Clapper, Yates, Russiagate, Yada Yada

A

anatta

100% recycled karma
The Congressional probe into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections takes another step forward on Monday, with the first public testimony from former acting Attorney General Sally Yates, who reportedly told the Trump White House of intelligence concerns about ex-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, centering on his contacts with Russian officials.

Here is some of what we might see on Monday afternoon before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee:

. A renewed focus on former Trump aide Michael Flynn. Maybe the most anticipated part of Monday’s testimony will be from former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates, who reportedly warned the White House of questions related to former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, and whether he told the truth about his contacts with Russian government officials. Yates, who was fired by President Trump for refusing to defend his first travel and refugee order, has not publicly told her story as yet. Yates reportedly told the White House of fears that Flynn could be at risk of blackmail by the Russians – several weeks before Flynn was fired; the White House said it was because Flynn had misled Vice President Mike Pence on the matter. Last week, FBI Director James Comey acknowledged that he had discussions with Yates about Flynn and his contacts with the Russian ambassador.

. Former DNI Clapper likely to zero in on Moscow again. The formal title of this hearing is “Russian Interference in the 2016 United States Election,” and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper is certainly a top witness to discuss the view of the U.S. Intelligence Community on that matter. Clapper has been clear from the beginning about his belief that the Russians were causing trouble. “The hacking was only one part of it,” Clapper told Senators in January, adding that Moscow also used “classical propaganda, disinformation, fake news,” as Clapper said the Russians were still using those tools to disrupt the U.S. political system. “I think the public should know as much about this as possible,” said Clapper, who retired when President Trump took office.

Why isn’t Susan Rice testifying at this hearing? Former Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice was not originally scheduled to be part of this hearing, but last week, Republicans asked her to join Yates and Clapper. Rice refused, and that prompted Republicans to hint that she is hiding something. “I am deeply disappointed that Ambassador Rice has declined to participate in this hearing,” said Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA). Republicans want to question Rice about “unmasking” the names of Americans caught up in incidental intelligence collection related to the probe of possible links between Russia and the Trump Campaign

Where is Congress going next on the Russia matter? This won’t be the only public testimony for Yates and Clapper, as the House Intelligence Committee wants both of them to return for a public hearing soon, along with former CIA Director John Brennan. No date has been set for that appearance. No new public hearings have been set as yet by the Senate Intelligence Committee on the Russia matter, though members of that panel have been going over to the Central Intelligence Agency to review materials reportedly related to the probe – it’s not clear what they have seen, or where their probe is headed. The top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee told CNN this past week that there was no evidence as yet of collusion between Trump associates and Russia over the elections. But that isn’t stopping the investigation from moving forward.

http://jamiedupree.blog.palmbeachpo...with-yates-clapper-testimony-to-senate-panel/
 
yea, where is the Trump Russia collusion, shouldn't we be onto something by now... a lot of effort for nothing it seems.

Democrats should be ashamed of themselves, again
 
nothing about leaking IC reports about the incidental collection of Flynn's phone calls-
intercepts of the highest level.
The Deep State is purposely impenitrable- Congress has to sorta gues the right question to ask,
and even there liars like Clapper aren't going to cooperate
 
Liberals at some point need to look around and see the needle is not moving in their direction.

This throwing darts at the wall strategy is the ploy of children

Personally I hope they continue to not get it, we certainly will have a full generation without Democrat rule of any sort, so this childish behavior may assure two generations
 
Susan Rice doesn't want to talk about the unmasking lol.

Think about that: the one person that knows about the only actual crime that was committed in the whole affair, doesn't want to talk.
 
Susan Rice is a treasure trove of corruption.
there's a reason why Obama is laying low, he does not want the pot stirred, his administration was one of the most conniving, corrupt cesspools of dishonesty of all time, and I'm including comparison to Nixon and Bill Clinton.
 
Darth Omar said:
Susan Rice doesn't want to talk about the unmasking lol.

Think about that: the one person that knows about the only actual crime that was committed in the whole affair, doesn't want to talk.
Click to expand...
she certainly could clarify if she wanted to..she finds her way on to TV shows to talk about it!
 
anatta said:
The Congressional probe into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections takes another step forward on Monday, with the first public testimony from former acting Attorney General Sally Yates, who reportedly told the Trump White House of intelligence concerns about ex-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, centering on his contacts with Russian officials.

