The FBI was actually trying to ‘Protect Trump’

[Slyhunter]

OK, so now the above admits that Clapper did not say they planted anyone in the campaign, despite the lies, etc., around their comments.

And only those defending people and orgs suspected of acting criminality would call a lawful surveillance "spying". I am sure that is how Capone et al thought of lawful surveillance.

Doesn't change the fact that there was an FBI Spy, ie confidential informant, in the Trump camp.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, there was not.

Give us factual, objective evidence, Sly, but you can't, can you?

 

[task0778]

No, there was not.

Give us factual, objective evidence, Sly, but you can't, can you?

From the NY Times:

" WASHINGTON — President Trump accused the F.B.I. on Friday, without evidence, of sending a spy to secretly infiltrate his 2016 campaign “for political purposes” even before the bureau had any inkling of the “phony Russia hoax.”

In fact, F.B.I. agents sent an informant to talk to two campaign advisers only after they received evidence that the pair had suspicious contacts linked to Russia during the campaign. The informant, an American academic who teaches in Britain, made contact late that summer with one campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, according to people familiar with the matter. He also met repeatedly in the ensuing months with the other aide, Carter Page, who was also under F.B.I. scrutiny for his ties to Russia. "

F.B.I. Used Informant to Investigate Russia Ties to Campaign, Not to Spy, as Trump Claims

See, here's the thing: what is this so-called 'evidence' of suspicious contacts? There's no denying contacts took place, but the question is what made the FBI/DOJ/Obama Admin determine these contacts were suspicious, as of July 2016? I want to know the reasons why federal gov't agencies took these actions against American citizens, they ain't supposed to be spying on any of us without just cause and so far I haven't heard jack squat about any just cause. And yeah, this is spying; deny it all you want but this is the textbook definition of spying on somebody to acquire information.

Am I to believe that after all this time, this so-called evidence of suspicious contacts has not been leaked? Seriously? Not a peep out of anyone as to what they based this surveillance/spying operation on and I'm supposed to just swallow it hook, line, and sinker? Nuh-uh, ain't happening.

 

[Wry Catcher]

No, there was not.

Give us factual, objective evidence, Sly, but you can't, can you?

From the NY Times:

" WASHINGTON — President Trump accused the F.B.I. on Friday, without evidence, of sending a spy to secretly infiltrate his 2016 campaign “for political purposes” even before the bureau had any inkling of the “phony Russia hoax.”

In fact, F.B.I. agents sent an informant to talk to two campaign advisers only after they received evidence that the pair had suspicious contacts linked to Russia during the campaign. The informant, an American academic who teaches in Britain, made contact late that summer with one campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, according to people familiar with the matter. He also met repeatedly in the ensuing months with the other aide, Carter Page, who was also under F.B.I. scrutiny for his ties to Russia. "

F.B.I. Used Informant to Investigate Russia Ties to Campaign, Not to Spy, as Trump Claims

See, here's the thing: what is this so-called 'evidence' of suspicious contacts? There's no denying contacts took place, but the question is what made the FBI/DOJ/Obama Admin determine these contacts were suspicious, as of July 2016? I want to know the reasons why federal gov't agencies took these actions against American citizens, they ain't supposed to be spying on any of us without just cause and so far I haven't heard jack squat about any just cause. And yeah, this is spying; deny it all you want but this is the textbook definition of spying on somebody to acquire information.

Am I to believe that after all this time, this so-called evidence of suspicious contacts has not been leaked? Seriously? Not a peep out of anyone as to what they based this surveillance/spying operation on and I'm supposed to just swallow it hook, line, and sinker? Nuh-uh, ain't happening.

How do you feel about the advice all US Citizens are getting these days, that is, "if you see something, say something"? And if you say something one would expect those who have the duty and responsibility to act will do so.

 

[task0778]

No, there was not.

Give us factual, objective evidence, Sly, but you can't, can you?

From the NY Times:

" WASHINGTON — President Trump accused the F.B.I. on Friday, without evidence, of sending a spy to secretly infiltrate his 2016 campaign “for political purposes” even before the bureau had any inkling of the “phony Russia hoax.”

