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

[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.

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?

Strawman
Strawman
Strawman
Strawman
Strawman
Strawman
Strawman

 

[Theowl32]

Good Lord liberals are fucking losers.

 

[NYcarbineer]

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?

What is true to a RWnut, and especially a Trumptard, is what the Nut/tard wants to be true.

 

[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?

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

No, you are just babbling shit with no substance. Press the little button and get your nurse aid to come explain things to you. Trump and his team talked to the Russians who were being monitored and their conversations were recorded. There is no one to blame for that other than Trump and his team. If you don't play in the mud you won't get dirty.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Good Lord liberals are fucking losers.

And with that, theowl lives up to the old rule of broadcasting,

keep talking until you have something to say.

 

[meaner gene]

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.

Who says Trumps phone was bugged. What about the phone of the person Trump was calling?

 

[NoNukes]

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.

When Trump accuses Obama of this, he has to provide proof. It is no propaganda campaign. You just post BS and waste everyone's time, because you are not this stupid. Or are you?

 

[meaner gene]

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

Duh!!!

 

[NYcarbineer]

Isn't it uncanny how much the mindset and tactics of the Trump supporters on this issue resemble those of the Birthers all those years?

 

[Snouter]

It is great a retarded, delusional, narcissistic Kenyan piece of shit retard listens to our telephone conversations!



NYcarbineer, are you one of those idiots who can't post a pic on the internet?

 

[Redfish]

Correct libs, a president cannot order a wiretap. BUT a president can tell one of his cronies in the FBI or DOJ------------------ "I sure wish there was a tap on Trump's phone".

Don't be so fricken naïve. We all know that is exactly what happened.

 

[Mac1958]

It's becoming clear that this is the best we're going to get. Circumstantial evidence with a strong partisan bias.

And that's enough for an American President to accuse another American President of something this bad.

That's it. That's what we have.
.

 

[Iceweasel]

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.

No, you are just babbling shit with no substance. Press the little button and get your nurse aid to come explain things to you. Trump and his team talked to the Russians who were being monitored and their conversations were recorded. There is no one to blame for that other than Trump and his team. If you don't play in the mud you won't get dirty.

You keep puking up your faith like they were facts. I won big time, lefties are losing their feeble minds left and right. You think you can speak for everyone because you're insane.

Let us know when you stumble across a fact.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Correct libs, a president cannot order a wiretap. BUT a president can tell one of his cronies in the FBI or DOJ------------------ "I sure wish there was a tap on Trump's phone".

Don't be so fricken naïve. We all know that is exactly what happened.

No. We all know that is rubbish.

 

[Iceweasel]

It's becoming clear that this is the best we're going to get. Circumstantial evidence with a strong partisan bias.

And that's enough for an American President to accuse another American President of something this bad.

That's it. That's what we have.
.

Oh look. Ten minutes has passed so Mac slams down the gavel.

 

[meaner gene]

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

A president can ASK for anything. He can ask for the Cubs to win the series, He can ask for snow in july. He can ask for a wiretap. But he's not going to get any of them. A wiretap has to be approved by a judge.

 

[Redfish]

Correct libs, a president cannot order a wiretap. BUT a president can tell one of his cronies in the FBI or DOJ------------------ "I sure wish there was a tap on Trump's phone".

Don't be so fricken naïve. We all know that is exactly what happened.

No. We all know that is rubbish.

Really? exactly how to "we all know" that?

BTW, I am still waiting for you to tell us exactly what the Russians did that changed the outcome of our election.

 

[Mac1958]

It's becoming clear that this is the best we're going to get. Circumstantial evidence with a strong partisan bias.

And that's enough for an American President to accuse another American President of something this bad.

That's it. That's what we have.
.

Oh look. Ten minutes has passed so Mac slams down the gavel.

I'm looking forward to being proven wrong.

Being proven wrong on a message board is definitely better than being embarrassed for my country.
.

 

[Redfish]

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

A president can ASK for anything. He can ask for the Cubs to win the series, He can ask for snow in july. He can ask for a wiretap. But he's not going to get any of them. A wiretap has to be approved by a judge.

Right, A judge appointed by the president. Wake up and smell reality.

 

[Iceweasel]

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.

When Trump accuses Obama of this, he has to provide proof. It is no propaganda campaign. You just post BS and waste everyone's time, because you are not this stupid. Or are you?

Where is Obie's proof?


Obama Accuses Vladimir Putin of Meddling in U.S. Election | Democracy Now!
Today’s Electoral College meeting comes as President Obama has publicly accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of meddling in the U.S. election.

President Barack Obama: "Not much happens in Russia without Vladimir Putin. I mean, this is a pretty hierarchical operation. Last I checked, there’s not a lot of debate and democratic deliberation, particularly when it comes to policies directed at the United States. We have said, and I will confirm, that this happened at the highest levels of the Russian government, and I will let you make that determination as to whether there are high-level Russian officials who go off rogue and decide to tamper with the U.S. election process without Vladimir Putin knowing about."

That was President Obama speaking Friday. U.S. intelligence agencies have also accused Russia of hacking the U.S. election to help Donald Trump win.