This is of course nonsense but I will report back to your propaganda overlords that you are trying to get their messages Out, no matter how lame.

That Clinton investigation was started for political reasons so the conviction should be overturned.

Check mate libtard

Why would the Vice President need to know the person unmasked? Why would he need to know that information at the timing he did? Isn't unmasking done by investigators? You dodged the question.

I know the taping of foreigners calls is standard. The unmasking of General Flynns name is where the abuse of power and breaking of the forth amendment comes into play. The fact that there were so many "mistakes" we know it was corrupt. All the mistakes were made in an effort to hurt Trump and his team.

So because the FBI didn't announce it was investigating Trump, they helped him... Comey was just covering his ass. Everyone thought Clinton would win. She committed crimes and then Comey covered it up and didn't prosecute her.

If the FBI wanted to help Trump, they would have just indicted Hillary Clinton and there was plenty of precedent to do that with her handling of classified information/ destroying the evidence.

Here's what's key for you to understand:

1) The person doing the unmasking has no idea who the subject is. Prior to the unmasking the individual is referred to as something like 'USPERSON!' or something.

2) The reason the VP might need that is because he, like everyone in the administration, was working on the transition to the new group. Thus if there was someone compromised he/she would need to know who that person was in order to determine whether they should treat them differently.


Except that wasn't the basis for the investigation. It was just a small piece of a very big picture that showed suspicious activity and warranted investigation. After all, the notion that one of the two people who might be elected President, or even just people very close to him or her, is a very, very big deal. But in your universe the experienced counter intelligence agents in the FBI who are seeing all these contacts between members of Trump's team and members of a hostile foreign government are just supposed to, what? Ignore it? That's absurd.

You need to learn what unmasking is and how it's done, because you're making yourself look stupid here.

This is false. She broke no laws and that's been confirmed over and over again.

It's amusing because after years and years of fruitless investigations into Bill Clinton by the Republicans lead by Ken Starr and Brett Kavanaugh that came to absolutely nothing, ...not a crime to be found against him, they got so excited when they found out he was cheating on his wife with Monica Lewinsky.

They could not wait to get him into a true PERJURY trap which was :

- either he 'admit the affair under oath and take the fall out from that politically and from his family',

Or

- he would lie under oath (and who does not lie about affairs once they engage in them?) and deny it and thus finally give them 'lie and crime' they could not get otherwise.

People wrongly use the word Perjury Trap, especially when it comes to Flynn statements or Congress trying to Trump in to speak during the Mueller investigations. Neither of those are perjury traps. What they did to Clinton WAS a perjury trap.

Dude, the Vice President can not unmask people to know if he should treat them differently. LOL WHAT? How is that legal? What gives the VP the power to unmask an American citizens private conversation?


What was the basis of the Russia investigation?

The contacts between Trumps team and those "hostile foreign government" were standard. If Trump sees anyone interact with someone from a country we don't like, are you saying it is fine if we start a investigation into them? Based off what you are saying, you could talk to someone from China and it would be fine for Trump and his people to spy on them. John Kerry talked to people from Iran earlier this year, if you find out Trump has been spying on him and all his calls, are you okay with that?

You are fine with peoples civil liberties being taken away because you are a partisan hack.


She broke laws. I think you would almost need to be a shill, to not know that. Our law enforcement subpoenaed her emails and then she had her team destroy them. They took hammers to her phones lol. If that is not obstruction of justice, I don't know how you can pretend to make a case on Trump for that.

I was answering your question about what unmasking is and explicitly said I was ignoring the stuff about the investigation. I don't know how you got "dodged the question" out of that.

But if you insist then it was probably standard for a VP to ask for information into national security information. Maybe there's an argument that the intelligence wasn't accurate but given what was presented it would have been negligent for Biden not to be fully informed.

You realise there are literally thousands of unmasking requests every year right? That a few dozen were made of an intelligence report that alleged that there was a potentially compromised individual seems entirely unremarkable and certainly not proof of corruption. Again, the people making the requests by definition did not know who they were unmasking. It's hard to argue that the unmasking was part of a targetted hit job when they didn't know who they were requesting the information about.

You are ignorant of why the investigation was started and YES there was probable cause to start it.

I'll educate you:

- A member of the Trump campaign (George Papadopoulos) told a foreign Diplomat that Russians were trying to intervene in the US election to benefit the Trump campaign.
- That discussion so alarmed the diplomat that he took it to his countries Intelligence Agencies and reported it
- Those Intelligence Agencies took it seriously enough to report to the US Intelligence.
- The US intelligence, noting this is a serious crime, IF TRUE, decided they needed to investigate to find out
- The Group of 8 including Mitch McConnell and the Obama Admin ok'd the investigation.


THAT is the justification for the investigation. And in no instance past or FUTURE if any gov't (China, Russia, N.Korea, Cuba, other) is suspected of trying to influence a US election should it NOT be investigated.

So what Trump didn't bother to confirm what happened before he fired a high profile guy? What is he, a moron? Or just a coward?

We don't know this. Much of the evidence has not been provided and examined. Mueller himself reported that the Trump administration blocked his investigation multiple times, likely breaking the law in doing so.

Because it's illegal. It's about as clear a case of obstruction as there can be.

Do you honestly think the mayor of LA could tell the DA "Hey, can you drop the charges on OJ? He's a golf buddy of mine." If the DA then thinks about it and delays the investigation for even a microsecond, it's a felony by the mayor.



The Obama thing is false, of course. Meanwhile, his intent when meeting the woman from Russia was to accept help from foreign agents to further his father's chances of winning the election. The fact that it didn't end up happening means nothing. Attempting to rob a bank and failing is still a crime. In fact even discussing the idea of robbing a bank with a friend is conspiracy and that is also a crime.

