quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

i guess likerical nuts looks facts like unhinged to factsuckerical nutsuckerical nutsucker unhinged to facts looks looks hysterical nutsuckers!

fellllllllllllllllllch gobble!

quote:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes on Thursday stepped aside from the probe of Russian actions during the 2016 campaign, saying he needed to deal with a congressional ethics inquiry into claims he improperly disclosed classified information.

Democrats rejoiced at the news. “The White House made a fool of Chairman Nunes, and he has deeply tarnished his credibility as Chairman and the credibility of his Republican colleagues,” declared Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi. There is no question that this was a blow for the chairman, following his revelation that Obama administration officials had collected information of Trump transition members incidentally, unmasked it, and widely disseminated it. But the victory for Nunes’ critics could be pyrrhic.

For one thing, stepping aside on the Russia inquiry isn’t as big of a deal now as it might have been months ago. That’s because the Russia investigation isn’t really going anywhere. On March 9, BuzzFeed reported that Democrats on the committee are worried that their base is expecting dramatic results that simply won’t be coming. [oh, so sorry comrades!]

quote:

Even some Democrats on the Intelligence Committee now quietly admit, after several briefings and preliminary inquiries, they don’t expect to find evidence of active, informed collusion between the Trump campaign and known Russian intelligence operatives, though investigators have only just begun reviewing raw intelligence. Among the Intelligence Committee’s rank and file, there’s a tangible frustration over what one official called “wildly inflated” expectations surrounding the panel’s fledgling investigation. [oh, so sorry comrades!]

“The Russia narrative has been a sensational marketing effort, but the investigation won’t live up to the hype,” Michael Sainato writes. Glenn Greenwald of the Intercept has a good rundown of the problems caused by Democrats hyping Russian conspiracy theories...

Now, perhaps there will be something that comes out that changes everything, but after the better part of a year involving claims that the end was near for Donald Trump, people seem to have a general idea of Russia’s efforts that’s gone unchanged.

Nunes not having to deal with that part of his duties frees up time to focus on an area of investigation that has proved fruitful: the Obama administration’s leaking against the Trump administration.

Everyone knows that there was leaking, because multiple media outlets published the leaks. These many leaks were sourced to high-level Obama officials, though their identities were kept anonymous by the journalists publishing the information.

Two weeks ago, there was a breakthrough. Nunes revealed that he’d seen dozens of reports of information collected on U.S. citizens close to the Trump transition. Their information had been unmasked despite the lack of intelligence value in the reports. This had nothing to do with Russia, and the information was widely disseminated, according to Nunes. While many in the media immediately attempted to downplay the news or distract from it, earlier this week it was revealed that Obama’s National Security Advisor had requested such unmasking dozens of times. She was not the only Obama official to request the unmasking.

After initially denying knowledge of Nunes’ revelations when he first made them, Rice later defended her requests for unmasked information when it came out she was one of the Obama officials to request the unmasked information. Rice says she “leaked nothing to nobody,” although she is not known for her truth-telling. Still, in order for a leak campaign to work, the leaker didn’t need to also be the person who requested the unmasking of information on U.S. citizens or the person who made sure the unmasked information was distributed widely. But the unmasking would be a necessary first step.

Observers are beginning to see the significance of the news of Susan Rice’s involvement, despite a lack of media coverage of same.

The point is that Nunes was doing the tenacious oversight that enabled this news to be discovered. And he can spend his time focused on getting to the bottom of the Obama administration’s leaking scandal without having to spend time on the Russia portion that was already wrapping up. He’ll need that time to deal with the bureaucracy’s resistance to oversight. Intelligence agencies are “stonewalling” efforts to figure out who leaked protected information to the press:

quote:

“Our requests are simply not being answered,” one House Intelligence committee source told Fox News. “The agencies are not really helping at all and there is truly a massive web for us to try and wade through.”

A source in the Senate Intelligence Committee had a similar story.

“Any information that will help find the wide extent on the unmasking and surveillance is purposely not being provided,” the source said.

...

If Republicans wanted to make life difficult for Democrats on the committee, they could. Or as one anonymous official on the committee said, “There is evidence that some Democrats have leaked classified material — both inadvertently and intentionally.”

