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: 245
158
<< 242  243  244    246  247  248 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Are you saying that you consider Bill Ayers a threat to national security?


I am saying that having a president be a close friend of a known terrorist who contributed to killing people with bombs, who bombed government buildings in an attempt to fight the government is worth investigating.

You have no problem with a president being friends with a terrorists that wanted to bring down the US government and used bombs that killed people to try to do it?
edit on 8-3-2017 by Grambler because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: xuenchen

Can you prove it by posting the unedited version?



Yup.

real show




posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Jesus.

Do we have no concerns about a current President attempting to denigrate or harass a previous President with empty allegations and obvious political maneuvering?

Doesn't the blade cut both ways?



Right, how many times past 8 years have I heard the refrain "it was Bush's fault"

Talk about tone deaf, poster child here!



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Are you saying that you consider Bill Ayers a threat to national security?


I am saying that having a president be a close friend of a known terrorist who contributed to killing people with bombs, who bombed government buildings in an attempt to fight the government is worth investigating.

You have nor problem with a oresident being friends with a terrorists that wanted to bring down the US government?


Bill Ayers has been a public figure since 1972. He is not a threat to national security now, and he wasn't in 2009.

You know this. You're comparing what Bill Ayers did to the possible involvement in cyber-crime and collusion with a Presidential Candidate of a nuclear world power with thousands of warheads POINTED at us that is being investigated by FOUR Congressional committees and the majority of our Intelligence Community.

The two are not equal in any wild leap of the imagination.




edit on 8-3-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phoenix

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Jesus.

Do we have no concerns about a current President attempting to denigrate or harass a previous President with empty allegations and obvious political maneuvering?

Doesn't the blade cut both ways?



Right, how many times past 8 years have I heard the refrain "it was Bush's fault"

Talk about tone deaf, poster child here!


So claiming that a crappy economy was Bush's fault is the same as accusing Obama of multiple federal crimes and possibly treason?

You guys are on the False Equivalency Brigade today, aren't you?



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:22 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Sad state of affairs that out of all the billion ppl you guys have she was the SECOND best to lead you out of your hell. What's that got to say about the rest of yall??



edit...200 hours later, just hand me the W. I´ll save you the trouble.


edit on VAmerica/ChicagoWed, 08 Mar 2017 18:46:49 -060049America/Chicago by Verse because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Are you saying that you consider Bill Ayers a threat to national security?


I am saying that having a president be a close friend of a known terrorist who contributed to killing people with bombs, who bombed government buildings in an attempt to fight the government is worth investigating.

You have nor problem with a oresident being friends with a terrorists that wanted to bring down the US government?


Bill Ayers has been a public figure since 1972. He is not a threat to national security now, and he wasn't in 2009.

You know this. You're comparing what Bill Ayers did to the possible involvement of a nuclear world power with thousands of warheads POINTED at us that is being investigated by FOUR Congressional committees and the majority of our Intelligence Community.

The two are not equal in any wild leap of the imagination.





He is a known terrorists. Yoou see no problem knowing a president may be influenced by someone who is a known terrorists that wants to take down the government? Sure ayers wasn't a threat on his own, but if his ideology was shared by the president, who knows.

You are the people that are suggesting that a president should be allowed to wiretap political opponents in the name of security. This means the the president would legally be allowed to tap Obama based on his connection to ayers. What would be there to stop him?

And if not ayers, then it will be another group.

But you will see. If trump does this in four years and accuses his opponent of associating with a national security threat, and he shares the intel of that investigation with all agencies and other countries, and that info gets leaked to the media,

You will be the people screaming loudest of all how unjust this is.



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phoenix

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Jesus.

Do we have no concerns about a current President attempting to denigrate or harass a previous President with empty allegations and obvious political maneuvering?

Doesn't the blade cut both ways?



Right, how many times past 8 years have I heard the refrain "it was Bush's fault"

Talk about tone deaf, poster child here!


At least Bush didn't spy on Obama when he was running against Songbird McCain.



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Yup, big difference Bush did not go after Obama once out of office.

Looks like Obama on otherhand is doing everything possible against Trump.



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: xuenchen

Can you prove it by posting the unedited version?



Yup.

real show



Thank you ... that guy I could have voted for for President.

Making complete sentences, tolerable megalomania ... reasonable, smart, strong.

By the way, at 15:00 Trump very clearly says that he had met Putin once.

Nice try.

And thanks.



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phoenix
a reply to: Gryphon66

Yup, big difference Bush did not go after Obama once out of office.

Looks like Obama on otherhand is doing everything possible against Trump.



Can you list some examples of "everything possible" that you think Obama is doing against Trump?



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

A "known terrorist" that's been working in education in Chicago since 1972. Yeah, okay.

"You are the people" ? Who? Can you quote me saying I think a President should be able to wiretap political opponents?

You don't sound like you're waiting for an investigation to reveal the facts ... LOL.

Ideology, eh?



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

A "known terrorist" that's been working in education in Chicago since 1972. Yeah, okay.

"You are the people" ? Who? Can you quote me saying I think a President should be able to wiretap political opponents?

You don't sound like you're waiting for an investigation to reveal the facts ... LOL.

Ideology, eh?


First I have already said I am waiting for an investigation. My point were in response to alphabetaone who is arguing that he supports the potential wiretapping

You are correct that you didn't say you think wiretapping a political opponent is acceptable. I apologize for lumping you in with alphabetaone who is saying that.

So I assume you do not think it would be ok for a sitting president to wiretap an incoming one thats an opponent?

And yes ayers is a know terrorists. Is he a big of threat as "Russians". Probably not. But the point is once you open up the can of worms allowing a sitting president to surveill opponents for security this is the kind of thing that will happen.

Hell, even James rosen was surveilled in the name of national security. You really think that presidents won't take advantage of this precedent to spy on their opponents?

ASnd again, I am not saying Iknow Obama did this. I am speaking to alphabetaone about rather it would be ethical if he did.



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

No I won't because pertinent to your asinine post but not to the OP of this thread.

Which is,

Did Obama administration use IC to surveil Trumps campaign and transition as Trump tweeted about.

I'd gather answer is yes Trump was correct as discussion has definitely been about why instead of did he.

All this discussion is, is whether or not Obamas administration was operating within or outside the law.



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Alphabetone has an interesting argument about the Omnibus and Safe Streets Act of 1968 and the powers that bestows on a President to have surveillance conducted. I don't have any other comments about that argument because I haven't researched it, except to that Alpha's posts don't say what you seem to be interpreting them to say.

It would not be okay for a President to wiretap anyone who is merely a political opponent. However, if good intelligence has suggested that such an individual or those surrounding them are in league with a foreign power to do harm to the United States? Then yes. Wiretap away with the appropriate warrants. Democrat, Republican, Green, Communist, whomever.

If Bill Ayers is a known terrorist can you explain why he isn't in jail? What terrorist act did he commit again?

Presidents take advantage of all their rather considerable powers, and many they don't legitimately have. Our courts system restricts those grabs for power, some of which have been discussed here.

All politicians are liars, and anyone who wants to run for National office is a politician.

It is my belief that anyone who wants to exert that level of control over the lives of others is a psychopath, and that would include Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, Obama, Bill, GW, Ronnie, Jimmy, etc. All of them. And 99.9% of Congress, the State Houses and the Governorships.

That's a big part of what's "wrong with the world" today. But I digress.
edit on 8-3-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Phoenix

There's been no proof that Obama tapped Trumps phones.

Perhaps the coming investigation will reveal the legality of actions taken.

Let us hope so; this from every angle is bad for the United States.



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 07:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Verse
a reply to: xuenchen

Sad state of affairs that out of all the billion ppl you guys have she was the SECOND best to lead you out of your hell. What's that got to say about the rest of yall??



edit...200 hours later, just hand me the W. I´ll save you the trouble.



So clever.




posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 07:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phoenix
a reply to: Gryphon66

Yup, big difference Bush did not go after Obama once out of office.

Looks like Obama on otherhand is doing everything possible against Trump.


I have a feeling Bush and Obama are on the same team.
Not ours.



new topics




 
158
<< 242  243  244    246  247  248 >>

log in

join