Two issues with Comey's testimony

[Slade3200]

Yes, that is pretty obvious, Obama didn't send people to put old school bugs in Trumps office. Trump accused Obama of doing something illegal in relation to surveillance on Trump tower. He called him a sick/bad guy and compared it to McCarthyism. Trump didn't have evidence to back up these tweets or we wouldn't of have the head of the FBI and NSA both saying that there was no evidence to back up Trumps tweets. All this other talk of searching for other types of surveillance is now officially a desperate attempt to find something that can shield Trump from his false statement and somehow justify it.

1) That's pretty obvious.

2) Yes he did. Don't you get that this is related to the Flynn thing? My guess is that the phone calls Flynn (and others) made was from Trump Tower. Ergo, "Obama was 'bugging' Trump Tower". Yeah, a stretch, but closer to the truth than Slick Willie's denial of "sexual relations with that woman".

3) No one seems to be confirming or deny that data collected in could have included Trump Tower, but I agree that Trump Tower wasn't specifically targeted. What was targeted were communications with Russia from within the United States.
Trump team communications captured by intelligence community surveillance, Nunes says
"Members of the intelligence community "incidentally collected" communications from the Trump transition team during legal surveillance operations of foreign targets, a top Republican lawmaker said Wednesday afternoon.

House Intelligence Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said this produced "dozens" of reports which eventually unmasked several individuals’ identities and were "widely disseminated."

He said none of the reports he had read mentioned Russia or Russians and he was unsure whether the surveillance occurred at Trump Tower -- as President Trump has suggested. Nunes also was unsure if then President-elect Trump was captured by the surveillance, which occurred in November, December and January."

Per your second point. If the government was bugging the Russian ambassador who was in Butt Fuck Egypt and Flynn called him then they would have record of the call. In this case, which is the likely scenario they get Flynn and they don't have Trump Tower bugged. Common sense dude.
About your 3rd point... sounds like a bunch of speculation, proving that there was no evidence behind Trumps tweets when he tweeted them. You have to recognize that there is something wrong with throwing around accusations like that. It's one shiny object after another. It is humorous to see how many actually fall for it.

 

[Divine Wind]

....In this case, which is the likely scenario they get Flynn and they don't have Trump Tower bugged.....

If you scroll up you will see that "bugged" is an outdated term in the modern electronic surveillance age. No US intelligence agency uses "bugs" when simply using computer software to monitor all calls going through cell phone towers and satellites suffices.

Trump-Russia inquiry in 'grave doubt' after GOP chair briefs White House
Two days after testimony from the directors of the FBI and NSA that dismissed any factual basis to Trump’s 4 March claim that Barack Obama had him placed under surveillance, Nunes publicly stated he was “alarmed” to learn that the intelligence agencies may have “incidentally” collected communications from Trump and his associates.

Nunes, who served on Trump’s national security transition team, said the surveillance “appears to be all legally collected” and masked the identities of Americans, but did so in such a way that Nunes could hazard a guess as to whom the intercepted communications discussed. Nunes added that the alleged intercepts did not actually concern Russia.

You have to recognize that there is something wrong with throwing around accusations like that. It's one shiny object after another. It is humorous to see how many actually fall for it.

Your accusation is false at best and a lie at worst since I do obviously recognize the bullshit spread by Washington politicians. If you have a quote of mine that proves me wrong and you correct, please post it.

 

[jc456]

facts bubba, just facts.

That is all that the FBI seems to be interested in discussing.

Yep, no other way to investigate someone unless you are doing surveillance, just as trump stated!

Disagreed. Records checks and interviews, to name two, are done without surveillance.

how do they know what the conversations were if they weren't under surveillance?

 

[Divine Wind]

how do they know what the conversations were if they weren't under surveillance?

You might want to read up on the Patriot Act and how the NSA gathers intelligence.

Basically, those conversations were caught in a large automated net which scans for key phrases that bring it to the attention of human analysts. In short, any of us who makes or receives for communications to/from foreign nations is "under surveillance". You can thank all of those who voted for and supported the Patriot Act for empowering our government to do this.

 

[Slade3200]

....In this case, which is the likely scenario they get Flynn and they don't have Trump Tower bugged.....

If you scroll up you will see that "bugged" is an outdated term in the modern electronic surveillance age. No US intelligence agency uses "bugs" when simply using computer software to monitor all calls going through cell phone towers and satellites suffices.

Trump-Russia inquiry in 'grave doubt' after GOP chair briefs White House
Two days after testimony from the directors of the FBI and NSA that dismissed any factual basis to Trump’s 4 March claim that Barack Obama had him placed under surveillance, Nunes publicly stated he was “alarmed” to learn that the intelligence agencies may have “incidentally” collected communications from Trump and his associates.

Nunes, who served on Trump’s national security transition team, said the surveillance “appears to be all legally collected” and masked the identities of Americans, but did so in such a way that Nunes could hazard a guess as to whom the intercepted communications discussed. Nunes added that the alleged intercepts did not actually concern Russia.

You have to recognize that there is something wrong with throwing around accusations like that. It's one shiny object after another. It is humorous to see how many actually fall for it.

Your accusation is false at best and a lie at worst since I do obviously recognize the bullshit spread by Washington politicians. If you have a quote of mine that proves me wrong and you correct, please post it.

Are you kidding? You really need a quote? The head of the intelligence agency's and congressional leaders have all come out saying the there is NO evidence to back up Trumps tweets. It's been said over and over. The White House keeps kicking the can down the road with new interpretations of what he meant by the tweet saying to try and justify and explain them but it is conplete BS and most people know it. It's sad that you can objectively look at this and realize what's really going on

 

[jc456]

how do they know what the conversations were if they weren't under surveillance?

You might want to read up on the Patriot Act and how the NSA gathers intelligence.

Basically, those conversations were caught in a large automated net which scans for key phrases that bring it to the attention of human analysts. In short, any of us who makes or receives for communications to/from foreign nations is "under surveillance". You can thank all of those who voted for and supported the Patriot Act for empowering our government to do this.

yep, however, the american side of those conversations are to be cleaned out. that didn't happen, so they were technically spying on the trump team. Dude, there is no other way around that. you can split all the hairs you wish to, the fact remains that there is no warrant and names are being released by our intelligence agency illegally. ILLEGALLY. There are no warrants, Comey stated so. So did Clapper. so any release of any name is a violation by an american against another american, treasonous and unacceptable. And again, proves trump's point. again, you can try and spin that anyway you want, but those are the actual facts. And Michael Flynn was person number one.

And there was no law that conversations with russia were illegal. So, how is it they can run an investigation?

 

[jc456]

....In this case, which is the likely scenario they get Flynn and they don't have Trump Tower bugged.....

If you scroll up you will see that "bugged" is an outdated term in the modern electronic surveillance age. No US intelligence agency uses "bugs" when simply using computer software to monitor all calls going through cell phone towers and satellites suffices.

Trump-Russia inquiry in 'grave doubt' after GOP chair briefs White House
Two days after testimony from the directors of the FBI and NSA that dismissed any factual basis to Trump’s 4 March claim that Barack Obama had him placed under surveillance, Nunes publicly stated he was “alarmed” to learn that the intelligence agencies may have “incidentally” collected communications from Trump and his associates.

Nunes, who served on Trump’s national security transition team, said the surveillance “appears to be all legally collected” and masked the identities of Americans, but did so in such a way that Nunes could hazard a guess as to whom the intercepted communications discussed. Nunes added that the alleged intercepts did not actually concern Russia.

You have to recognize that there is something wrong with throwing around accusations like that. It's one shiny object after another. It is humorous to see how many actually fall for it.

Your accusation is false at best and a lie at worst since I do obviously recognize the bullshit spread by Washington politicians. If you have a quote of mine that proves me wrong and you correct, please post it.

Are you kidding? You really need a quote? The head of the intelligence agency's and congressional leaders have all come out saying the there is NO evidence to back up Trumps tweets. It's been said over and over. The White House keeps kicking the can down the road with new interpretations of what he meant by the tweet saying to try and justify and explain them but it is conplete BS and most people know it. It's sad that you can objectively look at this and realize what's really going on

dude, that is all spin. the fact is the release of Michael Flynn's name demonstrates spying no matter how you wish to view the facts. Trump 100% correct.

 

[Divine Wind]

....In this case, which is the likely scenario they get Flynn and they don't have Trump Tower bugged.....

If you scroll up you will see that "bugged" is an outdated term in the modern electronic surveillance age. No US intelligence agency uses "bugs" when simply using computer software to monitor all calls going through cell phone towers and satellites suffices.

Trump-Russia inquiry in 'grave doubt' after GOP chair briefs White House
Two days after testimony from the directors of the FBI and NSA that dismissed any factual basis to Trump’s 4 March claim that Barack Obama had him placed under surveillance, Nunes publicly stated he was “alarmed” to learn that the intelligence agencies may have “incidentally” collected communications from Trump and his associates.

Nunes, who served on Trump’s national security transition team, said the surveillance “appears to be all legally collected” and masked the identities of Americans, but did so in such a way that Nunes could hazard a guess as to whom the intercepted communications discussed. Nunes added that the alleged intercepts did not actually concern Russia.

You have to recognize that there is something wrong with throwing around accusations like that. It's one shiny object after another. It is humorous to see how many actually fall for it.

Your accusation is false at best and a lie at worst since I do obviously recognize the bullshit spread by Washington politicians. If you have a quote of mine that proves me wrong and you correct, please post it.

Are you kidding? You really need a quote? The head of the intelligence agency's and congressional leaders have all come out saying the there is NO evidence to back up Trumps tweets. It's been said over and over. The White House keeps kicking the can down the road with new interpretations of what he meant by the tweet saying to try and justify and explain them but it is conplete BS and most people know it. It's sad that you can objectively look at this and realize what's really going on

If you don't have one, that's fine.

 

[Divine Wind]

yep, however, the american side of those conversations are to be cleaned out. that didn't happen, so they were technically spying on the trump team. Dude, there is no other way around that. you can split all the hairs you wish to, the fact remains that there is no warrant and names are being released by our intelligence agency illegally. ILLEGALLY. There are no warrants, Comey stated so. So did Clapper. so any release of any name is a violation by an american against another american, treasonous and unacceptable. And again, proves trump's point. again, you can try and spin that anyway you want, but those are the actual facts. And Michael Flynn was person number one.

And there was no law that conversations with russia were illegal. So, how is it they can run an investigation?

Only if there is no wrong doing.

Partisan politics doesn't belong in national security matters. Consider that both Rizwan Farook and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were not only on the "american side of those conversations", but also American citizens. If anyone in the US, regardless of citizenship, is conversing about illegal activities with foreigners outside the US, they're fair game.

 

[jc456]

yep, however, the american side of those conversations are to be cleaned out. that didn't happen, so they were technically spying on the trump team. Dude, there is no other way around that. you can split all the hairs you wish to, the fact remains that there is no warrant and names are being released by our intelligence agency illegally. ILLEGALLY. There are no warrants, Comey stated so. So did Clapper. so any release of any name is a violation by an american against another american, treasonous and unacceptable. And again, proves trump's point. again, you can try and spin that anyway you want, but those are the actual facts. And Michael Flynn was person number one.

And there was no law that conversations with russia were illegal. So, how is it they can run an investigation?

Only if there is no wrong doing.

Partisan politics doesn't belong in national security matters. Consider that both Rizwan Farook and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were not only on the "american side of those conversations", but also American citizens. If anyone in the US, regardless of citizenship, is conversing about illegal activities with foreigners outside the US, they're fair game.

WTF does that mean Only if there is no wrong doing?
They have no authorization to listen to them. Period unless they have a warrant. Sorry dude. no one gets to just say, ah-hah!!! nope. The court system doesn't work that way. Can't profile, can't suspect somethings in a trunk and pull someone over. No matter if you saw them put that something in the car. Need a fking warrant!!!!! It's called spying as I already stated.

 

[Divine Wind]

WTF does that mean Only if there is no wrong doing?
They have no authorization to listen to them. Period unless they have a warrant. Sorry dude. no one gets to just say, ah-hah!!! nope. The court system doesn't work that way. Can't profile, can't suspect somethings in a trunk and pull someone over. No matter if you saw them put that something in the car. Need a fking warrant!!!!! It's called spying as I already stated.

Please try to stay calm. Why are you panicking? Don't you believe a Republican President and a Republican Congress will ferret out any wrongdoing?

 

[Slade3200]

....In this case, which is the likely scenario they get Flynn and they don't have Trump Tower bugged.....

If you scroll up you will see that "bugged" is an outdated term in the modern electronic surveillance age. No US intelligence agency uses "bugs" when simply using computer software to monitor all calls going through cell phone towers and satellites suffices.

