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: 221
158
<< 218  219  220    222  223  224 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 07:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage


He said that he knew of no evidence of collusion between the campaign an the Russians.


Right. Nothing illegal was done, so why release info of a classified investigation to other countries.



Really? Seems that information about associates of the president-elect meeting with members of "unfriendly" governments would be something that our allies should know about. And, after all, some of that information actually came from other allies, didn't it?


First this raises anotyher shady question. Did our intelligence agencies ask other countries to dig up dirt on a presidential candidate when they had ZERO evidence of wrong doing by that person? Again this is insane!

Secondly, even if they did give info, that gives the Obama admin no right to release more info to those countries, especially when there was no evidence of wrong doing.

So any meeting with "unfreindly" countries should be rpeorted to our allies? Did Obamas admin point out to other countries facts from the FBI investigation on Hillary? She met with the Saudias, so obama should have let all of our allies in on that investigation too.

And lets not forget Shumer, Pelosi, Hillary, and many others have met with Russians. Did the Obama admin contact allies to let them know about these potential troubling meetings?

You really don't get it, do you? You have no right to complain if Trump uses agencies to investigate political opponents, spreads the info to all Us agencies and to our political allies, and if the info leaks to the press and is used to sabotage thos political people.

I can't believe you are defending this!


edit on 7-3-2017 by Grambler because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 08:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler




Thats right, cotton said there was a WIRETAP issued by an agency that he knew of.
Yes. On the Russian. Off course there was a tap. Otherwise the conversation could not have been (illegally) leaked.


Now, this:
www.politico.com...



The House Intelligence Committee chairman confirmed earlier that they would e reviewing raw information at Langley before the 1st hearing on 20th March. There is a press conference further up the thread.



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 08:03 PM
link   



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 08:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler




Nothing illegal was done, so why release info of a classified investigation to other countries.

If nothing illegal was done, what information was classified? Were the meetings secret government activities?



So any meeting with "unfreindly" countries should be rpeorted to our allies?
Reciprocity, that sort of thing. Yeah, it "should" be done, and is.



And lets not forget Shumer, Pelosi, Hillary, and many others have met with Russians. Did the Obama admin contact allies to let them know about these potential troubling meetings?
Members of the government. Pretty sure that our allies would have known about those meetings.


You have no right to complain if Trump uses agencies to investigate political opponents, spreads the info to all Us agencies and to our political allies, and if the info leaks to the press and is used to sabotage thos political people.
You seem to be missing the point that the investigation was, and is, about Russian hacking and attempts to influence the election. Do you think that evidence should be ignored? You know, the evidence for which Congress will be going over in the upcoming weeks:
www.politico.com...


edit on 3/7/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 08:14 PM
link   



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 08:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Not breaking.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 08:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
If nothing illegal was done, what information was classified? Were the meetings secret government activities?

Transcripts of what foreign ambassadors said and who they talked to are classified and handled by the NSA. Those transcripts are not released, let alone acknowledged... except in the case of Flynn and Sessions. Transcripts of that type are accessed by the highest levels of the NSA so in order for a news outlet to get info on it it had to come from on high. Transcripts are considered unfinished data and are used to support a finished document.


originally posted by: Phage Reciprocity, that sort of thing. Yeah, it "should" be done, and is.

Not always.



originally posted by: Phage Members of the government. Pretty sure that our allies would have known about those meetings.

An assumption not supported by anything.



originally posted by: PhageYou seem to be missing the point that the investigation was, and is, about Russian hacking and attempts to influence the election. Do you think that evidence should be ignored? You know, the evidence for which Congress will be going over in the upcoming weeks:
www.politico.com...



The point your missing is the Russia hacking BS, which the government still has zero evidence to back the claim, was used in an effort to attack Trump and to justify illegal wiretaps on a political oponent in a presidential election...

and Clinton still lost.
edit on 7-3-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 08:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xcathdra

Not breaking.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


You should contact the youtube channel author who posted the video since I have no ability to control the titles they give their videos.



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Ok. In the meantime, you could do something more than post a youtube link.



