PSA...Trump has some great tweets this morning.
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2017 1:39 pm
That is all.
Virginia Tech fans discussing politics, religion, and football
https://uwsboard.com/
saw the Yates testimony, what collusion are you referring to? Do you mean Flynn speaking with the Russian Ambassador about sanctions? Wouldn't that topic come up in a conversation with the Russian dude, what has that got to do with the election?HooFighter wrote:This was his Twitter header yesterday after Sally Yates testified. What a **** moron.
Kind of reminds me of "I am not a crook"USN_Hokie wrote:Not seeing the problem.
that is the russian collusion, try harderHooFighter wrote:Kind of reminds me of "I am not a crook"USN_Hokie wrote:Not seeing the problem.
I don't really see an issue with that one? The one that is funny is blaming the Flynn security clearance silliness on Obama. His tweet about that is pure bullshirt.HooFighter wrote:This was his Twitter header yesterday after Sally Yates testified. What a **** moron.
So a fact is balogney, the Obama folks did give him a clearance, I don't get the freak out, he was fired for his actions, that is what happens with an employee that does not work outHokieFanDC wrote:I don't really see an issue with that one? The one that is funny is blaming the Flynn security clearance silliness on Obama. His tweet about that is pure bullshirt.HooFighter wrote:This was his Twitter header yesterday after Sally Yates testified. What a **** moron.
He had a clearance, not the highest clearance, and not the clearance required to be NSA. This continues to have legs because Trump won't admit they screwed up, and then tries to blame Obama, and then puts out tweets that are plain false.cwtcr hokie wrote:So a fact is balogney, the Obama folks did give him a clearance, I don't get the freak out, he was fired for his actions, that is what happens with an employee that does not work outHokieFanDC wrote:I don't really see an issue with that one? The one that is funny is blaming the Flynn security clearance silliness on Obama. His tweet about that is pure bullshirt.HooFighter wrote:This was his Twitter header yesterday after Sally Yates testified. What a **** moron.
Facts don't matter to these brainwashed necks.HokieFanDC wrote:He had a clearance, not the highest clearance, and not the clearance required to be NSA. This continues to have legs because Trump won't admit they screwed up, and then tries to blame Obama, and then puts out tweets that are plain false.cwtcr hokie wrote:So a fact is balogney, the Obama folks did give him a clearance, I don't get the freak out, he was fired for his actions, that is what happens with an employee that does not work outHokieFanDC wrote:I don't really see an issue with that one? The one that is funny is blaming the Flynn security clearance silliness on Obama. His tweet about that is pure bullshirt.HooFighter wrote:This was his Twitter header yesterday after Sally Yates testified. What a **** moron.
I suppose you have a link to substantiate all of that? The ones I've seen don't.HokieFanDC wrote:He had a clearance, not the highest clearance, and not the clearance required to be NSA. This continues to have legs because Trump won't admit they screwed up, and then tries to blame Obama, and then puts out tweets that are plain false.cwtcr hokie wrote:So a fact is balogney, the Obama folks did give him a clearance, I don't get the freak out, he was fired for his actions, that is what happens with an employee that does not work outHokieFanDC wrote:I don't really see an issue with that one? The one that is funny is blaming the Flynn security clearance silliness on Obama. His tweet about that is pure bullshirt.HooFighter wrote:This was his Twitter header yesterday after Sally Yates testified. What a **** moron.
You should get some better resources.USN_Hokie wrote:I suppose you have a link to substantiate all of that? The ones I've seen don't.HokieFanDC wrote:He had a clearance, not the highest clearance, and not the clearance required to be NSA. This continues to have legs because Trump won't admit they screwed up, and then tries to blame Obama, and then puts out tweets that are plain false.cwtcr hokie wrote:So a fact is balogney, the Obama folks did give him a clearance, I don't get the freak out, he was fired for his actions, that is what happens with an employee that does not work outHokieFanDC wrote:I don't really see an issue with that one? The one that is funny is blaming the Flynn security clearance silliness on Obama. His tweet about that is pure bullshirt.HooFighter wrote:This was his Twitter header yesterday after Sally Yates testified. What a **** moron.
Your link (which describes itself as a "social justice-oriented media company dedicated to providing the bold, combative, thought-provoking journalism that the current regime opposes.") is bullshirt and doesn't support the argument you're making. It sounds like a bunch of people who have no idea how security clearances work jumping to conclusions.HokieFanDC wrote:You should get some better resources.USN_Hokie wrote: I suppose you have a link to substantiate all of that? The ones I've seen don't.
It's been reported in a lot of places, mostly from the NBC tweet in this article. The main point being that the NSA is supposed to be independently vetted by the CIA to receive the level of clearance that the NSA has. Blaming Obama is silly.
http://resistancereport.com/politics/tr ... clearance/
Umm...OK. You're agreeing that there is a higher clearance than what he already had from his previous job, which is what I said.USN_Hokie wrote:Your link (which describes itself as a "social justice-oriented media company dedicated to providing the bold, combative, thought-provoking journalism that the current regime opposes.") is bullshirt and doesn't support the argument you're making. It sounds like a bunch of people who have no idea how security clearances work jumping to conclusions.HokieFanDC wrote:You should get some better resources.USN_Hokie wrote: I suppose you have a link to substantiate all of that? The ones I've seen don't.
