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.

 

Here's Why Heads Will Probably Roll Over Obama Wiretapping Trump

page: 7
86
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 05:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Liquesence

Here's Why Heads Will Probably Roll Over Obama Wiretapping Trump


So, it's now a fact that Trump wiretapped Trump?

THIS is the problem, when claims are automatically taken as "fact" with little to no supporting evidence.


Its far from a fact that Obama requested a wire tap on Trump, but the evidence is significant that there was some form of spying on Trump, instigated by the Obama administration. The FISA requests were all reported at the time.


And we've been through this.

If there was a FISA request it's because there was probably cause of wrongdoing, namely involving foreign intelligence, and that warrant for a tap (depending on what kind of tap, whether direct communication or server traffic) had to be signed off on by a JUDGE via the DOJ.

Doesn't mean Obama ordered it, but IF someone had probable cause the Trump campaign had ongoing contact with Russian intelligence or any kind, there is every right to ask the DOJ to submit a FISA request to the judge.

Not hard to understand at all.


Yes we have been through it. It would appear Trump was wire tapped, and now we wait to understand why and what was uncovered along with who gained access to the information. Of course we also want to know who was involved in requesting the tap.

Not hard to understand at all really.




posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 05:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

Again, what would constitute proof in your view. You're the audience.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Liquesence

Again, what would constitute proof in your view. You're the audience.


Irrefutable evidence that Obama ordered it (since THAT is the claim), not that the FBI/DOJ had probable cause for a warrant, or that there was such a warrant.

Pretty simple, really.
edit on 5-3-2017 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:12 PM
link   
"The paper of record" has been reporting the wiretaps as fact since January.




posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: diggindirt

Speculation.

You have no proof.


And I could say the same about all your posts. As I stated: "Seems to me that both sides of this issue are lacking evidence." But the totality of evidence so far presented seems to favor the Donald since it was the Democrat party's side that needed some assistance due to the weakness of their candidate. It was their terror at the thought of losing---inspired by the lackluster crowds and fund-raising their candidate was generating---that made them go desperate. That is just logic, needs no proof. When they realized that the Donald was drawing 10x the number of Hillary's crowds, they lost their minds. When the internal polling was turning against them---seems to me that was about April or May---when her crowds didn't pick up despite the weather turning nice---they went outlaw. They knew the party was facing bankruptcy in most states and probably on the national level as well.
But you are correct. I have no proof.
The really neat part is---neither do you and yet you continue to refuse to face reality---continue to do the same thing over and over and expect different results. Well, the voters spoke and said they wanted to try something new. If you want to continue banging your head on the headboard---feel free. It is annoying to others but you're certainly free to keep doing it since you are the only one to suffer the consequences.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:14 PM
link   
a reply to: diggindirt

The burden of proof is not on me to disprove your claims but for you to prove your baseless claims.

Pretty simple.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: syrinx high priest
as an american, isn't it more important to find out if our president is a puppet for putin?

they are still the bad guys, right?

We obviously have no idea what happened and who did what, but just from a basic level can't we agree that the first thing that needs to get sorted out is who is really running the country?



Well apparently our former POTUS imagines he is still in charge. And he seems to be co running the shadow government with Soros and the CFR..... they have a stranglehold and wont let go of their death grip. But we will see whether the light or the darkness prevails.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Deny Arrogance

The wiretapping of associates of Trump, which is known, is completely different than the claims that Obama had Trump himself tapped.

Two different issues.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

That's not the claim of this thread. In fact, I've said numerous times that I doubt Obama will see any real blowback. Obama was a smooth operator, always with plausible deniability.

If obama faces blowback it will be from the dissemination of this information, see EO12333 and this NYT article.
edit on 5-3-2017 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Liquesence

Yes. It's a fact. Now, how the sequence of events unfolded who knows. But we all know trump tower was wire tapped. Even Obama didn't deny that it was. Hillary sent out campaign emails claiming they were going to. There are articles from the NYT talking about wiretapped information on DJT being passed along to, then president, Obama. It's a fact that the Trump campaign was tapped. The extent and some of the details are murky, but it's not really a question of whether it even happened at this point.

