Rumor BarrShootsDownTrumpgate?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

yes it’s just absurd to think Trump and his groupies will just take defeat and move on. That’s totally their MO.
Trump has only ever participated in one presidential election, which he won, so you really have no basis to compare what his “MO” may or may not be when losing an election. You’re grasping for straws to set off some fear mongering tyranny alarms. You’re Alex Jones circa 2012.
 
If they can find who leaked, they sure as hell can. This is a serious crime.

18 U.S.C. § 798 - U.S. Code - Unannotated Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 798. Disclosure of classified information

I didn't say it wasn't a crime. I said I doubt they'll be able to charge anyone for it. Because they probably won't be able to find out who leaked.

barfo
 
I didn't say it wasn't a crime. I said I doubt they'll be able to charge anyone for it. Because they probably won't be able to find out who leaked.

barfo
Oh, I’m sure they can. All the Obama holdovers with any power are gone. All intelligence are stored.
 
We can get some perjury charges as well. Tick tock.

1FD2D25A-8621-47E2-85FC-B42FE9BD1721.jpeg 03714F2F-189F-476D-BCB6-A6480ADBB08A.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • 1FD2D25A-8621-47E2-85FC-B42FE9BD1721.jpeg
    1FD2D25A-8621-47E2-85FC-B42FE9BD1721.jpeg
    20.4 KB · Views: 88
  • 03714F2F-189F-476D-BCB6-A6480ADBB08A.jpeg
    03714F2F-189F-476D-BCB6-A6480ADBB08A.jpeg
    137.7 KB · Views: 84
Read most of the comments and for me, it comes down to 2 things,

1. Are we/you better off now than we/you were 4 years ago.

2. Between Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, who is the better/more electable candidate?
 
lol...considering recent events, perjury charges evidently don't really count anymore.
 
Oh, I’m sure they can. All the Obama holdovers with any power are gone. All intelligence are stored.

Can they? Because the Trump administration leaks like a sieve, and Trump is reportedly upset about that. Yet he doesn't seem to be able to stop it, or prosecute any of the leakers.

Unless the government is spying on all government employees and all reporters, I don't see how they will have a record to consult.

barfo
 
Trump has only ever participated in one presidential election, which he won, so you really have no basis to compare what his “MO” may or may not be when losing an election. You’re grasping for straws to set off some fear mongering tyranny alarms. You’re Alex Jones circa 2012.

You’re funny
 
No, you didn’t. You said there was a criminal investigation of James Comey. Are you taking that back?
I'm taking nothing back because I did not say that.
Here's what I said "It was supposed to be imminent several months ago." Now you tell me where I said there was a criminal investigation of Comey. Perhaps you don't understand 'imminent' especially when joined with "supposed to be imminent".

All you had to do was ask.
 
I'm taking nothing back because I did not say that.
Here's what I said "It was supposed to be imminent several months ago." Now you tell me where I said there was a criminal investigation of Comey. Perhaps you don't understand 'imminent' especially when joined with "supposed to be imminent".

All you had to do was ask.
Absolutely... Let’s put this in context.
upload_2020-5-14_6-59-28.jpeg
I said, “There is an active criminal investigation” and then you said there was an investigation of Comey.

First of all, there were no investigations of Comey “yet.” And if you think the IG report was that investigation of Comey, I disagree. The IG was investigating everyone involved with the Russia Investigation.

Second, replying to my statement of a criminal investigation implies the criminal investigation will be on Comey.

If I read that wrong, I’ll stand corrected.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2020-5-14_6-59-28.jpeg
    upload_2020-5-14_6-59-28.jpeg
    134.6 KB · Views: 61
R-1034609-1547976082-8427.jpeg.jpg
 
Who else finds it ironic that the right is now claiming someone used the government to go after a political opponent?

It's like the man is incapable of not going "nuh uh, you did it!"
 
Wait, the president knew about an investigation about the incoming national security advisor? And that is bad why?
 
One of the reason I left both the democratic and republican party was all the dogmatic positions people took, only because it aligned with the party affiliation. There just didn't seem to be a give and take approach anymore through comprise to get things done. And now Im very glad I did because my concerns and predictions have amplified to the point where its obvious either side is only interested in proving the other side wrong, through hate and unwillingness to work together, at least to set a good example to the younger generation.
The tribal animosity and arrogance of ,Im right, and you're wrong, gotcha, forms of communicating anymore are basically cheating young people the right to learn to effectively communicate and compromise and be respectful of people with differing points of views. They are being forced to take sides and beat the other side at all cost. Look at the various tribal wars that have gone on for centuries in various parts of the world. They cant shake it, it's what they've learned and how they live. I'm bothered because it's happening here at a fast pace.
It is good to know there still are families that try and instill within their kids to be respectful of others points of views and to learn to communicate without getting all sideways because someone disagree's with them and they cant get their way all the time.
I vote issues and beliefs that I have, and it's usually a representation of both liberal and conservatives views. I respect both sides positions, and the people that have them, as long as they can be civil and considerate.
 
Wait, the president knew about an investigation about the incoming national security advisor? And that is bad why?

Because they had to find something to pin on Obama that sounded at least plausible, hoping people wouldn't actually look into it, and just believe it without questioning it.

Which never happens...
 
