quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

ok so let's follow the timeline here:

he wasn't briefed at all
ok it was in the written briefing
well it was in the briefing but she decided not to read it aloud (since he cannot or will not read)

---

---

OK, Schiff is equally culpable as a Congressman as Trump is as president. You good with that?

---

No because we all know that Schiff would try to impeach the President for adding an extra scoop of ice cream, and he would also try and spin anything to hurt him. So if he didn't see anything wrong w/ this then you know it wasn't an issue. Unless they tried to hide it on purpose which not even I would do what you all are doing and blame Schiff for something like that. He's evil, but not that evil - hopefully

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

ok so let's follow the timeline here:

he wasn't briefed at all
ok it was in the written briefing
well it was in the briefing but she decided not to read it aloud (since he cannot or will not read)

---

---

OK, Schiff is equally culpable as a Congressman as Trump is as president. You good with that?

---

I think Trump wants the same treatment Schiff gets

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

ok so let's follow the timeline here:

he wasn't briefed at all
ok it was in the written briefing
well it was in the briefing but she decided not to read it aloud (since he cannot or will not read)

---

---

OK, Schiff is equally culpable as a Congressman as Trump is as president. You good with that?

---

I think Trump wants the same treatment Schiff gets

---

Let him run for Congress then.

HuMcK said:

---

"Most of the Intel Community" doubts it? I think that would come as a surprise to the actual Intel Community, seeing as they've been briefing forces in the field about it for about a year now...

Why do y'all continue to take this administration at their word despite them being caught lying about this story multitude times already? That is what bias looks like: willingness to accept obvious lies from the party out of loyalty.

---

Again, knowing a fair amount about intelligence gathering and verification, if there had been strong evidence (even well short of consensus) it would have been a Priority item. It's clear nobody treated it that way. It's not about taking Trump at his word. I don't take any pols at their word, and he'd be near the bottom of my list.

But, unlike some, I'm not going to accuse any President of what's close to treason based on anonymous sources, especially when the pieces just don't seem to fit together. I've said from the outset on this, I want to see all the facts. There obviously are reports going both ways. But to me, anonymous sources and the CNN and NYT reports are no more credible than the Trump folks. And the pieces to the puzzle as I know it still suggest there is nothing there.

And one more point because CNN seemed to hype this up: It is routine for intel folks to share unverified intel with allies and others well before going up the chain (and certainly far before briefing the Pres). This early stage sharing is an integral part of the gathering and verification process.

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

ok so let's follow the timeline here:

he wasn't briefed at all
ok it was in the written briefing
well it was in the briefing but she decided not to read it aloud (since he cannot or will not read)

---

---

OK, Schiff is equally culpable as a Congressman as Trump is as president. You good with that?

---

I think Trump wants the same treatment Schiff gets

---

Let him run for Congress then.

---

Why not treat Schiff like Trump?

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

ok so let's follow the timeline here:

he wasn't briefed at all
ok it was in the written briefing
well it was in the briefing but she decided not to read it aloud (since he cannot or will not read)

---

---

OK, Schiff is equally culpable as a Congressman as Trump is as president. You good with that?

---

I think Trump wants the same treatment Schiff gets

---

Let him run for Congress then.

---

Why not treat Schiff like Trump?

---

One is a congressman, one is commander in chief.

Who knew?

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

As I understand it, they told Schiff in Feb. I guess he didn't think much of it then.

So no answer then, noted. And that wiretapping claim is a malicious lie, he got Lev Parnas' (remember him, the guy who funneled russian money to GOP campaigns?) phone records and discovered that Nunes had been talking to him. Instead of being mad at Schiff for finding it, ask yourself what Nunes could have been up to talking to a Russian agent like Lev Parnas.

