Unwillingness from the Intelligence Committee Today ~ Total Bullshit

[debbiedowner]

Because we know that Democrats would just blurt out classified information for all to hear.

Both sides of the isle as they asked their questions and all 4 basically refused to answer said nothing they were discussing was classified. Some of it had already been discussed in public.

In fact, they did not say that nothing they were discussing was classified. They said they would be more open and free to answer in a closed session. For people who have never had a security clearance, they don't understand the minefield that comes ith that clearance. To stick to the topic, lets play this game.

Senator A asks one of the guys if he had had a conversation with the President with regard to the Russian investigation.

The guy answers, yes.

It is now an open question that has been answered, and Senator A can now drill into that conversation because the witness has opened that line of questioning. This would include the classified parts of the conversation. The witness risks problems if he lets slip accidentally classified information trying to answer it. The witness is now in serious legal jeopardy.

However, if he defers answering to a closed session where any answer is given to people who have a 'need to know' this information, he is no longer in legal jeopardy.

I sat and watched some of it on the internet and Rubio asks several questions they said they'd answer in closed sessions and he responded they were not classified and could answer now, which they declined. One of the senator's asked, may have been Rubio a question they refused to answer and the senator said if it's not true say no and the DNI still refused. Again an answer yes or no to that question was not classified the senator responded.

 

[Darkwind]

Because we know that Democrats would just blurt out classified information for all to hear.

Both sides of the isle as they asked their questions and all 4 basically refused to answer said nothing they were discussing was classified. Some of it had already been discussed in public.

In fact, they did not say that nothing they were discussing was classified. They said they would be more open and free to answer in a closed session. For people who have never had a security clearance, they don't understand the minefield that comes ith that clearance. To stick to the topic, lets play this game.

Senator A asks one of the guys if he had had a conversation with the President with regard to the Russian investigation.

The guy answers, yes.

It is now an open question that has been answered, and Senator A can now drill into that conversation because the witness has opened that line of questioning. This would include the classified parts of the conversation. The witness risks problems if he lets slip accidentally classified information trying to answer it. The witness is now in serious legal jeopardy.

However, if he defers answering to a closed session where any answer is given to people who have a 'need to know' this information, he is no longer in legal jeopardy.

I sat and watched some of it on the internet and Rubio asks several questions they said they'd answer in closed sessions and he responded they were not classified and could answer now, which they declined. One of the senator's asked, may have been Rubio a question they refused to answer and the senator said if it's not true say no and the DNI still refused. Again an answer yes or no to that question was not classified the senator responded.

You never answer yes or no to any question. That is just asking for jail time.

They can answer in closed meetings and that's good enough for Me. The rest of it is just entrapment.

 

[Darkwind]

Refusing to answer is just looking really bad..wow


Panel Chiefs Conclude Hearing Lamenting Witnesses Lack of Candor
The chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee ended the hearing with expressions of disappointment about the witnesses declining to answer questions about whether President Donald Trump asked them to interfere in any way with the ongoing probe into his former associates.

Intelligence Officials Testify in Senate Hearing -- Live Coverage

THERE GOES THE NARRATIVE:

DNI Director Dan Coats: “I Have Never Been Pressured,” Nor Have I “Felt Pressure To Intervene.”

Clapper said Watergate pales in comparision. How's that for a narrative?

 

[blackhawk]

There are a great many people on both the left and right who will not accept any testimony if it's not what they want to hear. This whole thing is getting very tiresome.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Refusing to answer is just looking really bad..wow


Panel Chiefs Conclude Hearing Lamenting Witnesses Lack of Candor
The chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee ended the hearing with expressions of disappointment about the witnesses declining to answer questions about whether President Donald Trump asked them to interfere in any way with the ongoing probe into his former associates.

Intelligence Officials Testify in Senate Hearing -- Live Coverage

THERE GOES THE NARRATIVE:

DNI Director Dan Coats: “I Have Never Been Pressured,” Nor Have I “Felt Pressure To Intervene.”

Clapper said Watergate pales in comparision. How's that for a narrative?

That and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

 

[Weatherman2020]

There are a great many people on both the left and right who will not accept any testimony if it's not what they want to hear. This whole thing is getting very tiresome.

Word of mouth accusations are meaningless.

 

[The Original Tree]

maybe they are trying to save face
just a thought

Exactly what I thought..

