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: 351
158
<< 348  349  350    352  353  354 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: UKTruth




Now we now Trump was being spied on for sure

I didn't hear Nunes say that.


Trump and his teams conversations were unmasked from standard foreign intelligence surveillance. That is targeting individuals, US citizens.
Someone asked for it. Someone shared it, Someone leaked it.
edit on 22/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Usually, when someone reacts personally to a general statement, there's a reason.

I'll clarify: there's no reason to assume that any ATS poster is working for any outside interests here ... I do want to be clear on that as the usual attempts to muddle the facts are in play.

What is true is that the right-wing media "echo chamber" has been actively fronting the question of identities being "unmasked" today ... which culminated in Mr. Nune's little side-show of running from the Hill to the White House to "inform the President."

Brave Congressman Nunes. Wouldn't a phone call on a super-secret line have been sufficient?

Oh, wait ... that wouldn't have involved cameras and headlines would it .... my bad.

This is more than likely much ado about nothing, although much cheese will be churned from it.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: MysticPearl
Well what do you know, fake news MSM and lefties caught with their pants down again.


More like an egregious breach of the Separation of Powers by a former Trump associate (Nunes).



Well, Nunes is in a tough spot. He has to inform the President of any findings whether they are pro-Trump or anti-Trump. Frankly this precisely underscores us having a bi-partisan oversight committee, I doubt Schiff would allow any unsubstantiated information to reach Trumps ears in an effort of fulfilling his fantasies of a Twitter run nation.

I think all this waiting and watching is tantamount to "Writing a report, to have a meeting, to form a committee, to address the problem" tactics.

What I personally believe is that he is left in a position to delay as much as possible in the hopes of finding anything substantial to actually verify Trumps claims, or hopes if he takes long enough, the flames under peoples asses to find answers will wane.

I will say this much, I certainly wouldn't want his job right now.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: Phage




Did Nunes say that Trump's phones were tapped?


AT 9:00 he has no evidence of wire tap.

You spelled that incorrectly. It's tapp.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



We only have confirmation from the FBI that they were spying and of course the actual evidence of transcripts being leaked of secretly recorded phone calls.


So the FBI was spying, not an individual within Obama's cabinet?

Glad we cleared that up.


Yes and they get their authorisation from the Executive branch administration - under Obama at the time.


Which cabinet member gave that authorization?


The authorisation is implicit, as stated.
Perhaps read the AG's guidelines for FBI operations.


So no one within the Obama administration actually gave the order to spy on Trump's campaign.

Cool. We're making progress.


No, he'll just play a different word game. "Administration" has multiple meanings. Let's watch the monkey play with that.


I don't see how. The "administration" has always been comprised of the President, the VP and the cabinet.


The last I checked the AG is part of the cabinet and heads the DoJ. It is the DoJ who give authority to the FBI and therefore are accountable for their actions. No denying it.


Ok. Now can you prove the AG gave the order to the FBI to spy on Trump?


The DoJ gave authorisation as they always do for all FBI operations.


So then, you are left with no choice but to acquiesce that since all of your touts are true, and since there is an on-going investigation (because clearly since the administration in it's entirety is responsible for all "spying"), that the Trump Administration is NOW investigating the ties to Russia within the Trump campaign - or in other words, Trump is spying on himself. (on the taxpayers dime no less)


It doesn't change the fact that the Obama Administration was spying on a political opponent leading up to an election.



Please substantiate that "fact"?

It seems that the Intelligence Community, FBI, Obama Admin and GOP in congress have all now debunked that claim?


Already have.


No ...You haven't...Lie much???

Again...Please substantiate this "Fact" you claimed.

"the fact that the Obama Administration was spying on a political opponent leading up to an election"

Should be easy...



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



We only have confirmation from the FBI that they were spying and of course the actual evidence of transcripts being leaked of secretly recorded phone calls.


So the FBI was spying, not an individual within Obama's cabinet?

Glad we cleared that up.


Yes and they get their authorisation from the Executive branch administration - under Obama at the time.


Which cabinet member gave that authorization?


