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.

 

Trump Wiretap Confirmed "Incidental Collection" Becomes the Scapegoat for the Lying Media

page: 9
113
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Both of you are either hating Trump or hating Obama,that solves nothing.Just political.




posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 04:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mike.Ockizard
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Regardless of whether this was "legal" or not, when you look at the big picture it's pretty obvious what the intent was here. The "Trump makes crazy unsubstantiated claims of wiretapping" narrative is collapsing much like the "Trump in collusion with Russia" narrative is in shambles. Just looking at this objectively. Then there were those pesky directives Obama announced to his pawns on his way out. Hard to believe anyone takes the MSM or the Obama camp seriously anymore. Even Fox is questionable! LOL


Let me help you out if I can. You clearly REALLY REALLY REALLY want to believe Trump even it requires acting stupid.

If you call a person like Ambassador Kislyak — who is under surveillance by our intelligence agencies — that call will be logged. Period.

That's not being under surveillance, that's showing up under the surveillance of somebody else. It in no way, shape or form bears any relation to the allegations made by President Trump.

Nunes was clearly trying to throw lying Trump a bone even though he knows that he was fueling conflation used to manipulate first order thinking dumbasses. He should recuse himself from any investigation as he's clearly compromised.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 04:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Comey didn't lie even if this is true. At no point was a wiretap authorized or carried out on Trump Tower. That is what Comey said, and it is true. That also has nothing to do with incidental collection.


did you brief any calls made by M. Flynn with president obama.

Basically comey say's i dont have to answer that question!

He also states something interesting in judicial proceedings in that judicial proceedings can unmask a persons name! The question I have could you consider flynns questioning judicial proceeding? If you can they how are they allowed to use information gathered as it has to be destroyed also how did an investigation not relating to trump get used in judicial proceeding related to trumps cabinet picks? Basically how did they know where to look? Because it was leaked to the press thats how! So basically comey is in a world of hurt for not answering the obama question!
edit on 22-3-2017 by digital01anarchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 04:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Jobeycool

Last I checked there are threads on all of those topics and humans are capable of dealing with more than one issue in a day.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 04:41 PM
link   
a reply to: digital01anarchy

That's way too many logical leaps for the random obama herd follower. They need to be led by the nose to the pasture or they'll lose their way. IOW, until obama is on trial and found guilty, they won't believe it.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 04:43 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Why are you talking about Flynn and kysliak so much. This is Trump we're talking about here.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

I tried hard to believe the story being put out by the MSM and all of their partners in high places but for me, the pieces just don't fit. Also trying to trigger me with the "acting stupid" comment just makes you look desperate.

The "Trump makes crazy unsubstantiated claims of wiretapping" narrative is collapsing much like the "Trump in collusion with Russia" narrative is in shambles. Neither is over yet but the big wave broke a while ago and still no smoking gun.

I call BS on Nunes trying to win favor from Trump unless you can provide information to persuade me. On capital hill Trump is toxic and nobody really loses by going against him right now. That may be changing though.

How exactly has Nunes become "compromised" ??



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 04:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: theantediluvian

Why are you talking about Flynn and kysliak so much. This is Trump we're talking about here.


If you call Russian ambassadors, expect to have your call intercepted automatically by US intelligence agencies and those of our allies and those of Russia and probably their allies for that matter.

None of this is a revelation. None of it has anything to do with what Trump said which is that Obama had HIS phone calls intercepted. I'm sure you're smart enough to make the distinction if you can get past your deep rooted desire to make Trump's tweet something other than the lie that it was.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 04:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

Nunes now states that the FBI has still not responded on who performed the "unmasking" of names. No way you can convince me they dont have that information already. driup..drip..

FBI is not cooperating...



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 05:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: theantediluvian

Why are you talking about Flynn and kysliak so much. This is Trump we're talking about here.


If you call Russian ambassadors, expect to have your call intercepted automatically by US intelligence agencies and those of our allies and those of Russia and probably their allies for that matter.

None of this is a revelation. None of it has anything to do with what Trump said which is that Obama had HIS phone calls intercepted. I'm sure you're smart enough to make the distinction if you can get past your deep rooted desire to make Trump's tweet something other than the lie that it was.


You can play games with this all day long but in the real world, those in power that control the information, released information with the intent to do damage to a sitting President. Word games. sheesh...



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

Lmao. I could care a less if you're triggered or not. Trump did make an unsubstantiated claim of wiretapping. What Nunes said doesn't change that at all.

