The NSA says that the missteps amount to a small number — less than 1 percent — when compared to the hundreds of thousands of specific phone numbers and email addresses the agencies intercepted through the so-called Section 702 warrantless spying program created by Congress in late 2008."
Of course, the NSA would like for you to take solace in the fact that they spy on you so much that the 1,000’s of reported violations only amount to ~1% of the estimated “taskings.”
Just curious - how do you square these 2 facts?
"Burr remarked ambiguously: “The unmasking thing was all created by Devin Nunes, and I’ll wait to go through our full evaluation to see if there was anything improper that happened. But clearly there were individuals unmasked. Some of that became public, which it’s not supposed to, and our business is to understand that, and explain it.” (http://www.thedailybeast.com/what-id-really-like-to-hear-explained-about-russiagate)
“In the end, the source of the documents turned out to be the White House, and Nunes stepped away from the Russia probe when the House Ethics Committee announced it was investigating Nunes himself for revealing classified information.” (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/congress/article153717844.html)
Square what? Whatever Nunes did on his own? No, the problem goes back to what I said originally: Burr is full of crap about Nunes, because Burr contradicted himself with his own statement. This from the article:
Senator Burr’s ambiguous remark that Congressman Nunes “created” the “unmasking thing” does not clarify the questions raised these last weeks about how the Obama administration used surveillance during the 2016 campaign.
Note the word “ambiguous” here. First Burr says this was all innocent, then he says it’s NOT all innocent. He admits there are things that can’t be explained, and need to be investigated. Even after he says well, it’s all made up… as if it doesn’t need to be investigated. That’s why this whole article is bogus, it’s just TPM seizing on a VERY “ambiguous” (actually, contradictory) one-liner to make a partisan point.
So even IF Nunes ALSO revealed “classified information,” so what? It doesn’t change the fact that Rice or someone else in the previous administration may have abused the unmasking privilege, or violated civil-liberty protections. So Burr’s pronouncement about Nunes was premature at best, and likely very irresponsible. Which has been my point all along.
Oh and note: the Daily Beast is also wondering what the heck Power was doing rooting around the woodpile. Like I said, there’s a lot more to this than just what Rice herself did, so stay tuned.
Interesting - even with fairly broad search terms, google won’t give me results to corroborate that.
So, I guess I will need to rely on you to provide sourcing for your claim.
Got a URL to back that up? I’d like to review it.
You’ve had the quote all along: “The unmasking thing was all created by Devin Nunes, and I’ll wait to go through our full evaluation to see if there was anything improper that happened. But clearly there were individuals unmasked. Some of that became public, which it’s not supposed to, and our business is to understand that, and explain it.”
Burr said that Friday – there was info gathered that “became public which it’s not supposed to.” That’s right, because that’s ILLEGAL. You all just missed it, jumping around and high-fiving yourselves over the part about the unmasking “thing” being simply the creation of Nunes. Dude, what do you think I’ve been talking about since day one? Namely, somebody abused the unmasking privilege by subsequently getting information leaked – so it doesn’t matter that Rice doing the unmaskings themselves was legal. It’s been my whole point that there IS something to see here, despite the fact that you all claim there isn’t.
Would be if I had said that. Said that bad GOP policies are resented. We all know some nut cases carry things too far. But it is the GOP which has spent time blithering about 2nd Amendment remedies – including Trump himself – not the Democratic Party.
But the action of Rice was legal. For all you know it was Nunes himself or the Rusdians who leaked it.
The Russians leaked what Rice unmasked?
Wow just when I thought they couldn’t blame Putin for anything else, you come along and top them all! Congratulations. You should be proud.
Yes, we know Rice doing the unmasking was legal. That was never the point.
And nice job deflecting again from the fact that the nut case got worked up into a frenzy by liberal news television.
I told you this stunk! Busted! Now we’ll see how much this “unmasking thing was all created by Nunes.” Samatha Power? No WAY she had ANY business getting involved in unmaskings!
Intelligence chairman accuses Obama aides of hundreds of unmasking requests
“The 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,” Nunes wrote. “Of those requests, only one offered a justification that was not boilerplate.”
Sources familiar with the Nunes letter identified the official as then-U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power.
