Was Trump Wiretapped? Just the facts.

[Preacher]

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.

A liberal think its all bs....now THERE is a shocker!

So, I assume you can provide some actual evidence?

Bout as much as you can refute it.

 

[jc456]

Sounds much like that Russian rigging election thingy

Depends on what "Russian rigging" thingy you mean...

Did the Russians hack the voting machines? Hell no.
Did Trump actively collude with Russians to throw the election? No evidence thus far, unlikely
Did the Russians attempt to interfere in our election to favor Trump? Plenty of evidence thus far, likely (let's see what the investigation shows).

There is about the same amount of evidence the Russians attempted to interfere as there is Obama ordered the wiretap.

It's all political theatre and narratives and it's past old

All the US Intelligence agencies are in agreement that the Russians attempted to interfere. They've provided as much evidence as can be provided without declassifying. Not only US Intelligence, but that of other countries in Europe who have been targeted by the Russians.

Compare that to nothing whatsoever supporting Trumps claim.

I'm not going to buy that there is some sort of massive conspiracy at work cooping the Intelligence community, the past adminstration, judiciary and the media attempting to topple Trump. That's a the product of a delusional and paranoid mind.

Talking about the "evidence" and providing the same is not the same thing.

Everyone is targeted by Russians, and mainly by us. It's what they do. It's what we do. Complaining about it, as it if happened first time is ridiculous.

Again, getting DNC "hacked" or rather leaked, and getting Podesta's emails doesn't mean that election was hacked. It just means that Dems are buthurt for losing and they need someone to blame.

Not everyone has the Russians attempting to interfere in their elections - refusing to take it seriously is ludicrous. It's a serious issue and you're just lobbing it off as "butthurt".

That's unbelievable.

dudette, that is the best double talkin I've ever witnessed. nothing ever was there, but you have to take that nothing serious. dare to explain your double talk?

 

[Slade3200]

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.

3. To put the Democrats on defense. They have made non-stop accusations without evidence from the moment they declared 'Russians Hacked the Election' to accusing Flynn / Sessions / Trump of having contacts inappropriately with the Russians. (McCaskill and Pelosi were even proven to have lied in their attacks on Trump).

what he, trump, is actually stating is if you got anything you got it from wiretapping period. so let's wash this out folks, present the evidence of the russia collaboration and you got the evidence of wire tapping. there is no other way to come up with evidence if there is any. right? where else would they get any evidence, even though none exists, but to play the dems game, you gotta think like them. so, again, evidence is immediately wire tapping. It's a catch 22 for obummer.

You are such a gullible puppet... Its funny watching people like you running around chasing all the shiny objects Trump is throwing your way. With your logic Trump can literally make any claim of illegal activity by Obama and you'd justify it... who cares about evidence right? Anything to distract from the shit stain Trump is leaving on the floor of the white house.

 

[jc456]

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.

3. To put the Democrats on defense. They have made non-stop accusations without evidence from the moment they declared 'Russians Hacked the Election' to accusing Flynn / Sessions / Trump of having contacts inappropriately with the Russians. (McCaskill and Pelosi were even proven to have lied in their attacks on Trump).

what he, trump, is actually stating is if you got anything you got it from wiretapping period. so let's wash this out folks, present the evidence of the russia collaboration and you got the evidence of wire tapping. there is no other way to come up with evidence if there is any. right? where else would they get any evidence, even though none exists, but to play the dems game, you gotta think like them. so, again, evidence is immediately wire tapping. It's a catch 22 for obummer.

You are such a gullible puppet... Its funny watching people like you running around chasing all the shiny objects Trump is throwing your way. With your logic Trump can literally make any claim of illegal activity by Obama and you'd justify it... who cares about evidence right? Anything to distract from the shit stain Trump is leaving on the floor of the white house.

well fk, you don't worry about evidence. How long we been talking about russia? Now post up your evidence. squirm a little while you try to figure out how to reply.

 

[Siete]

Depends on what "Russian rigging" thingy you mean...

