Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

What You Might Need To Know About Politics In United States Of America

politics USA

  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#18 Farming guy

Farming guy

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 966 posts

Posted 24 September 2017 - 07:12 AM

A cattle dealer I know said it best, "I suppose it all depends on who's bull is getting gored."


  • Buffy likes this

#19 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 24 September 2017 - 11:38 AM

Do you expect everyone to take Devin Nunes word for it with no proof?



Do you expect everyone to deny what's in the document written by:

Rosemary M. Collyer



This is called "conflation," dear.

Devin Nunes is the only one to claim to have evidence of "unmasking of 260 names by Sarah Power."

Rosemary Collyer's opinion generally attacks the NSA's procedures over a five year span, but in fact generally reinforces it's powers in a way that civil libertarians find disturbing.

Most imporantly though it makes absolutely no mention of Sarah Powers. None. Go look for yourself.

So you'd really have to be a comlete moron to use the latter as "proof" of the former here.


Allow me to contradict my clarifications and in no time we'll get to the bottom of nothing, :phones:
Buffy

#20 scherado

scherado

    Questioning

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 207 posts

Posted 24 September 2017 - 02:18 PM

...
Allow me to contradict my clarifications and in no time we'll get to the bottom of nothing, :phones:
Buffy

.
I had the post of yours you deleted in it's entirety--for good reason--but I deleted it and went back to find it gone. Lucky you; prudent decision--and I don't have to type a response, praise the lord. The Agnostic "speaks."

#21 scherado

scherado

    Questioning

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 207 posts

Posted 24 September 2017 - 02:25 PM

...
Devin Nunes is the only one to claim to have evidence of "unmasking of 260 names by Sarah Power."
...

.
Do you even know what actually happened? Did you assert in the above that Powers' requests were approved? I thought they were requested but not approved. Do you know differently?

#22 scherado

scherado

    Questioning

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 207 posts

Posted 24 September 2017 - 02:47 PM

...
Devin Nunes is the only one to claim to have evidence of "unmasking of 260 names by Sarah Power."
...

.
The Nunes document linked below and linked in posts above and which you have hung your hat, precipitously, does not mention the name "Powers". Before anyone views that document, again or for the first time, notice the list of names on the top-left margin and the two names on the top-right margin--26 name, I think. One must assume that they all have given their imprimatur with respect to the contents of the document. Our very own Admin "Buffy"--yes, that's the name she uses, does not find this adequate. Ok.

From page 2 of the Nunes document
.

For example, this Committee has learned that one official, whose position had no apparent intelligence-related function, made hundreds of unmasking requests during the final year of the Obama Administration. Of those requests, only one offered a justification that was nt biolerplate and articulated why that specific official required the U.S. person information for the performance of his or her official duties.

.
Further, I think that I read above in her posts that she asserts that the hundreds of requests have something to do with "terrorist" or terrorism? I'd like to see how that connection was established...Oh my!

#23 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 24 September 2017 - 04:12 PM

Devin Nunes is the only one to claim to have evidence of "unmasking of 260 names by Sarah Power."


The Nunes document linked below and linked in posts above and which you have hung your hat, precipitously, does not mention the name "Powers".


No it doesn't, but the day the letter came out, her name was leaked to Fox News citing "2 unnamed sources."

So interesting that the whole point of Nunes letter is going after "leakers," and yet the only evidence comes from....leaks in the administration.
 

Before anyone views that document, again or for the first time, notice the list of names on the top-left margin and the two names on the top-right margin--26 name, I think. One must assume that they all have given their imprimatur with respect to the contents of the document.


It's called "letterhead" dear, and no, there have been endless complaints from both parties that Nunes--who is still the Intelligence Committee chair although having recused himself from "Russia-related" investigations by the committee--is off sending out letters without sharing them with *anyone* on the committee.

You'll note the letter is signed only by him, whereas you will find most such letters bear the names of numerous committee letters showing their agreement. A committee's letterhead can be used by a minority of members in the process of any committee related business, but never implies approval by any more than those who sign it unless there is a statement that "the committee has agreed and is requesting..." which shows that it is a request or demand approved by a majority of the committee.

If it only has one signature, it's generally defined as a "cowboy operation," that is, "some guy's off doing his own thing and can't get a single other member to agree with him."
 

Our very own Admin "Buffy"--yes, that's the name she uses, does not find this adequate. Ok.


Nope, neither does anyone who has any knowledge of the way the government actually works.

 

For example, this Committee has learned that one official, whose position had no apparent intelligence-related function, made hundreds of unmasking requests during the final year of the Obama Administration. Of those requests, only one offered a justification that was nt biolerplate and articulated why that specific official required the U.S. person information for the performance of his or her official duties.

Further, I think that I read above in her posts that she asserts that the hundreds of requests have something to do with "terrorist" or terrorism? I'd like to see how that connection was established...Oh my!


I'm not sure why you have difficulty understanding the general argument that
  • FISA is used to gather intelligence about foreigners communicating with US citizens when related to all threats to the US
  • that FISA is extensively used for combatting terrorism, and
  • that point 2) is exactly why both parties find that unmasking is a perfectly acceptable and must be approved by the FISA Court anyway.
Whether any particular unmasking request is "terrorist" related or justified is up to that court, and Rosemary Collyer is a conservative judge, appointed to the DC District Court by GW Bush and by John Roberts to the FISA court. She has approved lots of FISA warrants and unmaskings. It's her job. Many of them do not have anything to do with "terrorism" and are related to the Russia-related investigations. She's considered tough but fair, and if you'd bother to read the link I provided above, you'd see that she does lean in the direction of allowing such surveillance, although in the decision you cited, she did think that rules had been violated, but the vast majority of those cases were indeed "terrorist" related.

And again, to keep beating this dead horse: There's no actual evidence of these "hundreds of unmaskings" in Nunes letter except Nunes and "unnamed sources" that...um...leak it.

You seem to be seeking some sort of separation between topics that are inherently related in order to prove...something. Something that's not at all clear but seems to be "Obama/Clinton bad" and "anything any Republican ever did okay and how dare you say no."

Whatever. I'm happy to keep correcting your misleading and false claims, if you continue to post them. It's unfortunately, part of my job.


And this mess is so big and so deep and so tall, we cannot pick it up. There is no way at all! :phones:
Buffy



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: politics, USA