In fact, F.B.I. agents sent an informant to talk to two campaign advisers only after they received evidence that the pair had suspicious contacts linked to Russia during the campaign. The informant, an American academic who teaches in Britain, made contact late that summer with one campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, according to people familiar with the matter. He also met repeatedly in the ensuing months with the other aide, Carter Page, who was also under F.B.I. scrutiny for his ties to Russia. "

F.B.I. Used Informant to Investigate Russia Ties to Campaign, Not to Spy, as Trump Claims

See, here's the thing: what is this so-called 'evidence' of suspicious contacts? There's no denying contacts took place, but the question is what made the FBI/DOJ/Obama Admin determine these contacts were suspicious, as of July 2016? I want to know the reasons why federal gov't agencies took these actions against American citizens, they ain't supposed to be spying on any of us without just cause and so far I haven't heard jack squat about any just cause. And yeah, this is spying; deny it all you want but this is the textbook definition of spying on somebody to acquire information.

Am I to believe that after all this time, this so-called evidence of suspicious contacts has not been leaked? Seriously? Not a peep out of anyone as to what they based this surveillance/spying operation on and I'm supposed to just swallow it hook, line, and sinker? Nuh-uh, ain't happening.

How do you feel about the advice all US Citizens are getting these days, that is, "if you see something, say something"? And if you say something one would expect those who have the duty and responsibility to act will do so.

It would kinda depend on who said what and whether they had an axe to grind and any evidence to support whatever they tell the authorities. Personally, if I'm a professional federal agency I'm going to want more than a dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign and the DNC, otherwise I'm not going to give much credence to whatever I am being told. And I am certainly not going to open a surveillance/spying operation against US Citizens, especially the presidential nominee of the opposition party to the one currently int he WH without authority from on high to do so. VERY on high.

In this instance Wry, we got NOTHIN'. We got nothing to indicate anybody saw or said anything suspicious happened, after all this time WE GOT NOTHIN'. What else is an open-minded person supposed to think? I am to believe after all this time nobody friendly to the Clintons or Obamas couldn't have leaked SOMETHING to indicate some justification for what they did? SOMETHING? But no, to this date we got zippo, and IMHO that's long enough to wait.

 

[Wry Catcher]

No, there was not.

Give us factual, objective evidence, Sly, but you can't, can you?

From the NY Times:

" WASHINGTON — President Trump accused the F.B.I. on Friday, without evidence, of sending a spy to secretly infiltrate his 2016 campaign “for political purposes” even before the bureau had any inkling of the “phony Russia hoax.”

In fact, F.B.I. agents sent an informant to talk to two campaign advisers only after they received evidence that the pair had suspicious contacts linked to Russia during the campaign. The informant, an American academic who teaches in Britain, made contact late that summer with one campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, according to people familiar with the matter. He also met repeatedly in the ensuing months with the other aide, Carter Page, who was also under F.B.I. scrutiny for his ties to Russia. "

F.B.I. Used Informant to Investigate Russia Ties to Campaign, Not to Spy, as Trump Claims

See, here's the thing: what is this so-called 'evidence' of suspicious contacts? There's no denying contacts took place, but the question is what made the FBI/DOJ/Obama Admin determine these contacts were suspicious, as of July 2016? I want to know the reasons why federal gov't agencies took these actions against American citizens, they ain't supposed to be spying on any of us without just cause and so far I haven't heard jack squat about any just cause. And yeah, this is spying; deny it all you want but this is the textbook definition of spying on somebody to acquire information.

Am I to believe that after all this time, this so-called evidence of suspicious contacts has not been leaked? Seriously? Not a peep out of anyone as to what they based this surveillance/spying operation on and I'm supposed to just swallow it hook, line, and sinker? Nuh-uh, ain't happening.

How do you feel about the advice all US Citizens are getting these days, that is, "if you see something, say something"? And if you say something one would expect those who have the duty and responsibility to act will do so.

It would kinda depend on who said what and whether they had an axe to grind and any evidence to support whatever they tell the authorities. Personally, if I'm a professional federal agency I'm going to want more than a dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign and the DNC, otherwise I'm not going to give much credence to whatever I am being told. And I am certainly not going to open a surveillance/spying operation against US Citizens, especially the presidential nominee of the opposition party to the one currently int he WH without authority from on high to do so. VERY on high.

In this instance Wry, we got NOTHIN'. We got nothing to indicate anybody saw or said anything suspicious happened, after all this time WE GOT NOTHIN'. What else is an open-minded person supposed to think? I am to believe after all this time nobody friendly to the Clintons or Obamas couldn't have leaked SOMETHING to indicate some justification for what they did? SOMETHING? But no, to this date we got zippo, and IMHO that's long enough to wait.

Yet the Investigation moves on. It matters not that the appointment of Mueller was based on an allegation (a) when in the course of investigation (a) it was not substantive, but in looking into its relevance evidence of collusion with Russian's opened the door to a question: Was American's security at stake?

