Chairman of House Intelligence says Trump surveiled by Obama !

1. 0

   ahorsebackposted 21 months ago

   After the election ! Pres.  Obama may have ordered  surveillance of the Trump  Administration ! At least some whistleblower[s] are saying - alleging  Trump was possible bugged  by the Obama administration .    This is aside of the whole Russian  connection  investigation , ......
   
   Can the ex-president Obama be charged with this ?
   
   Wonder how or where the media  hype will take this ?

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Credence2posted 21 months agoin reply to this

      Let's have the link?

      replyreport
      1. 86

         colorfuloneposted 21 months agoin reply to this

         http://www.breitbart.com/big-government … veillance/
         
         https://www.infowars.com/house-intellig … veillance/

         replyreport
         1. 80

            Credence2posted 21 months agoin reply to this

            Those are not credible sources, no more than you consider Salon one. Mainstream media sources are the only ones I can consider, not rabidly rightwing ones with lies and biased agendas.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               ahorsebackposted 21 months agoin reply to this

               Seriously Credence , its all over the news , either catch up or get out of the forums !  Stop being so  negative to reality .

               replyreport
               1. 80

                  Credence2posted 21 months agoin reply to this

                  You will need to have someone look at you if you really think that I will give any credibility to either Breitbart or Inforwars. Maybe you need to get on 'the stick'?
                  
                  The question still remains, where is the link?

                  replyreport
         2. 84

            Don Wposted 21 months agoin reply to this

            horseback: Obama may have ordered  surveillance of the Trump  Administration !
            
            Credence2: Let's have the link?
            
            colorfulone: breitbart.com, infowars.com
            
            I can't even . . .

            replyreport
            1. 80

               Credence2posted 21 months agoin reply to this

               Yeah, Don, I am laughing my a$$ off as well....

               replyreport
      2. 86

         colorfuloneposted 21 months agoin reply to this

         Did Obama Abuse Raw Intelligence?
         I couldn’t have seen those transcripts when I led the House intel committee.
         
         It was remarkable when Devin Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, revealed Wednesday that Trump campaign officials were caught up in the inadvertent collection of intelligence. Read between the lines with a clear understanding of the intelligence community, and it’s positively astonishing.
         
         Starting with the premise of Mr. Nunes’s announcement, there’s evidence to show that communications involving people connected with the Trump transition were collected by America’s intelligence apparatus. We don’t know the particulars, but it could include conversations between Trump transition staff and foreign officials whose conversations were subject to intelligence monitoring.
         
         Things begin to get a little frightening when we learn that this inadvertent collection of Trump staff conversations was followed up with transcriptions of those conversations and the disclosure (or unmasking) of the persons involved in the conversation. These transcripts would be considered raw intelligence reports.
         
         When I was chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, I was routinely involved in briefings as a member of the “Gang of Eight”—both parties’ leaders in the House and Senate and on the intelligence committees. I cannot recall how many times I asked to see raw intelligence reporting and was refused because that stuff is just not made available to policy makers.
         
         But according to Mr. Nunes, such information made its way to the Obama White House before Inauguration Day. Few if any people working in the White House would ever need to see raw intelligence. Like intelligence committee members, they are typically consumers of intelligence products, not raw intelligence.
         
         The raw transcripts of masked persons—or unmasked persons, or U.S. persons who can be easily identified—making their way to the White House is very likely unprecedented. One can only imagine who, at that point, might be reading these reports. Valerie Jarrett? Susan Rice? Ben Rhodes? The president himself? We don’t know, and the people who do aren’t talking at the moment.
         
         Then we have the testimony earlier this week from FBI Director James Comey and National Security Agency Director Adm. Mike Rogers. Mr. Comey said there was no basis to support the tweet from President Trump that his “wires” had been tapped by Barack Obama. What he didn’t say—and wasn’t asked—was whether information was collected on Trump staff by other means. Mr. Trump was a little inarticulate in the context of Twitter’s 140-character limit, but it seems he got the general picture right.
         