Did the Russians hack the voting machines? Hell no.
Did Trump actively collude with Russians to throw the election? No evidence thus far, unlikely
Did the Russians attempt to interfere in our election to favor Trump? Plenty of evidence thus far, likely (let's see what the investigation shows).

There is about the same amount of evidence the Russians attempted to interfere as there is Obama ordered the wiretap.

It's all political theatre and narratives and it's past old

All the US Intelligence agencies are in agreement that the Russians attempted to interfere. They've provided as much evidence as can be provided without declassifying. Not only US Intelligence, but that of other countries in Europe who have been targeted by the Russians.

Compare that to nothing whatsoever supporting Trumps claim.

I'm not going to buy that there is some sort of massive conspiracy at work cooping the Intelligence community, the past adminstration, judiciary and the media attempting to topple Trump. That's a the product of a delusional and paranoid mind.

Talking about the "evidence" and providing the same is not the same thing.

Everyone is targeted by Russians, and mainly by us. It's what they do. It's what we do. Complaining about it, as it if happened first time is ridiculous.

Again, getting DNC "hacked" or rather leaked, and getting Podesta's emails doesn't mean that election was hacked. It just means that Dems are buthurt for losing and they need someone to blame.

Not everyone has the Russians attempting to interfere in their elections - refusing to take it seriously is ludicrous. It's a serious issue and you're just lobbing it off as "butthurt".

That's unbelievable.

dudette, that is the best double talkin I've ever witnessed. nothing ever was there, but you have to take that nothing serious. dare to explain your double talk?

wtf difference do facts make to Russian-Wingers like you and the rest of your KGB asshole buddies anyway? every damn one of you is stuck on dumbest bitch on the planet and wont ever get unstuck.

be proud.

 

[easyt65]

You are such a gullible puppet... Its funny watching people like you running around chasing all the shiny objects....

Says the puppet...

'Russia Hacked The Election' - ZERO Evidence

'Trump and Putin / Russia Colluded' - ZERO Evidence / FBI Declares 'No'

'Flynn Illegally Communicated with Russians' - ZERO Evidence, NO Crime Committed

'Sessions had 'illegal / concerning communications' with Russians - ZERO evidence, NO Crime

And Illegally leaked info

.......

These accusations and leaks were made

- By Democrats, 32 of whom had 'communications' with Russians, 2 who lied about their 'communications' with Russians, 1 who has a history of exchanging 'gifts' with Russians, and 1 who met with Putin

- By Democrats AFTER their own hacked and released e-mails exposed them as being racist, sexist, homophobic, and anti-Semitic

- By Democrats after every important event in the Trump administration, such as after the outstanding State of The Union - called one of the best in US history - that both Liberal and Conservative papers praised.


AGAIN, only a child could not recognize the pattern / what's going on...only a snowflake could deny it with a straight face.

 

[Slade3200]

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.

3. To put the Democrats on defense. They have made non-stop accusations without evidence from the moment they declared 'Russians Hacked the Election' to accusing Flynn / Sessions / Trump of having contacts inappropriately with the Russians. (McCaskill and Pelosi were even proven to have lied in their attacks on Trump).

what he, trump, is actually stating is if you got anything you got it from wiretapping period. so let's wash this out folks, present the evidence of the russia collaboration and you got the evidence of wire tapping. there is no other way to come up with evidence if there is any. right? where else would they get any evidence, even though none exists, but to play the dems game, you gotta think like them. so, again, evidence is immediately wire tapping. It's a catch 22 for obummer.

You are such a gullible puppet... Its funny watching people like you running around chasing all the shiny objects Trump is throwing your way. With your logic Trump can literally make any claim of illegal activity by Obama and you'd justify it... who cares about evidence right? Anything to distract from the shit stain Trump is leaving on the floor of the white house.

well fk, you don't worry about evidence. How long we been talking about russia? Now post up your evidence. squirm a little while you try to figure out how to reply.

I never claimed that there was collusion. I actually don't think there was, as there is no evidence of it. But multiple officials lied about and/or hid meetings with Russian officials which would warrant further investigation. It brings the question, why lie if you have nothing to hide?

