Did Obama Wiretap The Donald?
- Thread starter iatrogenic
- Start date
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
What was the aim of this?
Just to embarrass Trump? To sew doubt among allies? To make the new WH seem chaotic?
Or was Flynn targeted specifically? Was someone in one of these 17 "intelligence" agencies just out to get him? It does seem he made a few enemies. Or was this all about Trump and Flynn just the tool of the hour?
Last edited:
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
This may not technically refer to a "wiretap" but shows that, whatever was actually going on, Hillary was aware of it
We also know that Lynch met with Bill Clinton on the tarmac of Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport in June 2016 which was around the same time as Obama's first FISA request. Did Bill use this knowledge to try and blackmail the FBI/Comey and/or Lynch to back off the Clinton investigation? History shows they did back off.
We also know that Lynch met with Bill Clinton on the tarmac of Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport in June 2016 which was around the same time as Obama's first FISA request. Did Bill use this knowledge to try and blackmail the FBI/Comey and/or Lynch to back off the Clinton investigation? History shows they did back off.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
The evolution of this story has also been amusing. For months, the narrative has been "Trump's Russian ties!"
But now, although most of the media is doing its best to ignore these facts, both Clapper and Coons have publicly said that there is zero evidence of any Trump-Russia collusion. Effectively debunking months of MSM narrative.
And what is now leftover? Leakers who have broken the law
The Law of Unintended Consequences?
But now, although most of the media is doing its best to ignore these facts, both Clapper and Coons have publicly said that there is zero evidence of any Trump-Russia collusion. Effectively debunking months of MSM narrative.
And what is now leftover? Leakers who have broken the law
The Law of Unintended Consequences?
Didn't click on the video as I watched it this morning on TV. Napolitano stated that the law gives the president the power to surveil or order surveillance of anyone without the need of a FISA warrant. So, Clapper saying the other day he was not made aware of a FISA warrant really means nothing.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Missed that, sorry.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Only two in over 10,000 applications were turned down by the FISA Court.
According to ABC at least, every FISA application is signed off by the AG
If you recall Obama's denial in respone to Trump's tweet, he said no one in the WH approved such an application. Well, the AG is not in the WH.
So, we are in the troubling position of possibly having a woman who just called for blood and death in the streets because she is unhappy with the results of an election, who may have authorized a wiretap on an opposition candidate during the heat of that election.
This would also mean that, at about the same time she was choosing not to investigate the Clinton Foundation for illegal activities, she was signing an application to wiretap Trump.
According to ABC at least, every FISA application is signed off by the AG
If you recall Obama's denial in respone to Trump's tweet, he said no one in the WH approved such an application. Well, the AG is not in the WH.
So, we are in the troubling position of possibly having a woman who just called for blood and death in the streets because she is unhappy with the results of an election, who may have authorized a wiretap on an opposition candidate during the heat of that election.
This would also mean that, at about the same time she was choosing not to investigate the Clinton Foundation for illegal activities, she was signing an application to wiretap Trump.
"...... More than a thousand applications for electronic surveillance, all signed by the attorney general, are submitted each year, and the vast majority are approved. From 2009 to 2015, for example, more than 10,700 applications for electronic surveillance were submitted, and only one was denied in its entirety, according to annual reports sent to Congress. Another one was denied in part, and 17 were withdrawn by the government....."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fisa-wiretaps/story?id=45913892
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fisa-wiretaps/story?id=45913892
Last edited:
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
So Russia said they hacked nothing.
Assange said Russia didn't provide the emails.
Now we learn CIA can make a hack "look" like Russia.
Looks like the Democrats picked a real bad year to go all-in on lionizing the CIA as the last line of defense against government overreach.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Don't know of Obama gave the order. He didn't need too. The Intel community basically does what it feels like and is above the law.
https://www.usnews.com/news/nationa...rump-is-absolutely-right-about-wiretap-claims
https://www.usnews.com/news/nationa...rump-is-absolutely-right-about-wiretap-claims
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
So I posted this^ a few hours before the WikiDump.