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 08:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
You seem to be missing the point that the investigation was, and is, about Russian hacking and attempts to influence the election. Do you think that evidence should be ignored? You know, the evidence for which Congress will be going over in the upcoming weeks:
www.politico.com...


No, I'm pretty sure that you are missing the point: That investigation just got much wider. Looks like we should all be happy that all of our questions are going to be addressed. Did that Politico article leave out NSA Director Mike Rogers, btw?

I have the feeling his testimony will be important.



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 08:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xcathdra

Ok. In the meantime, you could do something more than post a youtube link.


and you could do something more than comment on the title of a youtube link that I have nothing to do with and no control over.
edit on 7-3-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 08:40 PM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

That is deep.



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 08:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Ya know I think it's time we admit a couple things about this whole scandal.

1. In Trumps Tweet he even states that he just found out that Obama was Tapping his lines. Allegedly of course, even though he says it's a fact. That means it isn't some insider evidence that made him aware of it. It was the Breitbart article based off of Levin's theory that this is all coming from.

So even if we were to find out that Obama did tap his lines illegally or whatever, Trump doesn't get any credit for anything anyway. If anyone should get credit for exposing anything it's Levin because he put it all together. Trump just read about it and freaked out.

2. President Trump has the power to find out all the proof he needs with a phone call basically. He's the President now and all the Intel agencies are at his disposal. So the fact that he's still getting his Intel from media sources should worry everyone.

3. Ironicly, one of the major sources of this information about the wiretaps is being sourced from the NYTimes. Ya know, the news outlet which Trump himself has been calling fake news and a failing business for months and months now. So the fact that he's calling them and others Fake News and yet still apparently find them credible as long as they write something he likes to hear. So how stupid and scary is that thought.

Just a few points I thought others might want to think about.



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: The GUT




That investigation just got much wider.
It's been ongoing.


Looks like we should all be happy that all of our questions are going to be addressed.
No. We will not be privy to the classified aspects.



Did that Politico article leave out NSA Director Mike Rogers,
No.

These formal interviews are expected to take place on Capitol Hill, the source said, and will likely be with officials from the agencies that contributed to the assessment that concluded Moscow was trying to aid Trump in November — the CIA, the FBI and the National Security Agency.



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler


If nothing illegal was done, what information was classified? Were the meetings secret government activities?



Ah but something illegal was done - dissemination of information gathered from FISA on an American citizen during supposed eavesdropping on foreign person.

I believe that's a felony.

The information gathered on US citizen must not be released to anyone if no wrong doing is found - which is case here.

This would definitely include dissemination to other nations as well.
edit on 7-3-2017 by Phoenix because: Obamas crew going down!



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 09:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phoenix

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler


If nothing illegal was done, what information was classified? Were the meetings secret government activities?



Ah but something illegal was done - dissemination of information gathered from FISA on an American citizen during supposed eavesdropping on foreign person.

I believe that's a felony.

The information gathered on US citizen must not be released to anyone if no wrong doing is found - which is case here.

This would definitely include dissemination to other nations as well.


Exactly. I answered Phage on anothe thread, but you are making the correct point.

The intelligence agencies are not legally allowed to share information about classified investigations into American citizens to other countries. There are only a very smeall amount of people in the US intelligence agencies that should have access to that information.

Yet Obama did everything in his power to allow as many people as possible to see that information.

And even aside for legality, do we really think it is ethical for the Obama admin to give info to other countries that smear Trump as a possible russian assett while the investigation is ongoing and there w=has been no claim that there is evidence of Trumps guilt?

People thought that Obama ordering wiretaps on Trump would have been a huge deal if true. yet we are to believe that Obama admin revealing classified info to other countries to smear Trump is acceptable?

People have lost their minds that are defending this.



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 09:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: The GUT

originally posted by: Phage
You seem to be missing the point that the investigation was, and is, about Russian hacking and attempts to influence the election. Do you think that evidence should be ignored? You know, the evidence for which Congress will be going over in the upcoming weeks:
www.politico.com...


