Was Mike Rodgers, Obama head of the NSA, recommended to be fired for telling Trump about Political unmasking?


#35

Wrong… He retired. Obama admin wanted him fired.


#36

:rofl::joy:


#37

MIke Rogers was frutrated during the Obama admin because of their weak cyber defense…

"Former National Security Agency director Michael Rogers has welcomed the Trump administration’s willingness to use cyber-operations to deter foreign adversaries, adding that the United States’ previous reluctance to do so was counterproductive.

“My argument when I was [in government was]: “We want to keep the full range of options and capabilities available,” Rogers said Tuesday at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“One of the things that frustrated me at times was: Why are we taking one element just straight off the table?” said Rogers, who left the administration in May for the private sector.

“I just thought, boy, if you’re in Moscow or Beijing, you are loving this approach to life because it doesn’t really change your risk calculus,” Rogers added. While NSA director from 2014 to 2018, he also led U.S. Cyber Command."

Trump admin untied their hands…

"
The White House has “authorized offensive cyber operations” against U.S. adversaries, in line with a new policy that eases the rules on the use of digital weapons to protect the nation, National Security Adviser John Bolton said Thursday"


#38

Nit pick…


#39

You should try keeping up… The Trump admin put in those cyber defenses in September, and Rodger approves…lol!

It takes time to figure what to do. The Obama admin ignored it…


#40

i can haz words gud.

Try again please.


#41

The Trump admin put in those cyber defenses in September, and Rodger approves…lol!


#42

Article on Flynn sentencing and unmasking…

  1. " The document begins its recitation of Flynn’s offenses by citing information that had appeared in the Washington Post from a leaked, classified surveillance transcript in which Flynn’s name had been “unmasked”:"

  2. " Mueller’s sentencing document does not mention the fact that the information published in the Post was illegally leaked to the press by the intelligence services."

Oh, look the same pattern they used to get the FISA warrant with the Dossier… A Press manipulation circle…


#43

Here’s National reviews great article on it…

“So far, we know that the U.S. government decided to intervene in a political campaign to help one candidate and to smear the other — under the pretext of Russian “collusion.” And so it hired or made use of spies and informants including Hank Greenberg, Stefan Halper, Felix Sater, and others to contact Trump campaign officials to catch them in supposed collusion traps.”

"It enlisted the help of foreign intelligence agencies, specifically the British and Australians. "

"It misled FISA courts into granting warrants to spy on Americans "

threatened long prisons sentences with those surveilled and interviewed. And as a result, it has so far found no collusion”


#44

Breitbart was able get a pure lie in by the third sentence. Right after the unsubstantiated opinion in the second.

New record!


#45

What are you attacking the messenger on specifically?


#46

I clearly just attacked the lie in the third sentence.

and

highlighted the unsubstantiated opinion in the second.

You want to talk about facts, I’m into it.


#47

More likely, however, Mueller’s request reflects the fact that Flynn did not actually commit the crime to which he pleaded guilty.

“More likely.” Cool, at least this sentence starts off by revealing it’s not fact.

No less than then-FBI director James Comey told Congress last March that Flynn had not, in fact, lied to the FBI.

^^^ RED ALERT FULL LIE ^^^


#48

Sure, I just don’t see where you highlighted anything. And don’t know what the 3rd sentence says…


#49

The guy plead guilty. He admitted to further crimes. This is reality. This is fact. We have his statement owning up to it, in court, from his own mouth.

Pollack says he’s got a theory though… and then outright lies in his opening remarks. It’s fan fiction.


#50

Did you follow your own link to the article… I thought it was common knowledge…

“According to two sources familiar with the meetings, Comey told lawmakers that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that Flynn had lied to them, or that any inaccuracies in his answers were intentional.”


#51

Mark Meadows and Devin Nunes say a lot of things that have been proven to be completely fiction regarding all this as well.

There’s nothing to support that nonsense, at all.

There are guilty pleas and convictions and corroborating evidence to support what I’m telling you

It’s nonsense cratic. Again, this is all history at this point.


Also, for the record, that wasn’t “my own link”. That was a link built into the breitbart article you posted, that I quoted back to you. I specifically quoted it that way to give you the link to bait you into posting a bunk theory based on uncorroborated, unnamed sources, because I know you’re a guy who doesn’t otherwise like anonymous sources.


#52

WSJ…

"On pages 53-54, the report notes that in March 2017 “Director Comey testified to the Committee that ‘the agents . . . discerned no physical indications of deception. They didn’t see any change in posture, in tone, in inflection, in eye contact. They saw nothing that indicated to them that he knew he was lying to them.’” The quotes are from the committee transcript of Mr. Comey’s remarks.

The report goes on to say that then Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe “confirmed the interviewing agent’s initial impression and stated that the ‘conundrum that we faced on their return from the interview is that although [the agents] didn’t detect deception in the statements that he made in the interview . . . the statements were inconsistent with our understanding of the conversation that he had actually had with the ambassador.’”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-mystery-of-michael-flynns-guilty-plea-1525640861


#53

Good find. Thanks, it supports exactly my point.

‘the agents . . . discerned no physical indications of deception. They didn’t see any change in posture, in tone, in inflection, in eye contact. They saw nothing that indicated to them that he knew he was lying to them.’

Breitbart’s lie:

No less than then-FBI director James Comey told Congress last March that Flynn had not, in fact, lied to the FBI

Comey, as clearly read in the quote you found does not say “in fact” that Flynn had not lied.

Same with the second part of your quote:

Mcabe…“confirmed the interviewing agent’s initial impression and stated that the ‘conundrum that we faced on their return from the interview is that although [the agents] didn’t detect deception in the statements that he made in the interview . . . the statements were inconsistent with our understanding of the conversation that he had actually had with the ambassador.’”

McCabe matches Comey here. The interview agents initial impression they faced was basically they were looking this guy in the eye, and it didn’t appear that he was lying. However, this McCabe quote adds more than the Comey quote:

. . the statements were inconsistent with our understanding of the conversation that he had actually had with the ambassador.’”

Boom. Comey and McCabe’s quotes you found here are basically saying Flynn was a good liar.

The FBI already knew the answers to the questions the agents were asking him Cratic.

They were surprised at the ease in which he lied to the agents.

Good find. You have a WSJ subscription? That one was behind a paywall even.


#54

OK…, that’s what he was convicted on…