The leak is far worse than the resignation, obama's people really screwed up, jail may await them...

2aguy

Diamond Member
Jul 19, 2014
111,977
52,255
2,290
The idiots in obama's intelligence agencies leaked the Flynn information....and since they have to protect the identity of Americans when they are surveilling foreign assets........there are very few people who would have had access to the Flynn recordings......and they all belong to obama.....and now, they can go and get them ......

Catherine Herridge has high level sources......

We are talking jail time for the leakers when they are caught.......

Top House Republican wants FBI 'assessment' on Trump-related leaks

But the release of information from the Flynn phone calls also appears especially problematic, because when the intelligence community captures phone calls of an American inside the U.S., even if the discussion involves a foreign national (in this case an ambassador), steps must be taken to shield the American caller's identity.

"If [the conversation] was picked up inadvertently, then that would have had to been approved by someone in the last administration to actually unmask his name so that the FBI or intelligence officials knew who it was on the other end of the phone talking to the Russian ambassador," Nunes explained.

"If in fact the press reports are right, someone made the decision to deliberately listen to General Flynn's phone calls and that is, I think, unprecedented, unwarranted, and flat-out wrong."

Former NSA analyst and whistleblower Bill Binney confirmed to Fox News that surveillance programs that touch on leadership are highly restricted.

"I think it is compartmentalized, meaning a small circle, less than 100 [people would have access to the intelligence]," Binney said. "They are supposed to minimize the American side. ... All presumed U.S. citizens have rights under the Fourth Amendment."

Nunes said the timing may be significant because the authorization to unmask Flynn was likely taken under the Obama administration, as the phone calls occurred in December.

The committee chairman said the issue goes beyond politics because it is also undermining the relationship between a president and world leaders.

"I think all foreign leaders now are going to be worried that this is going to somehow leak out. I think it has done tremendous damage to [America's] reputation around the world, and no one's talking about it -- and this is because someone in the national security apparatus decided to leak this out. It's very, very serious," he said.

Simply revealing the contents of the calls can have the effect of what the intelligence community calls "burning the source," because the parties involved know beyond a doubt the U.S. government has the ability to track the conversations.

The leaking of information about the investigation into Russian interference in the U.S. race points to the possible compromise of even more sensitive collection sources.
 
America's spies anonymously took down Michael Flynn. That is deeply worrying.

In such a situation — our situation — shouldn't we hope the deep state will rise up to act responsibly to take down a member of the administration who may have broken the law?

The answer is an unequivocal no.

In a liberal democracy, how things happen is often as important as what happens. Procedures matter. So do rules and public accountability. The chaotic, dysfunctional Trump White House is placing the entire system under enormous strain. That's bad. But the answer isn't to counter it with equally irregular acts of sabotage — or with a disinformation campaign waged by nameless civil servants toiling away in the surveillance state.

As Eli Lake of Bloomberg News put it in an important article following Flynn's resignation,

Normally intercepts of U.S. officials and citizens are some of the most tightly held government secrets. This is for good reason. Selectively disclosing details of private conversations monitored by the FBI or NSA gives the permanent state the power to destroy reputations from the cloak of anonymity. This is what police states do. [Bloomberg]

Those cheering the deep state torpedoing of Flynn are saying, in effect, that a police state is perfectly fine so long as it helps to bring down Trump.

It is the role of Congress to investigate the president and those who work for him. If Congress resists doing its duty, out of a mixture of self-interest and cowardice, the American people have no choice but to try and hold the government's feet to the fire, demanding action with phone calls, protests, and, ultimately, votes. That is a democratic response to the failure of democracy.

Sitting back and letting shadowy, unaccountable agents of espionage do the job for us simply isn't an acceptable alternative.

Down that path lies the end of democracy in America.​
 
Pretty deep and wide swamp.


I hope Sessions and Pompeo catch the assholes and put them in a federal penitentiary for a long time..........Trump stated he counter punches...and they have been punching him for weeks...he now has people in place, and he needs to use them to enforce the law and the power of the executive branch....
 
