U.S President: Donald Trump

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Yes. I don't see grounds for people complaining that their phones were tapped when they phoned officials of what the US classified as a hostile country, Russia.

Did you actually bother to view the video passingbat posted earlier?

Originally Posted by Mick

Did you actually bother to view the video passingbat posted earlier?

Nothing says "Independent" like a Republican Chairman of the oversight committee briefing the Republican President that he may have been part of an incidental intelligence collection that was all done legally (incidental and legally being his words).

Shouldn't he wait until the investigation is complete before talking to the person who may have been involved in this?

As the top Democrat on the committee said

"This is not how you conduct an investigation. You don't take information that the committee hasn't seen and present it orally to the press and to the White House before the committee has a chance to vet whether it's even significant,"

Even more ironically

The intelligence collection, which took place mainly in November, December and January, was brought to the attention of Mr Nunes by an unnamed source or sources.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39358363

Originally Posted by Hugh

Nothing says "Independent" like a Republican Chairman of the oversight committee briefing the Republican President that he may have been part of an incidental intelligence collection that was all done legally (incidental and legally being his words).

Shouldn't he wait until the investigation is complete before talking to the person who may have been involved in this?

Nothing legal about spying on folk without any reason for doing so and without Warrant. The Russian links are weak. Isn't it so disappointing for liberals and Democrats, that no evidence, not one shred, that shows Trump has close ties to Putin and the FBI have been investigating this since July 2016 and still found nothing?

These are just pathetic Democrats throwing out crap because they still cannot believe their horrid choice for a presidential candidate lost.

As for the video...He said he had been approached with reports ranging from November 2016 to through Jan 2017. Chatter that contained normal talk during Transition. He also said they need to work out what laws, if any have been violated, so it is not quite true to conclude that absolutely no laws were broken during this incidental snooping.

The FBI are investigating the Trump campaign not just Trump

[passingbat]

Originally Posted by passingbat

Nunes announcement today.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kUcoNTR-0g

Originally Posted by Mick

Did you actually bother to view the video passingbat posted earlier?

Originally Posted by Hugh

Nothing says "Independent" like a Republican Chairman of the oversight committee briefing the Republican President that he may have been part of an incidental intelligence collection that was all done legally (incidental and legally being his words).

Shouldn't he wait until the investigation is complete before talking to the person who may have been involved in this?

As the top Democrat on the committee said

Even more ironically

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39358363

So did you actually watch the video I posted Hugh?


I do agree it does not seem the right way to go about things. But that video raises some grave concerns. Now they may turn out to be legitimate reasons for that surveillance; I am still reserving judgement. But the facts of this need to come to light. People who are serious about commenting on this, need to here what Nunes said. Likewise it is important to listen to Schiff's response.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JCq_wRtuxk&t=934s

Yes, all the way through, which is why I know he said all intelligence collected was incidental and legal.

---------- Post added at 16:43 ---------- Previous post was at 16:41 ----------

Originally Posted by Mick

Nothing legal about spying on folk without any reason for doing so and without Warrant. The Russian links are weak. Isn't it so disappointing for liberals and Democrats, that no evidence, not one shred, that shows Trump has close ties to Putin and the FBI have been investigating this since July 2016 and still found nothing?

These are just pathetic Democrats throwing out crap because they still cannot believe their horrid choice for a presidential candidate lost.

As for the video...He said he had been approached with reports ranging from November 2016 to through Jan 2017. Chatter that contained normal talk during Transition. He also said they need to work out what laws, if any have been violated, so it is not quite true to conclude that absolutely no laws were broken during this incidental snooping.

That contradicts what the President's spokesman said, when he was asked about the campaign team being under investigation - he said being investigated was not the same as a crime having been committed....

They've pulled for the vote for the American Healthcare Act (getting rid of Obamacare) as they don't have the votes at the moment. Moderate Republicans in more Democratic states are worried too many people will lose insurance but more hardline Republicans think the state is still doing too much.

And now it's set for today: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/house...dlines_bsq_hed

Trump has said there will be no more changes but the existing concessions look enough for the bill to pass. It's important for Trump that it passes as future tax cuts are 'paid for' by the medicare cuts in this bill and obviously losing the first major piece of legislation would be brutal.

He has said Obamacare stays if the bill fails. I wonder if that will be better for him in 2020 as he won't have to confront the flaws of this bill, and those who'll lose healthcare, but can still rail against Obamacare or if the failure of the bill will damage him

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39372607

The chairman of the House intelligence committee has apologised for not informing Democratic colleagues before going public with allegations about surveillance of Donald Trump's team

[1andrew1]

I don't think people should leak this kind of stuff as it's not been fully investigated but things are getting more politicised by the minute, thanks in part to Nunes's approach.

There is now “more than circumstantial evidence” the member's of Donald Trump’s campaign team colluding with Russia to disrupt the presidential election, a leading Democrat has claimed.

Adam Schiff, who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, told US broadcaster MSNBC that there was evidence “very much worth of investigation”, but he refused to elaborate on what that might be.

“I can tell you that the case is more than that,” the California congressman said. “And I can’t go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7645361.html

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I don't think people should leak this kind of stuff as it's not been fully investigated but things are getting more politicised by the minute, thanks in part to Nunes's approach.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7645361.html

He is a Democrat he would say that.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Mick

He is a Democrat he would say that.

That's my point. Trump and Nunes have so politicised this enquiry that the Democrats are responding with their leaks too.
Do you agree with me that Nunes and Schiff, should - as a minimum - be cautioned for their leaks?

They've withdrawn the bill to overturn Obamacare. Trump failed to seal the deal

[1andrew1]

Trump's healthcare vote withdrawn after Republican leaders fail to gain enough support for Obamacare replacement

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39387550

[1andrew1]

Financial Times - Trump’s errors sank his healthcare plan
1. Endorsing a bill whose contents he did not know.
2. Rushing the bill through Congress.
3. Thinking that threatening the Republican dissenters would be sufficient to win their votes.

It believes that it will be much harder now for Mr Trump to present himself as “the closer” having put his authority so visibly on the line.

https://www.ft.com/content/4448d236-...0-768954394623 or Google the headline