Nunes said at a news conference he discovered the potential surveillance of Trump himself while reviewing intelligence reports, but said it was not related to Russia.
"This is a normal, incidental collection, based on what I could collect," Nunes said. "This appears to be all legally collected foreign intelligence under" the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Also at that hearing, Comey said he had seen no evidence so far of the specific allegation of wiretapping Trump Tower.
Nunes did not know whether the "incidental collection" happened at Trump Tower, and could not say for certain whether Trump's communications were directly collected.
Why don't we just call it like it is? Trump made another off the cuff, unsubstantiated comment and every department is now scrambling to find a shred of something to make it look valid, rather than doing more important work like running the government.
It may have been legal to collect the information under FISA, but why was the previous administration "widely disseminating" details from about people in the incoming Trump administration that had no foreign intelligence value? The intent of the law is not serve as a database to mine personal information on your political opponents.Nunes said the surveillance appears to have been legal, incidental collection and that it does not appear to have been related to concerns over collusion with Russia.
Another story
Nunes: Trump transition members were under surveillance during Obama administration
Nunes: Trump transition members were under surveillance during Obama administration - POLITICO
Nunes said the surveillance appears to have been legal, incidental collection and that it does not appear to have been related to concerns over collusion with Russia.
Nunes is going to the White House later Wednesday to brief the Trump administration on what he has learned, which he said came from "sources."
It may have been legal to collect the information under FISA, but why was the previous administration "widely disseminating" details from about people in the incoming Trump administration that had no foreign intelligence value? The intent of the law is not serve as a database to mine personal information on your political opponents.
I'm confused. If the surveillance was legal why is he telling us?
Probably because disseminating it, especially without masking the names of those subject to incidental collection, is not.
Surveillance warrants only give you limited rights to collect and distribute data. If these people were not part of the warrant then disseminating the transcripts of their conversations is illegal.
Oh, so in other words Nune's is trying to shift the narrative away from the investigation into possible collusion between Russia and Trump. Got it.
Why don't we just call it like it is? Trump made another off the cuff, unsubstantiated comment and every department is now scrambling to find a shred of something to make it look valid, rather than doing more important work like running the government.
LOL. Wut.
Oh, so in other words Nune's is trying to shift the narrative away from the investigation into possible collusion between Russia and Trump. Got it.
Incidental collection isn't the issue, the issue is that someone unmasked his name (Flynn) for political purposes, which is really, really bad.
So partisan.......... Nune's is briefing the reporters and will brief the White on this new information.
Are you saying he is not telling the truth?
Michal Flynn the foreign agent.....
But it is really really bad that someone unmasked the name... It's bad for Flynn. Because it means that the people conducting the investigation thought the fact that naming foreign agent Michale Flynn name was vital to the investigation.
This is someone who retroactively filed as a foreign agent, who lied about both conversations, payments, and visits to foreign countries, who was given access to and allowed to make decisions on the most sensitive intelligence possible. So yeah, it's really bad.
Oh, so in other words Nune's is trying to shift the narrative away from the investigation into possible collusion between Russia and Trump. Got it.
House intel chairman: Trump personal communications may have been collected - CNNPolitics.com
Not quite a smoking gun, in fact, it's rather vague and doesn't speak to the wiretapping claim Trump has been backing down from the past week. But it's possible, that maybe, a little of Trump's communications had been captured. Maybe.
Another story
Nunes: Trump transition members were under surveillance during Obama administration
Nunes: Trump transition members were under surveillance during Obama administration - POLITICO
Nunes said the surveillance appears to have been legal, incidental collection and that it does not appear to have been related to concerns over collusion with Russia.
Nunes is going to the White House later Wednesday to brief the Trump administration on what he has learned, which he said came from "sources."
If Flynn broke the law, he should go to jail.
Unmasking is only supposed to be done for law enforcement issues and even then, it isn't supposed to be leaked to the media.
It's really bad, because it wasn't released for transparencies sake (something I would actually agree with) but it seems to be released purely as a political hit.
Now imagine this is normalized and Trump decides to use this on his political opponents.
Not only does it violate the trust we supposed to have that these orgs (NSA, FBI, CIA) are supposed to uphold, it allows for blackmail and all sorts of nasty things.
Stop being so "single issue" and look at the big picture.
Who's defending leaks? You trying to argue that intelligence gatherers that named foreign agent Flynn instead of leaving it anonymous represents some sort of criminality with the intelligence gathers.
Second we're dealing with more than law enforcement, this is also national security.
Third, don't be surprised if the leaks came from the VPs office as it wasn't leaked until the VP was informed weeks late.
Forth, why the hell did it take for this being leaked publicly for Trump to fire foreign agent Flynn?? Why?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?