FBI needs to explain why Flynn was recorded, Intelligence Committee chairman says

The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee said Tuesday that the most significant question posed by the resignation of national security adviser Michael Flynn is why intelligence officials eavesdropped on his calls with the Russian ambassador and later leaked information on those calls to the press.

“I expect for the FBI to tell me what is going on, and they better have a good answer,” said Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, which is conducting a review of Russian activities to influence the election. “The big problem I see here is that you have an American citizen who had his phone calls recorded.”...​
 
FBI needs to explain why Flynn was recorded, Intelligence Committee chairman says

The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee said Tuesday that the most significant question posed by the resignation of national security adviser Michael Flynn is why intelligence officials eavesdropped on his calls with the Russian ambassador and later leaked information on those calls to the press.

“I expect for the FBI to tell me what is going on, and they better have a good answer,” said Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, which is conducting a review of Russian activities to influence the election. “The big problem I see here is that you have an American citizen who had his phone calls recorded.”...​

And the beauty......Jeff Sessions is now Attorney General...not eric holder.........so now the House and Senate will have the ability to go after them....with subpoenas and jail time....
 
The idiots in obama's intelligence agencies leaked the Flynn information....and since they have to protect the identity of Americans when they are surveilling foreign assets........there are very few people who would have had access to the Flynn recordings......and they all belong to obama.....and now, they can go and get them ......

Catherine Herridge has high level sources......

We are talking jail time for the leakers when they are caught.......

Top House Republican wants FBI 'assessment' on Trump-related leaks

But the release of information from the Flynn phone calls also appears especially problematic, because when the intelligence community captures phone calls of an American inside the U.S., even if the discussion involves a foreign national (in this case an ambassador), steps must be taken to shield the American caller's identity.

"If [the conversation] was picked up inadvertently, then that would have had to been approved by someone in the last administration to actually unmask his name so that the FBI or intelligence officials knew who it was on the other end of the phone talking to the Russian ambassador," Nunes explained.

"If in fact the press reports are right, someone made the decision to deliberately listen to General Flynn's phone calls and that is, I think, unprecedented, unwarranted, and flat-out wrong."

Former NSA analyst and whistleblower Bill Binney confirmed to Fox News that surveillance programs that touch on leadership are highly restricted.

"I think it is compartmentalized, meaning a small circle, less than 100 [people would have access to the intelligence]," Binney said. "They are supposed to minimize the American side. ... All presumed U.S. citizens have rights under the Fourth Amendment."

Nunes said the timing may be significant because the authorization to unmask Flynn was likely taken under the Obama administration, as the phone calls occurred in December.

The committee chairman said the issue goes beyond politics because it is also undermining the relationship between a president and world leaders.

"I think all foreign leaders now are going to be worried that this is going to somehow leak out. I think it has done tremendous damage to [America's] reputation around the world, and no one's talking about it -- and this is because someone in the national security apparatus decided to leak this out. It's very, very serious," he said.

Simply revealing the contents of the calls can have the effect of what the intelligence community calls "burning the source," because the parties involved know beyond a doubt the U.S. government has the ability to track the conversations.

The leaking of information about the investigation into Russian interference in the U.S. race points to the possible compromise of even more sensitive collection sources.
Rube news, too funny two statue bowers jerking each other off
 
The idiots in obama's intelligence agencies leaked the Flynn information....and since they have to protect the identity of Americans when they are surveilling foreign assets........there are very few people who would have had access to the Flynn recordings......and they all belong to obama.....and now, they can go and get them ......

Catherine Herridge has high level sources......

We are talking jail time for the leakers when they are caught.......

Top House Republican wants FBI 'assessment' on Trump-related leaks

But the release of information from the Flynn phone calls also appears especially problematic, because when the intelligence community captures phone calls of an American inside the U.S., even if the discussion involves a foreign national (in this case an ambassador), steps must be taken to shield the American caller's identity.

"If [the conversation] was picked up inadvertently, then that would have had to been approved by someone in the last administration to actually unmask his name so that the FBI or intelligence officials knew who it was on the other end of the phone talking to the Russian ambassador," Nunes explained.