But my question is will we ever hear what they said behind closed doors ?

Because they are talking about the Criminal Actions of the Obama Administration, and it is doubtful they would impeach a Former President after he has left Office.
Only Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were impeached. It's a rare thing to impeach a president. Clinton was not even removed from office.
Doubtful Obama will be impeached despite his criminal abuse of his powers.
Rice might go down though, Evelyn Farkas and possibly Lynch and Lois Lerner and some others.
Hard to tell when they essentially constructed a cover up operation that went from the FBI to DOJ, STATE Department and IRS.
If you are going to be corrupt, that's how you do it.
Make sure everyone is corrupt, so if one sinks, you all sink.
That way no one rats you out.

Just don't leave a paper trail of your crimes...and you probably will skate free, like Hillary Clinton.

 

[imawhosure]

Refusing to answer is just looking really bad..wow


Panel Chiefs Conclude Hearing Lamenting Witnesses Lack of Candor
The chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee ended the hearing with expressions of disappointment about the witnesses declining to answer questions about whether President Donald Trump asked them to interfere in any way with the ongoing probe into his former associates.

Intelligence Officials Testify in Senate Hearing -- Live Coverage

They can't lie forever. At some point heads will start to roll.

So now, we have a poster claiming EVERYONE IS LYING, lololol! So sad. I told you lefties months ago you were SCREWED if you kept this narrative, and you kept on driving the bus anyway, didn't ya!

If you think THIS is bad, just wait till you see what happens when the OTHER investigation goes front and center. What is it I speak of? Why, the unmasking, and leaking of course.

You are upset because you claim you didn't hear enough. Believe it when I tell you when the next one starts, you will screaming for them to SHUT UP-)

 

[imawhosure]

Refusing to answer is just looking really bad..wow


Panel Chiefs Conclude Hearing Lamenting Witnesses Lack of Candor
The chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee ended the hearing with expressions of disappointment about the witnesses declining to answer questions about whether President Donald Trump asked them to interfere in any way with the ongoing probe into his former associates.

Intelligence Officials Testify in Senate Hearing -- Live Coverage

They can't lie forever. At some point heads will start to roll.

So now, we have a poster claiming EVERYONE IS LYING, lololol! So sad. I told you lefties months ago you were SCREWED if you kept this narrative, and you kept on driving the bus anyway, didn't ya!

If you think THIS is bad, just wait till you see what happens when the OTHER investigation goes front and center. What is it I speak of? Why, the unmasking, and leaking of course.

You are upset because you claim you didn't hear enough. Believe it when I tell you when the next one starts, you will screaming for them to SHUT UP-)

BLUB, BLUB, BLUB! What is that sound? Let me educate you------->that is the sound of the SS Democratic sinking, after it hit the iceberg known as Trump with all lefties lost-)

 

[2aguy]

Refusing to answer is just looking really bad..wow


Panel Chiefs Conclude Hearing Lamenting Witnesses Lack of Candor
The chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee ended the hearing with expressions of disappointment about the witnesses declining to answer questions about whether President Donald Trump asked them to interfere in any way with the ongoing probe into his former associates.

Intelligence Officials Testify in Senate Hearing -- Live Coverage

And you forgot the important parts...the parts that show your thread is stupid....


Key moments from intel chiefs' testimony on Trump and Russia

Coats "never felt pressure" to intervene in the Russia probe. The intelligence chief responded to a report in the Washington Post, which wrote Tuesday that Coats had told associates in March that the president asked him if he could intercede with then-FBI Director James Comey to encourage him to ease up on the FBI's investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

“My response to that was in my time of service, which is in interacting with the president of the United States or anybody in his administration, I have never been pressured, I have never felt pressure to intervene or interfere in any way with shaping intelligence in a political way or in relationship to an ongoing investigation,” Coats said, recounting his reaction to a request for comment from the Post.

And this.,.....

Coats suggested he is open to discussing private conversations he may have had with the president but not in a public setting. “I don’t believe that it’s appropriate for me to address that in a public session,” he said.

And this......

Rogers says he's never been directed to do anything "illegal" or "immoral." The NSA chief declined to “talk about theoreticals” or address private conversations he may have had with the president. “But I will make the following comment,” he said. “In the three-plus years that I have been the director of the National Security Agency, to the best of my recollection, I have never been directed to do anything I believed to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate, and to the best of my recollection during that same period of service, I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so.”

