https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-t...SKBN1E217J

We had this already. Dipshit Obama changed the rules. The next dipshit libturd who gets butthurt because they lost an election they rigged to win will simply do the same thing.

Now, the moment Strzok gets sent to federal pound him in the azz prison for 20 years is the moment this stops.

(12-08-2017 10:52 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  We had this already. Dipshit Obama changed the rules. The next dipshit libturd who gets butthurt because they lost an election they rigged to win will simply do the same thing.

Now, the moment Strzok gets sent to federal pound him in the azz prison for 20 years is the moment this stops.

I completely agree.......people have to start going to jail for this shite.....

this slap on the wrist bs has to end.....

it's another in long list why I abhor politics....

(12-08-2017 10:52 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  We had this already. Dipshit Obama changed the rules. The next dipshit libturd who gets butthurt because they lost an election they rigged to win will simply do the same thing.

Now, the moment Strzok gets sent to federal pound him in the azz prison for 20 years is the moment this stops.

Obama changed the rules? I never heard this before. Do you have a link for that?

(12-08-2017 10:59 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 10:52 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  We had this already. Dipshit Obama changed the rules. The next dipshit libturd who gets butthurt because they lost an election they rigged to win will simply do the same thing.

Now, the moment Strzok gets sent to federal pound him in the azz prison for 20 years is the moment this stops.

Obama changed the rules? I never heard this before. Do you have a link for that?

I do, but I'll let you research the whole scam yourself so you can be completely educated. Start with the Susan Rice interviews where she says "I dont know of any unmaskings", and then a couple of days later says "oh, THOSE unmaskings", and then the trail leads to where Obama changed the rules on the unmaskings.

(12-08-2017 11:31 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 10:59 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 10:52 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  We had this already. Dipshit Obama changed the rules. The next dipshit libturd who gets butthurt because they lost an election they rigged to win will simply do the same thing.

Now, the moment Strzok gets sent to federal pound him in the azz prison for 20 years is the moment this stops.

Obama changed the rules? I never heard this before. Do you have a link for that?

I do, but I'll let you research the whole scam yourself so you can be completely educated. Start with the Susan Rice interviews where she says "I dont know of any unmaskings", and then a couple of days later says "oh, THOSE unmaskings", and then the trail leads to where Obama changed the rules on the unmaskings.

We have covered this over and over and over again. Susan Rice did not have authorization to unmask anyone.

Only two or three people can unmask anyone and as far as I know, Obama did not change that rule.

(12-08-2017 11:39 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 11:31 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 10:59 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 10:52 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  We had this already. Dipshit Obama changed the rules. The next dipshit libturd who gets butthurt because they lost an election they rigged to win will simply do the same thing.

Now, the moment Strzok gets sent to federal pound him in the azz prison for 20 years is the moment this stops.

Obama changed the rules? I never heard this before. Do you have a link for that?

I do, but I'll let you research the whole scam yourself so you can be completely educated. Start with the Susan Rice interviews where she says "I dont know of any unmaskings", and then a couple of days later says "oh, THOSE unmaskings", and then the trail leads to where Obama changed the rules on the unmaskings.

We have covered this over and over and over again. Susan Rice did not have authorization to unmask anyone.

Only two or three people can unmask anyone and as far as I know, Obama did not change that rule.

Bless your heart.

(12-08-2017 11:41 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 11:39 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 11:31 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 10:59 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 10:52 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  We had this already. Dipshit Obama changed the rules. The next dipshit libturd who gets butthurt because they lost an election they rigged to win will simply do the same thing.

Now, the moment Strzok gets sent to federal pound him in the azz prison for 20 years is the moment this stops.

Obama changed the rules? I never heard this before. Do you have a link for that?

I do, but I'll let you research the whole scam yourself so you can be completely educated. Start with the Susan Rice interviews where she says "I dont know of any unmaskings", and then a couple of days later says "oh, THOSE unmaskings", and then the trail leads to where Obama changed the rules on the unmaskings.

We have covered this over and over and over again. Susan Rice did not have authorization to unmask anyone.

Only two or three people can unmask anyone and as far as I know, Obama did not change that rule.

Bless your heart.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink.

(12-08-2017 11:42 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 11:41 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 11:39 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 11:31 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 10:59 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Obama changed the rules? I never heard this before. Do you have a link for that?

I do, but I'll let you research the whole scam yourself so you can be completely educated. Start with the Susan Rice interviews where she says "I dont know of any unmaskings", and then a couple of days later says "oh, THOSE unmaskings", and then the trail leads to where Obama changed the rules on the unmaskings.

We have covered this over and over and over again. Susan Rice did not have authorization to unmask anyone.

Only two or three people can unmask anyone and as far as I know, Obama did not change that rule.

Bless your heart.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink.

Especially when that horse is busy swallowing what he's being spoon-fed because he doesnt want to think for himself.

