3 ms·
If you actually look at the CSPAN segment upon which the piece is gased, you can see that there is legitimate confusion between the FBI Director and the Congres
by rtpg 13y ago
If you actually look at the CSPAN segment upon which the piece is gased, you can see that there is legitimate confusion between the FBI Director and the Congressman during the exchange.
That could have been a ruse, or the Congressman could have legitimately misunderstood something previously, and thus tried to clear everything up after it blew up. Not everything is a fucking conspiracy.
- DanielBMarkham 13y agoThe story I read said that Nadler received one answer one day, and another answer during the closed-door, classified briefing. Didn't know they put those things on CSPAN. And nobody's implying a conspiracy. I specifically said as much. My point was that leadership had a vested interest in keeping the troops marching in line -- much more than with your normal poicy issues. Also that the Nadler thing is a tiny piece of a much larger tapestry. Doesn't matter much one way or the other how this specific story turns out. I was just assuming his first words were accurate for purposes of having a starting point in the discussion.
- eli 13y agoI agree that the Nadler thing is a small part of this whole news event... but it was pretty much the entirety of the CNET piece. It is no longer fair to say the NSA "admitted" to listening to the contents of phone calls. Maybe they do, maybe they don't, but there's no evidence they admitted it.