TowerGate - Timeline and Connecting Dots...follow the money!

[tycho1572]

I will be very surprised if this is disproven

Where is Obama to speak to the allegations made against him about the illegal wiretapping?

Where is Waldo?

Obabble is shitting bricks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As he should be! lol

 

[JakeStarkey]

The October FISA request (which omitted Trump's name) was approved. No evidence was found, but the eavesdropping continued.

Wireaping can't continue if it never started. Also they don't give FISA Warrants without evidence.

You are sorely mistaken in this case. It did continue...and that's why this situation requires investigation.

Again, you said it wasn't started then you said the wiretapping continued. It can't continue if it never started and the FISA court does not approve warrants without evidence.

What you are trying to say here is that the FISA Court denied the warrant which means they didn't approve it. Then you assert that the court that didn't approve it were wiretapping at the time of the second request. Then you're saying that the same court that denied it for lack of evidence then approved a warrant without evidence but they didn't need the warrant because they were already wiretapping and wouldn't stop wiretapping out of inconvenience.

Your timeline and assertions make no sense.

Classic explanation of the alt right's failure to create a consistent argument.

Yeah, the FBI asked for a tap. Yes, the court approved the warrant. Yes, we are waiting as Comey's feebs are sharpening the stake for the trampvires heart.

 

[JBond]

The October FISA request (which omitted Trump's name) was approved. No evidence was found, but the eavesdropping continued.

Wireaping can't continue if it never started. Also they don't give FISA Warrants without evidence.

You are sorely mistaken in this case. It did continue...and that's why this situation requires investigation.

Again, you said it wasn't started then you said the wiretapping continued. It can't continue if it never started and the FISA court does not approve warrants without evidence.

What you are trying to say here is that the FISA Court denied the warrant which means they didn't approve it. Then you assert that the court that didn't approve it were wiretapping at the time of the second request. Then you're saying that the same court that denied it for lack of evidence then approved a warrant without evidence but they didn't need the warrant because they were already wiretapping and wouldn't stop wiretapping out of inconvenience.

Your timeline and assertions make no sense.

Classic explanation of the alt right's failure to create a consistent argument.

Yeah, the FBI asked for a tap. Yes, the court approved the warrant. Yes, we are waiting as Comey's feebs are sharpening the stake for the trampvires heart.

The FBI already cleared Trump. The tapping of Trump Tower showed nothing.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The October FISA request (which omitted Trump's name) was approved. No evidence was found, but the eavesdropping continued.

Wireaping can't continue if it never started. Also they don't give FISA Warrants without evidence.

You are sorely mistaken in this case. It did continue...and that's why this situation requires investigation.

Again, you said it wasn't started then you said the wiretapping continued. It can't continue if it never started and the FISA court does not approve warrants without evidence.

What you are trying to say here is that the FISA Court denied the warrant which means they didn't approve it. Then you assert that the court that didn't approve it were wiretapping at the time of the second request. Then you're saying that the same court that denied it for lack of evidence then approved a warrant without evidence but they didn't need the warrant because they were already wiretapping and wouldn't stop wiretapping out of inconvenience.

Your timeline and assertions make no sense.

Classic explanation of the alt right's failure to create a consistent argument.

Yeah, the FBI asked for a tap. Yes, the court approved the warrant. Yes, we are waiting as Comey's feebs are sharpening the stake for the trampvires heart.

The FBI already cleared Trump. The tapping of Trump Tower showed nothing.

Give us a link then to a reputable sources, that says FBI clears Trump.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No link from a reputable source.

OK.

Let's see what is the deflection that will come.

 

[JBond]

Wireaping can't continue if it never started. Also they don't give FISA Warrants without evidence.

You are sorely mistaken in this case. It did continue...and that's why this situation requires investigation.

Again, you said it wasn't started then you said the wiretapping continued. It can't continue if it never started and the FISA court does not approve warrants without evidence.