(12-08-2017 11:55 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 11:42 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 11:41 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 11:39 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 11:31 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  I do, but I'll let you research the whole scam yourself so you can be completely educated. Start with the Susan Rice interviews where she says "I dont know of any unmaskings", and then a couple of days later says "oh, THOSE unmaskings", and then the trail leads to where Obama changed the rules on the unmaskings.

We have covered this over and over and over again. Susan Rice did not have authorization to unmask anyone.

Only two or three people can unmask anyone and as far as I know, Obama did not change that rule.

Bless your heart.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink.

Especially when that horse is busy swallowing what he's being spoon-fed because he doesnt want to think for himself.

Perhaps so but hey, just post that link and we can clear this all up once and for all.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-secur...-to-unmask

Quote:Former President Barack Obama’s intelligence chief issued revised procedures in 2013 that made it easier for executive branch officials to “unmask” the names of lawmakers or congressional staffers caught up in intelligence intercepts overseas, according to interviews and documents reviewed by The Hill.

Procedures issued by Director of National Intelligence James Clapper in March 2013 formally supplanted a 1992 set of rules that made the dissemination of names of intercepted lawmakers or congressional aides an act of last resort.

https://www.circa.com/story/2017/03/28/p...ical-hands

Quote:As his presidency drew to a close, Barack Obama’s top aides routinely reviewed intelligence reports gleaned from the National Security Agency’s incidental intercepts of Americans abroad, taking advantage of rules their boss relaxed starting in 2011 to help the government better fight terrorism, espionage by foreign enemies and hacking threats, Circa has learned.

Quote:Over the last decade, the assumption of civil liberty and privacy protections for Americans incidentally intercepted by the NSA overseas has been eroded in the name of national security.

Today, the power to unmask an American’s name inside an NSA intercept -- once considered a rare event in the intelligence and civil liberty communities -- now resides with about 20 different officials inside the NSA alone. The FBI also has the ability to unmask Americans’ names to other intelligence professionals and policymakers.


And the justification for requesting such unmasking can be as simple as claiming “the identity of the United States person is necessary to understand foreign intelligence information or assess its importance,” according to a once-classified document that the Obama administration submitted in October 2011 for approval by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. It laid out specifically how and when the NSA could unmask an American’s identity.

Quote:The ACLU, an ally of Obama on many issues, issued a statement a few months ago warning that the president’s loosened procedures governing who could request or see unmasked American intercepts by the NSA were “grossly inadequate” and lacked “appropriate safeguards.”

The revelations are important on multiple political and policy fronts.

Nunes, the House intelligence panel chairman who was not interviewed for this story, alleged in the last week he has received evidence that Obama administration political figures gained access to unmasked American identities through foreign intercepts involving the Trump transition team between November and January.

Quote:The NSA is strictly forbidden from targeting Americans for surveillance while carrying out is perfectly legal and essential mission to spy on foreign powers, encoded in FISA’s Section 702.

If the government wants to wiretap or electronically surveil an American or a foreigner on U.S. soil, it must obtain court permission for what is known as a FISA warrant, which has strict limitations on time and collection and who can read the intercepted information.


The NSA, however, was granted dispensation from any penalty if it wiretaps or collects information of an American accidentally, an event known as an incidental collection.

For years, the NSA has been required to follow strict rules to protect the accidental intercepts of Americans from being consumed or misused by other government agencies. The rules required a process known as minimization, where the identity and information about an American who was intercepted is redacted or masked with generic references like “American No. 1.”


The number of senior government officials who could approve unmasking had been limited to just a few, like the NSA director himself.

But as the U.S. intelligence community became more worried over the last decade about its ability to locate lone wolf terrorists, foreign spies and hackers in an increasingly digital world, Bush and Obama began relaxing the rules for minimization and increasing access to NSA collected information on Americans. In short, the Obama administration created a standard set of “exceptions” to the minimization rules.

One of those relaxations came in 2011 when Attorney General Eric Holder sent a memo to the FISA court laying out the rules for sharing unmasked intercepts of Americans captured incidentally by the NSA. The court approved the approach.

In 2015, those rules were adapted to determine not only how the FBI got access to unmasked intelligence from NSA or FISA intercepts but also other agencies. One of the requirements, the NSA and FBI had to keep good records of who requested and gained access to the unredacted information.

And in his final days in office, Obama created the largest ever expansion of access to non-minimized NSA intercepts, creating a path for all U.S. intelligence to gain access to unmasked reports by changes encoded in a Reagan-era Executive Order 12333.


The government officials who could request or approve an exception to unmask a U.S. citizen’s identity has grown substantially. The NSA now has 20 executives who can approve the unmasking of American information inside intercepts, and the FBI has similar numbers.

And executives in 16 agencies -- not just the FBI, CIA and NSA -- have the right to request unmasked information.

chirpity chirp chirp

See was that so hard?