Jesus Christ dude, he wasn't unmasking the conversation, he was unmasking who was participating in it. The administration already had the full transcript.
The entire conversation was recorded as part of a legal wiretap on Kisylak, not on Flynn. Once the transcripts were made they block out the names of American citizens who are captured in the conversations so in order to see who was talking the name needs to be 'unmasked'. Until that happened nobody had any idea that it was Flynn.

10000% yes. And if they find out Kerry is an Iranian spy then he should be prosecuted.

It was a smackdown of Obama for lying and engaging in blatant hypocrisy, that's all.

And a very impressive smackdown it was too.

it was a paid opinion puff piece.

Hmmmm, are lying and hypocrisy things you find unbecoming of all presidents?

Nope. It was a well deserved smackdown delivered to a lying hypocrite.

By a class act, Flynn's lawyer.

Flynn finally gets a lawyer dedicated to fighting for him and posters like dino try to hold him to positions chosen by his previous legal team.

I'll put it in terms they are familiar with. You see guys, the government had "kompromat" on Flynn's lawyers. They messed up on Flynn's foreign contacts forms that he was required to fill out. At that point, they were no longer working in Flynn's best interest. So when you keep parroting that "Flynn lied!", remember that he just did what his compromised team told him to do.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/flynns...e_3350021.html

Hm this is a weird article

"The name of Michael Flynn wasn’t masked to protect his identity in transcripts of his calls with a Russian ambassador that were distributed or revealed to President Barack Obama and a number of top officials in his administration, recently released documents indicate.

Information about the calls, including Flynn’s name, was leaked to the media within days, setting off a series of events that cost the retired Army lieutenant general his job as national security adviser, millions of dollars in legal fees, and several years of his life."
"Then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper requested copies from Comey and then briefed Obama, his Vice President Joe Biden, and Obama’s senior staff about the calls, Comey said.

Clapper, during congressional testimony, denied briefing Obama about the calls, but then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates told the FBI that Obama brought up the calls during a meeting on Jan. 5. She said she didn’t know at the time how Obama learned about the calls (pdf).

Since no unmasking requests involving Flynn were made between the time the Kislyak calls took place and when the FBI had the transcripts with Flynn’s name unmasked, it appears his name was never masked to begin with.

That would align with Comey’s comment that “we did not disseminate this [redacted] in any finished intelligence.”"

"“So no transcript or summary of conversations with Kislyak that were ever masked, and therefore, there were no unmasking requests that could have been made for these nonexistent reports,” the staffer said, while describing the issue.

“I think your description is accurate,” McCabe ultimately responded.

As McCabe described the origin of the transcripts, “They came up—we found them through an effort—without getting into too long of an explanation—in an effort to respond to a tasking from [redacted] and so the results of what we found were communicated to the Agency, who I think had the pen on that response.”"


I think it is important for the people arguing with me to remember, the people who are investigating the russian collusion and going on tv, say they have 0 evidence of russia collusion. To me this seems like a complete false narrative disinformation push by the obama administration to try to drag down the incoming president.

Basically the Obama administration spied on his political rival campaign, with 0 evidence of Russian collusion (thats what they swear to under oath). Any events that happened, that you guys cite, the people who swear under oath that they have 0 evidence of collusion, know of those events. So when you bring up the Don Jr meeting, or Flynn talking to a Russian, or whatever. They have that information, at the time they swear under oath, that they have 0 evidence of collusion.

Given all these facts. I don't see how you could interpret this any other way than them just spying on their political rivals and using that information to try to undermine them through illegal leaks. Illegal spying, illegal leaks.

By God, the Enoch Times has blown this wide open!

Are you still repeating this nonsense despite being schooled with the facts just upthread.

----------

You are ignorant of why the investigation was started and YES there was probable cause to start it.

I'll educate you:

- A member of the Trump campaign (George Papadopoulos) told a foreign Diplomat that Russians were trying to intervene in the US election to benefit the Trump campaign.
- That discussion so alarmed the diplomat that he took it to his countries Intelligence Agencies and reported it
- Those Intelligence Agencies took it seriously enough to report to the US Intelligence.
- The US intelligence, noting this is a serious crime, IF TRUE, decided they needed to investigate to find out
- The Group of 8 including Mitch McConnell and the Obama Admin ok'd the investigation.


THAT is the justification for the investigation. And in no instance past or FUTURE if any gov't (China, Russia, N.Korea, Cuba, other) is suspected of trying to influence a US election should it NOT be investigated.

Except for this time, because Trump controls all the agencies that would investigate, and the foreign parties who want to influence the election want to do so in his favor.

This is odd. it seems like you are the one ignorant of why the investigation was started. Why no mention of the Steele Dossier? Also the people who testified under oath who ran the investigation, say there was no evidence of collusion. So while you can list off whatever "reasons" you want of why it was started, the fact is they knew they weren't colluding with Russia and that is what they testified to under oath. The people who ran this, are telling you they had no evidence of collusion...

Why wasn't General Flynns name masked in the original briefing of the call to Obama before the unmasking requests took place?

If Papadopoulos does not say what he does, there is no investigations of the Trump campaign. Flynn and others would still be investigated, as that was all pre Trump. but the Trump Campaigns investigation focus was STARTED by Papadopoulos saying what he did.

And in no world, real or imagined, if a Campaign rep says something like that , that is seen as serious by other countries Intelligence agencies, passed on to US Intelligence who also see it as serious, passed up to the Group of 8 and the Obama Admin who also see it as serious, SHOULD IT NOT be investigated.

Papadopoulos made it impossible for the FBI to not investigate and fully justified them doing so, regardless of anything that came prior.