ObamaGate

#801
#801
http://www.theday.com/nationworld/2...r-documents-substantiate-trumps-wiretap-claim

The committee had asked for copies of any warrants, applications, or court orders relating to a wiretap of Trump or his surrogates and affiliates in advance of a Monday hearing at which the FBI and NSA directors are expected to testify about alleged connections between the Trump team and Russian authorities.

How can you submit something that didn't exist??
 
#802
#802
lawgator1 said:
GOP had no problem with Russian hacking and wiki leaks then putting it out there. But now you're upset about it because it is exposing that we have a temper tantrum president?

Shenanigans.
Click to expand...

Want to try that one again? See 72s post.
 
#803
#803
Trump Aides Wrestle Drill Away From Trump As He Tries To Remove Obama Listening Device From Skull
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    79.9 KB · Views: 0
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#805
#805
Comey, and the FBI continue to look incompetent. Surely that's something both sides of the aisle agree on

C7ervNaXgAA4SxG.jpg
 
#807
#807
Sin City Vol said:
So is his opinion to be taken as fact???
Click to expand...

He presents facts.

How can the media all of a sudden ignore their previous reporting on leaks that were obtained through surveillance? The FBI was apparently investigating since last July, but they weren't conducting any surveillance?

Of course they were
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#808
#808
golfballs said:
He presents facts.

How can the media all of a sudden ignore their previous reporting on leaks that were obtained through surveillance? The FBI was apparently investigating since last July, but they weren't conducting any surveillance?

Of course they were
Click to expand...

Yep.

He said that they've admitted that they spied on Trump's campaign.

"Wiretap" is a loose term for "spying" in this day and age where few phones have wires.

So, everyone is whistling past the graveyard, wanting to argue semantics instead of the fact that they were obviously spying on Trump's campaign.
 
#809
#809
golfballs said:
He presents facts.

How can the media all of a sudden ignore their previous reporting on leaks that were obtained through surveillance? The FBI was apparently investigating since last July, but they weren't conducting any surveillance?

Of course they were
Click to expand...


Surveillance of Russians. Picked up GOP presidential staff in that process.

And in any event, its STILL NOT OBAMA ORDERING WIRETAPPING OF TRUMP TOWER, as falsely claimed by Trump.

Sorry, you can recharacterize it all you want, try to parse it here and there, try to minimize it. What Trump said was a flat out lie. Just admit it and move on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#810
#810
lawgator1 said:
Surveillance of Russians. Picked up GOP presidential staff in that process.

And in any event, its STILL NOT OBAMA ORDERING WIRETAPPING OF TRUMP TOWER, as falsely claimed by Trump.

Sorry, you can recharacterize it all you want, try to parse it here and there, try to minimize it. What Trump said was a flat out lie. Just admit it and move on.
Click to expand...

And Nixon didn't order Watergate, but he was responsible for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#811
#811
Orange_Crush said:
And Nixon didn't order Watergate, but he was responsible for it.
Click to expand...


Well, actually, he was in on parts of it. And then of course helped with the cover up.

But as I say, where we are now I think is that there is plenty of evidence that some of Trump's closest aides and advisors in the campaign were closely tied to Russia, got large sums of money from them, etc.

By itself, that is not good, but it does not involve Trump.

The question is whether these folks then in any way solicited or bargained for Russian help in getting Trump elected. A subsidiary question is the extent to which Trump was aware of that, if at all.

For example, let's say Flynn encourages Russia to do some hacking and share it with wikileaks. In exchange, Flynn says he will work to enhance Russia's position with Trump, should he win.

Flynn then says to Trump on the way to an event that he is advised that Wikileaks is going to put some stuff out on HRC and its going to be good. Maybe even shares the general content with him, and of course Trump is delighted.

Now that scenario would be very bad for Flynn, and somewhat bad for Trump. It might not implicate Trump, directly, but it would surely considerably taint his campaign and render him illegitimate as president.

If you add to that mix Trump knowing how he is getting the info, i.e. that the wink and a nudge here is that Russia will be treated well should he win, then that should mean indictment and he would have to immediately resign.

The only way to know that, I suspect, is by granting Flynn and Manafort or others immunity, to come in and testify to what Trump knew and the extent of it, where the info was coming from, and whether he was on board with a softer line on Russia down the road.

Let's remember, there was a very odd change to the GOP platform on Russia, and Trump defended it. Add to that all of his pro-Russia comments, his negativity to NATO, his green lighting Crimea take over and hinting at less support for Ukraine.

It has to be looked into. I say they give immunity to Flynn, Manafort and the others in question, and get to the bottom of what Trump knew, and when he knew it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#812
#812
lawgator1 said:
Well, actually, he was in on parts of it. And then of course helped with the cover up.

But as I say, where we are now I think is that there is plenty of evidence that some of Trump's closest aides and advisors in the campaign were closely tied to Russia, got large sums of money from them, etc.

By itself, that is not good, but it does not involve Trump.

The question is whether these folks then in any way solicited or bargained for Russian help in getting Trump elected. A subsidiary question is the extent to which Trump was aware of that, if at all.

For example, let's say Flynn encourages Russia to do some hacking and share it with wikileaks. In exchange, Flynn says he will work to enhance Russia's position with Trump, should he win.

Flynn then says to Trump on the way to an event that he is advised that Wikileaks is going to put some stuff out on HRC and its going to be good. Maybe even shares the general content with him, and of course Trump is delighted.

Now that scenario would be very bad for Flynn, and somewhat bad for Trump. It might not implicate Trump, directly, but it would surely considerably taint his campaign and render him illegitimate as president.

If you add to that mix Trump knowing how he is getting the info, i.e. that the wink and a nudge here is that Russia will be treated well should he win, then that should mean indictment and he would have to immediately resign.

The only way to know that, I suspect, is by granting Flynn and Manafort or others immunity, to come in and testify to what Trump knew and the extent of it, where the info was coming from, and whether he was on board with a softer line on Russia down the road.

Let's remember, there was a very odd change to the GOP platform on Russia, and Trump defended it. Add to that all of his pro-Russia comments, his negativity to NATO, his green lighting Crimea take over and hinting at less support for Ukraine.

It has to be looked into. I say they give immunity to Flynn, Manafort and the others in question, and get to the bottom of what Trump knew, and when he knew it.
Click to expand...

I think you accidentally posted in the wrong thread, counselor. Either that, or you just deflected better than the Star Ship Enterprise's shields.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#813
#813
The ability of the government to spy on anyone, tap anyone's communications, and do whatever they want is an absolute at this point. A cautionary tale for anyone who doesn't think we are close to total government control of everything.
 
#814
#814
Franklin Pierce said:
The ability of the government to spy on anyone, tap anyone's communications, and do whatever they want is an absolute at this point. A cautionary tale for anyone who doesn't think we are close to total government control of everything.
Click to expand...

Combine those facts with, say, the Serve and protect threads where appeals courts are saying that cops can shoot us just for opening our door, without recourse. It almost makes one feel like our wonderful country has become a tyrannical regime.
 
#815
#815
lawgator1 said:
Surveillance of Russians. Picked up GOP presidential staff in that process.

And in any event, its STILL NOT OBAMA ORDERING WIRETAPPING OF TRUMP TOWER, as falsely claimed by Trump.

Sorry, you can recharacterize it all you want, try to parse it here and there, try to minimize it. What Trump said was a flat out lie. Just admit it and move on.
Click to expand...

I said from the beginning they'll never be able to prove that Obama ordered a wiretap even if he did. Was not smart to allege that even if it were true. But there's no doubt the campaign was being surveilled. If they were actually investigating the campaign, they wouldn't just have happened to monitor some of their phone calls under the guise of monitoring muh Russians.
 
#816
#816
golfballs said:
I said from the beginning they'll never be able to prove that Obama ordered a wiretap even if he did. Was not smart to allege that even if it were true. But there's no doubt the campaign was being surveilled. If they were actually investigating the campaign, they wouldn't just have happened to monitor some of their phone calls under the guise of monitoring muh Russians.
Click to expand...

Why do you say this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#819
#819
lawgator1 said:
Surveillance of Russians. Picked up GOP presidential staff in that process.
Click to expand...

Comey's testimony before congress was that any time an American citizen is picked up during surveillance of foreign entities, those people are masked. So, targeting Flynn was illegal. Comey also testified that only about 100 people have the ability to unmask such individuals. Most of them are in the Obama administration and/or his DOJ. Whatja know?
 
#820
#820
U.S. House of Representatives intelligence committee Chairman Devin Nunes said on Wednesday that intelligence agencies had swept up incidental communications by Donald Trump's political campaign after the election, raising concerns about spying on the newly elected president.


Nunes said all of the additional information he has seen was collected legally after the election campaign, but the names of the Trump officials involved had been unmasked and the communications widely disseminated within the spy agencies.

Nunes, who briefed House Speaker Paul Ryan on the findings, said he planned to show the information to the White House and was "very concerned" about whether the intelligence community was spying on Trump after the elections.
Click to expand...
.
 
#822
#822
#825
#825
Septic said:
It's getting deep in here. Looks like Trump found a shill to soften the blow.

Now neither one will have any credibility. Speaking of which, anyone seen Jeff Sessions or is he still licking his wounds?
Click to expand...

Oh right. FAKE NEWS

Nothing to see here...
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top