What you are trying to say here is that the FISA Court denied the warrant which means they didn't approve it. Then you assert that the court that didn't approve it were wiretapping at the time of the second request. Then you're saying that the same court that denied it for lack of evidence then approved a warrant without evidence but they didn't need the warrant because they were already wiretapping and wouldn't stop wiretapping out of inconvenience.

Your timeline and assertions make no sense.

Classic explanation of the alt right's failure to create a consistent argument.

Yeah, the FBI asked for a tap. Yes, the court approved the warrant. Yes, we are waiting as Comey's feebs are sharpening the stake for the trampvires heart.

The FBI already cleared Trump. The tapping of Trump Tower showed nothing.

Give us a link then to a reputable sources, that says FBI clears Trump.

Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia

FBI investigations into Trump-Russia ties yield little

He was cleared after the tapping of Trump Tower.

 

[ClosedCaption]

You are sorely mistaken in this case. It did continue...and that's why this situation requires investigation.

Again, you said it wasn't started then you said the wiretapping continued. It can't continue if it never started and the FISA court does not approve warrants without evidence.

What you are trying to say here is that the FISA Court denied the warrant which means they didn't approve it. Then you assert that the court that didn't approve it were wiretapping at the time of the second request. Then you're saying that the same court that denied it for lack of evidence then approved a warrant without evidence but they didn't need the warrant because they were already wiretapping and wouldn't stop wiretapping out of inconvenience.

Your timeline and assertions make no sense.

Classic explanation of the alt right's failure to create a consistent argument.

Yeah, the FBI asked for a tap. Yes, the court approved the warrant. Yes, we are waiting as Comey's feebs are sharpening the stake for the trampvires heart.

The FBI already cleared Trump. The tapping of Trump Tower showed nothing.

Give us a link then to a reputable sources, that says FBI clears Trump.

Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia

FBI investigations into Trump-Russia ties yield little

He was cleared after the tapping of Trump Tower.

You forgot to add the link that shows he was cleared as you said. You got that?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Those links are from four months ago. And they don't clear DJT of the wire tap material.

That you would post such Alt Facts only incriminate DJT more.

So you have nothing.

 

[boedicca]

very good, boedica

trump is in the snare and can't escape

You are a bit more dense and clueless than usual today, bub.

The corruption of the Obabble Admin is quite glaring. One would hope that even the Progs (those who don't totally hate America) would be concerned about this...

Deflection to Obama is fail.

FBI convinced a court that evidence existed to tap Trump.

That is the issue: what was found out about his collusion with the Russians.

You didn't read the link. In the FISA request they purposely left Trump's name out.

This was a targeted, underhanded thing.

"Since Trump was the obvious target, the alleged failure to disclose his name in the second application could be a serious and severe violation of the obligation to disclose all material facts. Lastly, given the later behavior, it is evident any promise in the affidavit to protect the surveilled information from ever being sourced or disseminated was a false promise, intended to induce the illicit surveillance. This is criminalized both by federal perjury statutes, conspiracy statutes, and the FISA criminal laws themselves."

you and ALL right wingers ar WAYYYYY behind....

the Trump name was removed on the second request, because the server communicating with the Russian banks was renamed without the Trump name in the server name.

You are WAAAAAAAAYYYY behind by not understanding that the Obabble Admin spied on a private citizen.

 

[boedicca]

The October FISA request (which omitted Trump's name) was approved. No evidence was found, but the eavesdropping continued.

Wireaping can't continue if it never started. Also they don't give FISA Warrants without evidence.

You are sorely mistaken in this case. It did continue...and that's why this situation requires investigation.

Again, you said it wasn't started then you said the wiretapping continued. It can't continue if it never started and the FISA court does not approve warrants without evidence.

What you are trying to say here is that the FISA Court denied the warrant which means they didn't approve it. Then you assert that the court that didn't approve it were wiretapping at the time of the second request. Then you're saying that the same court that denied it for lack of evidence then approved a warrant without evidence but they didn't need the warrant because they were already wiretapping and wouldn't stop wiretapping out of inconvenience.

Your timeline and assertions make no sense.

Condolences on your lack of reading comprehension and cognitive abiility.

 

[boedicca]

very good, boedica

trump is in the snare and can't escape

You are a bit more dense and clueless than usual today, bub.

The corruption of the Obabble Admin is quite glaring. One would hope that even the Progs (those who don't totally hate America) would be concerned about this...

Deflection to Obama is fail.

FBI convinced a court that evidence existed to tap Trump.

That is the issue: what was found out about his collusion with the Russians.

You didn't read the link. In the FISA request they purposely left Trump's name out.

This was a targeted, underhanded thing.

"Since Trump was the obvious target, the alleged failure to disclose his name in the second application could be a serious and severe violation of the obligation to disclose all material facts. Lastly, given the later behavior, it is evident any promise in the affidavit to protect the surveilled information from ever being sourced or disseminated was a false promise, intended to induce the illicit surveillance. This is criminalized both by federal perjury statutes, conspiracy statutes, and the FISA criminal laws themselves."

Omitting material facts in a warrant affidavit is perjury. Misuse of federal assets for political gain is a felony.

I can see someone doing serious time very soon.

That is the correct motorcycle.

 

[boedicca]

very good, boedica

trump is in the snare and can't escape

You are a bit more dense and clueless than usual today, bub.

The corruption of the Obabble Admin is quite glaring. One would hope that even the Progs (those who don't totally hate America) would be concerned about this...

Deflection to Obama is fail.

FBI convinced a court that evidence existed to tap Trump.

That is the issue: what was found out about his collusion with the Russians.

You didn't read the link. In the FISA request they purposely left Trump's name out.

This was a targeted, underhanded thing.

"Since Trump was the obvious target, the alleged failure to disclose his name in the second application could be a serious and severe violation of the obligation to disclose all material facts. Lastly, given the later behavior, it is evident any promise in the affidavit to protect the surveilled information from ever being sourced or disseminated was a false promise, intended to induce the illicit surveillance. This is criminalized both by federal perjury statutes, conspiracy statutes, and the FISA criminal laws themselves."

you and ALL right wingers ar WAYYYYY behind....

the Trump name was removed on the second request, because the server communicating with the Russian banks was renamed without the Trump name in the server name.

Why the fuck was Macaca Joe asking for a FISA warrant on Trump in the first place???

What the fuck is wrong with you brainless, mindless Progressives???

I'll hazard a guess: Politics.

 

[boedicca]

The October FISA request (which omitted Trump's name) was approved. No evidence was found, but the eavesdropping continued.

Wireaping can't continue if it never started. Also they don't give FISA Warrants without evidence.

Proof?

If the wiretapping never started as the OP says then you can't continue something that was never started. That's common sense.

The "eavesdropping" occurred. Comey even testified about it.

 

[boedicca]

very good, boedica

trump is in the snare and can't escape

You are a bit more dense and clueless than usual today, bub.

The corruption of the Obabble Admin is quite glaring. One would hope that even the Progs (those who don't totally hate America) would be concerned about this...

Deflection to Obama is fail.

FBI convinced a court that evidence existed to tap Trump.

That is the issue: what was found out about his collusion with the Russians.

Read this and get back to us on that, bub.

Yes, There Could Be Serious Legal Problems if Obama Admin Involved in Illegal Surveillance

Here's a particularly noteworthy passage:


Out of 35,000+ requests for surveillance, the FISA court has only ever rejected a whopping 12. Apparently, according to published reports, you can add one more to that — even the FISA court first rejected Obama’s request to spy on Trump’s team under the guise of an investigation into foreign agents of a pending war attack, intelligence agents apparently returned to the court, where, it is my assumption, that they did not disclose or divulge all material facts to the court when seeking the surveillance the second time around, some of which they would later wrongfully disseminate and distribute to the public. By itself, misuse of FISA procedures to obtain surveillance is itself, a crime.

