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 Surveilled Before Nomination, Agencies with Info Blocked Nunes for Weeks

page: 1
64
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+41 more 
posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 06:44 PM
link   
FoxNews has come up with a story that has Trump under surveillance since before he was even nominated !!

According to "trusted sources", a high intelligence official was involved and the same official is the one who "unmasked" names in the intel reports !!

More sources say that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes found out somehow, but was getting resistance from intel people.

This gets better by the day.

Trump himself is active today on Twitter too !!

I think this could soon blow the lid off the Obama scorched earth agenda.

FOX: Trump Surveilled Before Nomination, Agencies with Info Blocked Nunes for Weeks

A Friday breaking Fox News report on surveillance of President Trump’s team that began before he became the Republican presidential nominee claimed a very senior intelligence official was responsible—as well as for the unmasking of the names of private U.S. citizens.

The report cited sources which also indicated that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) knew of the existence of the information in January, but one or more intelligence agencies blocked him, and there were only two locations where he could view the information that he called “very troubling.”






posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen


FoxNews has come up with a story that has Trump under surveillance since before he was even nominated !!


Well according to Trump, he was being surveilled all the way back since the 1990s.

Though I find this to be absolutely believable, trusted sources is a meh.


+10 more 
posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Yeah well they will ignore it because it's not CNN. There is so much evidence that the last administration did shady things but people won't listen.


+6 more 
posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

thank you for posting this xuenchen


+16 more 
posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 06:55 PM
link   
Of course he was, anyone who thinks the Establishment wasn't surveilling Trump is unbelievably naive. These people spy on reporters and Congress, but not the next potential President? Get real.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 07:32 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I really don't see what the big deal is. All presidential candidates should be thoroughly vetted, including active surveillance.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 07:33 PM
link   
I think it was infowars that pushed the date back to 2003 with the "dragnet" program .


+10 more 
posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 07:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: conscientiousobserver
a reply to: xuenchen

I really don't see what the big deal is. All presidential candidates should be thoroughly vetted, including active surveillance.

The issue is when and if this information is then used against the candidate.


+20 more 
posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 07:39 PM
link   
Folk keep underestimating Prez Trump. Does he have the goods this time? My guess is yes. Deep State smacked on the world wide web by a POTUS. BAM!

Trump is The Joker in the deck. Like Columbo---they never saw him coming. The glitch in the globalist two-party scam of Bonesmen & disciples of the Council On Foreign Relations.

The deep state globalists which pretty much include all of our Presidents since JFK, have abused the Constitution and have been using expanded mass surveillance powers for both diabolical & political acts.

The evidentiary items that are starting to build along with Trump's tweets as well as his uncanny ability to score wins over the deep state and their MSM propagandists, I'm leaning towards him being right on this.

I'm also starting to believe Trump is the karma for the rogue state that performed the deadly coup on JFK. It's a durn brawl for sure!


+1 more 
posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 07:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: conscientiousobserver
a reply to: xuenchen

I really don't see what the big deal is. All presidential candidates should be thoroughly vetted, including active surveillance.


This is exactly the problem.

mg



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 07:45 PM
link   
The US of A is a police-state.

Time to change it, Mr. Trump!



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 07:48 PM
link   
"The Report cited sources"

Oh no



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 08:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: muse7
"The Report cited sources"

Oh no


Classified Sources !!



+6 more 
posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 08:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: conscientiousobserver
a reply to: xuenchen

I really don't see what the big deal is. All presidential candidates should be thoroughly vetted, including active surveillance.


So they should be thoroughly vetted, including surveillance from the other political party that is currently in power and stumping for their party candidate in a presidential election?

So it's going to be fine with you if Trump has "active surveillance" on anyone even remotely thought of as a primary Democratic runner for the 2020 general election. You know, stuff he can use against the other party. Then, if he manages to lose, he can get an office in DC and work really hard with the people that he has put in power to undermine the new establishment.

It is astounding to me how Progressives just run with the notion that the end justifies the means and morality is relative. Their personal lives must be a real train wreck.


edit on 20Sat, 01 Apr 2017 20:16:56 -0500America/Chicago17st2017-04-01T20:16:56-05:00pmSaturdayAmerica/Chicago by GreyScale because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Since we only have anonymous sources to rely on at this point, we can't be sure what the truth is.

I look at the Democrats actions in the last few weeks as supporting coverup and subterfuge....my opinion.


+1 more 
posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: GreyScale

Worse than that, the sources are saying that members of Congress and even the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS were spied upon.
This, if true, is outrageous.

edit on b000000302017-04-01T20:28:52-05:0008America/ChicagoSat, 01 Apr 2017 20:28:52 -0500800000017 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Its a witch hunt. That's all it is. The left Is looking to tarnish the reputation of the most reputable leader of the free state and guess what it's not Obama and apparently their's alot of people having a really really hard time comeing to terms with the fact that there side lost. Well guess what. There side lost. Get over it.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

Oh, I agree with you.

What I actually find outrageous is that we have American citizens who vote and are OK with their party doing it because it advances the "cause".

Perhaps we should not have repealed the Espionage Act and the Sedition Act after all.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 08:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: xuenchen


FoxNews has come up with a story that has Trump under surveillance since before he was even nominated !!


Well according to Trump, he was being surveilled all the way back since the 1990s.

Though I find this to be absolutely believable, trusted sources is a meh.


Because of Trump's dealings with the Russians, he has been watched for many years, just like all the people who have business dealings with Russians do. Russia is not the only country that actually stimulates surveillance, there are many of them. Knowing that a person doing financial transactions with these countries is being watched probably keeps these people from doing more wrong. I am sure Trump knew he was being watched with foreign investments. They were probably way more legit than the business dealings he had here in America.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: GreyScale

Did I say it should be done by the opposing party? No it should be done by a bipartisan or even non partisan group of investigators for all candidates and any findings should only be revealed and acted upon if any laws have been broken. I believe it's either the house or the Senate that has similar committees that investigate and deter any wrong doings done by officials.

It is widely known that we are all already being watched anyways... which is something that is well beyond partisan politics to begin with. So why not demand that it be used to the advantage of the American people, by letting us know who these politicians really are.



new topics

top topics



 
64
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join