Top committee staff for Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, were briefed in February on intelligence about Russia offering the Taliban bounties in Afghanistan, but he took no action in response to the briefing, multiple intelligence sources familiar with the briefing told The Federalist. The intelligence was briefed to Schiff's staff during a congressional delegation, or CODEL, trip to Afghanistan in February.
https://thefederalist.com/2020/07/02/schiff-learned-of-russian-bounty-intelligence-in-february-withheld-information-from-congress-and-took-no-action/

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

Yes, very common. If you're in the business world, think of it in that context. The higher up the chain often the less info you receive but the more significant that info is. Even more so with US Gov intel. Analysts receive thousands of pieces of intel daily. That intel is distributed based on individual discretion or according to pre-determined distribution lists based on subject matter. Info is regularly sent to other analysts, other agencies, people we don't know exist, allies, and politicians, and the more significant and verified the info the higher it goes and the more it is prioritized.

Again, this is hogwash, boondoggles. No Russian in his right mind would pay bounties.

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

Yes, very common. If you're in the business world, think of it in that context. The higher up the chain often the less info you receive but the more significant that info is. Even more so with US Gov intel. Analysts receive thousands of pieces of intel daily. That intel is distributed based on individual discretion or according to pre-determined distribution lists based on subject matter. Info is regularly sent to other analysts, other agencies, people we don't know exist, allies, and politicians, and the more significant and verified the info the higher it goes and the more it is prioritized.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff but not Trump on this issue?

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

Yes, very common. If you're in the business world, think of it in that context. The higher up the chain often the less info you receive but the more significant that info is. Even more so with US Gov intel. Analysts receive thousands of pieces of intel daily. That intel is distributed based on individual discretion or according to pre-determined distribution lists based on subject matter. Info is regularly sent to other analysts, other agencies, people we don't know exist, allies, and politicians, and the more significant and verified the info the higher it goes and the more it is prioritized.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff but not Trump on this issue?

---

Yes, that's what I already answered and explained.

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

Yes, very common. If you're in the business world, think of it in that context. The higher up the chain often the less info you receive but the more significant that info is. Even more so with US Gov intel. Analysts receive thousands of pieces of intel daily. That intel is distributed based on individual discretion or according to pre-determined distribution lists based on subject matter. Info is regularly sent to other analysts, other agencies, people we don't know exist, allies, and politicians, and the more significant and verified the info the higher it goes and the more it is prioritized.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff but not Trump on this issue?

---

Yes, that's what I already answered and explained.

---

Why do you think this issue merits Schiff's attention but not Trump's?

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

Yes, very common. If you're in the business world, think of it in that context. The higher up the chain often the less info you receive but the more significant that info is. Even more so with US Gov intel. Analysts receive thousands of pieces of intel daily. That intel is distributed based on individual discretion or according to pre-determined distribution lists based on subject matter. Info is regularly sent to other analysts, other agencies, people we don't know exist, allies, and politicians, and the more significant and verified the info the higher it goes and the more it is prioritized.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff but not Trump on this issue?

---

Yes, that's what I already answered and explained.

---

Why do you think this issue merits Schiff's attention but not Trump's?

---

Again I'm speculating, but based on what I know about the process, it would mean at that time the intel was nowhere near verified.

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

Yes, very common. If you're in the business world, think of it in that context. The higher up the chain often the less info you receive but the more significant that info is. Even more so with US Gov intel. Analysts receive thousands of pieces of intel daily. That intel is distributed based on individual discretion or according to pre-determined distribution lists based on subject matter. Info is regularly sent to other analysts, other agencies, people we don't know exist, allies, and politicians, and the more significant and verified the info the higher it goes and the more it is prioritized.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff but not Trump on this issue?

---

Yes, that's what I already answered and explained.

---

Why do you think this issue merits Schiff's attention but not Trump's?

---

If it isn't worth Schiff's time, why take it on up the chain?

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

Yes, very common. If you're in the business world, think of it in that context. The higher up the chain often the less info you receive but the more significant that info is. Even more so with US Gov intel. Analysts receive thousands of pieces of intel daily. That intel is distributed based on individual discretion or according to pre-determined distribution lists based on subject matter. Info is regularly sent to other analysts, other agencies, people we don't know exist, allies, and politicians, and the more significant and verified the info the higher it goes and the more it is prioritized.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff but not Trump on this issue?

---

Yes, that's what I already answered and explained.

---

Why do you think this issue merits Schiff's attention but not Trump's?

