Was Trump Wiretapped? Just the facts.

[tycho1572]

I'm going to side with Lucy on this. What she's said is spot-on.

 

[OldLady]

For people who care - this is definitely worth reading:

The people’s tyrant: what Plato can teach us about Donald Trump

Good article.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Anything is possible, but for now this is just a theory, even if some are pretending it's fact.

I notice it did get the Trump/Russia thing off the front burner, though.
.

No it didn't.

 

[SavannahMann]

No spin. No smoke and mirrors. No conjecture. Was he wire tapped? If that can't be answered everything else is Conspiracy Theory material of attempting to create links between unrelated incidents.

At this point, it see - the whole wire-tap claim is unsubstantiated and taking on the guise of a conspiracy theory.

From: Analysis | Donald Trump was a conspiracy-theory candidate. Now he’s on the edge of being a conspiracy-theory president.

The problem here, of course, is that what Levin — and Breitbart — use as evidence for these claims are a series of seemingly unconnected events — from FISA court requests to Trump joking about the Russia email hack, to the release of Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails in the fall. The proof that all — or any — of these events are tied together by actual facts as opposed to supposition is not offered.


The idea that Obama’s administration authorized — and was able to get approval for — the wiretapping of the opposition party’s candidate for president is, frankly, far-fetched. And, if someone is making that claim — as Trump is now doing — the burden of proof is on them. If you are going to say there is a grand conspiracy that only you and a handful of others see, you need to offer a step-by-step explanation to the broader public to show why you’re right.


It seems unlikely — given Trump’s past pattern of making baseless claims without proof and then simply insisting he is right and no evidence is needed to prove the point — that any meaningful effort will be made by the Trump administration to connect the dots on this alleged wiretapping conspiracy.​

From the LA Times: Citing no evidence, Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phones during the election

It would be highly unusual for a sitting president to be aware of such [surveillance] requests. By blaming Obama directly, Trump accused the former president of reaching into a federal investigation and signing off on an illegal wiretap, which is a felony.


If federal investigators did monitor Trump’s phones or computers lawfully, a court would have demanded information about potential criminal misconduct or unlawful foreign contacts. Such investigations are closely held and rarely, if ever, shared with the White House.


It is possible Trump has no evidence his phones were tapped and is repeating unfounded reports circulating in conservative media circles. ​

There is a lot of smoke, mirrors and redirection going on here, an attempt I'm sure, to distract from the demands for an investigation into Russian ties with the Trump campaign.

Rather than blowing this up into a full blown conspiracy theory, how about looking at actual evidence?

First question to answer is: is there any hard evidence that Trump Tower was indeed wire tapped? If we can't answer that, the rest is meaningless distraction.

From the Washington Post: Analysis | Trump’s ‘evidence’ for Obama wiretap claims relies on sketchy, anonymously sourced reports

Trump’s ‘evidence’ for Obama wiretap claims relies on sketchy, anonymously sourced reports

Brietbart article on FISA Requests: June & October. Breitbart based it's article entirely on one source: and article written by Louise Mensch, a former Tory member of the British Parliament and an independent journalist for Heat Street. But no one seems to be able to independently confirm the claim.

The Washington Post for months has sought to confirm this report of a FISA warrant related to the Trump campaign but has been unable to do so. Presumably other U.S. news organizations have tried to do so as well. So one has to take this claim with a huge dose of skepticism. Indeed, the New York Times reported before the election that the FBI “ultimately concluded that there could be an innocuous explanation, like a marketing email or spam, for the computer contacts” with the Russian banks.​

According to the WP article:

The White House provided three other sources. Two, a National Review article and a Fox News interview, are simply derivative of the Heat Street article, with no independent confirmation. The third is a New York Times report that intelligence agencies “are examining intercepted communications and financial transactions” as part of a probe of possible links between Russian officials and Trump campaign aides. (We recall the president has previously deemed Times reporting on this matter as “fake news.”)​

The article goes on to conclude:

Only two articles, both with British roots, have reported that a FISA court order was granted in October to examine possible activity between two Russian banks and a computer server in the Trump Tower. This claim has not been confirmed by a U.S. news organizations. Moreover, neither article says President Obama requested the order or that it resulted in the tapping of Trump’s phone lines.​

And lastly:

Moreover, the articles do not support the White House’s claim that these were “potentially politically motivated investigations” led by President Obama. The articles all suggest the FISA requests — if they happened — were done by the intelligence agencies and the FBI.​

So, before we have this huge political uproar, and immediate comparisons to Watergate, lets' get at the facts first. Can anyone answer these questions?

1. Was Trump wiretapped? If yes - what evidence? Were bugs found in Trump Tower?

2. Were FISA requests issued? If yes - can the claims be confirmed by more then one source and for what specifically were they for?

Until those are answered - there's nothing but smoke.

OK. Let me get this straight. The evidence of Trump collusion with the Russians was so damning that the Democrats demanded that the Electors be briefed so they would switch their vote to Hillary this included transcripts of phone calls. Now how did they get those transcripts if they had not tapped the phones?

Now of course anything and everything said two months ago is irrelevant and the Democrats act like it never happened.

 

[Lakhota]

For people who care - this is definitely worth reading:

The people’s tyrant: what Plato can teach us about Donald Trump

I don't think your type has ever read Plato, let alone heard of him, intellectually he's way out of your league.

Well, Lucy, that's beside the point. Do you agree with the article?

 

[jc456]

No spin. No smoke and mirrors. No conjecture. Was he wire tapped? If that can't be answered everything else is Conspiracy Theory material of attempting to create links between unrelated incidents.

At this point, it see - the whole wire-tap claim is unsubstantiated and taking on the guise of a conspiracy theory.

From: Analysis | Donald Trump was a conspiracy-theory candidate. Now he’s on the edge of being a conspiracy-theory president.

The problem here, of course, is that what Levin — and Breitbart — use as evidence for these claims are a series of seemingly unconnected events — from FISA court requests to Trump joking about the Russia email hack, to the release of Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails in the fall. The proof that all — or any — of these events are tied together by actual facts as opposed to supposition is not offered.


The idea that Obama’s administration authorized — and was able to get approval for — the wiretapping of the opposition party’s candidate for president is, frankly, far-fetched. And, if someone is making that claim — as Trump is now doing — the burden of proof is on them. If you are going to say there is a grand conspiracy that only you and a handful of others see, you need to offer a step-by-step explanation to the broader public to show why you’re right.


It seems unlikely — given Trump’s past pattern of making baseless claims without proof and then simply insisting he is right and no evidence is needed to prove the point — that any meaningful effort will be made by the Trump administration to connect the dots on this alleged wiretapping conspiracy.​

From the LA Times: Citing no evidence, Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phones during the election

It would be highly unusual for a sitting president to be aware of such [surveillance] requests. By blaming Obama directly, Trump accused the former president of reaching into a federal investigation and signing off on an illegal wiretap, which is a felony.


If federal investigators did monitor Trump’s phones or computers lawfully, a court would have demanded information about potential criminal misconduct or unlawful foreign contacts. Such investigations are closely held and rarely, if ever, shared with the White House.


It is possible Trump has no evidence his phones were tapped and is repeating unfounded reports circulating in conservative media circles. ​

There is a lot of smoke, mirrors and redirection going on here, an attempt I'm sure, to distract from the demands for an investigation into Russian ties with the Trump campaign.

Rather than blowing this up into a full blown conspiracy theory, how about looking at actual evidence?

First question to answer is: is there any hard evidence that Trump Tower was indeed wire tapped? If we can't answer that, the rest is meaningless distraction.

From the Washington Post: Analysis | Trump’s ‘evidence’ for Obama wiretap claims relies on sketchy, anonymously sourced reports

Trump’s ‘evidence’ for Obama wiretap claims relies on sketchy, anonymously sourced reports

Brietbart article on FISA Requests: June & October. Breitbart based it's article entirely on one source: and article written by Louise Mensch, a former Tory member of the British Parliament and an independent journalist for Heat Street. But no one seems to be able to independently confirm the claim.

The Washington Post for months has sought to confirm this report of a FISA warrant related to the Trump campaign but has been unable to do so. Presumably other U.S. news organizations have tried to do so as well. So one has to take this claim with a huge dose of skepticism. Indeed, the New York Times reported before the election that the FBI “ultimately concluded that there could be an innocuous explanation, like a marketing email or spam, for the computer contacts” with the Russian banks.​

According to the WP article:

The White House provided three other sources. Two, a National Review article and a Fox News interview, are simply derivative of the Heat Street article, with no independent confirmation. The third is a New York Times report that intelligence agencies “are examining intercepted communications and financial transactions” as part of a probe of possible links between Russian officials and Trump campaign aides. (We recall the president has previously deemed Times reporting on this matter as “fake news.”)​

The article goes on to conclude:

Only two articles, both with British roots, have reported that a FISA court order was granted in October to examine possible activity between two Russian banks and a computer server in the Trump Tower. This claim has not been confirmed by a U.S. news organizations. Moreover, neither article says President Obama requested the order or that it resulted in the tapping of Trump’s phone lines.​

And lastly:

Moreover, the articles do not support the White House’s claim that these were “potentially politically motivated investigations” led by President Obama. The articles all suggest the FISA requests — if they happened — were done by the intelligence agencies and the FBI.​

So, before we have this huge political uproar, and immediate comparisons to Watergate, lets' get at the facts first. Can anyone answer these questions?

1. Was Trump wiretapped? If yes - what evidence? Were bugs found in Trump Tower?

2. Were FISA requests issued? If yes - can the claims be confirmed by more then one source and for what specifically were they for?

Until those are answered - there's nothing but smoke.

Well, it's as much evidence that the Russians did anything LOL. See how accusations can trigger a need for an investigation?

 

[Lakhota]

We already know that Trump conducted an "unethical" campaign by openly encouraging Russia to hack Hillary - now we must have honest and thorough investigations to determine if any "criminality" also lies underneath.

 

[tycho1572]

I can't help thinking coyote is clinging onto a sinking ship.

 

[jc456]

No spin. No smoke and mirrors. No conjecture. Was he wire tapped? If that can't be answered everything else is Conspiracy Theory material of attempting to create links between unrelated incidents.

At this point, it see - the whole wire-tap claim is unsubstantiated and taking on the guise of a conspiracy theory.

From: Analysis | Donald Trump was a conspiracy-theory candidate. Now he’s on the edge of being a conspiracy-theory president.

The problem here, of course, is that what Levin — and Breitbart — use as evidence for these claims are a series of seemingly unconnected events — from FISA court requests to Trump joking about the Russia email hack, to the release of Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails in the fall. The proof that all — or any — of these events are tied together by actual facts as opposed to supposition is not offered.


The idea that Obama’s administration authorized — and was able to get approval for — the wiretapping of the opposition party’s candidate for president is, frankly, far-fetched. And, if someone is making that claim — as Trump is now doing — the burden of proof is on them. If you are going to say there is a grand conspiracy that only you and a handful of others see, you need to offer a step-by-step explanation to the broader public to show why you’re right.


It seems unlikely — given Trump’s past pattern of making baseless claims without proof and then simply insisting he is right and no evidence is needed to prove the point — that any meaningful effort will be made by the Trump administration to connect the dots on this alleged wiretapping conspiracy.​

From the LA Times: Citing no evidence, Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phones during the election

It would be highly unusual for a sitting president to be aware of such [surveillance] requests. By blaming Obama directly, Trump accused the former president of reaching into a federal investigation and signing off on an illegal wiretap, which is a felony.


If federal investigators did monitor Trump’s phones or computers lawfully, a court would have demanded information about potential criminal misconduct or unlawful foreign contacts. Such investigations are closely held and rarely, if ever, shared with the White House.


It is possible Trump has no evidence his phones were tapped and is repeating unfounded reports circulating in conservative media circles. ​

There is a lot of smoke, mirrors and redirection going on here, an attempt I'm sure, to distract from the demands for an investigation into Russian ties with the Trump campaign.

Rather than blowing this up into a full blown conspiracy theory, how about looking at actual evidence?

First question to answer is: is there any hard evidence that Trump Tower was indeed wire tapped? If we can't answer that, the rest is meaningless distraction.

From the Washington Post: Analysis | Trump’s ‘evidence’ for Obama wiretap claims relies on sketchy, anonymously sourced reports

Trump’s ‘evidence’ for Obama wiretap claims relies on sketchy, anonymously sourced reports

Brietbart article on FISA Requests: June & October. Breitbart based it's article entirely on one source: and article written by Louise Mensch, a former Tory member of the British Parliament and an independent journalist for Heat Street. But no one seems to be able to independently confirm the claim.

The Washington Post for months has sought to confirm this report of a FISA warrant related to the Trump campaign but has been unable to do so. Presumably other U.S. news organizations have tried to do so as well. So one has to take this claim with a huge dose of skepticism. Indeed, the New York Times reported before the election that the FBI “ultimately concluded that there could be an innocuous explanation, like a marketing email or spam, for the computer contacts” with the Russian banks.​

According to the WP article:

The White House provided three other sources. Two, a National Review article and a Fox News interview, are simply derivative of the Heat Street article, with no independent confirmation. The third is a New York Times report that intelligence agencies “are examining intercepted communications and financial transactions” as part of a probe of possible links between Russian officials and Trump campaign aides. (We recall the president has previously deemed Times reporting on this matter as “fake news.”)​

The article goes on to conclude:

Only two articles, both with British roots, have reported that a FISA court order was granted in October to examine possible activity between two Russian banks and a computer server in the Trump Tower. This claim has not been confirmed by a U.S. news organizations. Moreover, neither article says President Obama requested the order or that it resulted in the tapping of Trump’s phone lines.​

And lastly:

Moreover, the articles do not support the White House’s claim that these were “potentially politically motivated investigations” led by President Obama. The articles all suggest the FISA requests — if they happened — were done by the intelligence agencies and the FBI.​

So, before we have this huge political uproar, and immediate comparisons to Watergate, lets' get at the facts first. Can anyone answer these questions?

1. Was Trump wiretapped? If yes - what evidence? Were bugs found in Trump Tower?

2. Were FISA requests issued? If yes - can the claims be confirmed by more then one source and for what specifically were they for?

Until those are answered - there's nothing but smoke.

OK. Let me get this straight. The evidence of Trump collusion with the Russians was so damning that the Democrats demanded that the Electors be briefed so they would switch their vote to Hillary this included transcripts of phone calls. Now how did they get those transcripts if they had not tapped the phones?

Now of course anything and everything said two months ago is irrelevant and the Democrats act like it never happened.

See them skating now? LOL

 

[yiostheoy]

No spin. No smoke and mirrors. No conjecture. Was he wire tapped? If that can't be answered everything else is Conspiracy Theory material of attempting to create links between unrelated incidents.

At this point, it see - the whole wire-tap claim is unsubstantiated and taking on the guise of a conspiracy theory.

From: Analysis | Donald Trump was a conspiracy-theory candidate. Now he’s on the edge of being a conspiracy-theory president.

The problem here, of course, is that what Levin — and Breitbart — use as evidence for these claims are a series of seemingly unconnected events — from FISA court requests to Trump joking about the Russia email hack, to the release of Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails in the fall. The proof that all — or any — of these events are tied together by actual facts as opposed to supposition is not offered.


The idea that Obama’s administration authorized — and was able to get approval for — the wiretapping of the opposition party’s candidate for president is, frankly, far-fetched. And, if someone is making that claim — as Trump is now doing — the burden of proof is on them. If you are going to say there is a grand conspiracy that only you and a handful of others see, you need to offer a step-by-step explanation to the broader public to show why you’re right.


It seems unlikely — given Trump’s past pattern of making baseless claims without proof and then simply insisting he is right and no evidence is needed to prove the point — that any meaningful effort will be made by the Trump administration to connect the dots on this alleged wiretapping conspiracy.​

From the LA Times: Citing no evidence, Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phones during the election

It would be highly unusual for a sitting president to be aware of such [surveillance] requests. By blaming Obama directly, Trump accused the former president of reaching into a federal investigation and signing off on an illegal wiretap, which is a felony.


If federal investigators did monitor Trump’s phones or computers lawfully, a court would have demanded information about potential criminal misconduct or unlawful foreign contacts. Such investigations are closely held and rarely, if ever, shared with the White House.


It is possible Trump has no evidence his phones were tapped and is repeating unfounded reports circulating in conservative media circles. ​

There is a lot of smoke, mirrors and redirection going on here, an attempt I'm sure, to distract from the demands for an investigation into Russian ties with the Trump campaign.

Rather than blowing this up into a full blown conspiracy theory, how about looking at actual evidence?

First question to answer is: is there any hard evidence that Trump Tower was indeed wire tapped? If we can't answer that, the rest is meaningless distraction.

From the Washington Post: Analysis | Trump’s ‘evidence’ for Obama wiretap claims relies on sketchy, anonymously sourced reports

Trump’s ‘evidence’ for Obama wiretap claims relies on sketchy, anonymously sourced reports

Brietbart article on FISA Requests: June & October. Breitbart based it's article entirely on one source: and article written by Louise Mensch, a former Tory member of the British Parliament and an independent journalist for Heat Street. But no one seems to be able to independently confirm the claim.

The Washington Post for months has sought to confirm this report of a FISA warrant related to the Trump campaign but has been unable to do so. Presumably other U.S. news organizations have tried to do so as well. So one has to take this claim with a huge dose of skepticism. Indeed, the New York Times reported before the election that the FBI “ultimately concluded that there could be an innocuous explanation, like a marketing email or spam, for the computer contacts” with the Russian banks.​

According to the WP article:

The White House provided three other sources. Two, a National Review article and a Fox News interview, are simply derivative of the Heat Street article, with no independent confirmation. The third is a New York Times report that intelligence agencies “are examining intercepted communications and financial transactions” as part of a probe of possible links between Russian officials and Trump campaign aides. (We recall the president has previously deemed Times reporting on this matter as “fake news.”)​

The article goes on to conclude:

Only two articles, both with British roots, have reported that a FISA court order was granted in October to examine possible activity between two Russian banks and a computer server in the Trump Tower. This claim has not been confirmed by a U.S. news organizations. Moreover, neither article says President Obama requested the order or that it resulted in the tapping of Trump’s phone lines.​

And lastly:

Moreover, the articles do not support the White House’s claim that these were “potentially politically motivated investigations” led by President Obama. The articles all suggest the FISA requests — if they happened — were done by the intelligence agencies and the FBI.​

So, before we have this huge political uproar, and immediate comparisons to Watergate, lets' get at the facts first. Can anyone answer these questions?

1. Was Trump wiretapped? If yes - what evidence? Were bugs found in Trump Tower?

2. Were FISA requests issued? If yes - can the claims be confirmed by more then one source and for what specifically were they for?

Until those are answered - there's nothing but smoke.

Trump’s wiretap claims, then, carry presumably inadvertent implications. First, based on previous reporting and the nature of FISA courts, any wiretaps within Trump Tower would be legal. And they would stem from overwhelming evidence that the Trump campaign, or someone within it, has unsavory ties to Russia or another foreign power. Otherwise, it’s unlikely those wiretaps would exist at all.

If federal authorities did have cause to listen in on Trump Tower, though, and they provided enough evidence for a FISA court to approve the snooping, Obama is not the one who ought to worry.


FISA warrants don’t allow for broad wiretaps of, say, every call going in and out of a specific office in a 58-story Manhattan skyscraper. Federal authorities must demonstrate not just probable cause, but that a given phone line serves primarily to undermine US interests. It’s difficult, for instance, to obtain a warrant to wiretap a shared office, for fear of picking up innocent third-party conversations.

Jeeze !!!

There was NO FISA.

Did you not hear what James Clapper said ???

What is confusing to me is... a wiretap like this would be highly classified, wouldn't the president be privy to classified information? Wouldn't this leave two possible options.
1. Trump disclosed classified information in a tweet
Or
2. Trump made it up to distract from the sessions fiasco

If anybody has another theory please add it but these seem to be the only two options.

Seems to me IF there is evidence, Trump could declassify it and provide it....

If there is evidence and it's classified then would Trumps tweet be a crime?

The President is the only one that can declassify wiretaps at any time, so no crime.

Jeeze !!!

THERE WERE NO WIRETAPS !!!

EXCLUSIVE: FBI ‘Granted FISA Warrant’ Covering Trump Camp’s Ties To Russia

The Trump 'Kompromat' Story Is Disturbing — Every Bit of It

FISA and the Trump Team

More junk news.

Keep this up and I am putting you on the ignore list.

 

[yiostheoy]

James Clapper made it clear that Russia interfered, yes.

And he made it clear they will do it again.

And Rubio agrees.

But other than Trumps dumbazz comment in front of the whole Nation and also so Jesus himself and the Virgin Mary could hear it that Putin should hack Hillary -- other than this -- there was nothing done in the Trump camp in collusion with the Russians.
Trump urges Russia to hack Clinton's email

"James Clapper made it clear that Russia interfered, yes."

If AND that's IF Russia did interfere, then they must have wanted Hillary to win, she afterall as the Leftists keep telling people did win the Popular Vote, they have already said that Russia was involved with the DNC Server, but strangely they didn't have any interest in the RNC Server.

So Russia must have been supporting Hillary, in typical Leftist projection perhaps that's why without any publicly presented evidence they keep saying that it's the Trump Campaign who are the Russian Agents.

Hillary and Bill already have been in China's pocket for twenty years.

I doubt it. For one, all the damaging material through their proxy Wikileaks was aimed at Clinton. Also, they know Clinton, and she was a hardliner when it involved the sanctions. I think they figured they had a better chance with a Trump administration. In fact, it's kind of funny because folks on the one hand were saying Clinton's hardline attitude was going to lead to a war with Russia and on the other hand claiming Putin supported Hillary - none of that really makes sense in light of her stance and Trump's stances towards Russia.

I still think the leaks came from inside the DNC. What they did to Bernie pissed off a lot of other people.

Ya, but where's the evidence? There isn't any.

TowerGate Begins – Yes, If Trump is Correct, Even Partially, Then President Obama Might Be in Big Trouble…

Spam bot.

Ignore list.

 

[yiostheoy]

If Trump was wiretapped via a warrant then the court determined that there was sufficient suspicion of wrongdoing to issue such a warrant.

You must have slept-in too while the rest of the Nation was glued to Meet The Press.

James Clapper said there was no FIFA.

Former DNI Clapper: 'I can deny' wiretap of Trump Tower

 

[yiostheoy]

"James Clapper made it clear that Russia interfered, yes."

If AND that's IF Russia did interfere, then they must have wanted Hillary to win, she afterall as the Leftists keep telling people did win the Popular Vote, they have already said that Russia was involved with the DNC Server, but strangely they didn't have any interest in the RNC Server.

So Russia must have been supporting Hillary, in typical Leftist projection perhaps that's why without any publicly presented evidence they keep saying that it's the Trump Campaign who are the Russian Agents.

Hillary and Bill already have been in China's pocket for twenty years.

I doubt it. For one, all the damaging material through their proxy Wikileaks was aimed at Clinton. Also, they know Clinton, and she was a hardliner when it involved the sanctions. I think they figured they had a better chance with a Trump administration. In fact, it's kind of funny because folks on the one hand were saying Clinton's hardline attitude was going to lead to a war with Russia and on the other hand claiming Putin supported Hillary - none of that really makes sense in light of her stance and Trump's stances towards Russia.

I still think the leaks came from inside the DNC. What they did to Bernie pissed off a lot of other people.

Ya, but where's the evidence? There isn't any.

"Ya, but where's the evidence? There isn't any."

Where is the evidence that Trump is an Agent of Putin? There isn't any.

How many Democrats since say 2015 have met with the Russian Ambassador to America, how many Democrats have met with Putin? So how do we know Schumer and Pelosi etc aren't Agents of Putin?

I think I already said - that at this point, the only "evidence" that Trump "colluded" with Putin is very circumstantial in exactly the why you're infering - all those contacts could be perfectly normal contacts. It's worth an investigation though, for two reasons (imo) - one, it's against the back drop of attempted Russian interference in our election, and two - to definitively clear it up and move on.

James Clapper said there was NO evidence.

Former DNI Clapper: 'I can deny' wiretap of Trump Tower

 

[jc456]

by the way, the democrat on face the nation again confirmed they have zero evidence on Russia and trump. Can't call for an investigation until there is evidence of something. And if they feel they do have any, it would have to be because of a wire tap. Period

 

[Toro]

For people who care - this is definitely worth reading:

The people’s tyrant: what Plato can teach us about Donald Trump

I don't think your type has ever read Plato, let alone heard of him, intellectually he's way out of your league.

Well, Lucy, that's beside the point. Do you agree with the article?

She was good on Diff'rent Strokes.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

IF true.

But I'll add - it should also be a major concern to ALL Americans if the Russians attempted to influence our elections in the way that is being alledged and at this point, there is more evidence supporting that then there is for wire tapping.

James Clapper made it clear that Russia interfered, yes.

And he made it clear they will do it again.

And Rubio agrees.

But other than Trumps dumbazz comment in front of the whole Nation and also so Jesus himself and the Virgin Mary could hear it that Putin should hack Hillary -- other than this -- there was nothing done in the Trump camp in collusion with the Russians.
Trump urges Russia to hack Clinton's email

"James Clapper made it clear that Russia interfered, yes."

If AND that's IF Russia did interfere, then they must have wanted Hillary to win, she afterall as the Leftists keep telling people did win the Popular Vote, they have already said that Russia was involved with the DNC Server, but strangely they didn't have any interest in the RNC Server.

So Russia must have been supporting Hillary, in typical Leftist projection perhaps that's why without any publicly presented evidence they keep saying that it's the Trump Campaign who are the Russian Agents.

Hillary and Bill already have been in China's pocket for twenty years.

I doubt it. For one, all the damaging material through their proxy Wikileaks was aimed at Clinton. Also, they know Clinton, and she was a hardliner when it involved the sanctions. I think they figured they had a better chance with a Trump administration. In fact, it's kind of funny because folks on the one hand were saying Clinton's hardline attitude was going to lead to a war with Russia and on the other hand claiming Putin supported Hillary - none of that really makes sense in light of her stance and Trump's stances towards Russia.

I still think the leaks came from inside the DNC. What they did to Bernie pissed off a lot of other people.

Ya, but where's the evidence? There isn't any.

This below needs fully investigating also, this has already been looked into by Congressional investigators, see text below, there needs to be a full investigation now because the below is basically illegal.

Obama and his Democrat cheerleaders have now opened a can of worms by going after The Trump Administration, they better be prepared to get Subpoena's within the next few months, not just for the below but also for some other situations.

The below is an illegal Slush Fund, I think this is possibly just ONE reason why the Obama Crowd want to take The Trump Administration down, they are terrified the bodies will be found and the below is without the obvious soon to be announced investigation into the dirty money that was going into The Clinton Foundation.

GOP wants to eliminate shadowy DOJ slush fund bankrolling leftist groups

By Melissa Jacobs

Published March 01, 2017
FoxNews.com

"The Obama administration funneled billions of dollars to activist organizations through a Department of Justice slush fund scheme, according to congressional investigators.

“It’s clear partisan politics played a role in the illicit actions that were made,” Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas, told Fox News. “The DOJ is the last place this should have occurred.”

Findings spearheaded by the House Judiciary Committee point to a process shrouded in secrecy whereby monies were distributed to a labyrinth of nonprofit organizations involved with grass-roots activism.

“Advocates for big government and progressive power are using the Justice Department to extort money from corporations,” Judicial Watch’s Tom Fitton told Fox News. “It’s a shakedown. It’s corrupt, pure and simple.”

There is a recent effort by Republicans to eliminate the practice, which many believe was widely abused during the Obama administration.

When big banks are sued by the government for discrimination or mortgage abuse, they can settle the cases by donating to third-party non-victims. The settlements do not specify how these third-party groups could use the windfall.

So far, investigators have accounted for $3 billion paid to “non-victim entities.”

GOP wants to eliminate shadowy DOJ slush fund bankrolling leftist groups

Report: Obama Admin Funneled Billions Into Left-Wing Activist Groups

Report: Obama Admin Funneled Billions Into Left-Wing Activist Groups

Obama "Slush Fund" Scheme Is "Worse Than A Mafia Shakedown"

Huckabee: Obama "Slush Fund" Scheme Is "Worse Than A Mafia Shakedown"

Edited to add this.

Lakhota who is one of this forums Great Morons with the IQ of a paper cup thinks the above is funny....yet presents on a daily basis all types of full-on Moonbat OPs that are increasingly hysterical.

 

[Lakhota]

James Clapper made it clear that Russia interfered, yes.

And he made it clear they will do it again.

And Rubio agrees.