The House is busy with health care discussions and on a spring break. But Rep. Nunes will continue to dig into the potentially improper handling of information collected on Trump associates. And now he’ll have more time to do so. Those who watched him investigating previous intelligence problems know he is like a dog with a bone when it comes to getting to the bottom of wrongdoing. Whether Democrats agree with Nunes’ decision to go public with the news of the unmasking and dissemination of information about Trump associates, the fact that the public knows about it means that an investigation must continue. [oh, so sorry comrades!]

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
Even some Democrats on the Intelligence Committee now quietly admit, after several briefings and preliminary inquiries, they don’t expect to find evidence of active, informed collusion between the Trump campaign and known Russian intelligence operatives, though investigators have only just begun reviewing raw intelligence. Among the Intelligence Committee’s rank and file, there’s a tangible frustration over what one official called “wildly inflated” expectations surrounding the panel’s fledgling investigation. [oh, so sorry comrades!]

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
Even some Democrats on the Intelligence Committee now quietly admit, after several briefings and preliminary inquiries, they don’t expect to find evidence of active, informed collusion between the Trump campaign and known Russian intelligence operatives, though investigators have only just begun reviewing raw intelligence. Among the Intelligence Committee’s rank and file, there’s a tangible frustration over what one official called “wildly inflated” expectations surrounding the panel’s fledgling investigation. [oh, so sorry comrades!]

So many of them were so foolish to buy the obvious party line propaganda

It's amazing their brains work well enough to allow them to breathe

quote:

Conservative author and "Rush Limbaugh Show" guest-host Mark Steyn said that the Susan Rice story is a "real story" because the mainstream media refuses to cover it.

As Tucker Carlson noted, CNN's Don Lemon and Christopher Cuomo dismissed the premise of allegations that Rice unmasked Trump associates for political purposes.

"The media is basically annoyed because this is a distraction from their distraction about [Russian] collusion [with the Trump campaign]," Steyn said.

He said it was "odd" that Rice would allegedly be surveilling conversations involving Trump for more than a year, while acting as a national security adviser for President Obama.

Steyn added that the "biggest clue" to whether the story is a true bombshell is the fact mainstream media figures like Cuomo and Lemon refuse to report on it.

"They're annoyed that someone has managed to out-fake their own fake news with the 'fake' Susan Rice story," he said.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
Even some Democrats on the Intelligence Committee now quietly admit, after several briefings and preliminary inquiries, they don’t expect to find evidence of active, informed collusion between the Trump campaign and known Russian intelligence operatives, though investigators have only just begun reviewing raw intelligence. Among the Intelligence Committee’s rank and file, there’s a tangible frustration over what one official called “wildly inflated” expectations surrounding the panel’s fledgling investigation. [oh, so sorry comrades!]

So many of them were so foolish to buy the obvious party line propaganda

It's amazing their brains work well enough to allow them to breathe

the mnalevolent, vile critter parts mnottertroll is making his living here on it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

to the point of the OP

"Steyn: Susan Rice Situation 'A Real Story' Because the Media Won't Cover It"

[oh no comrades, fox news!]

quote:

Conservative author and "Rush Limbaugh Show" guest-host Mark Steyn said that the Susan Rice story is a "real story" because the mainstream media refuses to cover it.

As Tucker Carlson noted, CNN's Don Lemon and Christopher Cuomo dismissed the premise of allegations that Rice unmasked Trump associates for political purposes.

"The media is basically annoyed because this is a distraction from their distraction about [Russian] collusion [with the Trump campaign]," Steyn said.

He said it was "odd" that Rice would allegedly be surveilling conversations involving Trump for more than a year, while acting as a national security adviser for President Obama.

Steyn added that the "biggest clue" to whether the story is a true bombshell is the fact mainstream media figures like Cuomo and Lemon refuse to report on it.

"They're annoyed that someone has managed to out-fake their own fake news with the 'fake' Susan Rice story," he said.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/04/04/mark-steyn-susan-rice-story-because-mainstream-media-wont-cover-it

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

to the point of the OP

"Steyn: Susan Rice Situation 'A Real Story' Because the Media Won't Cover It"

[oh no comrades, fox news!]

quote:

Conservative author and "Rush Limbaugh Show" guest-host Mark Steyn said that the Susan Rice story is a "real story" because the mainstream media refuses to cover it.