And look who shows up in the leaks> none of than the same McMullin
This is the same anti-Trump guy who ran against Trump for President for the sole purpose of pulling just enough votes away to throw it to HRC. But he is also one of the CIA guys who showed up in those fotos of McCain in Syria, before that turned into a colossal mess. This guy is a walking bag of dirty tricks.
Last edited:
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
The is an article, with its own ssources, that tries to pull these various things together
The site that published it, IMO at least, is not well organized
http://circa.com/politics/fbi-probe...during-election-yielded-no-evidence-of-crimes
Here is a summary ..........
-- A months-long FBI counterintelligence investigation into the Russians and the election revealed no evidence to charge anyone criminally
-- Agents who investigated claims of computer server activity tied to Russia and candidate Trump’s businesses in Trump Towers came to the conclusion that no disreputable contacts, financial transactions or encrypted communications occurred with the Russians
-- Whoever in the IC who spoke to Circa appeared frustrated over media accounts of their investigation of Russia’s activities.
-- The report stresses that Americans routinely are incidentally intercepted when the FBI monitors foreign individuals like Russian embassy officials. Michael Flynn was one American who was intercepted during his conversations with the Russian ambassador to the US. A warrant was not necessary to review his conversations because it was a national security matter and Flynn had a security clearance. The calls and text messages from last Dec to the ambassador were essentially holiday wishes and condolences for tragedies that had happened in Russia at the time. There was also a text conversation about sanctions imposed on Russia by the Obama administration in late December.
-- Who leaked Flynn’s name to the media? The leaks began in Jan after Obama changed a long time EO that enabled information intercepted from FISA warrants or by the NSA to be pooled out to 16 other federal agencies. Such sensitive information is normally given to just 8 top leaders in Congress, who are regularly briefed by the intelligence community about classified matters. But after Obama changed the EO, a massive number of staff throughout the government had access to the information.
The site that published it, IMO at least, is not well organized
http://circa.com/politics/fbi-probe...during-election-yielded-no-evidence-of-crimes
Here is a summary ..........
-- A months-long FBI counterintelligence investigation into the Russians and the election revealed no evidence to charge anyone criminally
-- Agents who investigated claims of computer server activity tied to Russia and candidate Trump’s businesses in Trump Towers came to the conclusion that no disreputable contacts, financial transactions or encrypted communications occurred with the Russians
-- Whoever in the IC who spoke to Circa appeared frustrated over media accounts of their investigation of Russia’s activities.
“We have people spouting off who don’t know the difference between FISA surveillance and a wiretap or a counterintelligence probe versus a special prosecutor criminal case, and it has hurts our ability to get to the truth and has wrongly created the impression that intelligence officials have a political agenda”
-- The report stresses that Americans routinely are incidentally intercepted when the FBI monitors foreign individuals like Russian embassy officials. Michael Flynn was one American who was intercepted during his conversations with the Russian ambassador to the US. A warrant was not necessary to review his conversations because it was a national security matter and Flynn had a security clearance. The calls and text messages from last Dec to the ambassador were essentially holiday wishes and condolences for tragedies that had happened in Russia at the time. There was also a text conversation about sanctions imposed on Russia by the Obama administration in late December.
“But the message Flynn gave was mostly that a new sheriff was about to take over the WH and Russians shouldn’t react to the new sanctions in a way that would foreclose better dialog in the future under a Trump administration."
-- Who leaked Flynn’s name to the media? The leaks began in Jan after Obama changed a long time EO that enabled information intercepted from FISA warrants or by the NSA to be pooled out to 16 other federal agencies. Such sensitive information is normally given to just 8 top leaders in Congress, who are regularly briefed by the intelligence community about classified matters. But after Obama changed the EO, a massive number of staff throughout the government had access to the information.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Of all people, Rolling Stone magazine is telling Democrats "bro, slow your roll, your story might not check out"
http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...minefield-for-democrats-and-the-media-w471074
"..... But the manner in which these stories are being reported is becoming a story in its own right. Russia has become an obsession, cultural shorthand for a vast range of suspicions about Donald Trump.
