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.

 

Confirmed: The Obama White House Received Intel Reports On Trump

page: 6
65
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 03:25 PM
link   
a reply to: digital01anarchy

Some of the people here are extremely obtuse for a conspiracy message board.
edit on 27-3-2017 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

thats exactly correct. Liberals/Progressives/Democrats who approve of what Obama/Intel agencies under Obama did cannot with logical consistency then turn right around and say Trump has no right to do the same thing under the same pretense of "listening to foreign agents', which of course is such a naked, obvious ploy and semantical game stand in for listening to your political opposition using "foreigners" as the pretense. Totally not buying that at all.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 03:56 PM
link   
a reply to: digital01anarchy

Exactly right. Nunez doesn't know who to trust.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 03:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: digital01anarchy
Oh I know what you were doing. I was just using your partisanship to pitch a better idea. That's all.


Makes sense most liberals like yourselve are devoid of original ideas thats why you all need to be bottle fed your opinions and feeling.
edit on 27-3-2017 by digital01anarchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: introvert

A source that has the proper evidence, confirmed it. Now, unless he is lying, it's confirmed. Is this really that hard of a concept?


Do you believe everything you are told?



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Do you believe anything you don't see with your own eyes?



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 04:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: introvert

Do you believe anything you don't see with your own eyes?


Rarely.

I'm not much in to blind faith.

The point in all of this is that we need to stop playing these political games and trying to fool ourselves in to believing Trump, his team, Obama...whomever, is completely innocent or guilty based on the information we are receiving.

There are big gaps in the information and context that we are not able to get our hands on. We should take a much more logical approach and wait till we have that info.

Too many people are trying to defend their "side" and are not approaching this reasonably.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 04:28 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




The point in all of this is that we need to stop playing these political games and trying to fool ourselves in to believing Trump, his team, Obama...whomever, is completely innocent or guilty based on the information we are receiving. There are big gaps in the information and context that we are not able to get our hands on. We should take a much more logical approach and wait till we have that info. Too many people are trying to defend their "side" and are not approaching this reasonably.

Oh my how things change in just a few short months.
I agree with this post.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 04:29 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

So before the CIA leaks you didn't believe they could use nearly every device in your house to spy on you?



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 04:29 PM
link   
a reply to: digital01anarchy


Lol the level of hypocrisy is astonishing with liberals


LOL!!! The level of presumption is astonishing with partisans. I am equally contemptuous of both parties and their partisan crap.


are you not the same people who have been fighting trump supporters on this very same issue about laying all the cards on the table with regards to the russian collusion case where trump supporters want to see the evidence by the fbi! then you cry victim when its done back to you?


Nope! Not me. I believe the only comment I've ever made regarding the Russian collusion crap was made before the inauguration and it was to the effect that I was more concerned about what was revealed by the leaks than who leaked it. To the best of my knowledge, there has been no more evidence produced of Trump/Russian collusion than there has been evidence produced of Obama wiretapping Trump. Just a bunch of unsourced gossip.

I want the proper authorities to conduct a proper investigation and produce a proper report.


The sad truth is there is way more evidence of illegal activity in this spying on trump then there is with the collusion case.


Um... something like this? NSA/CIA Whistleblower Dennis Montgomery: Trump, Chief Justice, and 156 Judges were spied on Evidence that Nunes has had and has been sitting on? Oh! Until Klayman/Montgomery threatened to take it public if he didn't address it appropriately... You mean that kind of evidence???


Obama allowing intelligence communities to share information, the unmasking of flynn, obamas request for fisa's, the information leaked to the media, comey not answering the question about obama being briefed on information that was obtained by the IC in relation to the case, the fact that nunes can't be open with the investigation and that the evidence was presented directly to the president and the white house lawyers.


Yeah, Obama's a dirty dog. So are lots of other critters -- Republican and Democrat. I want to know which Republicans -- "Never Trumpers" for example -- were not only aware that Trump was being spied on, but aided and abetted the spying. I want the proper authorities to conduct a proper investigation and produce proper evidence. Then let the chips fall where they may!!!
edit on 27-3-2017 by Boadicea because: formatting



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert




The point in all of this is that we need to stop playing these political games and trying to fool ourselves in to believing Trump, his team, Obama...whomever, is completely innocent or guilty based on the information we are receiving. There are big gaps in the information and context that we are not able to get our hands on. We should take a much more logical approach and wait till we have that info. Too many people are trying to defend their "side" and are not approaching this reasonably.