As Tucker Carlson noted, CNN's Don Lemon and Christopher Cuomo dismissed the premise of allegations that Rice unmasked Trump associates for political purposes.

"The media is basically annoyed because this is a distraction from their distraction about [Russian] collusion [with the Trump campaign]," Steyn said.

He said it was "odd" that Rice would allegedly be surveilling conversations involving Trump for more than a year, while acting as a national security adviser for President Obama.

Steyn added that the "biggest clue" to whether the story is a true bombshell is the fact mainstream media figures like Cuomo and Lemon refuse to report on it.

"They're annoyed that someone has managed to out-fake their own fake news with the 'fake' Susan Rice story," he said.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/04/04/mark-steyn-susan-rice-story-because-mainstream-media-wont-cover-it

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

laughs...

have you ever met a more loathsome character?

while im here:

"Sorry, Democrats, The Obama Spying Scandal Isn’t Going Away"

quote:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes on Thursday stepped aside from the probe of Russian actions during the 2016 campaign, saying he needed to deal with a congressional ethics inquiry into claims he improperly disclosed classified information.

Democrats rejoiced at the news. “The White House made a fool of Chairman Nunes, and he has deeply tarnished his credibility as Chairman and the credibility of his Republican colleagues,” declared Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi. There is no question that this was a blow for the chairman, following his revelation that Obama administration officials had collected information of Trump transition members incidentally, unmasked it, and widely disseminated it. But the victory for Nunes’ critics could be pyrrhic.

For one thing, stepping aside on the Russia inquiry isn’t as big of a deal now as it might have been months ago. That’s because the Russia investigation isn’t really going anywhere. On March 9, BuzzFeed reported that Democrats on the committee are worried that their base is expecting dramatic results that simply won’t be coming. [oh, so sorry comrades!]

quote:

Even some Democrats on the Intelligence Committee now quietly admit, after several briefings and preliminary inquiries, they don’t expect to find evidence of active, informed collusion between the Trump campaign and known Russian intelligence operatives, though investigators have only just begun reviewing raw intelligence. Among the Intelligence Committee’s rank and file, there’s a tangible frustration over what one official called “wildly inflated” expectations surrounding the panel’s fledgling investigation. [oh, so sorry comrades!]

“The Russia narrative has been a sensational marketing effort, but the investigation won’t live up to the hype,” Michael Sainato writes. Glenn Greenwald of the Intercept has a good rundown of the problems caused by Democrats hyping Russian conspiracy theories...

Now, perhaps there will be something that comes out that changes everything, but after the better part of a year involving claims that the end was near for Donald Trump, people seem to have a general idea of Russia’s efforts that’s gone unchanged.

Nunes not having to deal with that part of his duties frees up time to focus on an area of investigation that has proved fruitful: the Obama administration’s leaking against the Trump administration.

Everyone knows that there was leaking, because multiple media outlets published the leaks. These many leaks were sourced to high-level Obama officials, though their identities were kept anonymous by the journalists publishing the information.

Two weeks ago, there was a breakthrough. Nunes revealed that he’d seen dozens of reports of information collected on U.S. citizens close to the Trump transition. Their information had been unmasked despite the lack of intelligence value in the reports. This had nothing to do with Russia, and the information was widely disseminated, according to Nunes. While many in the media immediately attempted to downplay the news or distract from it, earlier this week it was revealed that Obama’s National Security Advisor had requested such unmasking dozens of times. She was not the only Obama official to request the unmasking.

After initially denying knowledge of Nunes’ revelations when he first made them, Rice later defended her requests for unmasked information when it came out she was one of the Obama officials to request the unmasked information. Rice says she “leaked nothing to nobody,” although she is not known for her truth-telling. Still, in order for a leak campaign to work, the leaker didn’t need to also be the person who requested the unmasking of information on U.S. citizens or the person who made sure the unmasked information was distributed widely. But the unmasking would be a necessary first step.

Observers are beginning to see the significance of the news of Susan Rice’s involvement, despite a lack of media coverage of same.