This raises the second problem: Obama’s team submission of an affidavit to to the FISA court. An application for a warrant of any kind requires an affidavit, and that affidavit may not omit material factors. A fact is “material” if it could have the possible impact of impacting the judicial officer deciding whether to authorize the warrant. Such affidavits are the most carefully drawn up, reviewed, and approved affidavits of law enforcement in our system precisely because they must be fully-disclosing, forthcoming, and include any information a judge must know to decide whether to allow our government to spy on its own. My assumption would be that intelligence officials were trying to investigate hacking of DNC which is not even a FISA covered crime, so therefore serious questions arise about what Obama administration attorneys said to the FISA court to even consider the application. If the claim was “financial ties” to Russia, then Obama knew he had no basis to use FISA at all.

Since Trump was the obvious target, the alleged failure to disclose his name in the second application could be a serious and severe violation of the obligation to disclose all material facts. Lastly, given the later behavior, it is evident any promise in the affidavit to protect the surveilled information from ever being sourced or disseminated was a false promise, intended to induce the illicit surveillance. This is criminalized both by federal perjury statutes, conspiracy statutes, and the FISA criminal laws themselves.

That raises the third problem: it seems the FISA-compelled protocols for precluding the dissemination of the information were violated, and that Obama’s team issued orders to achieve precisely what the law forbids, if published reports are true about the administration sharing the surveilled information far-and-wide to promote unlawful leaks to the press. This, too, would be its own crime, as it brings back the ghost of Hillary’s emails — by definition, FISA information is strictly confidential or it’s information that never should have been gathered. FISA strictly segregates its surveilled information into two categories: highly confidential information of the most serious of crimes involving foreign acts of war; or, if not that, then information that should never have been gathered, should be immediately deleted, and never sourced nor disseminated. It cannot be both.

Recognizing this information did not fit FISA meant having to delete it and destroy it. According to published reports, Obama’s team did the opposite: order it preserved, ordered the NSA to search it, keep it, and share it; and then Obama’s Attorney General issued an order to allow broader sharing of information and, according to the New York Times, Obama aides acted to label the Trump information at a lower level of classification for massive-level sharing of the information. The problem for Obama is simple — if it could fit a lower level of classification, then it had to be deleted and destroyed, not disseminated and distributed, under crystal clear FISA law. Obama’s team’s admission it could be classified lower, yet taking actions to insure its broadest distribution, could even put Obama smack-middle of the biggest unlawful surveillance and political-opponent-smear campaign since Nixon. Except even Nixon didn’t use the FBI and NSA for his dirty tricks...

Yes, There Could Be Serious Legal Problems if Obama Admin Involved in Illegal Surveillance

I just looked at the author of your link...Dan Abrams is saying this....he is not a conservative hack.....he has worked for the regular networks and been a legal consultant..........I think obama minions should be very afraid........Trump is not Bush, mccain or Romney.....he isn't going to look the other way simply because "you just don't do that..." .......

This scandal has real legs. Jonathan Turley (also not a conservative) is calling for an investigation.

What did Obama know and when did he know it?

 

[boedicca]

very good, boedica

trump is in the snare and can't escape

You are a bit more dense and clueless than usual today, bub.

The corruption of the Obabble Admin is quite glaring. One would hope that even the Progs (those who don't totally hate America) would be concerned about this...

Deflection to Obama is fail.

FBI convinced a court that evidence existed to tap Trump.

That is the issue: what was found out about his collusion with the Russians.

You didn't read the link. In the FISA request they purposely left Trump's name out.

This was a targeted, underhanded thing.

"Since Trump was the obvious target, the alleged failure to disclose his name in the second application could be a serious and severe violation of the obligation to disclose all material facts. Lastly, given the later behavior, it is evident any promise in the affidavit to protect the surveilled information from ever being sourced or disseminated was a false promise, intended to induce the illicit surveillance. This is criminalized both by federal perjury statutes, conspiracy statutes, and the FISA criminal laws themselves."

If true, the exclusion of Trump's name means nothing. What counts is the evidence on which the court acted in approving the tap. If evidence of Trump wrong doing emerges, so much better.

Sorry dipshit.......you don't get a wire tap based on "if"........and then go fishing for crimes......

Well, you do if you are abusing the power of your office to harass political enemies.

Just sayin'.

 

[boedicca]

The October FISA request (which omitted Trump's name) was approved. No evidence was found, but the eavesdropping continued.

