Sure, everything needs to be out, even if it may hurt the US and our efforts in the War on Terror, just as long as it will hurt Trump.
To: Innovative
Nonsense. Complete BS.
Gowdy will believe anything.
2 posted on
09/13/2017 4:06:55 PM PDT by
tennmountainman
("Prophet Mountainman" Predicter Of All Things RINO...for a small fee.)
To: Innovative
According to the MSM/Democrat narrative, the Russian - Trump back channel had been in operation for months.
3 posted on
09/13/2017 4:10:46 PM PDT by
odawg
To: Innovative
The swamp gets deeper and deeper. I hope our President has some waders and a good life jacket.
The GOP and Demonrats just keep pissing in the swamp and dumping more raw sewage into it.
AND Gowdy, same old same old. He never met a lobbyist he did not like.
4 posted on
09/13/2017 4:12:17 PM PDT by
eartick
(Been to the line in the sand and liked it, but ready to go again)
To: Innovative
“everything needs to be out......just as long as it will hurt Trump.”....
The news media, 99 % of odumbo appointees all want to undermine Trump and in doing so are destroying this country. Every one of them needs to be immediately dumped into the trash heap ASAP, NO HOLD OVERS.
5 posted on
09/13/2017 4:12:46 PM PDT by
DaveA37
To: Innovative
If the Trump people had been colluding with Russia before the election, then why the need to establish back channel communications with Russia after the election?
To: Innovative
Why didn’t she just ask the Crown Prince why he was here? What a bogus reason for unmasking American citizens.
10 posted on
09/13/2017 4:26:08 PM PDT by
mass55th
(Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway...John Wayne)
To: Innovative
Gowdy will investigate forever and never find anything, what a dipshit!
13 posted on
09/13/2017 4:32:23 PM PDT by
Souled_Out
(Our hope is in the power of God working through the hearts of people.)
To: All
| Click the Pics & Text  
|
|
|
To: Innovative
CNN articles now get posted as real news?
To: Innovative
Every incoming U.S. president in my life time had, I don’t doubt, some attempt somewhere to have their own “back channel” communication line to an ally, or adversary (or adversaries) to have conversations unfiltered by the incumbent administration during the transition.
Such a back channel by itself presumes nothing wrong about it.
19 posted on
09/13/2017 4:48:19 PM PDT by
Wuli
To: Innovative
How does CNN know what Susan Rice told investigators in private?
20 posted on
09/13/2017 4:48:33 PM PDT by
Brown Deer
(America First!)
To: Innovative
Didn’t she unmask ‘hundreds’ of Americans? This would only account for what, 5 or 6?
To: Innovative
Cripes...I wonder who leaked this info ?
But her explanation appears to have satisfied some influential Republicans on the committee, undercutting both Nunes and Trump and raising new questions about whether any Trump associates tried to arrange back-channel discussions with the Russians.
Huh ? back-channel ? who cares ? at this point DJT is president-elect...it doesn't matter.
Did Rice need a legitimate reason to unmask ? If she needed a legitimate reason, this wasn't it.
23 posted on
09/13/2017 4:52:04 PM PDT by
stylin19a
(Lynch & Clinton - Snakes on a Plane)
To: Innovative
OT: I’m thinking of uploading my consciousness to the internet.
What do you think?
25 posted on
09/13/2017 5:17:29 PM PDT by
Concentrate
(ex-texan was right and Always Right was wrong, which is why we lost the election. Podesta the molest)
To: Innovative
Late last year Trump was the president elect. Why should she care who he has contact with?
As the President elect he has every right to set up contacts with foreign governments.
She was spying on him.
26 posted on
09/13/2017 6:30:59 PM PDT by
PJammers
(Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson