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 wire tapping trump residence part two

page: 5
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 07:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: burgerbuddy



To answer:

Yes: United States Intelligence Community

Ask them.

You have no idea what investigations were done, and neither do I. What we do know is that the joint announcment was made.

You're merely deflecting.

Care to actually address the comment I made?



Yeah, you don't know either but tell me, you really think 17 intel agencies were focused on and agree on the same thing and no one is in jail yet?

Even though 17 agencies had taps all over TT, microwave ovens taking 4k movies with surround sound, long range infrared scopes,
satellite imagery, human assets inside, lazer beams, hacking and nanny cams?

Does that seem right to you?

Seems like a waste of resources to come up empty like that.

Worthless even. Like no one was earning their paycheck type of worthless.







posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 07:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

You can deny reality along with anyone you choose, but the statement that the 17 members of the American Intelligence Community made a public statement that the Russian government has attacked the American election process is an unquestionable fact.

The report is available online: Google it.
edit on 25-3-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 07:58 AM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

What you think is irrelevant. What I think is irrelevant.

The proven fact is that the 17 members of the IC did make that public statement.

You can hem-and-haw all you want.

You're repeating BS about Trump Tower and you expect to be taken seriously? Do you have any evidence for the stack of horsemanure you just shoveled in?

Pfft.



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 07:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

You can deny reality along with anyone you choose, but the fact that the 17 members of the American Intelligence Community made a public statement that the Russian government has attacked the American election process is an unquestionable fact.

The report is available online: Google it.



Sure, 1 lies and the rest swear to it.




posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 07:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

You can deny reality along with anyone you choose, but the fact that the 17 members of the American Intelligence Community made a public statement that the Russian government has attacked the American election process is an unquestionable fact.

The report is available online: Google it.



Sure, 1 lies and the rest swear to it.



You must be talking about Congressman Nunes ...



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 08:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

Total BS from you.



Director of National Intelligence James Clapper affirmed an Oct. 7 joint statement from 17 intelligence agencies that the Russian government directed the election interference — and went further. "We stand more resolutely on that statement," Clapper said during a Senate Armed Services hearing with the intelligence chiefs into the politically charged issue.


Source

Nunes proved himself to be nothing more than a toady for the Trump Administration. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it.

His own statement that he was working, not for the people of his district, but for the Republican party is but one part of the clear evidence that he's a fraud.

Now ... care to try again?


The official report was published in it's entirety.
As it stands there is no evidence at all that we have seen that the Russians hacked the DNC.

Clapper says a lot of things, including lies under oath.

I don't care what people say, especially known liars and those who commit perjury, I want to see actual evidence.
When you have some, please share it, either of Russian hacking OR any collusion.

edit on 25/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

You quote Clapper as an absolute authority one moment, and claim he lies under oath the next.

Who cares what you say? If dishonesty is the mark of being worthy to ignore, where does that leave you?



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 08:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

You quote Clapper as an absolute authority one moment, and claim he lies under oath the next.

Who cares what you say? If dishonesty is the mark of being worthy to ignore, where does that leave you?



Nope.
Like I said, I want to see evidence.
When Clapper says there is no evidence of collusion, I concur with him (as opposed to believing him). Why? because there is no evidence that we have seen.

When Clapper says there is evidence of Russia hacking the DNC, I do NOT concur with him. Why? because there is no evidence that we have seen.

You, on the other hand, choose to believe people sometimes and not other times based on what you want to believe, rather than the evidence at hand.

edit on 25/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Clappers appearance on mtp.
No evidence of collusion or crimes
Look it up I have posted it multiple times
As DNI Clapper was over the agencies that issued the report

So yea when the head analyst says these things they actually mean something

And yes the report used data on and before 29 dec 2016

the report is available for the public to read in an unclassified format



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 08:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

You quote Clapper as an absolute authority one moment, and claim he lies under oath the next.

Who cares what you say? If dishonesty is the mark of being worthy to ignore, where does that leave you?



Nope.
Like I said, I want to see evidence.
When Clapper says there is no evidence I don't believe him, I concur with him. Why? because there is no evidence that we have seen.
When Clapper says there is evidence of Russia hacking the DNC, I do not concur with him. Why? because there is no evidence that we have seen.

You, on the other hand choose to believe people sometimes and not other times based on what you want to believe, rather than the evidence at hand.



