(03-23-2017 10:05 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-23-2017 10:00 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-23-2017 09:53 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-22-2017 03:07 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  1. The surveillance gathered was completely incidental. However, the incidental wiretap was a wiretap on Trump and his transition team.

No it wasn't it was more likely on the Russians. If Trump had anything to do with it, it was because they were talking to the Russians.

NO IT WASNT. STOP BEING A GRUBER.

The initial surveillance was on foreign people who mentioned the names of Trump and the transition team. That was it. And there was little to no "intelligence" value in what the foreigners were saying about Trump and the team members. There certainly was no talk of collusion, since what was being said admittedly had little to no intelligence value.

Someone unmasked the civilian names being mentioned by the foreigners. That should not have happened. There was no legal reason to unmask the names, because their names were not associated with any activity that required them to be unmasked.

Stop being a gruber.

If the initial surveillance had no intelligence, then they would have been no need to unmask Flynn. If Flynn did nothing wrong, they wouldn't have fired him.

Flynn was unmasked because the intell he provided was significant. It was enough to legally have him unmasked and he was fired because of it.

wrong. wrong, and wrong.

You can keep being a Gruber and be wrong, or you can open your eyes. Opening your eyes will cause you to see how much of a police state Obama was running. So be prepared.

(03-23-2017 10:21 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  By the way, Schiff is so concerned about how this is going down that he failed to mention any of this in his butthurt ramblings yesterday.

What are you talking about Nunez gave no new information.

(03-23-2017 10:25 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-23-2017 10:21 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  By the way, Schiff is so concerned about how this is going down that he failed to mention any of this in his butthurt ramblings yesterday.

What are you talking about Nunez gave no new information.

Actually, he did. But you aint getting it from Schiff. You want a video link?

JΞSŦΞR ✪ ΔCŦUAL³³º¹‏ @th3j35t3r 5h

ProTip: When testing if @DevinNunes loyalties lie w/ his intel committee investigation or DJT, just give him a nugget & watch where he runs.

(03-23-2017 10:26 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-23-2017 10:25 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-23-2017 10:21 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  By the way, Schiff is so concerned about how this is going down that he failed to mention any of this in his butthurt ramblings yesterday.

What are you talking about Nunez gave no new information.

Actually, he did. But you aint getting it from Schiff. You want a video link?

Give me whatever you got. I saw his press conference.

(03-23-2017 10:33 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  JΞSŦΞR ✪ ΔCŦUAL³³º¹‏ @th3j35t3r 5h

ProTip: When testing if @DevinNunes loyalties lie w/ his intel committee investigation or DJT, just give him a nugget & watch where he runs.

Oh, well that changes everything...

Yes, the point will sink in to some that his loyalties do not lie with getting to the truth. His loyalties lie with sheltering Trump.

Jester gets caught in Trumps Rope a Dope.

bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha

BUCKLE UP!