investigation into gov. leaking of FISA generated, NSA 'unmasked' raw data. (automatic felony)

- Then we have the criminal investigation/probe ongoing into team Trump coordinating with the Russians.

Knowing that Comey can't offer incomplete evidence before fully collating it, what do his "no evidence to support tapping claims" mean to you? Do you take it as 'that is the final answer' Trump is not validated by the evidence? Do you take it as there is documented FISA / NSA illegality in 'unmasking' Trump's raw data and the investigation is only starting on this and can't be commented on in an open Congressional hearing?

Thoughts, comments and smart remarks....

you nor I have the classified information, the investigation 9 months old and still underway, maybe for quite a while per Comey

, and do you have a link for a FISA leak investigtion?

Clapper says in the interview he's not aware of any links as of his leaving office

so what's your point?

 

[KeiserC]

The disparity in reporting is perplexing to me... On one hand we have an ongoing investigation into collusion where no evidence has been found at this point. On the other hand we have an established case of Gov. wrongdoing in leaking of classified data.

The Reporting in the MSM is backward on these two issues.

Let me be the first to say that if Trump, his team, are found to be guilty of collusion I want them to get what they deserve.
If the Gov. leakers are found I want them to get what they deserve.

As it stands though the Gov. has been found to be 'dirty', Team trump has not been found to be dirty (yet). REPORTING ACCORDINGLY would be a welcome change.

As it is right now, we have an 'emotional', ideologically driven, political lynching going on primarily by the Dems. Evidence is present against the gov. in leaking Trump's data. Evidence is not yet present of Trump colluding with Russia.

Where is my logic, or the facts not adding up here???