"If in fact the press reports are right, someone made the decision to deliberately listen to General Flynn's phone calls and that is, I think, unprecedented, unwarranted, and flat-out wrong."

Former NSA analyst and whistleblower Bill Binney confirmed to Fox News that surveillance programs that touch on leadership are highly restricted.

"I think it is compartmentalized, meaning a small circle, less than 100 [people would have access to the intelligence]," Binney said. "They are supposed to minimize the American side. ... All presumed U.S. citizens have rights under the Fourth Amendment."

Nunes said the timing may be significant because the authorization to unmask Flynn was likely taken under the Obama administration, as the phone calls occurred in December.

The committee chairman said the issue goes beyond politics because it is also undermining the relationship between a president and world leaders.

"I think all foreign leaders now are going to be worried that this is going to somehow leak out. I think it has done tremendous damage to [America's] reputation around the world, and no one's talking about it -- and this is because someone in the national security apparatus decided to leak this out. It's very, very serious," he said.

Simply revealing the contents of the calls can have the effect of what the intelligence community calls "burning the source," because the parties involved know beyond a doubt the U.S. government has the ability to track the conversations.

The leaking of information about the investigation into Russian interference in the U.S. race points to the possible compromise of even more sensitive collection sources.
Funny chit coming from the party that outed a CIA agent for political revenge.
 
Standard fascist behavior. "Waaa! The treasonous conduct of our party was revealed! Jail whatever patriot did that! All must put party before country!"

So, JimBowie, 2aguy, AnCap'n and Death Angel aren't even pretending to be loyal Americans any more. That's probably for the best, as they never could pull off the charade. The party gives orders, they obey, and they don't care how that harms the USA. Their boy sold us out to the Russians, and since anything their side does is good by definition, they now think selling the USA out to the Russians is a good thing.
 
cmon you guys can make up a better way too spin this than that. you guys are pros at bullshit, your really complaining that the entire military existed under Obama so its his fault. you thin anyone is going to believe that? you can make up better crap than that to defend a stupid tweet

you sure you dont want to blame george soros for something? What about the jews thats usually your go to scapegoat?
 
The idiots in obama's intelligence agencies leaked the Flynn information....and since they have to protect the identity of Americans when they are surveilling foreign assets........there are very few people who would have had access to the Flynn recordings......and they all belong to obama.....and now, they can go and get them ......

Catherine Herridge has high level sources......

We are talking jail time for the leakers when they are caught.......

Top House Republican wants FBI 'assessment' on Trump-related leaks

But the release of information from the Flynn phone calls also appears especially problematic, because when the intelligence community captures phone calls of an American inside the U.S., even if the discussion involves a foreign national (in this case an ambassador), steps must be taken to shield the American caller's identity.

"If [the conversation] was picked up inadvertently, then that would have had to been approved by someone in the last administration to actually unmask his name so that the FBI or intelligence officials knew who it was on the other end of the phone talking to the Russian ambassador," Nunes explained.

"If in fact the press reports are right, someone made the decision to deliberately listen to General Flynn's phone calls and that is, I think, unprecedented, unwarranted, and flat-out wrong."

Former NSA analyst and whistleblower Bill Binney confirmed to Fox News that surveillance programs that touch on leadership are highly restricted.

"I think it is compartmentalized, meaning a small circle, less than 100 [people would have access to the intelligence]," Binney said. "They are supposed to minimize the American side. ... All presumed U.S. citizens have rights under the Fourth Amendment."

Nunes said the timing may be significant because the authorization to unmask Flynn was likely taken under the Obama administration, as the phone calls occurred in December.

The committee chairman said the issue goes beyond politics because it is also undermining the relationship between a president and world leaders.

"I think all foreign leaders now are going to be worried that this is going to somehow leak out. I think it has done tremendous damage to [America's] reputation around the world, and no one's talking about it -- and this is because someone in the national security apparatus decided to leak this out. It's very, very serious," he said.