Wireaping can't continue if it never started. Also they don't give FISA Warrants without evidence.

LOL

Its well documented that it was occurring.. But continue, Its amusing.

I can just imagine the big web or conference call under way right this minute in which the pants shitting Dems are desperately trying to deflect blame and identify scapegoats.

Lynch's signature is on the affidavit... Just Say'in..

Which puts her meeting on the tarmac with Bubba in an even more glaring light.

 

[boedicca]

very good, boedica

trump is in the snare and can't escape

You are a bit more dense and clueless than usual today, bub.

The corruption of the Obabble Admin is quite glaring. One would hope that even the Progs (those who don't totally hate America) would be concerned about this...

Deflection to Obama is fail.

FBI convinced a court that evidence existed to tap Trump.

That is the issue: what was found out about his collusion with the Russians.

Wrong. They could not get approval to tap Trump, so they mislead the court by omitting his name in the second attempt, even though he was the intended target.

Maybe Dems should have listened to the FBI and turned over their hacked servers. That they didn't, is telling.

Indeed. And it makes their shrieking about Russian hacks even more suspicious when the refused to let the FBI examine their supposedly hacked servers.

 

[boedicca]

The October FISA request (which omitted Trump's name) was approved. No evidence was found, but the eavesdropping continued.

Wireaping can't continue if it never started. Also they don't give FISA Warrants without evidence.

You are sorely mistaken in this case. It did continue...and that's why this situation requires investigation.

Again, you said it wasn't started then you said the wiretapping continued. It can't continue if it never started and the FISA court does not approve warrants without evidence.

What you are trying to say here is that the FISA Court denied the warrant which means they didn't approve it. Then you assert that the court that didn't approve it were wiretapping at the time of the second request. Then you're saying that the same court that denied it for lack of evidence then approved a warrant without evidence but they didn't need the warrant because they were already wiretapping and wouldn't stop wiretapping out of inconvenience.

Your timeline and assertions make no sense.

Classic explanation of the alt right's failure to create a consistent argument.

Yeah, the FBI asked for a tap. Yes, the court approved the warrant. Yes, we are waiting as Comey's feebs are sharpening the stake for the trampvires heart.

hiLIARy already got the stake on November 8th, bub.

 

[boedicca]

Wireaping can't continue if it never started. Also they don't give FISA Warrants without evidence.

You are sorely mistaken in this case. It did continue...and that's why this situation requires investigation.

Again, you said it wasn't started then you said the wiretapping continued. It can't continue if it never started and the FISA court does not approve warrants without evidence.

What you are trying to say here is that the FISA Court denied the warrant which means they didn't approve it. Then you assert that the court that didn't approve it were wiretapping at the time of the second request. Then you're saying that the same court that denied it for lack of evidence then approved a warrant without evidence but they didn't need the warrant because they were already wiretapping and wouldn't stop wiretapping out of inconvenience.

Your timeline and assertions make no sense.

Classic explanation of the alt right's failure to create a consistent argument.

Yeah, the FBI asked for a tap. Yes, the court approved the warrant. Yes, we are waiting as Comey's feebs are sharpening the stake for the trampvires heart.

The FBI already cleared Trump. The tapping of Trump Tower showed nothing.

Give us a link then to a reputable sources, that says FBI clears Trump.

Here you go, FAKEY:

For much of the summer, the F.B.I. pursued a widening investigation into a Russian role in the American presidential campaign. Agents scrutinized advisers close to Donald J. Trump, looked for financial connections with Russian financial figures, searched for those involved in hacking the computers of Democrats, and even chased a lead — which they ultimately came to doubt — about a possible secret channel of email communication from the Trump Organization to a Russian bank.

Law enforcement officials say that none of the investigations so far have found any conclusive or direct link between Mr. Trump and the Russian government. And even the hacking into Democratic emails, F.B.I. and intelligence officials now believe, was aimed at disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump...

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html

 

[boedicca]

No link from a reputable source.

OK.

Let's see what is the deflection that will come.

Again:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html