Any patriot would pursue further information once interviews and documents opened new paths to the most serious questions: Did Russia attack our democracy, and was there a conspiracy by members of the Trump Team's party to aid or abet Russia's effort.

 

[Leo123]

OK, so now the above admits that Clapper did not say they planted anyone in the campaign, despite the lies, etc., around their comments.

And only those defending people and orgs suspected of acting criminality would call a lawful surveillance "spying". I am sure that is how Capone et al thought of lawful surveillance.

There was no criminal activity so yes, spying was illegal. Those advocating spying on innocents are part of the fascist left.

 

[JakeStarkey]

task quoted accurately, which ends Trump's whining that, in fact, "President Trump accused the F.B.I. on Friday, without evidence, . . ".

IOW, whatever LEO thinks is meaningless.

Trump is accusing people with no evidence.

The fascist far and alt right are trying to avoid the just desserts of the law, without success.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The fascist alt right are terrified of what Mueller has been and will be finding out.

They will find out in spades soon enough.

 

[Wry Catcher]

OK, so now the above admits that Clapper did not say they planted anyone in the campaign, despite the lies, etc., around their comments.

And only those defending people and orgs suspected of acting criminality would call a lawful surveillance "spying". I am sure that is how Capone et al thought of lawful surveillance.

There was no criminal activity so yes, spying was illegal. Those advocating spying on innocents are part of the fascist left.

Bullshit.

BTW, once upon a time I made an arrest and the subject had large cut over a black eye. As I put him in for booking I asked him what happened to his eye. He said that MFer he worked for kicked his ass and hit him with a wrench, and I should know he was a fence who bought stolen items frm car and house burglaries.

Since the business was in an adjacent jurisdiction I notified that agency of what I had heard, and they has a plain clothes officer sell items from the evidence locker at the business.

Based on the information from me and the willingness of the owner of said business, warrants were issued for his business and home. The Result: Item found were illegal weapons, drugs and lots of stolen property.

 

[Leo123]

OK, so now the above admits that Clapper did not say they planted anyone in the campaign, despite the lies, etc., around their comments.

And only those defending people and orgs suspected of acting criminality would call a lawful surveillance "spying". I am sure that is how Capone et al thought of lawful surveillance.

There was no criminal activity so yes, spying was illegal. Those advocating spying on innocents are part of the fascist left.

Bullshit.

BTW, once upon a time I made an arrest and the subject had large cut over a black eye. As I put him in for booking I asked him what happened to his eye. He said that MFer he worked for kicked his ass and hit him with a wrench, and I should know he was a fence who bought stolen items frm car and house burglaries.

Since the business was in an adjacent jurisdiction I notified that agency of what I had heard, and they has a plain clothes officer sell items from the evidence locker at the business.

Based on the information from me and the willingness of the owner of said business, warrants were issued for his business and home. The Result: Item found were illegal weapons, drugs and lots of stolen property.

What does that have to do with the subject of the thread?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Mueller's remit lets him go where the investigation goes.

 

[JakeStarkey]

OK, so now the above admits that Clapper did not say they planted anyone in the campaign, despite the lies, etc., around their comments.

And only those defending people and orgs suspected of acting criminality would call a lawful surveillance "spying". I am sure that is how Capone et al thought of lawful surveillance.

There was no criminal activity so yes, spying was illegal. Those advocating spying on innocents are part of the fascist left.

Bullshit.

BTW, once upon a time I made an arrest and the subject had large cut over a black eye. As I put him in for booking I asked him what happened to his eye. He said that MFer he worked for kicked his ass and hit him with a wrench, and I should know he was a fence who bought stolen items frm car and house burglaries.

Since the business was in an adjacent jurisdiction I notified that agency of what I had heard, and they has a plain clothes officer sell items from the evidence locker at the business.

Based on the information from me and the willingness of the owner of said business, warrants were issued for his business and home. The Result: Item found were illegal weapons, drugs and lots of stolen property.

What does your false statement that there was no criminality in Trump's organization have to do with the OP?

What does that have to do with the subject of the thread?

 

[Leo123]

The fascist alt right are terrified of what Mueller has been and will be finding out.

They will find out in spades soon enough.

Who are the 'alt-right?' Anyone who disagrees with you?

 

[Wry Catcher]

OK, so now the above admits that Clapper did not say they planted anyone in the campaign, despite the lies, etc., around their comments.

