Posted on 03/28/2017 7:44:02 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
With all due respect..what they f—k would she know about Trump and Russia? that’s not even logical....
If it something the AG office was doing before Trump came in to office then Eric Holder would be the logical person to talk about it
If it was something after Trump came in to office while she was acting AG for that short time why would anybody from the Trump camp be telling her anything about Russia?
Trump and office in the 20th and she was out of office on the 30th that’s 10 days ...what possible unique information did she acquire in 10 days ?
This is political theater by the Dems because she made a name for not defending Trumps travel ban
You are full of it. FR becoming anti Trump. Totally stupid.
Yep, nail on the head.
We are looking at the biggest corruption of our history that a new President was spied on, by the last administration, and yet nothing about this in the media. like you said they prefer to attack the messenger, instead of asking about the biggest corruption in history.
Leaks by whom? Former Obama administration officials? How does Trump stop those?
WAPO forgot to mention that Obama and his predecessors blocked testimony in the name of executive privilege countless times, as a standard procedure. Protecting the principle often far outweighs the content of what the witness might say in the particular instance.
As much as Yates should be grilled regarding the Clinton email cover-up, illegal surveillance of Trump and his associates, etc., most Republicans on the Intel Committee lack the wits to turn this their way. The Dems would coordinate their questions to stage another propaganda fest, and the media would cherry pick to pronounce that Trump is GUILTY. Better off quashing the whole thing.
Yates served as Deputy AG from January 10, 2015 to January 30, 2017. She served as acting AG for 10 days. She had two years to acquire "unique" information including possible surveillance of the Trump campaign, the incoming President-elect transition, and 10 days of the actual Administration. Did the FBI leak information or unmask Americans during incidental collection.
Yates is a partisan Obama appointee in the same mold as Lynch and Holder. Yates served under Lynch for the most part. Holder resigned on April 27, 2015.
The FBI begain its investigation of Russian meddling in our election and possible collusion by the Trump campaign in July 2016. Yates would have been privy to much of that information and history. Also, Nunes disclosed that there appears to have been incidental collection of intelligence information on the incoming Trump administration from November thru January that had nothing to do with Russia. Yates would have known about that as well.
Lest we forget?
Gowdy: Do you know whether Director Clapper knew the name of the U.S. citizen that appeared in the New York Times and Washington Post?
Comey: I can’t say in this forum because I again I do not want to confirm there was classified information in the newspaper.
Gowdy: Would he have had access to an unmasked name?
Comey: In some circumstances, sure, he was the director of National Intelligence. But I’m not talking about the particular.
Gowdy: Would Director Brennan have access to an unmasked U.S. citizen’s name?
Comey: In some circumstances, yes.
Gowdy: Would National Security Advisor Susan Rice have access to an unmasked U.S. citizen’s name?
Comey: Yes, in general, and any other national security advisor would, I think, as a matter of the ordinary course of their business.
Gowdy: Would former White House advisor Ben Rhodes have access to an unmasked citizen’s name?
Comey: I do not know the answer to that.
Gowdy: Would former Attorney General Loretta Lynch have access to an unmasked U.S. citizen’s name?
Comey: In general, yes, as would any attorney general.
Gowdy: So that would also include Acting A.G. Sally Yates?
Comey: Same answer.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/gowdy-points-to-obama-officials-as-potential-flynn-leakers
Considering where this article came from and the author of it, I call B.S.!!!
Isn’t Yates the political hack who let her foolish Communist-inspired opinions and emotions govern her actions rather than being guided by the law?
Yates clearly showed by her actions that she was unfit to hold any position of public responsibility, let alone the high position from which she was removed.
Such positions must be filled by individuals having the highest ethical standards as well as a respect for the law and a high level of trustworthiness, none of which were evidenced by Sally Yates’ reckless and personally-motivated actions.
White House just said otherwise (she is not blocked) apparently turning out to be fake news.
Take your baby aspirin and relax.
White House just said otherwise (she is not blocked) apparently turning out to be fake news.
My point is she s name being called for political show .. if there was true reason to call in the AG to testify it would be Lynch or Holder to call in... Yates it a blood shirt for the left to wave because she is the first left wing martyr under Trump ...she the lefts “Horst Wessel”
More WaPo FUD.
It is friggin amazing how many people on this board jump on things put out by the NYT, WP and other MSM as being factual. This is a lie by the WP. The WH did not claim Executive Privilege to keep her from testifying which is what the WP is trying to claim. This is more fake news by the fake news WP.
And? So ?
Yes and no. Lynch or Holder could say they weren’t in on any of the details, i.e., plausible deniability.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.