The authorisation is implicit, as stated.
Perhaps read the AG's guidelines for FBI operations.


So no one within the Obama administration actually gave the order to spy on Trump's campaign.

Cool. We're making progress.


No, he'll just play a different word game. "Administration" has multiple meanings. Let's watch the monkey play with that.


I don't see how. The "administration" has always been comprised of the President, the VP and the cabinet.


The last I checked the AG is part of the cabinet and heads the DoJ. It is the DoJ who give authority to the FBI and therefore are accountable for their actions. No denying it.


Ok. Now can you prove the AG gave the order to the FBI to spy on Trump?


The DoJ gave authorisation as they always do for all FBI operations.


So then, you are left with no choice but to acquiesce that since all of your touts are true, and since there is an on-going investigation (because clearly since the administration in it's entirety is responsible for all "spying"), that the Trump Administration is NOW investigating the ties to Russia within the Trump campaign - or in other words, Trump is spying on himself. (on the taxpayers dime no less)


It doesn't change the fact that the Obama Administration was spying on a political opponent leading up to an election.



Please substantiate that "fact"?

It seems that the Intelligence Community, FBI, Obama Admin and GOP in congress have all now debunked that claim?


Already have.


No ...You haven't...Lie much???

Again...Please substantiate this "Fact" you claimed.

"the fact that the Obama Administration was spying on a political opponent leading up to an election"

Should be easy...



Already done. Read the thread.
Whether you agree or not is irrelevant.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


Now we now Trump was being spied on for sure,
Based on what Nunes said? No, we don't know that.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: UKTruth


Now we now Trump was being spied on for sure,
Based on what Nunes said? No, we don't know that.



Yes we do.
Specific US citizens had to have been requested by someone from a vast pool of foreign intelligence surveillance.

Calls were recorded - not illegal
Somebody targeted Trump and his campaign team by requesting the unmasking of transcripts to see exactly who said what - not illegal.
Somebody shared it - possibly illegal *which may explain why Obama widened the scope to share information at the 11th hr before he left.
Somebody leaked it - illegal


edit on 22/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: UKTruth




It was not legal to unmask this information and then broadly share it.

How do you know that?
Nunes doesn't seem to say that anything illegal was done.


He said the surveillance may have been legal.

It's the use of the unmasking of names and the sharing, then the leaking.


He also said it did not happen during the campaign but during transition..

So...the question is...Why were Trump campaign Staff caught up in "legal" counter-espionage surveillance?


Maybe you did not hear. Nunes said much of it had little to no foreign intelligence value and not even related to Russia.
Sounds like all existing surveillance was being sifted for Trump and his campaign team.


Doesn't sound like it to me?

Trump said his campaign was spied on during the election..

Nunes is saying Trump team members were caught on surveillance during the transition..

How and Why? Who were they talking to?

NUNES:
"This is a normal, incidental collection, based on what I could collect," Nunes said. "This appears to be all legally collected foreign intelligence under" the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Nunes did not know whether the "incidental collection" happened at Trump Tower, and could not say for certain whether Trump's communications were directly collected.

Nunes said the collection included Trump transition officials and that it happened after the election.

He said he could not say whether it meant that Trump was "spied on"


AND

Democrats on the committee appeared blindsided by Nunes' announcement. Rep. Jim Himes said he spoke with ranking Democratic member Adam Schiff, and that neither of them are familiar with the evidence Nunes is citing.
www.cnn.com...

Seeing as they are all privy to the same evidence...

NUNES LOOKS FULL OF # AGAIN...He is Trump Transition member after-all...he head is very far up Trumps butt.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

opps...

I was talking about getting a beer.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:46 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth




Yes we do.
Then you'd better tell Nunes, because he doesn't know it.

Nunes also was unsure if then President-elect Trump was captured by the surveillance, which occurred in November, December and January.

www.foxnews.com...



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Ah yes ... Mr. Trump gets to come out and and claim that he was "vindicated" ... Nunes did a great job.

Hope he got his head patted properly.


edit on 22-3-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: UKTruth




It was not legal to unmask this information and then broadly share it.

How do you know that?
Nunes doesn't seem to say that anything illegal was done.