---

If it isn't worth Schiff's time, why take it on up the chain?

---

Why bother with Schiff if it was nowhere near verified?

I understand Putin may be having second thoughts about running Trump for re-election...

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

Yes, very common. If you're in the business world, think of it in that context. The higher up the chain often the less info you receive but the more significant that info is. Even more so with US Gov intel. Analysts receive thousands of pieces of intel daily. That intel is distributed based on individual discretion or according to pre-determined distribution lists based on subject matter. Info is regularly sent to other analysts, other agencies, people we don't know exist, allies, and politicians, and the more significant and verified the info the higher it goes and the more it is prioritized.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff but not Trump on this issue?

---

Yes, that's what I already answered and explained.

---

Why do you think this issue merits Schiff's attention but not Trump's?

---

If it isn't worth Schiff's time, why take it on up the chain?

---

Why bother with Schiff if it was nowhere near verified?

---

Why bother POTUS? Sounds like we all agree it wasn't intel with which to be concerned.

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

Yes, very common. If you're in the business world, think of it in that context. The higher up the chain often the less info you receive but the more significant that info is. Even more so with US Gov intel. Analysts receive thousands of pieces of intel daily. That intel is distributed based on individual discretion or according to pre-determined distribution lists based on subject matter. Info is regularly sent to other analysts, other agencies, people we don't know exist, allies, and politicians, and the more significant and verified the info the higher it goes and the more it is prioritized.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff but not Trump on this issue?

---

Yes, that's what I already answered and explained.

---

Why do you think this issue merits Schiff's attention but not Trump's?

---

If it isn't worth Schiff's time, why take it on up the chain?

---

Why bother with Schiff if it was nowhere near verified?

---

Why bother POTUS? Sounds like we all agree it wasn't intel with which to be concerned.

---

And yet Schiff was briefed. Curious.

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

Yes, very common. If you're in the business world, think of it in that context. The higher up the chain often the less info you receive but the more significant that info is. Even more so with US Gov intel. Analysts receive thousands of pieces of intel daily. That intel is distributed based on individual discretion or according to pre-determined distribution lists based on subject matter. Info is regularly sent to other analysts, other agencies, people we don't know exist, allies, and politicians, and the more significant and verified the info the higher it goes and the more it is prioritized.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff but not Trump on this issue?

---

Yes, that's what I already answered and explained.

---

Why do you think this issue merits Schiff's attention but not Trump's?

---

If it isn't worth Schiff's time, why take it on up the chain?

---

Why bother with Schiff if it was nowhere near verified?

---

Why bother POTUS? Sounds like we all agree it wasn't intel with which to be concerned.

---

And yet Schiff was briefed. Curious.

---

I don't think I could have been more clear. Schiff routinely receives unverified intel. In fact, in certain predetermined categories, he'll get briefed on sheer rumor. Schiff is considered mid-level for intel purposes, and that's how it works. Again, the more important and more verified the intel, the higher it goes. POTUS obviously is at the top. This is not complicated.

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

Yes, very common. If you're in the business world, think of it in that context. The higher up the chain often the less info you receive but the more significant that info is. Even more so with US Gov intel. Analysts receive thousands of pieces of intel daily. That intel is distributed based on individual discretion or according to pre-determined distribution lists based on subject matter. Info is regularly sent to other analysts, other agencies, people we don't know exist, allies, and politicians, and the more significant and verified the info the higher it goes and the more it is prioritized.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff but not Trump on this issue?

---

Yes, that's what I already answered and explained.

---

Why do you think this issue merits Schiff's attention but not Trump's?

---

If it isn't worth Schiff's time, why take it on up the chain?

---

Why bother with Schiff if it was nowhere near verified?

---

Why bother POTUS? Sounds like we all agree it wasn't intel with which to be concerned.

---

And yet Schiff was briefed. Curious.

---

I don't think I could have been more clear. Schiff routinely receives unverified intel. In fact, in certain predetermined categories, he'll get briefed on sheer rumor. Schiff is considered mid-level for intel purposes, and that's how it works. Again, the more important and more verified the intel, the higher it goes. POTUS obviously is at the top. This is not complicated.

