House Intelligence Chair: ‘No Proof’ Russians Were Trying To Get Trump Elected

[Bo-4]

Why haven't they presented their evidence to the appropriate oversight committee's ??

They have, and we're pretty sick of answering MV's cut and paste questions that have been answered 122 times.

[TimeLord962]

They have, and i've pretty sick of answering MV's cut and paste questions that have been answered 122 times.

No, no they haven't, 77 days still no evidence.

[Crepitus]

The national popular vote sort of says otherwise, don't ya think ??

Staying home in certain neglected states.

[TimeLord962]

After the investigation is done and the House is briefed ... what will be your excuse?

77 days still no evidence.

[hanger4]

They have, and i've pretty sick of answering MV's cut and paste questions that have been answered 122 times.

They have ?? Why don't you produce the link ??

[MisterVeritis]

They have, and i've pretty sick of answering MV's cut and paste questions that have been answered 122 times.

You have never answered.

1) Who briefed the House?
2) When did the briefing take place?
3) What was the nature of the evidence?


Humor me.

[Beevee]

This is an excellent point. Intelligence sources and methods could be exposed. That is why we have members in the House and Senate who are cleared for such information.

So why hasn't the Obama Regime briefed the House?

If Mitch McConnell is still a member, I can understand the reluctance.

[MisterVeritis]

If Mitch McConnell is still a member, I can understand the reluctance.

The top leadership in the House and Senate have the appropriate clearances. For extremely sensitive intelligence, only the chair and ranking members of each committee are briefed.

[MMC]

If the "investigation" is not complete (I have never heard intelligence gathering and analysis described as an investigation before) then why would the Regime make a spurious claim?

If the House is briefed and satisfied with the evidence I would have no objections. Meanwhile the calendar ripens.

Lets not forget BO and Team was also blaming WikiLeaks. Which Assange came out yesterday and addressed another point.


Assange To Hannity: Source For WikiLeaks Was Not Russian Government.....


In an exclusive interview with FOX News Channel's Sean Hannity the founder of WikiLeaks Julian Assange said Russia was not the source for the DNC and John Podesta hacks.


[HANNITY: Can you say to the American people, unequivocally, that you did not get this information about the DNC, John Podesta's emails, can you tell the American people 1,000 percent that you did not get it from Russia or anybody associated with Russia?


JULIAN ASSANGE: Yes. We can say, we have said, repeatedly that over the last two months that our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party.]


Hannity's full interview with Assange will air Tuesday night at 10pm ET. More from the interview:



[ASSANGE: Our publications had wide uptake by the American people, they're all true. But that's not the allegation that’s being presented by the Obama White House. So, why such a dramatic response? Well, the reason is obvious. They’re trying to delegitimize the Trump administration as it goes into the White House. They are trying to say that President-elect Trump is not a legitimate President...

ASSANGE: Our source is not a state party, so the answer for our interactions is no. But if we look at our most recent statement from the US government, which is on the 29th of December, OK, we had five different branches of government, Treasury, DHS, FBI, White House presenting their accusations to underpin Obama’s throwing out 29 Russian diplomats. What was missing from all of those statements? The word WikiLeaks. It’s very strange.].....snip~


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...overnment.html

[Ethereal]

Briefings are not good enough at this point. This information, assuming it actually exists, is of such magnitude and severity that it MUST be revealed to the public in its entirety. If that means we compromise a few assets or methods, then so be it. Obviously, we'd have to remove those assets before releasing the information in order to maintain their safety, but their operational position is not more important than the profound consequences of escalating tensions with a nuclear power like Russia. At this point, the public interest far, far outweighs state secrecy.