He said the surveillance may have been legal.

It's the use of the unmasking of names and the sharing, then the leaking.


He also said it did not happen during the campaign but during transition..

So...the question is...Why were Trump campaign Staff caught up in "legal" counter-espionage surveillance?


Maybe you did not hear. Nunes said much of it had little to no foreign intelligence value and not even related to Russia.
Sounds like all existing surveillance was being sifted for Trump and his campaign team.


Doesn't sound like it to me?

Trump said his campaign was spied on during the election..

Nunes is saying Trump team members were caught on surveillance during the transition..

How and Why? Who were they talking to?

NUNES:
"This is a normal, incidental collection, based on what I could collect," Nunes said. "This appears to be all legally collected foreign intelligence under" the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Nunes did not know whether the "incidental collection" happened at Trump Tower, and could not say for certain whether Trump's communications were directly collected.

Nunes said the collection included Trump transition officials and that it happened after the election.

He said he could not say whether it meant that Trump was "spied on"


AND

Democrats on the committee appeared blindsided by Nunes' announcement. Rep. Jim Himes said he spoke with ranking Democratic member Adam Schiff, and that neither of them are familiar with the evidence Nunes is citing.
www.cnn.com...

Seeing as they are all privy to the same evidence...

NUNES LOOKS FULL OF # AGAIN...He is Trump Transition member after-all...he head is very far up Trumps butt.


Keep up, that was from his first statement.
Much more since then.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 22/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: UKTruth




Yes we do.
Then you'd better tell Nunes, because he doesn't know it.

Nunes also was unsure if then President-elect Trump was captured by the surveillance, which occurred in November, December and January.

www.foxnews.com...


Watch the later press conference outside the Whitehouse, including:



"Trump and his team were the subject of intelligence reports that ended up at this Whitehouse"

edit on 22/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Ah yes ... Mr. Trump get's to come out and and claim that he was "vindicated" ... Nunes did a great job.

Hope he got his head patted properly.



Yes, Trump "somewhat vindicated".
He will be fully vindicated if Obama was the one that ordered the unmasking or any of his cabinet.
edit on 22/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Let's see what we know ...

Representative Nunes, rather than updating his colleagues on the House Intelligence Committee instead ran with whatever "evidence" he's so excited about directly to the President.

The information he has is that communications within the Intelligence Community AFTER THE ELECTION included the unmasked names of Mr. Trump and some of his associates.

Mr. Nunes, Mr. Trump and various online surrogates are desperately attempting to spin this into evidence that the President Elect was being illegally surveilled.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
"Trump and his team were the subject of intelligence reports that ended up at this Whitehouse"


The above doesn't even have any meaning.

the "Subject of intelligence reports that ended up at this Whitehouse"

In whose stretch of the imagination does that even have value?



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Ah yes ... Mr. Trump get's to come out and and claim that he was "vindicated" ... Nunes did a great job.

Hope he got his head patted properly.



Yes, Trump "somewhat vindicated".
He will be fully vindicated if Obama was the one that ordered the unmasking or any of his cabinet.


Okay, I'll play for a minute ... are you aware of the circumstances that must exist for such intelligence to contain "unmasked" information?

For example, let's say that the information that Mr. Nunes ran to the President today with are audio recordings, picked up incidentally ... do you think that Mr. Trump, at that point, had an easily recognized voice pattern?

One of multiple possibilities much different from the Nixonian references of "who knew and when did they know" about the illegal "unmasking" that you're desperately trying to sell here.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Well it indicates to me that "Truth"ers are trying to claim that a sitting President should not be investigated if they are potentially breeching national security.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 02:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth
"Trump and his team were the subject of intelligence reports that ended up at this Whitehouse"


The above doesn't even have any meaning.

the "Subject of intelligence reports that ended up at this Whitehouse"

In whose stretch of the imagination does that even have value?


It does when he was talking about specific intelligence reports that he said were unmasked for the US citizens after being collected from recording foreign telephone calls not even related to Russia.

edit on 22/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
158
<< 348  349  350    352  353  354 >>

log in

join