Simply revealing the contents of the calls can have the effect of what the intelligence community calls "burning the source," because the parties involved know beyond a doubt the U.S. government has the ability to track the conversations.

The leaking of information about the investigation into Russian interference in the U.S. race points to the possible compromise of even more sensitive collection sources.
Funny chit coming from the party that outed a CIA agent for political revenge.
Actually that never happened and the proof is available to anyone with even a 5th grade education. Armitage leaked the info by accident and was given a pass by the prosecutor. NO ONE in the Bush Government was involved at all.
 
Standard fascist behavior. "Waaa! The treasonous conduct of our party was revealed! Jail whatever patriot did that! All must put party before country!"

So, JimBowie, 2aguy, AnCap'n and Death Angel aren't even pretending to be loyal Americans any more. That's probably for the best, as they never could pull off the charade. The party gives orders, they obey, and they don't care how that harms the USA. Their boy sold us out to the Russians, and since anything their side does is good by definition, they now think selling the USA out to the Russians is a good thing.



No treason whatsoever by Flynn........Russia was put in "time out" by the globalists whose asses you kiss on a daily basis.
 
How is any of this different then the wikileaks leaks on Hillary that you all were joyfully defending....?
It is completely different since the officials involved broke numerous laws and violated the agreements they made to serve. They can be charged with actual laws and we can find out who they were. How are you ok with the US Government spying on US citizens? Or better yet an outgoing US Government spying on an incoming Government?
 
How is any of this different then the wikileaks leaks on Hillary that you all were joyfully defending....?
It is completely different since the officials involved broke numerous laws and violated the agreements they made to serve. They can be charged with actual laws and we can find out who they were. How are you ok with the US Government spying on US citizens? Or better yet an outgoing US Government spying on an incoming Government?

Oh really?

Your argument, in defense of wikileaks was that it was justified in exposing potential "criminal conduct".

The leaks WERE an illegal act however.

Do you still justify it?

If so, how can you not justify the leaks on Flynn?

Ans: it's DIFFERENT when it's OUR side
 
How is any of this different then the wikileaks leaks on Hillary that you all were joyfully defending....?


Do you really believe that Flynn having a conversation with Russian leaders to ease tensions is on the same par as the leaked e-mails of the Hildebeast and the DNC? A bunch of back-biting commies in the state department that are attempting to undermine a detente between America, NATO with Russia?
I can only hope that the first nuke lands were you live...... since you are so eager for war......
 
How is any of this different then the wikileaks leaks on Hillary that you all were joyfully defending....?


Do you really believe that Flynn having a conversation with Russian leaders to ease tensions is on the same par as the leaked e-mails of the Hildebeast and the DNC? A bunch of back-biting commies in the state department that are attempting to undermine a detente between America, NATO with Russia?
I can only hope that the first nuke lands were you live...... since you are so eager for war......

Like I thought. A double standard.

Flynn tellling the Russians not to worry about sanctions and implying they'd be reversed is "ok" when his boss isn't even sworn in and the actual president.

Unreal.

If you are THAT concerned about war....well why the beliigerence towards Iran and China? You guys take the cake.
 
How is any of this different then the wikileaks leaks on Hillary that you all were joyfully defending....?
It is completely different since the officials involved broke numerous laws and violated the agreements they made to serve. They can be charged with actual laws and we can find out who they were. How are you ok with the US Government spying on US citizens? Or better yet an outgoing US Government spying on an incoming Government?

Oh really?

Your argument, in defense of wikileaks was that it was justified in exposing potential "criminal conduct".

The leaks WERE an illegal act however.

Do you still justify it?

If so, how can you not justify the leaks on Flynn?

Ans: it's DIFFERENT when it's OUR side
That is YOUR defense and you just admitted it. The Government has no authority to spy on American citizens and no authority to spy on the incoming Admin. In fact NOTHING Flynn did is was or will be illegal. Or perhaps you can explain how an incoming government official haviing a discussion about potential actions of the incoming admin are illegal?
 

Forum List

Back
Top