 

[Slade3200]

You are such a gullible puppet... Its funny watching people like you running around chasing all the shiny objects....

Says the puppet...

'Russia Hacked The Election' - ZERO Evidence

'Trump and Putin / Russia Colluded' - ZERO Evidence / FBI Declares 'No'

'Flynn Illegally Communicated with Russians' - ZERO Evidence, NO Crime Committed

'Sessions had 'illegal / concerning communications' with Russians - ZERO evidence, NO Crime

And Illegally leaked info

.......

These accusations and leaks were made

- By Democrats, 32 of whom had 'communications' with Russians, 2 who lied about their 'communications' with Russians, 1 who has a history of exchanging 'gifts' with Russians, and 1 who met with Putin

- By Democrats AFTER their own hacked and released e-mails exposed them as being racist, sexist, homophobic, and anti-Semitic

- By Democrats after every important event in the Trump administration, such as after the outstanding State of The Union - called one of the best in US history - that both Liberal and Conservative papers praised.


AGAIN, only a child could not recognize the pattern / what's going on...only a snowflake could deny it with a straight face.

How many times do I have to tell you to stop putting words in my mouth. I never claimed anything about the collusion with Russia. The one time you did try and quote me on my actual words I ran you through the ringer with the Flynn fired comment. You're over your head junior... Stop the BS

 

[easyt65]

How many times do I have to tell you to stop putting words in my mouth. I never claimed anything about the collusion with Russia.

Not talking about YOU. I am talking about the rest of the nutter Liberal universe who has continued to claim there was ...

 

[kiwiman127]

You are such a gullible puppet... Its funny watching people like you running around chasing all the shiny objects....

Says the puppet...

'Russia Hacked The Election' - ZERO Evidence

'Trump and Putin / Russia Colluded' - ZERO Evidence / FBI Declares 'No'

'Flynn Illegally Communicated with Russians' - ZERO Evidence, NO Crime Committed

'Sessions had 'illegal / concerning communications' with Russians - ZERO evidence, NO Crime

And Illegally leaked info

.......

These accusations and leaks were made

- By Democrats, 32 of whom had 'communications' with Russians, 2 who lied about their 'communications' with Russians, 1 who has a history of exchanging 'gifts' with Russians, and 1 who met with Putin

- By Democrats AFTER their own hacked and released e-mails exposed them as being racist, sexist, homophobic, and anti-Semitic

- By Democrats after every important event in the Trump administration, such as after the outstanding State of The Union - called one of the best in US history - that both Liberal and Conservative papers praised.


AGAIN, only a child could not recognize the pattern / what's going on...only a snowflake could deny it with a straight face.

Who in God's name claimed Trump's no substance speech to Congress was one of the best.
What I read, it was his best speech ever, because he acted like an adult. But the total lack of substance/specifics, made the speech, empty.
Now folks like you think every time Trump farts, that fart topped even the Gettysburg Address.

 

[Slade3200]

How many times do I have to tell you to stop putting words in my mouth. I never claimed anything about the collusion with Russia.

Not talking about YOU. I am talking about the rest of the nutter Liberal universe who has continued to claim there was ...

WEAK... we can have a pointless conversation about what the wingnuts claim all day but whats the point of that. How about you stick to the conversation at hand. If you reply to me then comment on my statements. When you try and characterize my views as the same as the wingnuts then you are pretty much giving up on the debate.

 

[jc456]

There is about the same amount of evidence the Russians attempted to interfere as there is Obama ordered the wiretap.

It's all political theatre and narratives and it's past old

All the US Intelligence agencies are in agreement that the Russians attempted to interfere. They've provided as much evidence as can be provided without declassifying. Not only US Intelligence, but that of other countries in Europe who have been targeted by the Russians.

Compare that to nothing whatsoever supporting Trumps claim.

I'm not going to buy that there is some sort of massive conspiracy at work cooping the Intelligence community, the past adminstration, judiciary and the media attempting to topple Trump. That's a the product of a delusional and paranoid mind.