         Then there’s Mr. Comey’s testimony that the FBI had been investigating Trump staff for eight months. It almost certainly included surveillance; an investigation without surveillance would approach farcical.
         
         Adm. Rogers told the House Intelligence Committee that there are strict controls in place for masking and unmasking the identities of people caught up in the inadvertent collection of information and the distribution of this kind of material. It now appears he either misled the committee or doesn’t know what’s happening inside his own agency. If Mr. Nunes is right, the rules either weren’t followed or were much less stringent than Adm. Rogers let on.
         
         Last, and rather damningly, I believe that Mr. Comey and Adm. Rogers would have to have known that raw transcripts of captured conversations that included members of the Trump team were at the White House. It is inconceivable that people in those positions of power would not know. While this may not be criminal, it is at least a cause for them to be fired.
         
         My greatest concern—the one that keeps me awake at night—is that the awesome powers of our intelligence community might have been corrupted for political purposes. While we’re not witnessing broad, Stasi-style surveillance of citizens, it’s clear there have been serious errors of judgment and action among our otherwise professional intelligence community. This is truly scary. We have to learn the entire truth before anyone, in or out of Congress, can again have confidence in our intelligence community.
         
         Mr. Hoekstra, a Michigan Republican, was chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, 2004-07.
         *  https://www.wsj.com/articles/did-obama- … inion_main

         replyreport
         1. 80

            Credence2posted 20 months agoin reply to this

            Thank you, Colorfulone, as this is a credible source. Also for copying the article as you can't read WSJ with a subscription.
            
            While, this is still speculation yet to be proved in its substance, it cannot be dismissed out of hand.

            replyreport
   2. 86

      colorfuloneposted 21 months agoin reply to this

      There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it.
      
      There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone.
      
      The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press?
      
      We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.
      
      ~ John Swinton former chief of staff of the New York Times statement before the New York Press Club
      
      That pretty much sums up the corporate mainstream press-titutes of today too!
      
      ADDED: I meant this reply for Credence.  But, it works!

      replyreport
   3. 86

      colorfuloneposted 21 months agoin reply to this

      So, Judge Napolitano spoke out about the surveillance on Trump and got canned from Fox News?  Seems he should get his job back since President Trump has been vindicated, and so was Napolitano.  Someone pulled some strings because the Judge told the truth or so it would seem.  At least we know he isn't just an intellectual prostitute.

      replyreport
2. 0

   ahorsebackposted 21 months ago

   So its all about HOW it was announced rather than who announced it , There lies the  media focus  , The Chairman or the entire committee ! Wow huge difference , ......What's a chairman [Nunes ]for  anyway,  ether trust him as chairman or not .   Liberals ON the  house intel. committee   are just pissed because they couldn't spin the announcement .
   
   Trump was bugged by Obama . , period !

   replyreport
3. 81

   FitnezzJimposted 20 months ago

   Credence?   Here is a link to what Nunes had to say Wednesday.
   
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxZNa4eYG0c
   
   This may, or may not, be the announcement ahorseback refers to in his question.
   
   I'm guessing not.  To me, the Nunes announcement appears rather artfully crafted for the purpose of encouraging lemmings to go jump off a cliff, rather than risk the consequences of leading a rather large unstoppable herd to the edge.
   
   Give it a week.  Perhaps he will say "April Fools".

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Credence2posted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Thanks, Jim, how have you been? I listened to Nunes  and it sounds like a lot of mud they are going throw on the wall to see what will actually stick. I guess Friday was yesterday and we should have more answers?

      replyreport
4. 79

   Live to Learnposted 20 months ago

   It fascinates me that there is any amount of surprise to the revelation. Anyone who thought the White House (under any administration, whether democrat or republican) wouldn't have done this is rather naive. Power corrupts.

   replyreport