Donald said, " his wires were tapped" However I like the way you acknowledge that Trump tower was tapped, which is entirely possible given that Manafort lives there for instance, and he did, or still does have an investigation going on by the FBI, and maybe the CIA, NSA as well. But, we don't really know if any individual was specifically targeted in the FISA, just that certain names were included, and that in itself doesn't mean a name should mean a target in itself, as indeed the only thing we have been given third party is that a server was a definite target. The only way to know that, is to know exactly what the FBI application for the FISA said.
For Trump himself, his tweet is probably less of a reaction, but more in his view, a comedic, 'cunning plan' since you can bet it comes from the dredgeover Breitbart story on 3rd of March, and probably encouraged by Slimeball Bannon,
www.breitbart.com...
At the end of the day, you can bet that the intelligence services will do their own thing anyway, they are beholden to nobody, checks and balances mean nothing, especially now in the computer era. So let's get real here.
My guess is that the target was/is Manafort he is worth watching, and he is still around and giving advice to Trump in the admin picks. So....?

edit on 5-3-2017 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite


That's not the claim of this thread.


Really?

The TITLE of the thread is

Why Heads Will Probably Roll Over Obama Wiretapping Trump


"Obama wiretapping Trump."

Jesus Christ...



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Liquesence

Again, what would constitute proof in your view. You're the audience.


Irrefutable evidence that Obama ordered it (since THAT is the claim), not that the FBI/DOJ had probable cause for a warrant, or that there was such a warrant.

Pretty simple, really.


Got it.. you will throw the baby out with the bath water to protect your "team"...

It is astonishing really... simple check of history shows rarely do leaders order anyone to do something shady... they complain in a vague way about something needed to happen and a peon complies.

If this checks out and the Fisa court did sign off on warrants, while he may not have said make this happen... he was the fricking president of the united states, when intelligence assets target a US citizen (and presidential candidate) ultimately the buck stops at the oval office, which means HE is responsible even if he did not say I want you to bug trump tower.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Irishhaf

Don't kid yourself. Obama and Valerie Jarrett are attached at the hip. A whisper in her ear...and it's done!! (Make it so.)



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 07:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Irishhaf


If this checks out and the Fisa court did sign off on warrants,


then there was probable cause.

but the fact that there was potential wrongdoing that a judge signed off (via warrant) on is secondary to the fact that it might have been signed off on?

smh

seems that according to some the reason for the potential warrant by the fbi/doj is secondary to the probable cause of wrongdoing therein that initiated it

my my



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 07:16 PM
link   
The liberal rag magines came out in the middle of the day on a sunday to claim that Trump was deluded by posting baseless accusation on twitter.

Well... there was a FISA court refusal of the wiretap request. That alone should tell us everything we need to know. The court approved over 20,000 requests and denied only a dozen, this being one of them.

Lots of subpoenas are denied on the basis of being overly broad. This would-be court order is likely no different.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 07:24 PM
link   
This vindicates Snowden, on one level.

Right?



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 07:26 PM
link   
So, according to many people, the issue is this:

"How dare you surveil me!"

"We had probable cause, hence the warrant, the judge, FISA, etc."

"But, how dare you surveil me!"

got it lol



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 08:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

not if the judge at the fisa court was aware of all the info he needed to render his permission and remember it was denied twice so how did they get it to place third time?



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: syrinx high priest

Clapper already said there is no connection with Russia and so did the FBI. So that means this is illegal. The FISA court granted spying on false documents. Not to mention Trump already has the person in the CIA that is blowing the whistle at hand. He lets the media go nuts then he normally proves them wrong in the end as a way to discredit them. Trump is a smart guy and knows what he is doing.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 09:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: GlassToTheArson
a reply to: syrinx high priest

How exactly are the Russians the "bad guys?"

Now one ever seems to be able to give me a good answer on that one



They made hillary lose and still owe her money for the uranium.


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



new topics

top topics



 
86
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join