And only those defending people and orgs suspected of acting criminality would call a lawful surveillance "spying". I am sure that is how Capone et al thought of lawful surveillance.

There was no criminal activity so yes, spying was illegal. Those advocating spying on innocents are part of the fascist left.

Bullshit.

BTW, once upon a time I made an arrest and the subject had large cut over a black eye. As I put him in for booking I asked him what happened to his eye. He said that MFer he worked for kicked his ass and hit him with a wrench, and I should know he was a fence who bought stolen items frm car and house burglaries.

Since the business was in an adjacent jurisdiction I notified that agency of what I had heard, and they has a plain clothes officer sell items from the evidence locker at the business.

Based on the information from me and the willingness of the owner of said business, warrants were issued for his business and home. The Result: Item found were illegal weapons, drugs and lots of stolen property.

What does that have to do with the subject of the thread?

They are both investigations of crime set in motion to investigate one thing, and finding many others. BTW, he went to prison on the Weapons charge which was found by the use of the warrant seeking stolen property.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A lot of Trump supporters will be going to prison as well for trying to cover up crimes.

 

[Leo123]

OK, so now the above admits that Clapper did not say they planted anyone in the campaign, despite the lies, etc., around their comments.

And only those defending people and orgs suspected of acting criminality would call a lawful surveillance "spying". I am sure that is how Capone et al thought of lawful surveillance.

There was no criminal activity so yes, spying was illegal. Those advocating spying on innocents are part of the fascist left.

Bullshit.

BTW, once upon a time I made an arrest and the subject had large cut over a black eye. As I put him in for booking I asked him what happened to his eye. He said that MFer he worked for kicked his ass and hit him with a wrench, and I should know he was a fence who bought stolen items frm car and house burglaries.

Since the business was in an adjacent jurisdiction I notified that agency of what I had heard, and they has a plain clothes officer sell items from the evidence locker at the business.

Based on the information from me and the willingness of the owner of said business, warrants were issued for his business and home. The Result: Item found were illegal weapons, drugs and lots of stolen property.

What does that have to do with the subject of the thread?

They are both investigations of crime set in motion to investigate one thing, and finding many others. BTW, he went to prison on the Weapons charge which was found by the use of the warrant seeking stolen property.

There was no crime to investigate in the case of Trump/Russian 'collusion' farce. It is the result of a fake dossier paid for by Hillary and the DNC and a FISA warrant that should never have been issued. The FBI is corrupt at the highest level as evidenced by Comey's exoneration of Hillary. The rank and file of the FBI is begging congress to testify about FBI fraud.

 

[Leo123]

A lot of Trump supporters will be going to prison as well for trying to cover up crimes.

A lot of HILLARY supporters will be going to prison as well for trying to cover up crimes.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes, many of them should go to prison, Leo, along with the Trumpers who are doing it.

 

[task0778]

task quoted accurately, which ends Trump's whining that, in fact, "President Trump accused the F.B.I. on Friday, without evidence, . . ".

IOW, whatever LEO thinks is meaningless.

Trump is accusing people with no evidence.

The fascist far and alt right are trying to avoid the just desserts of the law, without success.

First, I showed where the NYT declared:

" In fact, F.B.I. agents sent an informant to talk to two campaign advisers only after they received evidence that the pair had suspicious contacts linked to Russia during the campaign. The informant, an American academic who teaches in Britain, made contact late that summer with one campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, according to people familiar with the matter. He also met repeatedly in the ensuing months with the other aide, Carter Page, who was also under F.B.I. scrutiny for his ties to Russia. "

Which means there was indeed a surveillance/spying operation conducted by the FBI against the Trump campaign, which you denied.

And then you and the NYT say Trump acccuses people of infiltrating his campaign to spy on them with no evidence? Dude, it is the FBI/DOJ who is supposed to have evidence of wrong-doing before they undertake such operations, and yet you blithely ignore that part? IT'S NOT ON HIM TO PROVE ANYTHING, IT'S ON THE FBI/DOJ/OBAMA ADMIN TO PROVE THEY HAD JUST CAUSE TO DO WHAT THEY DID.

And then you say "The fascist far and alt right are trying to avoid the just desserts of the law, without success". Has somebody gone to jail yet, must have missed that. Looks more to me like it's the far left that trying to avoid the just desserts of the law, with some success I must admit. Mostly because they're pretty good at destroying or hiding evidence, practice makes perfect as they say. Your side is guilty as hell; they may never be found guilty in a court of law, but these guys used gov't agencies to illegally spy on US citizens and lied about it repeatedly. You must be so proud.