Talking about the "evidence" and providing the same is not the same thing.

Everyone is targeted by Russians, and mainly by us. It's what they do. It's what we do. Complaining about it, as it if happened first time is ridiculous.

Again, getting DNC "hacked" or rather leaked, and getting Podesta's emails doesn't mean that election was hacked. It just means that Dems are buthurt for losing and they need someone to blame.

Not everyone has the Russians attempting to interfere in their elections - refusing to take it seriously is ludicrous. It's a serious issue and you're just lobbing it off as "butthurt".

That's unbelievable.

dudette, that is the best double talkin I've ever witnessed. nothing ever was there, but you have to take that nothing serious. dare to explain your double talk?

wtf difference do facts make to Russian-Wingers like you and the rest of your KGB asshole buddies anyway? every damn one of you is stuck on dumbest bitch on the planet and wont ever get unstuck.

be proud.

so you have no evidence and yet you rant at me like someone did something. exactly what happened in your messed up version of the world?

 

[jc456]

How many times do I have to tell you to stop putting words in my mouth. I never claimed anything about the collusion with Russia.

Not talking about YOU. I am talking about the rest of the nutter Liberal universe who has continued to claim there was ...

WEAK... we can have a pointless conversation about what the wingnuts claim all day but whats the point of that. How about you stick to the conversation at hand. If you reply to me then comment on my statements. When you try and characterize my views as the same as the wingnuts then you are pretty much giving up on the debate.

dude, , the other dude explained his argument was with others and not you. WTF is wrong with you?

 

[jc456]

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.

3. To put the Democrats on defense. They have made non-stop accusations without evidence from the moment they declared 'Russians Hacked the Election' to accusing Flynn / Sessions / Trump of having contacts inappropriately with the Russians. (McCaskill and Pelosi were even proven to have lied in their attacks on Trump).

what he, trump, is actually stating is if you got anything you got it from wiretapping period. so let's wash this out folks, present the evidence of the russia collaboration and you got the evidence of wire tapping. there is no other way to come up with evidence if there is any. right? where else would they get any evidence, even though none exists, but to play the dems game, you gotta think like them. so, again, evidence is immediately wire tapping. It's a catch 22 for obummer.

You are such a gullible puppet... Its funny watching people like you running around chasing all the shiny objects Trump is throwing your way. With your logic Trump can literally make any claim of illegal activity by Obama and you'd justify it... who cares about evidence right? Anything to distract from the shit stain Trump is leaving on the floor of the white house.

well fk, you don't worry about evidence. How long we been talking about russia? Now post up your evidence. squirm a little while you try to figure out how to reply.

I never claimed that there was collusion. I actually don't think there was, as there is no evidence of it. But multiple officials lied about and/or hid meetings with Russian officials which would warrant further investigation. It brings the question, why lie if you have nothing to hide?

why? did they do something criminal? what is the reasoning behind that statement? if there is nothing there, what is it you think you need to find?

 

[Slade3200]

How many times do I have to tell you to stop putting words in my mouth. I never claimed anything about the collusion with Russia.

Not talking about YOU. I am talking about the rest of the nutter Liberal universe who has continued to claim there was ...

WEAK... we can have a pointless conversation about what the wingnuts claim all day but whats the point of that. How about you stick to the conversation at hand. If you reply to me then comment on my statements. When you try and characterize my views as the same as the wingnuts then you are pretty much giving up on the debate.

dude, , the other dude explained his argument was with others and not you. WTF is wrong with you?

The other dude has been engaging with me all day and putting words in my mouth. He wasn't making general claims he was responding to my posts and distorting my statements with those of wingnut extremists. I guess that's what he does when he can't win an argument. I have every right to call him out for it

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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.

Right in your OP it states, "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..." But he wasn't wiretapped?

Please resign as Moderator

The Russian officials are tapped, fool.