Yeah...those two bits of testimony pretty much show you have nothing...and this thread is a dud.....

 

[radical right]

Because they are talking about the Criminal Actions of the Obama Administration, and it is doubtful they would impeach a Former President after he has left Office.
Only Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were impeached. It's a rare thing to impeach a president. Clinton was not even removed from office.
Doubtful Obama will be impeached despite his criminal abuse of his powers.

Why would they waste money impeaching Obama? Even if the house impeaches Obama (which is legally questionable since he is no longer an officer of the US) the punishment is to be removed from the office he no longer holds.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from
Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or
Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be
liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to
Law.

And as I said, impeachment is for officers of the US, and Obama is a private citizen.

Section 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States,
shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason,
Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

 

[2aguy]

Because they are talking about the Criminal Actions of the Obama Administration, and it is doubtful they would impeach a Former President after he has left Office.
Only Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were impeached. It's a rare thing to impeach a president. Clinton was not even removed from office.
Doubtful Obama will be impeached despite his criminal abuse of his powers.

Why would they waste money impeaching Obama? Even if the house impeaches Obama (which is legally questionable since he is no longer an officer of the US) the punishment is to be removed from the office he no longer holds.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from
Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or
Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be
liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to
Law.

And as I said, impeachment is for officers of the US, and Obama is a private citizen.

Section 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States,
shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason,
Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

He is a private citizen now....they can just arrest him.....

 

[radical right]

He is a private citizen now....they can just arrest him.....

Everybody on your prosecution list are private citizens. If it was going to happen, it would already be history.

 

[Eaglewings]

Refusing to answer is just looking really bad..wow


Panel Chiefs Conclude Hearing Lamenting Witnesses Lack of Candor
The chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee ended the hearing with expressions of disappointment about the witnesses declining to answer questions about whether President Donald Trump asked them to interfere in any way with the ongoing probe into his former associates.

Intelligence Officials Testify in Senate Hearing -- Live Coverage

And you forgot the important parts...the parts that show your thread is stupid....


Key moments from intel chiefs' testimony on Trump and Russia

Coats "never felt pressure" to intervene in the Russia probe. The intelligence chief responded to a report in the Washington Post, which wrote Tuesday that Coats had told associates in March that the president asked him if he could intercede with then-FBI Director James Comey to encourage him to ease up on the FBI's investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

“My response to that was in my time of service, which is in interacting with the president of the United States or anybody in his administration, I have never been pressured, I have never felt pressure to intervene or interfere in any way with shaping intelligence in a political way or in relationship to an ongoing investigation,” Coats said, recounting his reaction to a request for comment from the Post.

And this.,.....

Coats suggested he is open to discussing private conversations he may have had with the president but not in a public setting. “I don’t believe that it’s appropriate for me to address that in a public session,” he said.

And this......

Rogers says he's never been directed to do anything "illegal" or "immoral." The NSA chief declined to “talk about theoreticals” or address private conversations he may have had with the president. “But I will make the following comment,” he said. “In the three-plus years that I have been the director of the National Security Agency, to the best of my recollection, I have never been directed to do anything I believed to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate, and to the best of my recollection during that same period of service, I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so.”

Yeah...those two bits of testimony pretty much show you have nothing...and this thread is a dud.....

And if you didn't watch the interview , you drink the kool-aide. They dance around the questions...go watch it on youtube...

 

[2aguy]

Refusing to answer is just looking really bad..wow


Panel Chiefs Conclude Hearing Lamenting Witnesses Lack of Candor
The chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee ended the hearing with expressions of disappointment about the witnesses declining to answer questions about whether President Donald Trump asked them to interfere in any way with the ongoing probe into his former associates.

Intelligence Officials Testify in Senate Hearing -- Live Coverage

And you forgot the important parts...the parts that show your thread is stupid....


Key moments from intel chiefs' testimony on Trump and Russia

Coats "never felt pressure" to intervene in the Russia probe. The intelligence chief responded to a report in the Washington Post, which wrote Tuesday that Coats had told associates in March that the president asked him if he could intercede with then-FBI Director James Comey to encourage him to ease up on the FBI's investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

“My response to that was in my time of service, which is in interacting with the president of the United States or anybody in his administration, I have never been pressured, I have never felt pressure to intervene or interfere in any way with shaping intelligence in a political way or in relationship to an ongoing investigation,” Coats said, recounting his reaction to a request for comment from the Post.