But other than Trumps dumbazz comment in front of the whole Nation and also so Jesus himself and the Virgin Mary could hear it that Putin should hack Hillary -- other than this -- there was nothing done in the Trump camp in collusion with the Russians.
Trump urges Russia to hack Clinton's email

"James Clapper made it clear that Russia interfered, yes."

If AND that's IF Russia did interfere, then they must have wanted Hillary to win, she afterall as the Leftists keep telling people did win the Popular Vote, they have already said that Russia was involved with the DNC Server, but strangely they didn't have any interest in the RNC Server.

So Russia must have been supporting Hillary, in typical Leftist projection perhaps that's why without any publicly presented evidence they keep saying that it's the Trump Campaign who are the Russian Agents.

Hillary and Bill already have been in China's pocket for twenty years.

I doubt it. For one, all the damaging material through their proxy Wikileaks was aimed at Clinton. Also, they know Clinton, and she was a hardliner when it involved the sanctions. I think they figured they had a better chance with a Trump administration. In fact, it's kind of funny because folks on the one hand were saying Clinton's hardline attitude was going to lead to a war with Russia and on the other hand claiming Putin supported Hillary - none of that really makes sense in light of her stance and Trump's stances towards Russia.

I still think the leaks came from inside the DNC. What they did to Bernie pissed off a lot of other people.

Ya, but where's the evidence? There isn't any.

This below needs fully investigating also, this has already been looked into by Congressional investigators, see text below, there needs to be a full investigation now because the below is basically illegal.

Obama and his Democrat cheerleaders have now opened a can of worms by going after The Trump Administration, they better be prepared to get Subpoena's within the next few months, not just for the below but also for some other situations.

GOP wants to eliminate shadowy DOJ slush fund bankrolling leftist groups

By Melissa Jacobs

Published March 01, 2017
FoxNews.com

"The Obama administration funneled billions of dollars to activist organizations through a Department of Justice slush fund scheme, according to congressional investigators.

“It’s clear partisan politics played a role in the illicit actions that were made,” Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas, told Fox News. “The DOJ is the last place this should have occurred.”

Findings spearheaded by the House Judiciary Committee point to a process shrouded in secrecy whereby monies were distributed to a labyrinth of nonprofit organizations involved with grass-roots activism.

“Advocates for big government and progressive power are using the Justice Department to extort money from corporations,” Judicial Watch’s Tom Fitton told Fox News. “It’s a shakedown. It’s corrupt, pure and simple.”

There is a recent effort by Republicans to eliminate the practice, which many believe was widely abused during the Obama administration.

When big banks are sued by the government for discrimination or mortgage abuse, they can settle the cases by donating to third-party non-victims. The settlements do not specify how these third-party groups could use the windfall.

So far, investigators have accounted for $3 billion paid to “non-victim entities.”

GOP wants to eliminate shadowy DOJ slush fund bankrolling leftist groups

Yeah, the GOP always wants to eliminate money flowing to leftist groups - but what about them...?

 

[Toro]

I think I already said - that at this point, the only "evidence" that Trump "colluded" with Putin is very circumstantial in exactly the why you're infering - all those contacts could be perfectly normal contacts. It's worth an investigation though, for two reasons (imo) - one, it's against the back drop of attempted Russian interference in our election, and two - to definitively clear it up and move on.

The investigation should be on Russia's interference in our election.

Obviously, if Russia colluded with the Trump campaign, that would be a part of it.

But thus far, there doesn't seem to be any evidence of it.

 

[Lakhota]

I think I already said - that at this point, the only "evidence" that Trump "colluded" with Putin is very circumstantial in exactly the why you're infering - all those contacts could be perfectly normal contacts. It's worth an investigation though, for two reasons (imo) - one, it's against the back drop of attempted Russian interference in our election, and two - to definitively clear it up and move on.

The investigation should be on Russia's interference in our election.

Obviously, if Russia colluded with the Trump campaign, that would be a part of it.

But thus far, there doesn't seem to be any evidence of it.

We don't yet know the "evidence" - and maybe never will. If the media had subpoena power - we would likely know much more than we currently know.

 

[Lakhota]

Stephen King likens Trump's baseless wiretapping claims to the movie, "The Stupids".



The Horror! Stephen King Tweets Mock Tale Of Trump ‘Wiretap’