Scandal-free administration my butt! Total abuse of the 4th Amendment here. Busted!
Explain how Power has any business getting involved in this. Go ahead.
Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), in a letter to Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, said the requests were made without specific justifications on why the information was needed.
“We have found evidence that current and former government officials had easy access to U.S. person information and that it is possible that they used this information to achieve partisan political purposes, including the selective, anonymous leaking of such information,” Nunes wrote in the letter to Coats.
BUSTED!!!
My argument is that the nut got worked up both by what the GOP congress is attempting to do – kicking millions off of health care (including mental health care) and by the 2nd Amendment rhetoric spouted by the rightwing including Donnie. The job of the press, liberal or not, is to report this stuff. Too bad you seem to resent a free press.
Your repeated attempts to portray this flaming liberal as a guy who listened to “rhetoric spouted by the right wing” is a joke. The “nut” didn’t listen to Donnie or right wing media, he was tuned into MSNBC as he mentioned often. That’s how he started getting militant and violent. The liberal press hasn’t just “reported stuff” they’ve consistently pushed a narrative that the Russians stole the election away from “rightful winner” Hillary, to rile up their liberal audience. They’ve pushed the idea that Trump’s presidency is “illegitimate” and it’s your duty to “resist.” Don’t act like they haven’t tried to manufacture opinion and outrage. Their agitating got puppies like this guy barking, enough to go out and actually shoot at a bunch of people.
Stop running away from the facts. You sound ridiculous.
Well kenga, I see you want no part of the discussion anymore now that you’ve been shown the quote (and the facts). Like I said, you all got so giddy over Burr saying the stuff about Rice was all created by Nunes, you didn’t bother to read the REST of what Burr had to say.
Yes, ajm and kenga, Rice doing the unmaskings was perfectly legal. But leaking it to the public, whether done by Rice or someone else, is NOT. Nor is using that information to gather intel on the opposing candidate’s campaign to help out Hillary Clinton. This is what Burr is referring to. And why the Democrats should be very nervous. Especially now that we’ve discovered that Power is somehow wrapped up in all this.
Sorry, it’s your guys who have been blithering about 2nd Amendment remedies.
Yes it’s becoming more and more apparent that Donnie is probably an illegitimate President. Yes, many Americans want to resist. And what are they being called upon to do?
Attend town halls with their local reps, hold peaceful marches, urge Congress to investigate and impeach.
This is a far cry from the NRA’s claim that everybody should be armed.
Every time you reply you just confirm what I say.
–You run away from the fact that the shooter was a flaming LIBERAL who got his inspiration from watching LIBERAL news like MSNBC.
–You present unevidenced claims as fact like: “it’s becoming more apparent that…”
–You throw in red herrings like the NRA. Also, “being armed” is a Constitutional right, proving that many liberals are against the Constitution.
Your kind of liberal echo-chamber crap might play at Vox or New York Magazine, but not in the real world. You lose again.
Better idea - educate me as to why she did not. You are, after all, the one making that assertion.
I’m sure you’ve got a very convincing case built, which you haven’t shared with the class.
So, have at.
Sounds to me like someone isn’t at all sure, and is engaging in public speculation.
Power was U.N. ambassador at that time. What business does an ambassador have getting mixed up in unmaskings? And as I noted before, even liberal sites like Daily Beast are wondering what she was doing getting involved. Now how about you explain that, if you think that’s all innocent and stuff.
Wow, looks like Ben Rhodes is now a person of interest in the investigation. This circus just keeps adding more clowns!
Anyway ajm you’ve got bigger problems in the short term. This liberal media attempt to call it the “fake Seth Rich story” is backfiring big time on them and their Clinton campaign allies! All it’s done is raised awareness big time and now it’s come out that Sy Hersh is reporting Rich WAS the leaker as a by-product of the Fox News suit. This is backfiring BIG on your crowd! I don’t care how much damage control New York Magazine or Vox attempt, the Democrats are going to die by their own sword here. Hilarious!
Oh and by the way I thought the media hated the term “fake news” (when Trump says it). Here I see CNN using the term “fake Seth Rich story” on the TV screen. Hmmm.