So you believe there is no evidence, you select as true statements that support your belief, and reject those that don't.

You are the poster child for confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance.

Here are the facts: DNI Clapper announced that the consensus of the Intelligence Community was that the Russian government had hacked the DNC.

This has been repeatedly confirmed.

There has been evidence provided multiple times. Low-hanging fruit: Wikipedia - Russian Interference in the 2016 United States Elections

You are denying reality.



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 08:11 AM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

What do you think the additional sanctions on Russia were?
Punishment.
How are we supposed to put the Kremlin in jail?



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 08:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

You quote Clapper as an absolute authority one moment, and claim he lies under oath the next.

Who cares what you say? If dishonesty is the mark of being worthy to ignore, where does that leave you?



Nope.
Like I said, I want to see evidence.
When Clapper says there is no evidence I don't believe him, I concur with him. Why? because there is no evidence that we have seen.
When Clapper says there is evidence of Russia hacking the DNC, I do not concur with him. Why? because there is no evidence that we have seen.

You, on the other hand choose to believe people sometimes and not other times based on what you want to believe, rather than the evidence at hand.



So you believe there is no evidence, you select as true statements that support your belief, and reject those that don't.

You are the poster child for confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance.

Here are the facts: DNI Clapper announced that the consensus of the Intelligence Community was that the Russian government had hacked the DNC.

This has been repeatedly confirmed.

There has been evidence provided multiple times. Low-hanging fruit: Wikipedia - Russian Interference in the 2016 United States Elections

You are denying reality.


Nope.
I do not believe people just because they tell me something.
I look to see if there is any evidence of what they are saying.

Is there evidence that Russia hacked the DNC? - No.
Is there evidence available that Russia colluded with the Trump campaign to influence the election? - No
Is there evidence that a crime was committed by someone leaking classified information from private conversations - Yes.

It's all very simple. It's not a question of always believing someone or never believing someone, it's about evidence, dear boy, evidence.



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Do you understand the intel clapper had access to?
The nsa has everything, going back at least 5 years. If anything was there they would have indicted someone.

As I asked others previously if you have any evidence of collusion, crimes by trump or his campaign(as clapper stated) please post it here. I would love to see it.

Otherwise I would say the report released is accurate.

Where do you think the data came from that was legally or illegaly unmasked?
You do understand they store all data in case it is needed in investigations?



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 08:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Sillyolme

Clappers appearance on mtp.
No evidence of collusion or crimes
Look it up I have posted it multiple times
As DNI Clapper was over the agencies that issued the report

So yea when the head analyst says these things they actually mean something

And yes the report used data on and before 29 dec 2016

the report is available for the public to read in an unclassified format


So, you, like UK, want to believe Clapper when he says what you want and distrust him when he doesn't?

Here's the IC Report, courtesy of the New York Times

From the report, first statement, page 1:



"Assessing Ruissian Activities and Intnetions in Recent US Elections" is a declassified version of a highly classified assessment that has been provided to the President and to recipients approved by the President.



edit on 25-3-2017 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

More dishonesty: you believe Congressman Nunes because he told you something.
edit on 25-3-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Notice



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 08:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

I agree the investigation is ongoing.
I agree there may be more info that comes to light.
The nsa is pretty good at what they do. Page, Manfort, Flynn, ect have all had all their data shaken down. All of it.
If there were anything there Clapper would not have gone out of his way to say what he did on mtp.

You go right ahead and crap on the intel report.
It is only a matter of time.



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 08:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Sillyolme

I agree the investigation is ongoing.
I agree there may be more info that comes to light.
The nsa is pretty good at what they do. Page, Manfort, Flynn, ect have all had all their data shaken down. All of it.
If there were anything there Clapper would not have gone out of his way to say what he did on mtp.

You go right ahead and crap on the intel report.
It is only a matter of time.


You mean the intel report that clearly states that the Russian government attacked the American Electoral process?

That report?

You're making less sense than normal; quite an accomplishment.



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 08:27 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Yeah like I said and Clapper said. "It could have unfolded or become available since I left. "
Same interview.
Cherry pick your info much?



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 08:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Please point out when I have told you I had any problem with clapper as dni or his statement made on mtp?



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Hold your breath and stamp your feet all you want.
Do you understand this is developing in the moment and that Clappers intel is totall obsolete?



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join