task0778
Diamond Member
If you pay someone to hookup with somebody you don't like for the purpose of gaining information you can use against them, that's called spying. If you already know information about that someone and you go to the authorities and spill it, that's an informant. In the latest Washington scandal, we have one Stefan Halper who was hired by and paid pretty well by the FBI to obtain information that could be used against the Trump campaign by his opposition. An opposition which includes the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and the Obama Administration. Seriously, are we to believe that someone lower down in the FBI chain of command authorized and paid big money to a person(s) to spy on the other party's preidential campaign? Halper didn't know jack squat about any Russians, ergo he certainly was not an informant.
Some may say the spying was done to uncover criminality on the part of someone in the Trump campaign if not Trump himself. But to this point we have absolutely NOTHING that indicates any criminality; no evidence of wrongdoing that would or should warrant the FBI to resort to such measures as of July 31, 2016, which is when the FBI counterintelligence probe targeting the Trump campaign began. The FBI is not supposed to be doing this stuff without reasonable evidence to warrant the surveillance and spying. They can't just decide one day to go spy on the Trump campaign cuz we don't like him. It's been over a year, right, and so far they got NOTHING. This wasn't about wrongdoing, this was pure politics. To deny that is to deny reality.
Look - politics is a dirty business, we all know that. It would be nothing new for one side or the other to try to plant a spy inside the other campaign to find usable negative information against them. It's ugly but I doubt it is illegal, unless they resorted to illegal means or subverted somebody's freedom of speech or right to privacy, whatever. BUT - to use a gov't agency such as the FBI to spy on an opposition political campaign for political purposes? That's way over the top, and cannot be condoned.
So, we are left with certain questions that ought to be answered:
What was the legal basis for that surveillance and the authorization for someone to spy on the Trump campaign?
What evidence was there to support the decisions and actions taken?
Who approved it?
When did he/she/they approve it?
In short: WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?
Some may say the spying was done to uncover criminality on the part of someone in the Trump campaign if not Trump himself. But to this point we have absolutely NOTHING that indicates any criminality; no evidence of wrongdoing that would or should warrant the FBI to resort to such measures as of July 31, 2016, which is when the FBI counterintelligence probe targeting the Trump campaign began. The FBI is not supposed to be doing this stuff without reasonable evidence to warrant the surveillance and spying. They can't just decide one day to go spy on the Trump campaign cuz we don't like him. It's been over a year, right, and so far they got NOTHING. This wasn't about wrongdoing, this was pure politics. To deny that is to deny reality.
Look - politics is a dirty business, we all know that. It would be nothing new for one side or the other to try to plant a spy inside the other campaign to find usable negative information against them. It's ugly but I doubt it is illegal, unless they resorted to illegal means or subverted somebody's freedom of speech or right to privacy, whatever. BUT - to use a gov't agency such as the FBI to spy on an opposition political campaign for political purposes? That's way over the top, and cannot be condoned.
So, we are left with certain questions that ought to be answered:
What was the legal basis for that surveillance and the authorization for someone to spy on the Trump campaign?
What evidence was there to support the decisions and actions taken?
Who approved it?
When did he/she/they approve it?
In short: WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?