No, I'm pretty sure that you are missing the point: That investigation just got much wider. Looks like we should all be happy that all of our questions are going to be addressed. Did that Politico article leave out NSA Director Mike Rogers, btw?

I have the feeling his testimony will be important.


And was it Mike Rogers who got Trump clued into the Obama spying in the first place?

Source


edit on 7-3-2017 by SBMcG because: Bill Clinton's wife lost the popular vote too!



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 09:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
1. In Trumps Tweet he even states that he just found out that Obama was Tapping his lines. Allegedly of course, even though he says it's a fact. That means it isn't some insider evidence that made him aware of it. It was the Breitbart article based off of Levin's theory that this is all coming from.


I can agree with this to an extent. We do need to keep in mind Trumps speaking style. During his Congressional address he also stated he just now talked to Sec. Mattis when it is obvious Mattis never spoke with Pres. Trump in the middle of his address to congress.



originally posted by: mOjOm
So even if we were to find out that Obama did tap his lines illegally or whatever, Trump doesn't get any credit for anything anyway. If anyone should get credit for exposing anything it's Levin because he put it all together. Trump just read about it and freaked out.

I think there is more to it than Trump just freaking out. I believe he has the evidence to back his claim. With that said I agree with your assessment about Levin.



originally posted by: mOjOm
2. President Trump has the power to find out all the proof he needs with a phone call basically. He's the President now and all the Intel agencies are at his disposal. So the fact that he's still getting his Intel from media sources should worry everyone.


Some issues to consder -
* - The administration is not qualified to investigate itself, hence the request for a Congressional review.
* - Second given the claim he made, any investigation by the Executive can be viewed as the current President launching an investigation into a former President can and will be spun as political with the investigation and what it finds being turned into a process story rather than a story on the issues.
* - Finally the WH stated if they release the info they have lives could be in danger. Whether or not this is the case is up for debate however, if you were in a similar position, would you be willing to expose someone to danger for doing the right thing?
* - There is also the possibility that, if the claims are true and info is released, other damning info could end up disappearing.



originally posted by: mOjOm
3. Ironicly, one of the major sources of this information about the wiretaps is being sourced from the NYTimes. Ya know, the news outlet which Trump himself has been calling fake news and a failing business for months and months now. So the fact that he's calling them and others Fake News and yet still apparently find them credible as long as they write something he likes to hear. So how stupid and scary is that thought.

The NYT was only one media outlet involved and in that case the NYT reported on the FISA warrants / surveillance.

The fact those same media outlets are now trying to deny their own articles it makes one wonder. Was the media lying then or are they lying now?



originally posted by: mOjOm
Just a few points I thought others might want to think about.

Some good points.
edit on 7-3-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 09:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: The GUT

originally posted by: Phage
You seem to be missing the point that the investigation was, and is, about Russian hacking and attempts to influence the election. Do you think that evidence should be ignored? You know, the evidence for which Congress will be going over in the upcoming weeks:
www.politico.com...


No, I'm pretty sure that you are missing the point: That investigation just got much wider. Looks like we should all be happy that all of our questions are going to be addressed. Did that Politico article leave out NSA Director Mike Rogers, btw?

I have the feeling his testimony will be important.


And was it Mike Rogers who got Trump clued into the Obama spying in the first place?

Source



Excellent article. I learned a couple of additional things from it.



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 09:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I agree and posted last night about what bad precedent spying on candidates by government set.

Those on other side this discussion discount that at great peril to the Republic and are demonstrating potential deficit of morality by continually insisting on using an unproven and publicly disavowed theory of Russian interference in election as motivation to basically approve the former administrations lawlessness and politicalization of intelligence apparatus for spying on opponents.

Is it a wonder, we proclaim "someone must've got to them" as time after time unconstutional legislation and acts were seemingly pulled out rabbits hat with last minute vote changes or judicial opinions flying in face of logic.

Weaponization of IC against domestic targets, especially judicial and political may be case.

I agree Grambler, just undefensible, yet they persist,



new topics

top topics



 
158
<< 218  219  220    222  223  224 >>

log in

join