Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (625856)	2/16/2017 7:07:59 AM
From: LindyBill	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Respond to of 793905

The WH is pushing back on the linked WSJ story. Claims it is not happening. The Intel leakers are saying they are giving Trump the info, just not the "sources and methods." OBAMA’S WATERGATE? Why Was FBI Wiretapping An American Citizen? 655shares Share Tweet Plus The Media (D) are thrilled to have kneecapped Flynn. But the leaks raise DEEPER questions… Liberals are piling on. Gleefully saying things like ‘bigger than Watergate’. Zac Petkanas… we’re looking at you. Funny thing that you should invoke ‘Watergate’ in this case. There are some interesting parallels. What was the problem that deep-sixed Nixon, ultimately? Wasn’t it the weaponizing of federal agencies to hurt his political rivals? As Wiki puts it in defining Watergate: The term Watergate has come to encompass an array of clandestine and often illegal activities undertaken by members of the Nixon administration. Those activities included such “dirty tricks” as bugging the offices of political opponents and people of whom Nixon or his officials were suspicious. Nixon and his close aides also ordered investigations of activist groups and political figures, using the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). -Wiki IRS. FBI. CIA. Obama’s already had his IRS scandals. But what EXACTLY is going on with the Flynn leaks? It turns out that conversations between Flynn and the Russian Ambassador were recorded, and then leaked to the Media (D). Keep in mind, the recording happened during OBAMA’s final days in office. Officials within the intelligence community kneecapped Flynn. (They have had their private reasons, which we have referenced elsewhere.) But when they leaked the information? They had to break the law to do it. Remember, it was a wiretapping case that brought down Nixon. Who was behind the decision to wiretap Flynn? On what authority? And did Obama or his aides have any part to play in it? We already know Obama is quite willing to color outside the lines of legal restraints (Fast and Furious. IRS scandal. Hillary’s email. Etcetera.) But what role did he, or his loyalists play in the submarining of General Flynn. That’s a question the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee would like an answer to. And who ELSE is the government eavesdropping on? Chaffez is introducing a bill. And also, calling for an investigation on exactly this topic. (Here’s the letter.) Wyden, Chaffetz, Conyers Introduce Bill To Crack Down on Warrantless Tracking, Use of Cell-Site Technology t.co — Jason Chaffetz (@jasoninthehouse) February 15, 2017 When we finally get to the bottom of this, will we Obama be as tainted as Nixon? Or will someone else take the fall?

To: LindyBill who wrote (625856)	2/16/2017 7:54:32 AM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793905

More disinformation from CIA. Et tu, WSJ?

To: LindyBill who wrote (625856)	2/16/2017 10:36:46 AM
From: skinowski	2 Recommendations Recommended By lightshipsailor Maurice Winn Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793905

The current and former officials said the decision to avoid revealing sources and methods with Mr. Trump stems in large part from the president’s repeated expressions of admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin and his call during the presidential campaign for Russia to continue hacking the emails of his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton. I think the above "concerns" are bullsh*t and no more than campaign rethoric. Imho, if our intelligence people seriously think this way, they lack intelligence. Speaking of which - simple question - what can spooks do with intelligence that is supposedly so sensitive that they wouldn't share it with the President? Burn it? Hide it? Leak it to the newspapers?? Makes no sense. They must answer to the legitimately elected government. If they don't, what's the purpose for their existence?