Here is some of what we might see on Monday afternoon before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee:

. A renewed focus on former Trump aide Michael Flynn. Maybe the most anticipated part of Monday’s testimony will be from former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates, who reportedly warned the White House of questions related to former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, and whether he told the truth about his contacts with Russian government officials. Yates, who was fired by President Trump for refusing to defend his first travel and refugee order, has not publicly told her story as yet. Yates reportedly told the White House of fears that Flynn could be at risk of blackmail by the Russians – several weeks before Flynn was fired; the White House said it was because Flynn had misled Vice President Mike Pence on the matter. Last week, FBI Director James Comey acknowledged that he had discussions with Yates about Flynn and his contacts with the Russian ambassador.

. Former DNI Clapper likely to zero in on Moscow again. The formal title of this hearing is “Russian Interference in the 2016 United States Election,” and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper is certainly a top witness to discuss the view of the U.S. Intelligence Community on that matter. Clapper has been clear from the beginning about his belief that the Russians were causing trouble. “The hacking was only one part of it,” Clapper told Senators in January, adding that Moscow also used “classical propaganda, disinformation, fake news,” as Clapper said the Russians were still using those tools to disrupt the U.S. political system. “I think the public should know as much about this as possible,” said Clapper, who retired when President Trump took office.

Why isn’t Susan Rice testifying at this hearing? Former Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice was not originally scheduled to be part of this hearing, but last week, Republicans asked her to join Yates and Clapper. Rice refused, and that prompted Republicans to hint that she is hiding something. “I am deeply disappointed that Ambassador Rice has declined to participate in this hearing,” said Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA). Republicans want to question Rice about “unmasking” the names of Americans caught up in incidental intelligence collection related to the probe of possible links between Russia and the Trump Campaign

Where is Congress going next on the Russia matter? This won’t be the only public testimony for Yates and Clapper, as the House Intelligence Committee wants both of them to return for a public hearing soon, along with former CIA Director John Brennan. No date has been set for that appearance. No new public hearings have been set as yet by the Senate Intelligence Committee on the Russia matter, though members of that panel have been going over to the Central Intelligence Agency to review materials reportedly related to the probe – it’s not clear what they have seen, or where their probe is headed. The top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee told CNN this past week that there was no evidence as yet of collusion between Trump associates and Russia over the elections. But that isn’t stopping the investigation from moving forward.

http://jamiedupree.blog.palmbeachpo...with-yates-clapper-testimony-to-senate-panel/
Click to expand...

:popcorn:​
 
Oh Lord..now we gotta hear Lindsey Graham going on and on about Russia's "threatening of the Baltics"
 
it jumped out at me that Clapper's opening statement self-described he had requested unmasking "dozens" Of time over his long career.

Rice appears to have unmasked at least that many times in the short time during the presidential campaign,
and after the election.
It's that sheer number of unmasking requests by Rice that makes her actions politically suspicious
 
Durbin calls it "Muslim Travel ban" *tonight's TV soundbite*
defending Yates conclusion that campaign rhetoric made "on the face" reading of the XO- and reminding that the 9th used the same criteria..

Clearly this needs to go to SCOTUS ( my opinion is the text needs to be looked at instead of rhetoric)
 
Clapper goes after WIKI LEAKS as a "non-state actor" acting as Russian op.

That's important as it leaves WIKI open to prosecution
 
anatta said:
it jumped out at me that Clapper's opening statement self-described he had requested unmasking "dozens" Of time over his long career.

Rice appears to have unmasked at least that many times in the short time during the presidential campaign,
and after the election.
It's that sheer number of unmasking requests by Rice that makes her actions politically suspicious
Click to expand...

Clapper and Yates are definitely not on the same page. She declined to answer a question due to classified information, while he candidly answered the same question with an unclassified report. What did she have that he didn't?
 
talk of yet more Russian sanctions led by a bill sponsored by Graham....
the All American Senate served hot dogs as hors d'oeuvres
 
Chlorate said:
Clapper and Yates are definitely not on the same page. She declined to answer a question due to classified information, while he candidly answered the same question with an unclassified report. What did she have that he didn't?
Click to expand...
you'd have to be specific, but Yates has an agenda to defend her "Muslim ban" refusal to enforce.
Clapper -for all his Russiaphobia- is more willing to give info on IC activities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top