The notion that the president is either an agent or a useful idiot of the Russian state is so freely accepted in some quarters that Beck Bennett's shirtless representation of Putin palling with Alec Baldwin's Trump is already a no-questions-asked yuks routine for the urban smart set.
**********
But it could also be true that both the Democratic Party and many leading media outlets are making a dangerous gamble, betting their professional and political capital on the promise of future disclosures that may not come.
**************
We have to remember that the unpopularity of the press was a key to Trump's election. Journalists helped solve the billionaire's accessibility problem by being a more hated group than the arrogant rich. Trump has people believing he shares a common enemy with them: the news media. When we do badly, he does well.
Trump calls us "enemies of the people" who purvey "fake news." Together with what vile ex-CNN turncoat Lou Dobbs calls the "global corporatists" who own the major media companies, we are said to comprise the "opposition party."
One could list the more ridiculous examples, like the Washington Post's infamous "PropOrNot" story identifying hundreds of alternative media sites as fellow travellers aiding Russia, or the Post's faceplant over a report about a hacked utility in Vermont.
There was the "Russian cybercrime arrests" story that multiple outlets incorrectly suggested was linked to last year's election, or the bizarre series of stories about Russia-linked murders around the world that are supposedly connected to this tale. (Glenn Greenwald at the Intercept noted the similarity between these latter tales and early anti-Clinton paranoia).
All of this noise matters. The pop culture realm is filled with bits like the SNL "Santa Putin" routine, the New Yorker's Cyrillic cover and the promiscuous use of terms like "Siberian Candidate." ...."
The notion that the president is either an agent or a useful idiot of the Russian state is so freely accepted in some quarters that Beck Bennett's shirtless representation of Putin palling with Alec Baldwin's Trump is already a no-questions-asked yuks routine for the urban smart set.
**********
But it could also be true that both the Democratic Party and many leading media outlets are making a dangerous gamble, betting their professional and political capital on the promise of future disclosures that may not come.
**************
We have to remember that the unpopularity of the press was a key to Trump's election. Journalists helped solve the billionaire's accessibility problem by being a more hated group than the arrogant rich. Trump has people believing he shares a common enemy with them: the news media. When we do badly, he does well.
Trump calls us "enemies of the people" who purvey "fake news." Together with what vile ex-CNN turncoat Lou Dobbs calls the "global corporatists" who own the major media companies, we are said to comprise the "opposition party."
One could list the more ridiculous examples, like the Washington Post's infamous "PropOrNot" story identifying hundreds of alternative media sites as fellow travellers aiding Russia, or the Post's faceplant over a report about a hacked utility in Vermont.
There was the "Russian cybercrime arrests" story that multiple outlets incorrectly suggested was linked to last year's election, or the bizarre series of stories about Russia-linked murders around the world that are supposedly connected to this tale. (Glenn Greenwald at the Intercept noted the similarity between these latter tales and early anti-Clinton paranoia).
All of this noise matters. The pop culture realm is filled with bits like the SNL "Santa Putin" routine, the New Yorker's Cyrillic cover and the promiscuous use of terms like "Siberian Candidate." ...."
http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...minefield-for-democrats-and-the-media-w471074
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Dennis Kucinich (of all people) writes: "I'm no fan of Trump's but he's got a point about wiretapping." He tells story of how he was surprised to learn, from someone in the media, he was wiretapped while serving in his official capacity as a Congressperson, 4 years after the fact.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017...umps-but-hes-got-point-about-wiretapping.html
"President Trump’s assertion that his phones at Trump Tower were tapped last year has been treated as hilarious—and in some circles as beyond contempt. But I can vouch for the fact that extracurricular surveillance does occur, regardless of whether it is officially approved. I was wiretapped in 2011 after taking a phone call in my congressional office from a foreign leader.
That a secret recording had been made of this call was revealed to me by the Washington Times in 2015, a full two years after I left office.
