fateWhy was the UN Ambassador unmasking Trump campaign people?
If all these communications are innocent why are the people involved in the communications worried about being "unmasked"?
That is so wrong. Do you not understand this?
The government is spying on Americans. There are valid reasons for this on SOME occasions. However, unmasking is reserved for intel agencies WHEN there is a "need to know." The government doesn't have carte blanche to do as it pleases.
Under the rules that apply to foreign-intelligence-collection, there is a presumption against revealing the names of American citizens. But there are significant loopholes: The names may be unmasked if intelligence officials determine that knowing the identity of an American is necessary in order to understand and exploit the intelligence value of the information collected. Thus, as I’ve also outlined, it is unlikely that any single instance of unmasking would be found to be a violation of law — and, indeed, it would not violate any penal statute (it would violate court-ordered “minimization” procedures). Nevertheless, were a pattern of unmasking established, divorced from any proper foreign-intelligence purpose, that would be a profound abuse of power in the nature of a “high crime and misdemeanor” — the Constitution’s predicate for impeachment.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... telligence
So, please explain how the UN Ambassador would have a "need to know" and how she is an "intel official."
If it can be shown this was for political purposes, she is in a lot of trouble.
fateI said we've seen nothing of substance--and we haven't.
Hasn't stopped you from jumping to conclusions about things as varied as Ben Ghazi, the Clinton Foundation, Obama's birth place..... Your gauge for the value of evidence is entirely relative.
Nah. Benghazi had some objective truths, namely that four Americans died. That's indisputable. It's also indisputable that agents of the President (Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton) lied. Those are hard, cold facts.
Muellers investigation will take awhile. At the heart of it may be, will probably be, Trumps financial involvement with Russians... And Mueller will be able to determine that when he seeks Trumps tax returns..
At the risk of explaining things to you that you should know but choose to ignore, the FBI has been on this for months now. What have they found?
Oh, you'll be tempted to say, "It's too soon,": but you know that's not true. If Trump cannot keep leaks about Oval Office phone conversations from leaking, how would he stop the FBI?
A handful of legal scholars and former federal prosecutors I interviewed say it is too early to determine whether Mueller will seek the tax records. But they say it would not be at all surprising if he does. There have been a swirl of allegations about questionable financial ties between the Trump Organization and Russian businessmen and banks close to Russian President Vladimir Putin, including Russian oligarchs who have made major investments in Trump properties in the United States and overseas. Trump’s two adult sons have both been quoted as saying that Russian investments represent a lopsided share of their revenues (they later denied the quotations or suggested they had been taken out of context). Trump’s first national security adviser, retired Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, has cited his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in refusing to testify before Congress to discuss his own contacts with the Russian ambassador to Washington during the presidential transition period.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... rns-215212
As a well known expert on such matters proclaimedIf you're innocent, why are you taking the 5th?':
Yet, after all these months, not one "link" with potential criminal implications has surfaced. Not one.
As usual, and just like Hills, you're all theory and no substance.