---

As Chairman of the HPSCI Schiff is a member of the Gang of Eight that gets briefed to the highest levels, just under POTUS, he is not "mid-level" when it comes to intel. All of this is kind of moot anyway, Trump's NSA admits the info was in the PDB but Trump just doesn't read them, so they are going to blame the briefing agent for supposedly not bringing it up (just like they did for Trump's COVID briefings). And of course this ignores that named source John Bolton says he brought it up to POTUS himself, which I've noticed y'all just flat-out ignore in these discussions about what Trump knew.

Also not for nothing, but Trump has had about a week now to at least make some statement about it, and he has chosen to go down the "it's a hoax" route instead of even mildly condemning our Russian enemies, which is totally not conspicuous at all...

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

Yes, very common. If you're in the business world, think of it in that context. The higher up the chain often the less info you receive but the more significant that info is. Even more so with US Gov intel. Analysts receive thousands of pieces of intel daily. That intel is distributed based on individual discretion or according to pre-determined distribution lists based on subject matter. Info is regularly sent to other analysts, other agencies, people we don't know exist, allies, and politicians, and the more significant and verified the info the higher it goes and the more it is prioritized.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff but not Trump on this issue?

---

Yes, that's what I already answered and explained.

---

Why do you think this issue merits Schiff's attention but not Trump's?

---

If it isn't worth Schiff's time, why take it on up the chain?

---

Why bother with Schiff if it was nowhere near verified?

---

Why bother POTUS? Sounds like we all agree it wasn't intel with which to be concerned.

---

And yet Schiff was briefed. Curious.

---

And it didn't worry him enough to take precautions? That is very curious.
Now the intel troubles him? Surely he wouldn't politicize intel for political advantage.

Trump is trying to pull us out of Afghanistan and then this news comes out. It's pretty obvious that those who want to stay in Afghanistan put out this bounties story to ruin the pull out. They can't allow Trump to get a win by ending the Afghan war in the an election year.

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

Yes, very common. If you're in the business world, think of it in that context. The higher up the chain often the less info you receive but the more significant that info is. Even more so with US Gov intel. Analysts receive thousands of pieces of intel daily. That intel is distributed based on individual discretion or according to pre-determined distribution lists based on subject matter. Info is regularly sent to other analysts, other agencies, people we don't know exist, allies, and politicians, and the more significant and verified the info the higher it goes and the more it is prioritized.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff but not Trump on this issue?

---

Yes, that's what I already answered and explained.

---

Why do you think this issue merits Schiff's attention but not Trump's?

---

If it isn't worth Schiff's time, why take it on up the chain?

---

Why bother with Schiff if it was nowhere near verified?

---

Why bother POTUS? Sounds like we all agree it wasn't intel with which to be concerned.

---

And yet Schiff was briefed. Curious.

---

And it didn't worry him enough to take precautions? That is very curious.
Now the intel troubles him? Surely he wouldn't politicize intel for political advantage.

---

"Take precautions"? Pray tell, what precautions can a House Rep take that would make a difference? If he was indeed briefed in Afghanistan, he was probably briefed about the precautions being taken (because it was taken serious enough that forces in the field did adjust for it). I asked you once already what was Schiff supposed to do, and you declined to answer in any substantive way, but I see that you still bring the subject up so I'll ask again: What is Schiff supposed to have done with the intel?

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

Yes, very common. If you're in the business world, think of it in that context. The higher up the chain often the less info you receive but the more significant that info is. Even more so with US Gov intel. Analysts receive thousands of pieces of intel daily. That intel is distributed based on individual discretion or according to pre-determined distribution lists based on subject matter. Info is regularly sent to other analysts, other agencies, people we don't know exist, allies, and politicians, and the more significant and verified the info the higher it goes and the more it is prioritized.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff but not Trump on this issue?

---

Yes, that's what I already answered and explained.

---

Why do you think this issue merits Schiff's attention but not Trump's?

---

If it isn't worth Schiff's time, why take it on up the chain?

---

Why bother with Schiff if it was nowhere near verified?