It's been reported in a lot of places, mostly from the NBC tweet in this article. The main point being that the NSA is supposed to be independently vetted by the CIA to receive the level of clearance that the NSA has. Blaming Obama is silly.
http://resistancereport.com/politics/tr ... clearance/
The word granted is key there. Something like that would probably take a while - that doesn't mean that it wasn't started. Also, I'd like to see the exact requirements. I'd bet the clearance is only required for certain information.
Actually, no. I do not see that supported anywhereHokieFanDC wrote:Umm...OK. You're agreeing that there is a higher clearance than what he already had from his previous job, which is what I said.USN_Hokie wrote:Your link (which describes itself as a "social justice-oriented media company dedicated to providing the bold, combative, thought-provoking journalism that the current regime opposes.") is bullshirt and doesn't support the argument you're making. It sounds like a bunch of people who have no idea how security clearances work jumping to conclusions.HokieFanDC wrote:You should get some better resources.USN_Hokie wrote: I suppose you have a link to substantiate all of that? The ones I've seen don't.
It's been reported in a lot of places, mostly from the NBC tweet in this article. The main point being that the NSA is supposed to be independently vetted by the CIA to receive the level of clearance that the NSA has. Blaming Obama is silly.
http://resistancereport.com/politics/tr ... clearance/
The word granted is key there. Something like that would probably take a while - that doesn't mean that it wasn't started. Also, I'd like to see the exact requirements. I'd bet the clearance is only required for certain information.
Nor to erudite sophisticates, apparently...Facts don't matter to these brainwashed necks.
No, the clearance isn't just required for certain info, and it isn't a higher clearance.HokieFanDC wrote:Umm...OK. You're agreeing that there is a higher clearance than what he already had from his previous job, which is what I said.USN_Hokie wrote:Your link (which describes itself as a "social justice-oriented media company dedicated to providing the bold, combative, thought-provoking journalism that the current regime opposes.") is bullshirt and doesn't support the argument you're making. It sounds like a bunch of people who have no idea how security clearances work jumping to conclusions.HokieFanDC wrote:You should get some better resources.USN_Hokie wrote: I suppose you have a link to substantiate all of that? The ones I've seen don't.
It's been reported in a lot of places, mostly from the NBC tweet in this article. The main point being that the NSA is supposed to be independently vetted by the CIA to receive the level of clearance that the NSA has. Blaming Obama is silly.
http://resistancereport.com/politics/tr ... clearance/
The word granted is key there. Something like that would probably take a while - that doesn't mean that it wasn't started. Also, I'd like to see the exact requirements. I'd bet the clearance is only required for certain information.
Rapid fire tweets. Hokie80 is our commander in chief. How presidential.RiverguyVT wrote:Gosh, CT has terrible office holders.
https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTr ... r%5Eauthor
More IP bullshitip_law-hokie wrote:Rapid fire tweets. Hokie80 is our commander in chief. How presidential.RiverguyVT wrote:Gosh, CT has terrible office holders.
https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTr ... r%5Eauthor
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes, this.133743Hokie wrote:No, the clearance isn't just required for certain info, and it isn't a higher clearance.HokieFanDC wrote:Umm...OK. You're agreeing that there is a higher clearance than what he already had from his previous job, which is what I said.USN_Hokie wrote:Your link (which describes itself as a "social justice-oriented media company dedicated to providing the bold, combative, thought-provoking journalism that the current regime opposes.") is bullshirt and doesn't support the argument you're making. It sounds like a bunch of people who have no idea how security clearances work jumping to conclusions.HokieFanDC wrote:You should get some better resources.USN_Hokie wrote: I suppose you have a link to substantiate all of that? The ones I've seen don't.
It's been reported in a lot of places, mostly from the NBC tweet in this article. The main point being that the NSA is supposed to be independently vetted by the CIA to receive the level of clearance that the NSA has. Blaming Obama is silly.
http://resistancereport.com/politics/tr ... clearance/
The word granted is key there. Something like that would probably take a while - that doesn't mean that it wasn't started. Also, I'd like to see the exact requirements. I'd bet the clearance is only required for certain information.
The IC is territorial. A DoD based clearance is good for military and State Dept. CIA has it's own clearance and vetting process as does NSA. They are all little silos that don't play well with each other in the sandbox and don't recognize each others clearances. The Director of National Security obviously needs to have all of the above, plus a few others. Apparently Flynn didn't have all of them.
IP's idea of Presidential is getting blown by interns in the oval office and lying under oath.ip_law-hokie wrote:Rapid fire tweets. Hokie80 is our commander in chief. How presidential.RiverguyVT wrote:Gosh, CT has terrible office holders.
https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTr ... r%5Eauthor
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'd take it over twitter diplomacy.USN_Hokie wrote:IP's idea of Presidential is getting blown by interns in the oval office and lying under oath.ip_law-hokie wrote:Rapid fire tweets. Hokie80 is our commander in chief. How presidential.RiverguyVT wrote:Gosh, CT has terrible office holders.
https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTr ... r%5Eauthor
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk