Obama was kept informed of the conversations by wire tap. No spin. No more BS libs

[Hutch Starskey]

In this article the New York Times not only discusses the wire taps but points out that the White House was given the information.

Whoooooooooooooooooo hoooooooo! Thank you NYT's. There's something I thought I would never say.

" The F.B.I. is leading the investigations, aided by the National Security Agency, the C.I.A. and the Treasury Department’s financial crimes unit

The investigators have accelerated their efforts in recent weeks but have found no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, the officials said.

One official said intelligence reports based on some of the WIRE TAPPED COMMUNICATIONS had been provided to the White House."

Right there in the last line wiretaps and White House. Obama knew what was going on.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/us/politics/trump-russia-associates-investigation.html?_r=0

So the Republicans' argument here is not what Trump said - "How low has President Obama gone to tapp (sic) my phones during the sacred election process" - which clearly infers meddling in the campaign, but that members of Trump's group were being investigated for ties to Russia.

Do have I have that right?
.

The problem seems to be that nothing has been found. The only thing that has been discovered it that members of the Trump administration had contact with Russian officials in carrying out the transition. There has been no wrongdoing found. Democraps are taking a huge leap and accusing them of collusion without evidence. Democrats have ties to Russia. This has been proved beyond a shadow of doubt. Hillary took massive amounts of cash for her speaking engagements, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi has been caught rubbing elbows with them. Never mind the fact that aprox 80 Democrats are card carrying Communists.

It may well be that nothing has been found, but that was the process needed to determine if anything was there.

Unless Trump comes up with real evidence, his inference that this had something to do with the campaign is another lie. Only THIS lie is historic in context.

So far, all he has is Mark Levin, Breitbart, and his little tweet.
.

The task of any prosecution is to present proof, not the other way around. Democrats never proved that Trump was in collusion with Russia. Instead they went on a fishing expedition looking for dirt. How did they know who Trump officials talked to and how did they know what was said during those conversations? They had to have been tapping his communications illegally and leaking it to the press even after he was sworn in.

If there was any surveillance conducted on Trump, it would have required probable cause and judicial review. That process in and of itself suggests there's some meat on those bones. Trump should be careful what he asks for. If there were FISA warrants, that probable cause and the connection it suggest, will come to light.
For you to suggest this was some sort of ad hoc fishing expedition for political purposes is not in line with the available evidence and is wildly speculative.

 

[mudwhistle]

The problem seems to be that nothing has been found. The only thing that has been discovered it that members of the Trump administration had contact with Russian officials in carrying out the transition. There has been no wrongdoing found. Democraps are taking a huge leap and accusing them of collusion without evidence. Democrats have ties to Russia. This has been proved beyond a shadow of doubt. Hillary took massive amounts of cash for her speaking engagements, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi has been caught rubbing elbows with them. Never mind the fact that aprox 80 Democrats are card carrying Communists.

It may well be that nothing has been found, but that was the process needed to determine if anything was there.

Unless Trump comes up with real evidence, his inference that this had something to do with the campaign is another lie. Only THIS lie is historic in context.

So far, all he has is Mark Levin, Breitbart, and his little tweet.
.

The task of any prosecution is to present proof, not the other way around. Democrats never proved that Trump was in collusion with Russia. Instead they went on a fishing expedition looking for dirt. How did they know who Trump officials talked to and how did they know what was said during those conversations? They had to have been tapping his communications illegally and leaking it to the press even after he was sworn in.

What prosecution?

They looked, they found nothing, that was it.

Trump, on the other hand, has made a historic accusation with no proof. We was judge and jury.
.

Are you really this retarded?

Just asking for proof, after a sitting American President has declared that another American President has done something like this.

If that's retarded, okie dokie!
.

You already had the proof last month, dumbass. Where do you think all of those leaked stories came from in the first days of the Trump Administration? Do you think it came from somebody peering through keyholes?

 

[Lewdog]

He wasn't being tapped... how many fucking times do you have to be told this??? The people him and his people were talking to were being tapped. It's not the same thing... if Trump and his team wouldn't have been calling the people being tapped they wouldn't have had anything to worry about it. It's the same fucking excuse you all used on the DNC... if they hadn't been doing anything wrong, then WikiLeaks wouldn't have had anything to release and make them look bad.

You reap what you sow.

You're just proselytizing your faith. It has no meaning to a non believer. The fact is you don't know what went on behind the scenes. The bottom line is that democrat corruption was outed and libs are too intellectually dishonest and immature to accept why they lost the election so they need a simple answer that de-legitimizes your enemies.

In all this time libs needed no evidence Russians were involved or that it had any effect on the election outcome. Now we are supposed to dismiss out of hand any claims of illegal wiretapping for political expediency. You think everyone is on your level and will buy that? It's why you lose over and over.

Why *I*? Lose over and over? In this past election we all lost.

You keep chanting your faith like a drooling madman rocking in the corner of his padded cell.

WTF you talking about old man? Are you staring at your reflection in your monitor?

 

[mudwhistle]

Just asking for proof, after a sitting American President has declared that another American President has done something like this.

If that's retarded, okie dokie!
.

How long are you willing to wait? Another ten minutes?

Hey, I'm patient. How about a week?

Looking forward to it. That's one helluva declaration he made. I'll give him time to make the proof nice and clear.
.

I'll give him as much time as you liberals gave the Russian connection conspiracy. Which was lame from the get go because the context is democrat corruption. Like we're supposed to care more about the whistle blower than the whistle, when we on the right already knew how tainted it was/is and those of you on the left don't care.

So you don't need proof.

What a shock!
.

The proof is overwhelming.

What do you consider proof to look like? Please be specific?

It all has to be presented in hardback binders with a glossary and footnotes for the reading impaired.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The task of any prosecution is to present proof, not the other way around. Democrats never proved that Trump was in collusion with Russia. Instead they went on a fishing expedition looking for dirt. How did they know who Trump officials talked to and how did they know what was said during those conversations? They had to have been tapping his communications illegally and leaking it to the press even after he was sworn in.

What prosecution?

They looked, they found nothing, that was it.

Trump, on the other hand, has made a historic accusation with no proof. We was judge and jury.
.

Are you really this retarded?

Just asking for proof, after a sitting American President has declared that another American President has done something like this.

If that's retarded, okie dokie!
.

How long are you willing to wait? Another ten minutes?

Hey, I'm patient. How about a week?

Looking forward to it. That's one helluva declaration he made. I'll give him time to make the proof nice and clear.
.

Don't hold your breath.

 

[Mac1958]

Just asking for proof, after a sitting American President has declared that another American President has done something like this.

If that's retarded, okie dokie!
.

How long are you willing to wait? Another ten minutes?

Hey, I'm patient. How about a week?

Looking forward to it. That's one helluva declaration he made. I'll give him time to make the proof nice and clear.
.

I'll give him as much time as you liberals gave the Russian connection conspiracy. Which was lame from the get go because the context is democrat corruption. Like we're supposed to care more about the whistle blower than the whistle, when we on the right already knew how tainted it was/is and those of you on the left don't care.

So you don't need proof.

What a shock!
.

The proof is overwhelming.

What do you consider proof to look like? Please be specific?

I'd be more than happy to review the evidence that Trump looked at right before he "tweeted".

But, to date, he himself hasn't provided it.
.

 

[Mac1958]

What prosecution?

They looked, they found nothing, that was it.

Trump, on the other hand, has made a historic accusation with no proof. We was judge and jury.
.

Are you really this retarded?

Just asking for proof, after a sitting American President has declared that another American President has done something like this.

If that's retarded, okie dokie!
.

How long are you willing to wait? Another ten minutes?

Hey, I'm patient. How about a week?

Looking forward to it. That's one helluva declaration he made. I'll give him time to make the proof nice and clear.
.

Don't hold your breath.

I'm not. But anything is possible.

But this isn't talk radio. You can't just say something and everybody eats it up.

Especially when you're President.
.

 

[mudwhistle]

Trump knows his phone was bugged because he knows the details of the conversations, and they have been released immediately to the press.
If anyone knew....it would be the person who had the conversations. It doesn't take an FBI report to know that.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The problem seems to be that nothing has been found. The only thing that has been discovered it that members of the Trump administration had contact with Russian officials in carrying out the transition. There has been no wrongdoing found. Democraps are taking a huge leap and accusing them of collusion without evidence. Democrats have ties to Russia. This has been proved beyond a shadow of doubt. Hillary took massive amounts of cash for her speaking engagements, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi has been caught rubbing elbows with them. Never mind the fact that aprox 80 Democrats are card carrying Communists.

It may well be that nothing has been found, but that was the process needed to determine if anything was there.

Unless Trump comes up with real evidence, his inference that this had something to do with the campaign is another lie. Only THIS lie is historic in context.

So far, all he has is Mark Levin, Breitbart, and his little tweet.
.

His supporters are all over these boards saying that he is right, offering proof, etc. I want him to just come out with the proof. If it has been in the NYT, this should be easy for him to do. Just show us the proof.

Each day that does by with no proof makes it less likely that any exists.
.

As of last night, Spicer still confirmed that the WH had not reached out to Comey or anyone else to inquire about the validity of Trump's claim.

As if Comey can be trusted.
I think Comey has been given a long rope to hang himself. If he had any sense he's submit his resignation.

The FBI would have conducted the surveillance if it had been done. No one is in a better position to Know than Comey.
The fact that he has asked for the DOJ to refute Trump's claims is a pretty good tell of what their position is.

Besmirching his character doesn't address these facts at all.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[


He wasn't being tapped... how many fucking times do you have to be told this??? .

This tall tale is now permanently entered in the Big Book of Rightwing Mythology. Once there, it can never be removed.

Removing your head from its' safe space obviously isn't possible. In a few days you dance in victory yet will carry the Russians cost us the election torch until the day you die. You can't see how insane that is.

I have never said the Russians cost Hillary the election.

The Russians attempted, illegally, to influence the election, and, as I recall,

there weren't any Trump supporters around here who objected to that.

 

[gipper]

How long are you willing to wait? Another ten minutes?

Hey, I'm patient. How about a week?

Looking forward to it. That's one helluva declaration he made. I'll give him time to make the proof nice and clear.
.

I'll give him as much time as you liberals gave the Russian connection conspiracy. Which was lame from the get go because the context is democrat corruption. Like we're supposed to care more about the whistle blower than the whistle, when we on the right already knew how tainted it was/is and those of you on the left don't care.

So you don't need proof.

What a shock!
.

The proof is overwhelming.

What do you consider proof to look like? Please be specific?

I'd be more than happy to review the evidence that Trump looked at right before he "tweeted".

But, to date, he himself hasn't provided it.
.

If you think proof must be Big Ears caught with a smoking gun, then you will fall prey to the left media's propaganda campaign demanding absolute proof.

You need to do some research on the legal meaning of overwhelming circumstantial evidence, what a FISA request means, and the entire history of Obama's surveillance programs.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Trump knows his phone was bugged because he knows the details of the conversations, and they have been released immediately to the press.
If anyone knew....it would be the person who had the conversations. It doesn't take an FBI report to know that.

Where are those details?

Are you aware that if the OTHER guy in a phone conversation is being bugged, that the buggers hear YOU too?

 

[Iceweasel]

He wasn't being tapped... how many fucking times do you have to be told this??? The people him and his people were talking to were being tapped. It's not the same thing... if Trump and his team wouldn't have been calling the people being tapped they wouldn't have had anything to worry about it. It's the same fucking excuse you all used on the DNC... if they hadn't been doing anything wrong, then WikiLeaks wouldn't have had anything to release and make them look bad.

You reap what you sow.

You're just proselytizing your faith. It has no meaning to a non believer. The fact is you don't know what went on behind the scenes. The bottom line is that democrat corruption was outed and libs are too intellectually dishonest and immature to accept why they lost the election so they need a simple answer that de-legitimizes your enemies.

In all this time libs needed no evidence Russians were involved or that it had any effect on the election outcome. Now we are supposed to dismiss out of hand any claims of illegal wiretapping for political expediency. You think everyone is on your level and will buy that? It's why you lose over and over.

Why *I*? Lose over and over? In this past election we all lost.

You keep chanting your faith like a drooling madman rocking in the corner of his padded cell.

WTF you talking about old man? Are you staring at your reflection in your monitor?

I told what I was taking about, junior. Have an adult walk you through it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Hey, I'm patient. How about a week?

Looking forward to it. That's one helluva declaration he made. I'll give him time to make the proof nice and clear.
.

I'll give him as much time as you liberals gave the Russian connection conspiracy. Which was lame from the get go because the context is democrat corruption. Like we're supposed to care more about the whistle blower than the whistle, when we on the right already knew how tainted it was/is and those of you on the left don't care.

So you don't need proof.

What a shock!
.

The proof is overwhelming.

What do you consider proof to look like? Please be specific?

I'd be more than happy to review the evidence that Trump looked at right before he "tweeted".

But, to date, he himself hasn't provided it.
.

If you think proof must be Big Ears caught with a smoking gun, then you will fall prey to the left media's propaganda campaign demanding absolute proof.

You need to do some research on the legal meaning of overwhelming circumstantial evidence, what a FISA request means, and the entire history of Obama's surveillance programs.

So you accept the overwhelming circumstantial evidence that the Russians tried to influence our election.

 

[Iceweasel]

[


He wasn't being tapped... how many fucking times do you have to be told this??? .

This tall tale is now permanently entered in the Big Book of Rightwing Mythology. Once there, it can never be removed.

Removing your head from its' safe space obviously isn't possible. In a few days you dance in victory yet will carry the Russians cost us the election torch until the day you die. You can't see how insane that is.

I have never said the Russians cost Hillary the election.

The Russians attempted, illegally, to influence the election, and, as I recall,

there weren't any Trump supporters around here who objected to that.

That's because you won't see it if it lies outside of your template. I said many times wikileaks had no effect regardless of how they got the emails. Liberals said the same thing ...until they lost.

 

[NoNukes]

The problem seems to be that nothing has been found. The only thing that has been discovered it that members of the Trump administration had contact with Russian officials in carrying out the transition. There has been no wrongdoing found. Democraps are taking a huge leap and accusing them of collusion without evidence. Democrats have ties to Russia. This has been proved beyond a shadow of doubt. Hillary took massive amounts of cash for her speaking engagements, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi has been caught rubbing elbows with them. Never mind the fact that aprox 80 Democrats are card carrying Communists.

It may well be that nothing has been found, but that was the process needed to determine if anything was there.

Unless Trump comes up with real evidence, his inference that this had something to do with the campaign is another lie. Only THIS lie is historic in context.

So far, all he has is Mark Levin, Breitbart, and his little tweet.
.

His supporters are all over these boards saying that he is right, offering proof, etc. I want him to just come out with the proof. If it has been in the NYT, this should be easy for him to do. Just show us the proof.

Each day that does by with no proof makes it less likely that any exists.
.

As of last night, Spicer still confirmed that the WH had not reached out to Comey or anyone else to inquire about the validity of Trump's claim.

As if Comey can be trusted.
I think Comey has been given a long rope to hang himself. If he had any sense he's submit his resignation.

He was trusted to interfere with the election and you were not calling for his head.

 

[gipper]

I'll give him as much time as you liberals gave the Russian connection conspiracy. Which was lame from the get go because the context is democrat corruption. Like we're supposed to care more about the whistle blower than the whistle, when we on the right already knew how tainted it was/is and those of you on the left don't care.

So you don't need proof.

What a shock!
.

The proof is overwhelming.

What do you consider proof to look like? Please be specific?

I'd be more than happy to review the evidence that Trump looked at right before he "tweeted".

But, to date, he himself hasn't provided it.
.

If you think proof must be Big Ears caught with a smoking gun, then you will fall prey to the left media's propaganda campaign demanding absolute proof.

You need to do some research on the legal meaning of overwhelming circumstantial evidence, what a FISA request means, and the entire history of Obama's surveillance programs.

So you accept the overwhelming circumstantial evidence that the Russians tried to influence our election.

I would if it existed.

 

[Lewdog]

Hey, I'm patient. How about a week?

Looking forward to it. That's one helluva declaration he made. I'll give him time to make the proof nice and clear.
.

I'll give him as much time as you liberals gave the Russian connection conspiracy. Which was lame from the get go because the context is democrat corruption. Like we're supposed to care more about the whistle blower than the whistle, when we on the right already knew how tainted it was/is and those of you on the left don't care.

So you don't need proof.

What a shock!
.

The proof is overwhelming.

What do you consider proof to look like? Please be specific?

I'd be more than happy to review the evidence that Trump looked at right before he "tweeted".

But, to date, he himself hasn't provided it.
.

If you think proof must be Big Ears caught with a smoking gun, then you will fall prey to the left media's propaganda campaign demanding absolute proof.

You need to do some research on the legal meaning of overwhelming circumstantial evidence, what a FISA request means, and the entire history of Obama's surveillance programs.

Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?
Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?
Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?
Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?
Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?
Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?
Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?
Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?
Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?
Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?
Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?
Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?
Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?
Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?
Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?
Seriously, how many times do you have to be told that a President can not ask for wire taps?

 

[NYcarbineer]

It may well be that nothing has been found, but that was the process needed to determine if anything was there.

Unless Trump comes up with real evidence, his inference that this had something to do with the campaign is another lie. Only THIS lie is historic in context.

So far, all he has is Mark Levin, Breitbart, and his little tweet.
.

The task of any prosecution is to present proof, not the other way around. Democrats never proved that Trump was in collusion with Russia. Instead they went on a fishing expedition looking for dirt. How did they know who Trump officials talked to and how did they know what was said during those conversations? They had to have been tapping his communications illegally and leaking it to the press even after he was sworn in.

What prosecution?

They looked, they found nothing, that was it.

Trump, on the other hand, has made a historic accusation with no proof. We was judge and jury.
.

Are you really this retarded?

Just asking for proof, after a sitting American President has declared that another American President has done something like this.

If that's retarded, okie dokie!
.

You already had the proof last month, dumbass. Where do you think all of those leaked stories came from in the first days of the Trump Administration? Do you think it came from somebody peering through keyholes?

So your position is that the only possible way a story from inside an administration could be leaked is via a tapped phone?

lol, that is mentally retarded beyond your usual level of affliction.

 

[NoNukes]

It may well be that nothing has been found, but that was the process needed to determine if anything was there.

Unless Trump comes up with real evidence, his inference that this had something to do with the campaign is another lie. Only THIS lie is historic in context.

So far, all he has is Mark Levin, Breitbart, and his little tweet.
.

His supporters are all over these boards saying that he is right, offering proof, etc. I want him to just come out with the proof. If it has been in the NYT, this should be easy for him to do. Just show us the proof.

Each day that does by with no proof makes it less likely that any exists.
.

As of last night, Spicer still confirmed that the WH had not reached out to Comey or anyone else to inquire about the validity of Trump's claim.

Well, maybe the proof is a BIG SECRET.
.

Fucking smart-ass. The proof has already been leaked.

I'm done wasting my time with imbeciles.

You quit talking to yourself? Well done Mud.