Yates and Clapper Testimony Begins

This is an incorrect interpretation of facts. What he said on the campaign trail is proof of the intent of the EO.

Get an education.

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: UKTruth

Regardless of how you feel about Yates and whether or not the 14th Amendment applies to the people affected by the EO, the EO does violate the Establishment Clause. That makes the law illegal and Yates was right to refuse to enforce it.

No, just no.

She didn't enforce it because she didn't "like" what he said on the campaign trail, not what the EO said.

a reply to: SeekingAlpha

Can you imagine if this was Obama.

www.reuters.com...
www.washingtontimes.com...

The cognitive dissonance is strong with you. Your bias clearly is damaging your (if any) critical thinking skills.

a reply to: JinMI
I see what you're saying for sure.

The challenge with Clapper (and Trump's team quoting him all the time) is that he acknowledged today that he wasn't aware of the FBI counterintelligence investigation until Comey announced it in the hearing a while back. So while Clapper can say that all the info he had available didn't suggest any evidence of collusion, the FBI is super tight-lipped about counterintelligence matters and appears to have kept that under wraps--even from Clapper.

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: SeekingAlpha

I think you must have watched a different hearing than I did.

Manduhla effect. Seems to be quite a bit of that going on recently.

originally posted by: Gandalf77
a reply to: JinMI
I see what you're saying for sure.

The challenge with Clapper (and Trump's team quoting him all the time) is that he acknowledged today that he wasn't aware of the FBI counterintelligence investigation until Comey announced it in the hearing a while back. So while Clapper can say that all the info he had available didn't suggest any evidence of collusion, the FBI is super tight-lipped about counterintelligence matters and appears to have kept that under wraps--even from Clapper.

The impression that I get is that should anything happen outside the borders, CIA would be able to access that information especially if it is in possession of the FBI. This would certainly be one of those cases.

I could very well be wrong. With the amount of political football we've seen over the past year or so, I would not be one bit surprised to be wrong and each intel agency is actually pushing for or against its team based upon keeping their comfy careers.

a reply to: SeekingAlpha

This is the worst presidency in US history...hands down. He needs to be impeached immediately and all right wingers need to be taken to task by being complicit to the subversion of our democracy.

Democrats first....or are we supposed to forget that whole Sanders V Democratic party fiasco that people want so badly to ignore?

a reply to: JinMI
I think that's a really good point you make.

After 911, one would really hope there's better cooperation between the alphabet agencies, but as you say, there's quite the political game afoot, and if we factor in the historical territorial issues--not to mention independent agendas (ahem, CIA, FBI, TPTB)--who's to say what could really be going on behind closed doors.

Since ATS is, after all, a site to discuss conspiracy theories, I'll go out on a limb and offer up a wild one:

What if Trump was an anomaly where TPTB are concerned, & they had to get to him somehow? What better way than to use the IC's considerable resources to confirm some of these allegations and then turn the tables on Trump. It could just be that TPTB now has the kompramat. [sp?] Perhaps that even explains some of the flipflopping. Just a wild theory I've been noodling.

a reply to: SeekingAlpha

SPirit of the Law does not outweigh the WORD of the law. And also She was not a supreme court justice and overstepped her powers.

a reply to: Gandalf77

You...I like the way you think!

What if Trump was an anomaly where TPTB are concerned, & they had to get to him somehow? What better way than to use the IC's considerable resources to confirm some of these allegations and then turn the tables on Trump. It could just be that TPTB now has the kompramat. [sp?] Perhaps that even explains some of the flipflopping. Just a wild theory I've been noodling.

I see your CT and raise you one.

What if Trump was the perfect candidate that could be broken. The man has a long history and has lived very much in the public eye. Whether by actual or probable evidence he could be leaned on and broken. Not to mention his absence of insider political knowledge would surely put him at a disadvantage. I don't think believe this but time could tell a different story.

I do find a few things odd about his administration but I remain positive that we are heading down the right path. I reserve the right to change that outlook.

a reply to: GuidedKill

What would the point of that be? Shed only look bad if it turns out to be nothing.
She gave answers where she could and said she would answer in a secure hearing if they asked her.

You have no idea what you are talking about. All of the federal courts denying the muslim ban have looked at the intent which was more than exhibited by the Trump Administration on several accounts and is the reason why his EOs are unconstitutional. Them are the facts and intent in many cases of law is paramount on the interpretation of the words.

Again, get an education right wingers.

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: SeekingAlpha

SPirit of the Law does not outweigh the WORD of the law. And also She was not a supreme court justice and overstepped her powers.

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
Lol Yates got whipped.

pretty tough to whip steel.

Ha ha. Sorry, what Obama said and Trump's collusion with Russia's interference with US elections is pale in comparison.

And you are the one to criticize someone else's critical thinking? Idiot.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: SeekingAlpha

Can you imagine if this was Obama.

www.reuters.com...
www.washingtontimes.com...

The cognitive dissonance is strong with you. Your bias clearly is damaging your (if any) critical thinking skills.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Her priority was to inform the WH that Flynn was compromised and subject to blackmail.
That Russia probably had proof that Flynn lied to the Veep and could use that to control him.
That's what she meant by priority.
Of course to Spicer this means she gave the president a heads up that some information may not jive. That was a total lie and an attempt to down play the seriousness of this.

a reply to: Kali74

A Dog and Pony Show for the Masses with Nothing of Value concerning a Revealed Truth Spoken due to Security Restrictions . Both Offer Nothing , and Both seem Immune from answering Any Pertinent Questions ..YAWN .

a reply to: Christosterone

Donna Rice the old Victoria's secret model? From back in the day?

a reply to: Pyle

He underestimated her. Lol

originally posted by: SeekingAlpha
Ha ha. Sorry, what Obama said and Trump's collusion with Russia's interference with US elections is pale in comparison.

And you are the one to criticize someone else's critical thinking? Idiot.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: SeekingAlpha

Can you imagine if this was Obama.

www.reuters.com...
www.washingtontimes.com...

The cognitive dissonance is strong with you. Your bias clearly is damaging your (if any) critical thinking skills.

With every post you make, it is abundantly clear you have no clue what you are talking about. Refer to the earlier reply to you.

...idiot?

a reply to: BlueAjah

All those stupid stories of Hillary being sick was their work and no they didn't reveal any facts.
But they tricked you into believing so I guess they were very successful.

a reply to: BlueAjah

Why didn't trump get rid of Flynn immediately?