Oh my how things change in just a few short months.
I agree with this post.


I suppose it's bound to happen from time to time.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 04:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: introvert

So before the CIA leaks you didn't believe they could use nearly every device in your house to spy on you?


I didn't say anything even remotely close to that, or even in the same ballpark.

Apparently you glossed-over the meat of my post in order to ask me a completely irrelevant question.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

But that's not the what introvert really believes. The point introvert is really making is that we shouldn't trust Nunes, because it flies in the face of the left wing narrative and looks really incriminating for the obama administration. "Afterall, Nunes could be committing political suicide, who knows!"

The platitude about fooling ourselves into believing one side is guilty/innocent and acting reasonably is just a cover for that admission. And while it's generally a true statement, the motives behind it are less than admirable.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Not at all. You said you don't believe things you haven't seen. In this case (Nunes) we're talking about classified information. You asked if I believed everything I heard and I asked if you only believed things you've seen with your own eyes to illustrate the absurdity of the question. You tried to recover by saying that generally you don't trust anything you didn't see yourself. I blew that out of the water by bringing up another classified information case, which you (rightfully) believed before seeing with your own eyes.

I'm so tired of these stupid games. Why in the world is it so hard to admit that what we have now seems pretty bad for the previous administration and would lend more credence to the Trump's claims. That's the reality of the situation as it stands today.
edit on 27-3-2017 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 05:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: shooterbrody

But that's not the what introvert really believes. The point introvert is really making is that we shouldn't trust Nunes, because it flies in the face of the left wing narrative and looks really incriminating for the obama administration. "Afterall, Nunes could be committing political suicide, who knows!"

The platitude about fooling ourselves into believing one side is guilty/innocent and acting reasonably is just a cover for that admission. And while it's generally a true statement, the motives behind it are less than admirable.


So now you're a mind reader?

I left the door open for the potential guilt of Obama's admin as well in my statement. What we need are hard facts before we come to any conclusion and we simply do not have that yet.

Don't try to feed us a line of bull# all because you are trying to push your own narrative. You admit my statement was generally true, but your desire to point blame at the Left overcomes your ability to reason.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

No, a reasonable person is able to weigh the merits of a situation based on the available information and change their opinion as more information comes available. An unreasonable person denies currently available information for the ever elusive "more information" they think may be out there.

The leftists around here refuse to even discuss this in hypothetical terms, that speaks volumes to the level of denial they're in.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




So now you're a mind reader?


Nope, I just analyzed the language you used and balanced that against the other things you've said in this and other threads.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite



Not at all. You said you don't believe things you haven't seen.


I said rarely.



In this case (Nunes) we're talking about classified information. You asked if I believed everything I heard and I asked if you only believed things you've seen with your own eyes to illustrate the absurdity of the question.


Exactly. Do you believe what Nunes has said, even though you have no access to the information and he does not provide you with proof or complete context...and you even admit he could be lying?



You tried to recover by saying that generally you don't trust anything you didn't see yourself. I blew that out of the water by bringing up another classified information case, which you (rightfully) believed before seeing with your own eyes.


What case was that? I do not see any reference to another case in your responses and I cannot find a post in which I said I believed it before seeing evidence. Are you talking about the post referring to CIA leaks?



I'm so tired of these stupid games. Why in the world is it so hard to admit that what we have now seems pretty bad for the previous administration and would lend more credence to the Trump's claims. That's the reality of the situation.


It only seems bad if you are taking the words of others and not making an assessment based on verifiable information.

If we were to take the same logic and apply it elsewhere, we could say that Trump and his cronies are in bed with the Russians and should be impeached.

So what you are doing is no different.

All I am saying is we need to wait this out. There is a lot of disinfo out there and the possibilities are endless. Stop with the partisan bull# and quit wasting our time trying to peddle nonsense that even you had to admit could be bull#.
edit on 27-3-2017 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 05:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: introvert




So now you're a mind reader?


Nope, I just analyzed the language you used and balanced that against the other things you've said in this and other threads.


Analyzed? No. You just made crap up.

You may want to play partisan politics with someone else. You're not doing so well.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 05:45 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

In your opinion, based on what we know today, should hillary clinton have been taken to trial over her handling of classified information?



new topics

top topics



 
65
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join