Trump-Russia inquiry in 'grave doubt' after GOP chair briefs White House
Two days after testimony from the directors of the FBI and NSA that dismissed any factual basis to Trump’s 4 March claim that Barack Obama had him placed under surveillance, Nunes publicly stated he was “alarmed” to learn that the intelligence agencies may have “incidentally” collected communications from Trump and his associates.

Nunes, who served on Trump’s national security transition team, said the surveillance “appears to be all legally collected” and masked the identities of Americans, but did so in such a way that Nunes could hazard a guess as to whom the intercepted communications discussed. Nunes added that the alleged intercepts did not actually concern Russia.

You have to recognize that there is something wrong with throwing around accusations like that. It's one shiny object after another. It is humorous to see how many actually fall for it.

Your accusation is false at best and a lie at worst since I do obviously recognize the bullshit spread by Washington politicians. If you have a quote of mine that proves me wrong and you correct, please post it.

Are you kidding? You really need a quote? The head of the intelligence agency's and congressional leaders have all come out saying the there is NO evidence to back up Trumps tweets. It's been said over and over. The White House keeps kicking the can down the road with new interpretations of what he meant by the tweet saying to try and justify and explain them but it is conplete BS and most people know it. It's sad that you can objectively look at this and realize what's really going on

dude, that is all spin. the fact is the release of Michael Flynn's name demonstrates spying no matter how you wish to view the facts. Trump 100% correct.

All spin? Are you nuts? Those are the words out of the mouths of the leaders of our intelligence agencies. The release of Flynns name was an illegal leak, but that doesn't come remotely close to explaining Trumps tweet.

 

[Slade3200]

....In this case, which is the likely scenario they get Flynn and they don't have Trump Tower bugged.....

If you scroll up you will see that "bugged" is an outdated term in the modern electronic surveillance age. No US intelligence agency uses "bugs" when simply using computer software to monitor all calls going through cell phone towers and satellites suffices.

Trump-Russia inquiry in 'grave doubt' after GOP chair briefs White House
Two days after testimony from the directors of the FBI and NSA that dismissed any factual basis to Trump’s 4 March claim that Barack Obama had him placed under surveillance, Nunes publicly stated he was “alarmed” to learn that the intelligence agencies may have “incidentally” collected communications from Trump and his associates.

Nunes, who served on Trump’s national security transition team, said the surveillance “appears to be all legally collected” and masked the identities of Americans, but did so in such a way that Nunes could hazard a guess as to whom the intercepted communications discussed. Nunes added that the alleged intercepts did not actually concern Russia.

You have to recognize that there is something wrong with throwing around accusations like that. It's one shiny object after another. It is humorous to see how many actually fall for it.

Your accusation is false at best and a lie at worst since I do obviously recognize the bullshit spread by Washington politicians. If you have a quote of mine that proves me wrong and you correct, please post it.

Are you kidding? You really need a quote? The head of the intelligence agency's and congressional leaders have all come out saying the there is NO evidence to back up Trumps tweets. It's been said over and over. The White House keeps kicking the can down the road with new interpretations of what he meant by the tweet saying to try and justify and explain them but it is conplete BS and most people know it. It's sad that you can objectively look at this and realize what's really going on

If you don't have one, that's fine.

Here... Take 2 seconds and Google it and you can find dozens of additional quotes saying the same thing.

FBI's Comey: 'I have no information' to support Trump's wiretapping tweets

 

[Divine Wind]

Here... Take 2 seconds and Google it and you can find dozens of additional quotes saying the same thing.

FBI's Comey: 'I have no information' to support Trump's wiretapping tweets

Thanks. Here...take 2 seconds to Google the maxim "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" then take a few more seconds to study the logical fallacy of argument from ignorance.

Argument from Ignorance

The Absence of Proof - Freakonomics

After that, maybe you'll relax and try to have a rational discussion with me on this situation instead of going full tilt LEFT in a rant against anyone the right of your present position.

 

[Slade3200]

Here... Take 2 seconds and Google it and you can find dozens of additional quotes saying the same thing.

FBI's Comey: 'I have no information' to support Trump's wiretapping tweets

Thanks. Here...take 2 seconds to Google the maxim "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" then take a few more seconds to study the logical fallacy of argument from ignorance.

