It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Donald Trump has just directly accused Obama of wiretapping Trump residence.

page: 110
158
<< 107  108  109    111  112  113 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

Wow...interesting he thinks Obama knew about it but the architects were most likely Valerie Jarrett with Ben Rhodes. He implied Obama watches a lot of ESPN and reads, and leaves this kind of plotting and planning up to Jarrett. That gives him plausible deniability.

No wonder Jarrett is going to move in with him and Michelle to run the Project to Oust Trump operation.

edit on 5-3-2017 by queenofswords because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

Its the same setup the Clintons used... It creates plausible deniability.

I wonder ho long it will take Democrats to realize their party has been hijacked by people wanting to bring down the US.
edit on 5-3-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: queenofswords

Its the same setup the Clintons used... It creates plausible deniability.


Cheryl Mills?



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
Secondly we know surveillance was ordered because the FISA warrants

Head Fake. I'll damn near guarantee it.
edit on 5-3-2017 by Deplorable because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Still no defense against perjury. That's why Clinton was impeached.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: queenofswords

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: queenofswords

Its the same setup the Clintons used... It creates plausible deniability.


Cheryl Mills?


Huma Abedin....



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone

Can you post the link for what you have cited here (maybe I missed it).

I am not sure these are aall of the articles that Mark Levine cites in the fox interview today. He listed all liberal sources that mentioned the two FISA requests.

Your cite also seems to admit that at least the June FISA request happened. It then says there is no proof that Obama ordered it, byut that seems moot. It seems obvious it would have been someone in Obamas DOJ, and Obama would have known about it.

Iyt then says there was no proof this was politically motivated. Well of course the FISA request which these papers are reporting on wouldn't flat out say it was for political purposes. But it certainly raises eyebrows. For example, why didn't the DOJ seek FISA warrants in Hillary, who had connections not only to the Russians, but Saudias and many other foreign administrations? The fact that only one side was targeted reeks of partisanship.

So what we are left admitted in your cite is thaat at the very least someone in the Obama admin sought a FISA warrant involving people (no proof yet it was Trump) involved in the Trump campaign. This is a very dangerous precedent. Should Trump be able to seek warrants against his political opponents on suspicions of connections to foreign governments?

I guess all I can say is we shall see. It shouldn't be hard to verify rather or not these FISA warrants were requested.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Berns23
a reply to: Xcathdra

Still no defense against perjury. That's why Clinton was impeached.


If any of this is true we are way beyond perjury.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

He has morphed into charmingly nostalgic.
He was funny with the strategery rant.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

We're not talking about some local yokel judge on the circuit court you know. These are federal judges and no matter what your political leanings one must admit or at least acknowledge that federal judges don't get that position by being pigeons.
Therefore the likelihood of any federal judge issuing a warrant against a presidential candidate or the president elect is pretty unlikely. Let's keep this within the realm of actual probability.


You say this, but then how do you respond to the fact that only .03 of all FISA warrant requests are denied?



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Gryphon66

He has morphed into charmingly nostalgic.
He was funny with the strategery rant.


Who would have thought G.W. Bush had more common sense than Obama when it comes to knowing when to recognize you are no longer President and should shut your mouth so someone else can do the job.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

We're not talking about some local yokel judge on the circuit court you know. These are federal judges and no matter what your political leanings one must admit or at least acknowledge that federal judges don't get that position by being pigeons.
Therefore the likelihood of any federal judge issuing a warrant against a presidential candidate or the president elect is pretty unlikely. Let's keep this within the realm of actual probability.


You're half right, 1st request denied because it was against Trump (11 denials/33,900 requests)

Second request edited and narrowed, ostensibly remove Trump identifiers was approved.

That being case there was no there there as far a probable cause to do with Trump.

Nice try, no cigar.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Gryphon66

He has morphed into charmingly nostalgic.
He was funny with the strategery rant.


Not to just focus on you but you bring up something that has been bothering me.

I assume you are talking about W. Bush here.

All of these so called liberals on ATS and out in the world are now fawning over W. Bush.

Yet weren't these the very same people that called him a war criminal?

What a joke these liberals are! All of the sudden they fawn over and missing a charming war criminal that led to thousands of deaths in their mind. Why should we take anything thee liberals say seriously in light of this?



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

We're not talking about some local yokel judge on the circuit court you know. These are federal judges and no matter what your political leanings one must admit or at least acknowledge that federal judges don't get that position by being pigeons.
Therefore the likelihood of any federal judge issuing a warrant against a presidential candidate or the president elect is pretty unlikely. Let's keep this within the realm of actual probability.


really? lololol...

The 9th circuit shoots down your observation about political leanings.
edit on 5-3-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

We're not talking about some local yokel judge on the circuit court you know. These are federal judges and no matter what your political leanings one must admit or at least acknowledge that federal judges don't get that position by being pigeons.
Therefore the likelihood of any federal judge issuing a warrant against a presidential candidate or the president elect is pretty unlikely. Let's keep this within the realm of actual probability.


You say this, but then how do you respond to the fact that only .03 of all FISA warrant requests are denied?

And their first one was one of those .03. Meaning their case had to really suck.
edit on 5-3-2017 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Trump haters don't tweet on trumps behalf. He does that all by himself.
I wonder if there was consideration of legality in his decision to use his old Twitter account for this and not the official POTUS Twitter account.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

My guess would be the relationship the Bush's have with the Clintons and W's recent fawning, and vice vers a, michelle O's fawning over Bush.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

We're not talking about some local yokel judge on the circuit court you know. These are federal judges and no matter what your political leanings one must admit or at least acknowledge that federal judges don't get that position by being pigeons.
Therefore the likelihood of any federal judge issuing a warrant against a presidential candidate or the president elect is pretty unlikely. Let's keep this within the realm of actual probability.


really? lololol...

The 0th circuit shoots down your observation about political leanings.


The 9th? Perfect example.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: queenofswords

Its the same setup the Clintons used... It creates plausible deniability.

I wonder ho long it will take Democrats to realize their party has been hijacked by people wanting to bring down the US.


Unfortunately most Americans are primarily concerned about the roof over their heads or the garbage on tv or mobile phone apps it will be a hard lesson and one learnt too late Soros will kick off soon several radio hosts,some conspiracy/some not say that it will be a Maidan style operation when the weather starts to improve late March.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Gryphon66

He has morphed into charmingly nostalgic.
He was funny with the strategery rant.


Not to just focus on you but you bring up something that has been bothering me.

I assume you are talking about W. Bush here.

All of these so called liberals on ATS and out in the world are now fawning over W. Bush.

Yet weren't these the very same people that called him a war criminal?

What a joke these liberals are! All of the sudden they fawn over and missing a charming war criminal that led to thousands of deaths in their mind. Why should we take anything thee liberals say seriously in light of this?


I'm not the only one, Grambler. People more knowledgeable than me have been saying it....there is a psychological problem going on with them, especially since the election. Some serious mental health therapy is in order.



new topics

top topics



 
158
<< 107  108  109    111  112  113 >>

log in

join