And this.,.....

Coats suggested he is open to discussing private conversations he may have had with the president but not in a public setting. “I don’t believe that it’s appropriate for me to address that in a public session,” he said.

And this......

Rogers says he's never been directed to do anything "illegal" or "immoral." The NSA chief declined to “talk about theoreticals” or address private conversations he may have had with the president. “But I will make the following comment,” he said. “In the three-plus years that I have been the director of the National Security Agency, to the best of my recollection, I have never been directed to do anything I believed to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate, and to the best of my recollection during that same period of service, I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so.”

Yeah...those two bits of testimony pretty much show you have nothing...and this thread is a dud.....

And if you didn't watch the interview , you drink the kool-aide. They dance around the questions...go watch it on youtube...

I posted the answer to the question at issue.....and then the democrats tried to salvage sound bytes from their failed attempt.....go back, and re read the quotes where they say they were not influenced and that they would be fine answering questions in a closed session...which is not what the democrats want...

 

[Eaglewings]

Because they are talking about the Criminal Actions of the Obama Administration, and it is doubtful they would impeach a Former President after he has left Office.
Only Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were impeached. It's a rare thing to impeach a president. Clinton was not even removed from office.
Doubtful Obama will be impeached despite his criminal abuse of his powers.

Why would they waste money impeaching Obama? Even if the house impeaches Obama (which is legally questionable since he is no longer an officer of the US) the punishment is to be removed from the office he no longer holds.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from
Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or
Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be
liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to
Law.

And as I said, impeachment is for officers of the US, and Obama is a private citizen.

Section 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States,
shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason,
Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

They never even questioned if Obama bugged Trump...so comical.

 

[Eaglewings]

Refusing to answer is just looking really bad..wow


Panel Chiefs Conclude Hearing Lamenting Witnesses Lack of Candor
The chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee ended the hearing with expressions of disappointment about the witnesses declining to answer questions about whether President Donald Trump asked them to interfere in any way with the ongoing probe into his former associates.

Intelligence Officials Testify in Senate Hearing -- Live Coverage

And you forgot the important parts...the parts that show your thread is stupid....


Key moments from intel chiefs' testimony on Trump and Russia

Coats "never felt pressure" to intervene in the Russia probe. The intelligence chief responded to a report in the Washington Post, which wrote Tuesday that Coats had told associates in March that the president asked him if he could intercede with then-FBI Director James Comey to encourage him to ease up on the FBI's investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

“My response to that was in my time of service, which is in interacting with the president of the United States or anybody in his administration, I have never been pressured, I have never felt pressure to intervene or interfere in any way with shaping intelligence in a political way or in relationship to an ongoing investigation,” Coats said, recounting his reaction to a request for comment from the Post.

And this.,.....

Coats suggested he is open to discussing private conversations he may have had with the president but not in a public setting. “I don’t believe that it’s appropriate for me to address that in a public session,” he said.

And this......

Rogers says he's never been directed to do anything "illegal" or "immoral." The NSA chief declined to “talk about theoreticals” or address private conversations he may have had with the president. “But I will make the following comment,” he said. “In the three-plus years that I have been the director of the National Security Agency, to the best of my recollection, I have never been directed to do anything I believed to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate, and to the best of my recollection during that same period of service, I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so.”

Yeah...those two bits of testimony pretty much show you have nothing...and this thread is a dud.....

And if you didn't watch the interview , you drink the kool-aide. They dance around the questions...go watch it on youtube...

I posted the answer to the question at issue.....and then the democrats tried to salvage sound bytes from their failed attempt.....go back, and re read the quotes where they say they were not influenced and that they would be fine answering questions in a closed session...which is not what the democrats want...

But they refuse to answer if Trump asked them to stop Comey ...This is where they refused and would talk behind closed doors.

 

[2aguy]

Refusing to answer is just looking really bad..wow


Panel Chiefs Conclude Hearing Lamenting Witnesses Lack of Candor
The chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee ended the hearing with expressions of disappointment about the witnesses declining to answer questions about whether President Donald Trump asked them to interfere in any way with the ongoing probe into his former associates.

Intelligence Officials Testify in Senate Hearing -- Live Coverage

And you forgot the important parts...the parts that show your thread is stupid....