 

[Slade3200]

3. To put the Democrats on defense. They have made non-stop accusations without evidence from the moment they declared 'Russians Hacked the Election' to accusing Flynn / Sessions / Trump of having contacts inappropriately with the Russians. (McCaskill and Pelosi were even proven to have lied in their attacks on Trump).

what he, trump, is actually stating is if you got anything you got it from wiretapping period. so let's wash this out folks, present the evidence of the russia collaboration and you got the evidence of wire tapping. there is no other way to come up with evidence if there is any. right? where else would they get any evidence, even though none exists, but to play the dems game, you gotta think like them. so, again, evidence is immediately wire tapping. It's a catch 22 for obummer.

You are such a gullible puppet... Its funny watching people like you running around chasing all the shiny objects Trump is throwing your way. With your logic Trump can literally make any claim of illegal activity by Obama and you'd justify it... who cares about evidence right? Anything to distract from the shit stain Trump is leaving on the floor of the white house.

well fk, you don't worry about evidence. How long we been talking about russia? Now post up your evidence. squirm a little while you try to figure out how to reply.

I never claimed that there was collusion. I actually don't think there was, as there is no evidence of it. But multiple officials lied about and/or hid meetings with Russian officials which would warrant further investigation. It brings the question, why lie if you have nothing to hide?

why? did they do something criminal? what is the reasoning behind that statement? if there is nothing there, what is it you think you need to find?

What to find? How about The reason that they lied and the extent of the Russian interference. Are you really not getting it or are you just trying to be difficult? Try pretending that it was president Clinton instead of Trump and maybe you'll understand the reaction from the left.

 

[jc456]

How many times do I have to tell you to stop putting words in my mouth. I never claimed anything about the collusion with Russia.

Not talking about YOU. I am talking about the rest of the nutter Liberal universe who has continued to claim there was ...

WEAK... we can have a pointless conversation about what the wingnuts claim all day but whats the point of that. How about you stick to the conversation at hand. If you reply to me then comment on my statements. When you try and characterize my views as the same as the wingnuts then you are pretty much giving up on the debate.

dude, , the other dude explained his argument was with others and not you. WTF is wrong with you?

The other dude has been engaging with me all day and putting words in my mouth. He wasn't making general claims he was responding to my posts and distorting my statements with those of wingnut extremists. I guess that's what he does when he can't win an argument. I have every right to call him out for it

but he didn't say you in that particular post you went off on. WTF is wrong with you?

 

[jc456]

what he, trump, is actually stating is if you got anything you got it from wiretapping period. so let's wash this out folks, present the evidence of the russia collaboration and you got the evidence of wire tapping. there is no other way to come up with evidence if there is any. right? where else would they get any evidence, even though none exists, but to play the dems game, you gotta think like them. so, again, evidence is immediately wire tapping. It's a catch 22 for obummer.

You are such a gullible puppet... Its funny watching people like you running around chasing all the shiny objects Trump is throwing your way. With your logic Trump can literally make any claim of illegal activity by Obama and you'd justify it... who cares about evidence right? Anything to distract from the shit stain Trump is leaving on the floor of the white house.

well fk, you don't worry about evidence. How long we been talking about russia? Now post up your evidence. squirm a little while you try to figure out how to reply.

I never claimed that there was collusion. I actually don't think there was, as there is no evidence of it. But multiple officials lied about and/or hid meetings with Russian officials which would warrant further investigation. It brings the question, why lie if you have nothing to hide?

why? did they do something criminal? what is the reasoning behind that statement? if there is nothing there, what is it you think you need to find?

What to find? How about The reason that they lied and the extent of the Russian interference. Are you really not getting it or are you just trying to be difficult? Try pretending that it was president Clinton instead of Trump and maybe you'll understand the reaction from the left.

lied about what? , holy crap the make believe today on the board. I'll just say it right now, you are no american.

 

[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.

Right in your OP it states, "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..." But he wasn't wiretapped?

Please resign as Moderator

The Russian officials are tapped, fool.

but not americans. so if they have tape of americans, guess what, they tapped americans. it is fking illegal you stupid fk. look up the law. They are not allowed to listen to americans.

Better yet, how can they say someone didn't talk to the ruskies if they weren't listening to them? see the dilemma?