Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie
As for "routine investigation"
NO! It is not.
|
It is routine. They've been doing this kind of surveillance since Trump was in diapers. You've said time and time again that a political campaign talking to a foreign government is routine, and I believe this. I am sure Clinton's campaign contacted the Russian government, China, and all of the major countries in Europe and around the world. And I am sure that most if not all of these conversations were caught up in incidental surveillance. However, because these communications were routine they were masked, set aside, and never thought of again. But with Trump and his campaign they found things that indicated violations of law.
Let's use Roger Stone for example. No one was watching Roger Stone, or wire tapping his phones. However, the moment he chatted with the hackers who hacked the DNC, well, at that point he was being investigated for a crime.
Manafort too. He was most likely under investigation before he went to work for Trump. At the very least he was on the radar of the CIA for multiple reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie
Nunes specifically said that the reports he saw were not of national security importance.
Meaning that not only should the names NOT have been unmasked...but that the surveillance shouldn't have even been put into a report at all.
|
We don't know what Nunes saw. We have no idea what he saw. Most likely it's a perfectly legal report by the FBI investigating someone who has worked for Trump that has nothing related politics or the campaign. It might have been classified only now because it's part of a much larger investigation, in which case there is no reason to have any of the information masked.
What is a lot more interesting is the fact that Nunes leaked information about what seems to be a classified report, which is a felony. Um.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie
Like I said earlier...everytime YOU write an email to a client in Europe or have a phone conversation with them...YOU are being surveilled and your data is being captured.
BUT...it is then quickly analyzed and determined to be useless. So the spy agencys do NOT write a report and disseminate it to 16 other spy agencys. And they DAMN sure don't unmask your name.
Understand? Nunes specifically said these conversations were not of any national security importance.
THAT is why he brought it to the press and the President and is demanding the FBI make all those transcripts available to the full committee.
This looks like a case of one political party spying on the President-Elect of the other party.
That my friend is dangerous to our Democracy.
You didn't see Hillary's campaign having reports made on them with names unmasked now did you?
What part of this are you missing? Are you just now learning of this from my reply?
|
Again, we have no idea what Nunes saw. But an LA Times article says the following...
But Democrats immediately disputed that claim, asserting that the intercepts appeared to be court-authorized intelligence gathering that did not target Drumpf or his aides and may not have disclosed their names even in classified intelligence reports.
We don't know what Nunes saw. It could have been an FBI investigation into one of Trump's friends or the friends of some of the people who worked for Trump and was completely unrelated to any political activity at all. Nunes has said this has "no connection the Russian investigation". If that is the case, why are we even discussing it?