Do you remember what Trump said? He said that Obama was wiretapping his calls from Trump Tower. That's not the same as your call to a Russian diplomat being intercepted because the Russian you're on the phone with is being surveilled.

How hard is that to understand? Nunes also didn't say definitely that Trump's own calls to a Russian were intercepted.

As for your question about Nunes. The only reason that Nunes would have had for making the statement that he did is that it gets folks who choose, as you are right now, to not comprehend/acknowledge the distinction, to believe that maybe Trump wasn't making unsubstantiated claims in his tweets. Except he was.

There was absolutely no other purpose for him to do it. That's a clear demonstration that he is unable to be objective.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 05:02 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Those things aren't mutually exclusive. But Friday is when the real vindication comes. You can read the FISA warrant yourself then and see in all of its glory that they were targeting Trump through his connections.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Specific to the wire tapping claim, nunes changed his statement from "I've seen no evidence" yesterday to "it is possible" today. Sooooo I'd say it definitely changes some things.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 05:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
This is hilarious. People are twisting backwards to try to redefine what Trump said so it's not a lie.

The reality is that the President saw a story on the news, tweeted angrily about it without thinking of the consequences, then his team had to play damage control and try to rationalize his actions.

That's it. You're no better than the brainwashed liberals you claim to hate if you accept this BS narrative.


This is the summary of his entire term so far.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 05:05 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Oh, and Nunes explicitly excluded russians from these calls, meaning they were targeting people that weren't Russian (or russian agents) to intercept phone calls from the trump transition team.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 05:07 PM
link   
So Hillary Clinton says, "Wipe a computer server, . . . . with a cloth?"

Now Obama can say. . . "Tap a phone line, . . . . like a keg?"


hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha




posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

Didn't we already know that there were 2 fisa warrant requests, since the first one was denied? Even my husband who was a Hillary supporter and debated with me the past couple of years, came home today and said, "damn! Trump was right once again!" he is just shaking his head and remarking that every time he think Trump is bs'ing and crazy...it seems to always come around that Trump is right. Btw...my husband refuses to make any $$$ money bets with me since the election. My savings for splurging is getting low nowadays!



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Trump: FIND ME SOMETHING....ANYTHING THAT WILL VINDICATE ME. I DONT CARE HOW TENUOUS THE CONNECTION MAY BE ! ! !

Nunes to the rescue look I found this. It doesn't even have anything to do with Russians. You're gonna love it. It's vapor but it's vapor that almost kinda sorta somewhat supports that wild claim you made.

trump: good now go release the info to the American people without going through the intelligence committee that your the chair of. Because I can't tweet it. Don't worry ill back you later.

Then reality comes crashing in.

Schiff: evidence is more than circumstantial.


The investigation is heating up and trump is scared.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 05:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: chiefsmom
Ohhhhhh This ought to be good.



Can we get some autistic screeching?



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

Lmao. I could care a less if you're triggered or not. Trump did make an unsubstantiated claim of wiretapping. What Nunes said doesn't change that at all.


Word games. Wiretapping, incidental collection. Who cares. Same thing in the sense they spied on him, unmasked and disseminated.


Do you remember what Trump said? He said that Obama was wiretapping his calls from Trump Tower. That's not the same as your call to a Russian diplomat being intercepted because the Russian you're on the phone with is being surveilled.

How hard is that to understand? Nunes also didn't say definitely that Trump's own calls to a Russian were intercepted.


As the ground melts away beneath your feet you cling to anything in sight. Nunes suggested in the interview that there was something troubling enough about what he learned that he went straight to the white house to talk to Donald. Cant wait to hear more!!


As for your question about Nunes. The only reason that Nunes would have had for making the statement that he did is that it gets folks who choose, as you are right now, to not comprehend/acknowledge the distinction, to believe that maybe Trump wasn't making unsubstantiated claims in his tweets. Except he was.


I do comprehend the spirit of the accusation. I also comprehend Trumps ignorance of using the correct language to describe how he was spied on and how the information was stripped of masking and released illegaly. Maybe soon we will see the cockroaches scatter for fear of going to prison.


There was absolutely no other purpose for him to do it. That's a clear demonstration that he is unable to be objective.


First you state:



Nunes was clearly trying to throw lying Trump a bone


Now you say:



The only reason that Nunes would have had for making the statement that he did is that it gets folks who choose, as you are right now, to not comprehend/acknowledge the distinction, to believe that maybe Trump wasn't making unsubstantiated claims in his tweets.


Which is it? Care to cite anything to back up his intentions? If not you are just casting wild accusations and are sounding more unhinged.




top topics



 
113
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join