Key moments from intel chiefs' testimony on Trump and Russia

Coats "never felt pressure" to intervene in the Russia probe. The intelligence chief responded to a report in the Washington Post, which wrote Tuesday that Coats had told associates in March that the president asked him if he could intercede with then-FBI Director James Comey to encourage him to ease up on the FBI's investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

“My response to that was in my time of service, which is in interacting with the president of the United States or anybody in his administration, I have never been pressured, I have never felt pressure to intervene or interfere in any way with shaping intelligence in a political way or in relationship to an ongoing investigation,” Coats said, recounting his reaction to a request for comment from the Post.

And this.,.....

Coats suggested he is open to discussing private conversations he may have had with the president but not in a public setting. “I don’t believe that it’s appropriate for me to address that in a public session,” he said.

And this......

Rogers says he's never been directed to do anything "illegal" or "immoral." The NSA chief declined to “talk about theoreticals” or address private conversations he may have had with the president. “But I will make the following comment,” he said. “In the three-plus years that I have been the director of the National Security Agency, to the best of my recollection, I have never been directed to do anything I believed to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate, and to the best of my recollection during that same period of service, I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so.”

Yeah...those two bits of testimony pretty much show you have nothing...and this thread is a dud.....

And if you didn't watch the interview , you drink the kool-aide. They dance around the questions...go watch it on youtube...

I posted the answer to the question at issue.....and then the democrats tried to salvage sound bytes from their failed attempt.....go back, and re read the quotes where they say they were not influenced and that they would be fine answering questions in a closed session...which is not what the democrats want...

But they refuse to answer if Trump asked them to stop Comey ...This is where they refused and would talk behind closed doors.

And you ignore this....they said they would not discuss private conversations with the President in open session...since any discussion with the President is considered classified......

and this ......

Coats "never felt pressure" to intervene in the Russia probe. The intelligence chief responded to a report in the Washington Post, which wrote Tuesday that Coats had told associates in March that the president asked him if he could intercede with then-FBI Director James Comey to encourage him to ease up on the FBI's investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

“My response to that was in my time of service, which is in interacting with the president of the United States or anybody in his administration, I have never been pressured, I have never felt pressure to intervene or interfere in any way with shaping intelligence in a political way or in relationship to an ongoing investigation,” Coats said, recounting his reaction to a request for comment from the Post.

And this.,.....

Coats suggested he is open to discussing private conversations he may have had with the president but not in a public setting. “I don’t believe that it’s appropriate for me to address that in a public session,” he said.

And this......

Rogers says he's never been directed to do anything "illegal" or "immoral." The NSA chief declined to “talk about theoreticals” or address private conversations he may have had with the president. “But I will make the following comment,” he said. “In the three-plus years that I have been the director of the National Security Agency, to the best of my recollection, I have never been directed to do anything I believed to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate, and to the best of my recollection during that same period of service, I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so.”

Ye

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Even so, there were a couple bombshells. Like saying he didn't think he had the legal right to refuse to talk openly about unclassified material.

That's UUUGE.

In any event, trump has incriminated himself. Let's hope he has one of his childish tweeting tantrums tomorrow cuz he really is his own worst enemy.


.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Because we know that Democrats would just blurt out classified information for all to hear.

Both sides of the isle as they asked their questions and all 4 basically refused to answer said nothing they were discussing was classified. Some of it had already been discussed in public.

In fact, they did not say that nothing they were discussing was classified. They said they would be more open and free to answer in a closed session. For people who have never had a security clearance, they don't understand the minefield that comes ith that clearance. To stick to the topic, lets play this game.

Senator A asks one of the guys if he had had a conversation with the President with regard to the Russian investigation.

The guy answers, yes.

It is now an open question that has been answered, and Senator A can now drill into that conversation because the witness has opened that line of questioning. This would include the classified parts of the conversation. The witness risks problems if he lets slip accidentally classified information trying to answer it. The witness is now in serious legal jeopardy.

However, if he defers answering to a closed session where any answer is given to people who have a 'need to know' this information, he is no longer in legal jeopardy.

They must have been up all night practicing...lol.... So will we hear what they say in closed session? Do you know?

too much public info and the Russians get involved ...

What the heck?

Pretty likely trumpery has already told Russia everything already.


.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com