The point is that Nunes was doing the tenacious oversight that enabled this news to be discovered. And he can spend his time focused on getting to the bottom of the Obama administration’s leaking scandal without having to spend time on the Russia portion that was already wrapping up. He’ll need that time to deal with the bureaucracy’s resistance to oversight. Intelligence agencies are “stonewalling” efforts to figure out who leaked protected information to the press:

quote:

“Our requests are simply not being answered,” one House Intelligence committee source told Fox News. “The agencies are not really helping at all and there is truly a massive web for us to try and wade through.”

A source in the Senate Intelligence Committee had a similar story.

“Any information that will help find the wide extent on the unmasking and surveillance is purposely not being provided,” the source said.

...

If Republicans wanted to make life difficult for Democrats on the committee, they could. Or as one anonymous official on the committee said, “There is evidence that some Democrats have leaked classified material — both inadvertently and intentionally.”

The House is busy with health care discussions and on a spring break. But Rep. Nunes will continue to dig into the potentially improper handling of information collected on Trump associates. And now he’ll have more time to do so. Those who watched him investigating previous intelligence problems know he is like a dog with a bone when it comes to getting to the bottom of wrongdoing. Whether Democrats agree with Nunes’ decision to go public with the news of the unmasking and dissemination of information about Trump associates, the fact that the public knows about it means that an investigation must continue. [oh, so sorry comrades!]

http://thefederalist.com/2017/04/07/sorry-democrats-the-obama-spying-scandal-isnt-going-away/

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

Do you ever read ANYTHING outside of the right wing echo chamber?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

Do you ever read ANYTHING outside of the right wing echo chamber?

If it's not right wing it's left wing. That goes for CNN and Newsweek, the New York Times, NBC and ABC and CBS, USA Today (Gannett) as well as the AP and Reuters...

Practically every newspaper as well as ESPN and MTV, and many more - all propaganda organs for the Democrat Party

So, do you have a point

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

Do you ever read ANYTHING outside of the right wing echo chamber?

If it's not right wing it's left wing. That goes for CNN and Newsweek, the New York Times, NBC and ABC and CBS, USA Today (Gannett) as well as the AP and Reuters...

Practically every newspaper as well as ESPN and MTV, and many more - all propaganda organs for the Democrat Party

So, do you have a point

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

Do you ever read ANYTHING outside of the right wing echo chamber?

If it's not right wing it's left wing. That goes for CNN and Newsweek, the New York Times, NBC and ABC and CBS, USA Today (Gannett) as well as the AP and Reuters...

Practically every newspaper as well as ESPN and MTV, and many more - all propaganda organs for the Democrat Party

So, do you have a point

quote:

After the November election last year, a friend of mine asked how many reporters know people with a pick up truck. It seemed a reasonable question. The pick up truck makes up the top three most popular vehicles in the United States. How many truck owners do political reporters know? You would have thought he had accused the American political press of prostitution. Members of the American political press were livid he would dare ask the question.

The American political press is one of the most insular institutions in America and hate being exposed for their insularity. They are mostly coastal, secular, if not flat out atheist, overwhelmingly liberal, and have nothing in common with nor want to have anything in common with the average American.

This past week has been a case study in that media bias starting with Susan Rice, President Obama's National Security Advisor. I have fond affection for CNN, having gotten my start in television there. Yes, I have seen firsthand liberal bias in their newsroom. But I think it often comes more from worldview and being inside a bubble than it does from aggressive partisanship.

I think most of the anchors at CNN, particularly the further in the day one watches, do their absolute best to be objective, fair and cover all sides. If the network would abandon the Democrat Governor of New York's more dimwitted brother for their morning show, the network as a whole would be improved. The people at CNN are some of the best and most professional in the news business.

But CNN did a real disservice this past week. Two weeks ago, Susan Rice denied unmasking any Trump transition team members. Her denial came as Republicans found more evidence that Obama Administration officials did seek the names of Trump transition team officials talking to foreign governments.

But just this past week, she reversed course but claimed it was not illegal and said she was not the leaker. Rice, however, has a sordid history with truth. She is the one who blamed the Benghazi terrorist attack on a YouTube video, which we all know was not true.