Argument from Ignorance

The Absence of Proof - Freakonomics

After that, maybe you'll relax and try to have a rational discussion with me on this situation instead of going full tilt LEFT in a rant against anyone the right of your present position.

I'm not going Left or right on this I'm using direct quotes of simple statements from the heads of our intelligence agencies. One of which was appointed by Trump. What about "No evidence to back up Trumps tweets" do you not understand? I'm sure Trump will keep digging and digging to find anything wrong with our intel agencies or the leakers to try and justify the accusations he made. But at this point it is obvious what's going on. I'm sorry man, there is so much partisan spin coming from you all who try and rationalize his emotional bluster.

Tell you what. Admit that Trump was full of shit, then maybe we can have a rational conversation about surveillance and leaking problems within our intel agencies.

 

[Divine Wind]

Here... Take 2 seconds and Google it and you can find dozens of additional quotes saying the same thing.

FBI's Comey: 'I have no information' to support Trump's wiretapping tweets

Thanks. Here...take 2 seconds to Google the maxim "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" then take a few more seconds to study the logical fallacy of argument from ignorance.

Argument from Ignorance

The Absence of Proof - Freakonomics

After that, maybe you'll relax and try to have a rational discussion with me on this situation instead of going full tilt LEFT in a rant against anyone the right of your present position.

I'm not going Left or right on this I'm using direct quotes of simple statements from the heads of our intelligence agencies. One of which was appointed by Trump. What about "No evidence to back up Trumps tweets" do you not understand? I'm sure Trump will keep digging and digging to find anything wrong with our intel agencies or the leakers to try and justify the accusations he made. But at this point it is obvious what's going on. I'm sorry man, there is so much partisan spin coming from you all who try and rationalize his emotional bluster.

Tell you what. Admit that Trump was full of shit, then maybe we can have a rational conversation about surveillance and leaking problems within our intel agencies.

It's not the direct quotes I'm questioning, but your interpretation and/or spin on those quotes.

You want me to join sides with you when, in fact, I'm not taking sides. I'm simply disagreeing with your claim you aren't "going Left or right on this" since you are obviously going Left on this. I'm simply saying there's a lot of bullshit and spin in Washington DC. Trump is one one of a long line of Washington bullshitters.

 

[Slade3200]

Here... Take 2 seconds and Google it and you can find dozens of additional quotes saying the same thing.

FBI's Comey: 'I have no information' to support Trump's wiretapping tweets

Thanks. Here...take 2 seconds to Google the maxim "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" then take a few more seconds to study the logical fallacy of argument from ignorance.

Argument from Ignorance

The Absence of Proof - Freakonomics

After that, maybe you'll relax and try to have a rational discussion with me on this situation instead of going full tilt LEFT in a rant against anyone the right of your present position.

I'm not going Left or right on this I'm using direct quotes of simple statements from the heads of our intelligence agencies. One of which was appointed by Trump. What about "No evidence to back up Trumps tweets" do you not understand? I'm sure Trump will keep digging and digging to find anything wrong with our intel agencies or the leakers to try and justify the accusations he made. But at this point it is obvious what's going on. I'm sorry man, there is so much partisan spin coming from you all who try and rationalize his emotional bluster.

Tell you what. Admit that Trump was full of shit, then maybe we can have a rational conversation about surveillance and leaking problems within our intel agencies.

It's not the direct quotes I'm questioning, but your interpretation and/or spin on those quotes.

You want me to join sides with you when, in fact, I'm not taking sides. I'm simply disagreeing with your claim you aren't "going Left or right on this" since you are obviously going Left on this. I'm simply saying there's a lot of bullshit and spin in Washington DC. Trump is one one of a long line of Washington bullshitters.

How is my interpretation of "No evidence" as no evidence, spin?

 

[Divine Wind]

Here... Take 2 seconds and Google it and you can find dozens of additional quotes saying the same thing.

FBI's Comey: 'I have no information' to support Trump's wiretapping tweets

Thanks. Here...take 2 seconds to Google the maxim "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" then take a few more seconds to study the logical fallacy of argument from ignorance.

Argument from Ignorance

The Absence of Proof - Freakonomics

After that, maybe you'll relax and try to have a rational discussion with me on this situation instead of going full tilt LEFT in a rant against anyone the right of your present position.

