I'm glad the Putin Organization has gotten off of it's ass & gone to doing what it is supposed to be doing.
Its a seaside town, that they forgot to shut down So, come major storm surge, come Teller-Ulam, come.
So you guys won't trust these unnamed sources, but the NYT ones are to be trusted. The point is you can't trust any of it...on either side. Gotta wait until there is actual evidence before you all start smearing people with MSM bs. That's why I laugh at the endless declarations you guys make from anonymous MSM sources. Our sources: Unmasking the names and then spreading the names was for political purposes that have nothing to do with national security— Adam Housley (@adamhousley) March 31, 2017 Our sources: "It had everything to do with hurting and embarrassing Trump and his team"— Adam Housley (@adamhousley) March 31, 2017 I will also note...my sources are "not Trump people" They are "just frustrated with the politicalization of our intelligence agencies"— Adam Housley (@adamhousley) March 31, 2017 http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...p-associates-is-very-high-up-source-says.html
Why should Obama say anything? Comey himself came out two weeks ago and confirmed there's nothing to that claim. As has the CIA and NSA. The fact that you didn't hear them is your problem. You're obviously not listening. Contrary to popular belief, Obama doesn't have an independent wiretapping department. When Trump made those accusations, they were directed at the departments that wiretap ... FBI, CIA etc ... Trump just happened to include "Obama" in his tweet because he knew that it would trigger his base. Obama coming out and talking about this would confirm the flawed premise that he has anything to explain. This would be like me blaming Bruce Arena for why the Falcons lost and then expecting Arena to hold a press conference to explain himself. It's absurd.
Right, it was the NYT's fault that Devin Nunes went to the White House, took info from White House staffers loyal to Trump, and then told the world that he had a source that somewhat what vindicated Trump's claim of wiretapping. It's also the NYT's fault that Nunes then lied about the Source being an intelligence resource and not a White House staffer. So clearly, revealing Nunes' sources was purely political to embarras Trump, and not at all relevant to the fact that a Congressional Committee leader lied to the public about a lie that the POTUS told America
This has the potential to look as bad as Obama's "line in the sand" losing America's credibility even more. Thanks, Jamie!
Obama at least had a rational behind that. He was pretty outspoken on why he did what he did in the Atlantic.
I've made zero assumptions. Multiple investigations by the media have confirmed that Nunes' sources are 3 white house staffers. It matters not that you refuse to believe it because Trump is your God.
Honestly, you wouldn't want Obama to come out publicly and deny all of this? Just to hear him deny it so you knew for sure he didn't do it? You wouldn't want to hear his explanation for why he expanded the power of the NSA in the last weeks of his Presidency? You may be ok with it...but to people who aren't so sure of his motivations, keeping radio silence is not a good look.
OMG, that's right. He hasn't denied it, has he? And while we're at it, has Hillary denied raping those children in that tunnel under the pizza joint? Glenn, is that you? We're still waiting to hear about that young girl it is said you murdered...
what in the hell are you talking about? He can't legally expand the powers of the NSA on his own. That would require Coingress. also - he DID deny wiretapping. Through his spokesman.
How about him saying it himself rather than hiding behind someone else. So if he does ever get busted for being behind this, its Lewis who lied...not Obama.
“no reasonable person, who has the benefit of advice from counsel, would submit to questioning in such a highly politicized, witch-hunt environment without assurances against unfair prosecution.”
That's very convenient for you. It allows you to believe whatever you want to believe with no regard for the facts. It must be very freeing.
Actually that new NSA rule did not expand their powers. What it did was make it easier for FBI to have access to NSA databases and analysts in their investigations. The rules as far as the scope of what the NSA is allowed to do did not change at all. Personally I have zero doubt that this had something to do with the Russia investigation. I wouldn't use this angle to make your side look better. The fact that Obama felt it necessary to facilitate cooperation between FBI and NSA should be worrying to you. That suggests the FBI is looking for something specific. As for Obama coming out publicly, I have no opinion. At this point it's clear that Trump is still in campaign mode. He's not going to stop running against Hillary and Obama any time soon. Is Obama supposed to come like an obedient dog every time Trump blows his whistle? I don't recall Obama attacking Bush in 2009, even though there was a lot to complain about with a failed war and a recession. At some point Trump just has to deal with this scandal on its own merits. This is between him and the IC and Congress at this point. If he's got nothing to hide, just ride it out until the story dies. Every president has to deal with stories they'd rather not be talking about. I'm sure Obama didn't want to talk about his birth certificate either.
LOL "When you're given immunity that probably means you've committed a crime." -- Gen. Flynn, 9/25/16 (via @yashar) pic.twitter.com/SpGHexKHZZ— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) March 31, 2017 EDIT: @taosjohn beat me to it.