---

Why bother POTUS? Sounds like we all agree it wasn't intel with which to be concerned.

---

And yet Schiff was briefed. Curious.

---

And it didn't worry him enough to take precautions? That is very curious.
Now the intel troubles him? Surely he wouldn't politicize intel for political advantage.

---

"Take precautions"? Pray tell, what precautions can a House Rep take that would make a difference? If he was indeed briefed in Afghanistan, he was probably briefed about the precautions being taken (because it was taken serious enough that forces in the field did adjust for it). I asked you once already what was Schiff supposed to do, and you declined to answer in any substantive way, but I see that you still bring the subject up so I'll ask again: What is Schiff supposed to have done with the intel?

---

Schiff is bothered enough now to hold press conference. Why not in Feb?

Sorry but you're wrong. You're confusing title with the intel gathering and verification process, for which Schiff and every other politician short of POTUS is mid-level. Intel Chairs have significant authority and it is an important position but NOT in intel gathering/verification. I was actually being generous with "mid-level." Your bias truly is clouding your judgment on this issue. However, IF (and it's a big if that I highly doubt) the intel was/is verified enough to act on it, and Trump did nothing, then this is a big story. I've said that from my first post, but I've also said all evidence I've seen suggests that is not the case. You have no problem jumping to conclusions, and that's your right, but it doesn't make you right.

The answer is surprisingly simple. If Schiff thought the intel was credible, and Trump did nothing about it, he would have leaked the story at that time and/or during the impeachment proceedings. If he Would have set politics aside and acted in the Country's best interest, he would have requested (on the Intel Committee's behalf) a meeting with one ore more of the heads of the three main intel agencies/departments and also the DNI.

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

sombear said:

---

quash said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

So what should Schiff's response have been? What is he supposed to do from his Chairman's seat that POTUS cant? What authority is granted to him to respond in foreign policy like that? Furthermore, what could he have done without approval from POTUS? And finally, don't you think it's odd (i.e. not credible) that Schiff knew and Trump says he never heard about it?

---

Chairman of House Intelligence Committee assumed all sorts of authority during impeachment proceedings. Had colleagues wiretapped, leaked classified information, promised evidence about Trump that did not exist, subpoenaed whomever he wanted.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff and not Trump?

---

Yes, very common. If you're in the business world, think of it in that context. The higher up the chain often the less info you receive but the more significant that info is. Even more so with US Gov intel. Analysts receive thousands of pieces of intel daily. That intel is distributed based on individual discretion or according to pre-determined distribution lists based on subject matter. Info is regularly sent to other analysts, other agencies, people we don't know exist, allies, and politicians, and the more significant and verified the info the higher it goes and the more it is prioritized.

---

Do you think IC would brief Schiff but not Trump on this issue?

---

Yes, that's what I already answered and explained.

---

Why do you think this issue merits Schiff's attention but not Trump's?

---

If it isn't worth Schiff's time, why take it on up the chain?

---

Why bother with Schiff if it was nowhere near verified?

---

Why bother POTUS? Sounds like we all agree it wasn't intel with which to be concerned.

---

And yet Schiff was briefed. Curious.

---

And it didn't worry him enough to take precautions? That is very curious.
Now the intel troubles him? Surely he wouldn't politicize intel for political advantage.

---

"Take precautions"? Pray tell, what precautions can a House Rep take that would make a difference? If he was indeed briefed in Afghanistan, he was probably briefed about the precautions being taken (because it was taken serious enough that forces in the field did adjust for it). I asked you once already what was Schiff supposed to do, and you declined to answer in any substantive way, but I see that you still bring the subject up so I'll ask again: What is Schiff supposed to have done with the intel?

---

Schiff is bothered enough now to hold press conference. Why not in Feb?

---

Oh I see now, you aren't being serious, you're just trolling.

Such a press conference would have been a crime btw, Schiff doesn't have any authority to declassify Intel like POTUS does, but he can discuss public reporting.

All of this of course is a slick sidestep of acknowledging that Trump still refuses to even verbally rebuke the Russians for headhunting US soldiers...