I'm not going Left or right on this I'm using direct quotes of simple statements from the heads of our intelligence agencies. One of which was appointed by Trump. What about "No evidence to back up Trumps tweets" do you not understand? I'm sure Trump will keep digging and digging to find anything wrong with our intel agencies or the leakers to try and justify the accusations he made. But at this point it is obvious what's going on. I'm sorry man, there is so much partisan spin coming from you all who try and rationalize his emotional bluster.

Tell you what. Admit that Trump was full of shit, then maybe we can have a rational conversation about surveillance and leaking problems within our intel agencies.

It's not the direct quotes I'm questioning, but your interpretation and/or spin on those quotes.

You want me to join sides with you when, in fact, I'm not taking sides. I'm simply disagreeing with your claim you aren't "going Left or right on this" since you are obviously going Left on this. I'm simply saying there's a lot of bullshit and spin in Washington DC. Trump is one one of a long line of Washington bullshitters.

How is my interpretation of "No evidence" as no evidence, spin?

Again, it's not the statement, it's the spin.

 

[Slade3200]

Here... Take 2 seconds and Google it and you can find dozens of additional quotes saying the same thing.

FBI's Comey: 'I have no information' to support Trump's wiretapping tweets

Thanks. Here...take 2 seconds to Google the maxim "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" then take a few more seconds to study the logical fallacy of argument from ignorance.

Argument from Ignorance

The Absence of Proof - Freakonomics

After that, maybe you'll relax and try to have a rational discussion with me on this situation instead of going full tilt LEFT in a rant against anyone the right of your present position.

I'm not going Left or right on this I'm using direct quotes of simple statements from the heads of our intelligence agencies. One of which was appointed by Trump. What about "No evidence to back up Trumps tweets" do you not understand? I'm sure Trump will keep digging and digging to find anything wrong with our intel agencies or the leakers to try and justify the accusations he made. But at this point it is obvious what's going on. I'm sorry man, there is so much partisan spin coming from you all who try and rationalize his emotional bluster.

Tell you what. Admit that Trump was full of shit, then maybe we can have a rational conversation about surveillance and leaking problems within our intel agencies.

It's not the direct quotes I'm questioning, but your interpretation and/or spin on those quotes.

You want me to join sides with you when, in fact, I'm not taking sides. I'm simply disagreeing with your claim you aren't "going Left or right on this" since you are obviously going Left on this. I'm simply saying there's a lot of bullshit and spin in Washington DC. Trump is one one of a long line of Washington bullshitters.

How is my interpretation of "No evidence" as no evidence, spin?

Again, it's not the statement, it's the spin.

What was the statement? I posted links with videos and quotes but let me know what your unspun interpretation is.

 

[Divine Wind]

Thanks. Here...take 2 seconds to Google the maxim "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" then take a few more seconds to study the logical fallacy of argument from ignorance.

Argument from Ignorance

The Absence of Proof - Freakonomics

After that, maybe you'll relax and try to have a rational discussion with me on this situation instead of going full tilt LEFT in a rant against anyone the right of your present position.

I'm not going Left or right on this I'm using direct quotes of simple statements from the heads of our intelligence agencies. One of which was appointed by Trump. What about "No evidence to back up Trumps tweets" do you not understand? I'm sure Trump will keep digging and digging to find anything wrong with our intel agencies or the leakers to try and justify the accusations he made. But at this point it is obvious what's going on. I'm sorry man, there is so much partisan spin coming from you all who try and rationalize his emotional bluster.

Tell you what. Admit that Trump was full of shit, then maybe we can have a rational conversation about surveillance and leaking problems within our intel agencies.

It's not the direct quotes I'm questioning, but your interpretation and/or spin on those quotes.

You want me to join sides with you when, in fact, I'm not taking sides. I'm simply disagreeing with your claim you aren't "going Left or right on this" since you are obviously going Left on this. I'm simply saying there's a lot of bullshit and spin in Washington DC. Trump is one one of a long line of Washington bullshitters.

How is my interpretation of "No evidence" as no evidence, spin?

Again, it's not the statement, it's the spin.

What was the statement? I posted links with videos and quotes but let me know what your unspun interpretation is.

My "unspun interpretation is" in the remarks you just quoted. Additional remarks are in previous posts you've quoted of me in this thread.