Because they had to find something to pin on Obama that sounded at least plausible, hoping people wouldn't actually look into it, and just believe it without questioning it.

Which never happens...

He should be impeached from being an ex-president.
 
He should be impeached from being an ex-president.
the fact that he won the popular vote AND the electoral, twice, proves he needed to be under investigation from the moment he made his speech at the 2004 DNC.
 
One of the reason I left both the democratic and republican party was all the dogmatic positions people took, only because it aligned with the party affiliation. There just didn't seem to be a give and take approach anymore through comprise to get things done. And now Im very glad I did because my concerns and predictions have amplified to the point where its obvious either side is only interested in proving the other side wrong, through hate and unwillingness to work together, at least to set a good example to the younger generation.
The tribal animosity and arrogance of ,Im right, and you're wrong, gotcha, forms of communicating anymore are basically cheating young people the right to learn to effectively communicate and compromise and be respectful of people with differing points of views. They are being forced to take sides and beat the other side at all cost. Look at the various tribal wars that have gone on for centuries in various parts of the world. They cant shake it, it's what they've learned and how they live. I'm bothered because it's happening here at a fast pace.
It is good to know there still are families that try and instill within their kids to be respectful of others points of views and to learn to communicate without getting all sideways because someone disagree's with them and they cant get their way all the time.
I vote issues and beliefs that I have, and it's usually a representation of both liberal and conservatives views. I respect both sides positions, and the people that have them, as long as they can be civil and considerate.
COMPLETELY AGREE!
Post of the year!!!
 
UNMASKING EXPLAINED

WHAT IS UNMASKING?


During routine, legal surveillance of foreign targets, names of Americans occasionally come up in conversations. Foreigners could be talking about a U.S. citizen or U.S. permanent resident by name, or a foreigner could be speaking directly to an American. When an American's name is swept up in surveillance of foreigners, it is called 'incidental collection.' In these cases, the name of the American is masked before the intelligence is distributed to administration officials to avoid invading that person's privacy.

Unless there is a clear intelligence value to knowing the American´s name, it is not revealed in the reports. The intelligence report would refer to the person only as 'U.S. Person 1' or U.S. Person 2.' If U.S. officials with proper clearance to review the report want to know the identity, they can ask the agency that collected the information - perhaps the FBI, CIA or National Security Agency - to 'unmask' the name.

Unmasking requests are common, according to Michael Morell, former CIA deputy director and host of 'Intelligence Matters' podcast.

'Literally hundreds of times a year across multiple administrations. In general, senior officials make the requests when necessary to understand the underlying intelligence. I myself did it several times a month and NSA adjudicates the request. You can't do your job without it,' he said.

Morell emphasized that unmasking is not the same as declassification. 'When a name is unmasked, the underlying intelligence to include the name remains classified so leaking it would be a crime.'

WHEN WOULD AN INTELLIGENCE AGENCY UNMASK A NAME?

The request is not automatically granted. The person asking has to have a good reason. Typically, the reason is that not knowing the name makes it impossible to fully understand the intelligence provided.

The name is released only if the official requesting it has a need to know and the 'identity is necessary to understand foreign intelligence information or assess its importance,' according to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence's latest report, which includes statistics on unmasking. 'Additional approval by a designated NSA official is also required.'

Former NSA Director Mike Rogers has said that only 20 of his employees could approve an unmasking. The names are shared only with the specific official who asked. They are not released publicly. Leaking a name, or any classified information, is illegal.

HOW OFTEN ARE NAMES UNMASKED?

The number of unmasking requests began being released to the public in response to recommendations in 2014 from the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board.

There were 9,217 unmasking requests in the 12-month period between September 2015 and August 2016, the first period in which numbers are publicly available. The period was during the latter years of the Obama administration.

The number rose during the Trump administration. The 9,529 requests in 2017 grew to 16,721 in 2018 and 10,012 last year.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...answer-questions-Mike-Flynns-prosecution.html
 
Absolutely... Let’s put this in context.
View attachment 31436
I said, “There is an active criminal investigation” and then you said there was an investigation of Comey.

First of all, there were no investigations of Comey “yet.” And if you think the IG report was that investigation of Comey, I disagree. The IG was investigating everyone involved with the Russia Investigation.

Second, replying to my statement of a criminal investigation implies the criminal investigation will be on Comey.

If I read that wrong, I’ll stand corrected.
That was so long ago that I can't recall anything about it.
Your post was a response to a totally different post.
Next time you want to bring up a dinosaur how about referencing it else the whole thing is wildly misleading.
 
That was so long ago that I can't recall anything about it.
Your post was a response to a totally different post.
Next time you want to bring up a dinosaur how about referencing it else the whole thing is wildly misleading.
That was the start of the exchange! Lol
 
I don’t think Trump will leave the office next January. Either the election will be rigged, he will win, or they’ll protest or some other shit. He won’t just go away. There is no chance. If he loses the election they’ll make something up that it’s fake results. It’ll be something.

id be willing to bet that if he wins, the initial thought from the DNC will be something is wrong or rigged.
 
Trump likes to belittle Obama as an attempt to secure the racist vote

I think one of the most upsetting things about this, is that it showed us that there are more racists out there, or people who are ok with racist behaviors from people, than I foolishly thought there was.

That and a lot of people stayed home in 16.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top