This brings me back to CNN. The network's national security reporter is Jim Sciutto. After reports circulated Rice was behind the unmasking, Sciutto claimed sources close to Rice told him, "The idea that Ambassador Rice improperly sought the identities of Americans is false." He was personally dismissive of the allegations. Remember, though, Susan Rice subsequently admitted she had names unmasked.

Jim Sciutto used to be an Obama Administration official who left the Administration for a job at ABC News working with Susan Rice's husband. Sciutto is one of many Obama appointees who went back into the media with the veneer of objectivity. Sciutto should have been conflicted out of coverage on this story, but he was not.

The Rice story comes as Republicans in Washington blow up the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees. On this story, CNN has been intellectually honest and one of the few to be honest. Read most any major newspaper or any news network other than CNN and Fox and you would never know Democrats actually scrapped the filibuster for Barack Obama's nominees. All the GOP is doing is finishing the Democrats' job.

Reporters who, when Democrats scuttled the filibuster for nominees, said it was no big deal, now argue that the Republicans are fundamentally destroying what makes the Senate unique. Of course, it is not just them. Senator Elizabeth Warren, who campaigned on destroying the filibuster to advance her liberal agenda, now claims destroying the filibuster is a national travesty. The intellectual dishonesty is amazing. That the media is as intellectually dishonest on this issue as partisan Democrats is not surprising, but should be disturbing.

If the American media wants to restore its reputation, perhaps it could both relate better to the American people and stop giving partisan political appointees the veneer of objectivity. The American people need a media they can trust and instead have a political press that not only does not relate to them, but holds the people in contempt.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

FR

Back on topic:

Video - MSNBC’s O’Donnell: Maybe Putin Masterminded Chemical Attack So Trump Could Look Good by Striking Syria

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/04/07/msnbcs-odonnell-maybe-putin-masterminded-chemical-attack-so-trump-could-look-good-by-striking-syria/

Talk about living rent-free in "liberals" heads... I don't know who is better at it. President Trump, or myself?

quote:


This brings me back to CNN. The network's national security reporter is Jim Sciutto. After reports circulated Rice was behind the unmasking, Sciutto claimed sources close to Rice told him, "The idea that Ambassador Rice improperly sought the identities of Americans is false." He was personally dismissive of the allegations. Remember, though, Susan Rice subsequently admitted she had names unmasked.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

FR

Back on topic:

Video - MSNBC’s O’Donnell: Maybe Putin Masterminded Chemical Attack So Trump Could Look Good by Striking Syria

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/04/07/msnbcs-odonnell-maybe-putin-masterminded-chemical-attack-so-trump-could-look-good-by-striking-syria/

Talk about living rent-free in "liberals" heads... I don't know who is better at it. President Trump, or myself?

Try this, as was posted yesterday morning
http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=5020048

conspiracy via msnbc

:)

Lawrence O’Donnell Wonders: What If ‘Vladimir Putin Masterminded the Last Week in Syria’?
by Josh Feldman | 11:12 pm, April 7th, 2017

MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell tonight opened his show positing that “if Vladimir Putin masterminded the last week in Syria, he has gotten everything he could have asked for.”

He argued that it’s conceivable that Putin could have told Bashar al-Assad to carry out a small chemical attack “just big enough to attract media attention so that my friend in the White House will see it on TV” and then Trump can fire missiles that will “do no real damage” to ensure that the U.S. media will “change the subject from Russian influence” on the White House.

O’Donnell said it certainly “changes the conventional wisdom” about the dynamic between Trump and Russia, “as long as you never, never question whether Vladimir Putin wanted all of this to happen this week.”

And when O’Donnell brought on his panel, he immediately made it clear that he does not know what the probability of this is, but he knows it’s not zero:

“I raise it without assigning a statistical probability to it, I don’t know what it is. I just know that it’s not zero, and it should be zero. It has been zero with every previous president. But when you look at the way that events have unfolded this week, Donald Trump could not have asked for a better end of the week for his presidency as he sees it.”

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/lawrence-odonnell-wonders-what-if-vladimir-putin-masterminded-the-last-week-in-syria/
there is a five minute segment,
but the full 15 minutes is at msnbc
The Trump-Putin theory on Syria that can't be ruled out
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word


Im guessing Breitbart has the spin you need, sadly, the facts are right there. at the source not a bias of the breitbart(fake everything)bullcrap.