You are posting something from Blackand BlondeMedia as being without any “conservative” wrapping? Are you still under the impression that nobody will check your sources?
I don’t think I’ve seen this posted yet, apparently it’s plausible that the revelation of names that Nunes alleged happened very well might have come from the current occupant of the white house: Is the Trump White House Spying on the FBI? . The fact that nothing more has come of the allegedly improperly redacted names, combined with articles like this makes me think that there really wasn’t ANY fire to Nunes’s smoke. Which is actually surprising to me, I wouldn’t expect someone like him to fly off the handle like that. Also it looks like he might have committed a few felonies in the process of getting the information the way he did, though I doubt he’s fearing prosecution.
Maybe I’m just misremembering, but I don’t think I’ve seen this level of unfounded and risky (for the person making them) accusations in previous scandals, like Bush’s Iraq war intel, or Iran-Contra, or any of Clinton’s shenanigans.
Wasn’t she describing efforts to preserve evidence in case they were at risk under an administration under investigation? How can anyone not empathize with this with what we know?
"The communications collected from Trump team associates apparently were picked up during surveillance of foreign targets. But an intelligence source familiar with those targets said they were spied on long before Trump became the GOP presidential nominee in mid-July.
In addition, citizens affiliated with Trump’s team who were unmasked were not associated with any intelligence about Russia or other foreign intelligence, sources confirmed. The initial unmasking led to other surveillance, which led to other private citizens being wrongly unmasked, sources said.
“Unmasking is not unprecedented, but unmasking for political purposes … specifically of Trump transition team members … is highly suspect and questionable,” an intelligence source told Fox News. “Opposition by some in the intelligence agencies who were very connected to the Obama and Clinton teams was strong. After Trump was elected, they decided they were going to ruin his presidency by picking them off one by one.”
… and some more from the story’s journalist:
"I will also note…my sources are “not Trump people” They are “just frustrated with the politicalization of our intelligence agencies”
This doesn’t appear to have anything to do with Trump’s evidence-free claims about Obama, nor with Nunes’ apparent collusion with the White House to try and support the baseless claims.
Further - ‘leading to other surveillance’ does not necessarily equal ‘new’ surveillance, just that it took them to other data. Putting together a puzzle of information.
I claimed and claim that Trump and some of his people were under surveillance. Whether targets or incidentals is immaterial if your name and transcripts of your conversations wind up in widely disseminated reports.
When your name with the transcripts of your conversations winds up disseminated in intelligence community as a result of a surveillance operation - that’s being “under surveillance”.
When a court authorizes intercepting/recording all your communications - that’s being a “target of surveillance”.