************
Shortly after the Times story was published, I alerted congressional leaders to the breach and then let the matter rest, assuming that a series of routine Freedom of Information Act requests I had made in 2012 before leaving office would provide answers.
Five years later I am still waiting for FOIA responses from some of the intelligence agencies.
I cannot say with assurance that my Libya call was the only one intercepted.
I have never gone public with this story, but when I saw the derision with which President Trump’s claims were greeted—and notwithstanding our political differences—I felt I should share my experience.
When the president raised the question of wiretapping on his phones in Trump Tower, he was challenged to prove that such a thing could happen.
It happened to me."
That a secret recording had been made of this call was revealed to me by the Washington Times in 2015, a full two years after I left office.
************
Shortly after the Times story was published, I alerted congressional leaders to the breach and then let the matter rest, assuming that a series of routine Freedom of Information Act requests I had made in 2012 before leaving office would provide answers.
Five years later I am still waiting for FOIA responses from some of the intelligence agencies.
I cannot say with assurance that my Libya call was the only one intercepted.
I have never gone public with this story, but when I saw the derision with which President Trump’s claims were greeted—and notwithstanding our political differences—I felt I should share my experience.
When the president raised the question of wiretapping on his phones in Trump Tower, he was challenged to prove that such a thing could happen.
It happened to me."
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017...umps-but-hes-got-point-about-wiretapping.html
I35
5,000+ Posts
It's laughable that some act like BHO wouldn't or isn't capable of wiretapping. He did stuff like this throughout his presidency. Even busted for it but it didn't get much coverage.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Spicer was great today
This is the guy we need every day to deal with these people
These live pressers (Ive seen maybe 5 or 6 of them now) are usually better TV than what you get from CNN or Fox News.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
If the president of one party spying on a candidate for president from the other party,
then continues to spy on him even after he became the incoming president,
then illegally leaking the info obtained via that spying to the media, and
then lies about it
Is that worse than burgling a party HQ?
Yeah or nah?
then continues to spy on him even after he became the incoming president,
then illegally leaking the info obtained via that spying to the media, and
then lies about it
Is that worse than burgling a party HQ?
Yeah or nah?
Last edited:
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Just, as a reminder, the NYT reported back on Jan 19 that the Obama White House had "wiretap Intel." That's a quote.
OK, so, if you are asking the Intelligence Community for evidence THEY broke the law, would they provide such evidence?
I suggest they would not.
OK, so, if you are asking the Intelligence Community for evidence THEY broke the law, would they provide such evidence?
I suggest they would not.
Last edited:
Brad Austin
2,500+ Posts
I never had a shred of doubt there was intentional spying on DT's team and the illegal leaking of intel gathered to the public was part of the plan.
The FBI buried HRC's clear and proven crimes in absurd scapegoat word play..."no intent". They'll dismiss this illegal spying the same way..."legal incidental collection".
Was Obama aware and behind all this? Hell yes, he was Prez then.
Did he distance himself by having intel monitor foreigners DT's team would naturally come in contact with? Absolutely.
Either something comes from this and people are held accountable, or the Dems just pulled another "nuclear option" screw up.
If all it takes to spy on your political opponent is to monitor foreign officials anyone remotely connected to the campaign communicates with, what's good for the goose...
The FBI buried HRC's clear and proven crimes in absurd scapegoat word play..."no intent". They'll dismiss this illegal spying the same way..."legal incidental collection".
Was Obama aware and behind all this? Hell yes, he was Prez then.
Did he distance himself by having intel monitor foreigners DT's team would naturally come in contact with? Absolutely.
Either something comes from this and people are held accountable, or the Dems just pulled another "nuclear option" screw up.
If all it takes to spy on your political opponent is to monitor foreign officials anyone remotely connected to the campaign communicates with, what's good for the goose...
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict HORNS-HOGS *
Sat, Nov 16 • 11:00 AM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
Senate Leader vote
- Started by BrntOrngStmpeDe
- Replies: 22
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
