So the FBI was wiretapping people connected to Trump

a reply to: AboveBoard

As you know, many people were unmasked and there were not allegations of most of the doing anything illegal, so you are wrong about that.

Again, its more than just Manafort was tapped, I guess I will repeat it here again.

the fact Hillary's team like podesta had undisclosed paid relationships with Russians and weren't investigated, the fact that rice unmasked americans connected with trump for such a dubious reason as a UAE meeting in the US, the fact that Obama took unprecedented steps to insure as many agencies as possible got access to this classified info, the fact that he told European allies about details of an ongoing investigaation into a political rival.

And I already showed the stats proving how the Fisa court is just a rubber stamp.

Again, we will see when Trump gets fisa warrants because he heard whoever runs against him in 2020 has someone in their team with connections to, oh lets say china, so he gets his appointees on the Fisa court to approve a wiretap that gets his opponent and many of their team on tape, unmasks many of them, shares the info with many us agencies and european allies, and then has allies in Fox news or Breitbart leak any daming info.

Hey as long as Fisa approves it, no big deal, right?

a reply to: Grambler

I have a hunch that the UAE meeting was merely the excuse. That is so lame. Obama wanted to know what Trump knows about something, and I don't think it has squat to do with the UAE or even Russia.

(BTW, Clapper has been caught in yet another lie regarding this! You cannot believe a word coming out of Clapper's mouth.....what an Obama tool!)

I just heard that Obama is accelerating the pace of his speaking engagements. He wants to rake in as many millions of dollars as he can before the hammer drops, and his credibility is shot to hell.

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: Grambler

I have a hunch that the UAE meeting was merely the excuse. That is so lame. Obama wanted to know what Trump knows about something, and I don't think it has squat to do with the UAE or even Russia.

(BTW, Clapper has been caught in yet another lie regarding this! You cannot believe a word coming out of Clapper's mouth.....what an Obama tool!)

Of course the UAE thing was a terrible exxcuse.

Trump was the President elect, but Obama was worried that the UAE didn't clear the exact reason they were in new york with him, so he had to unmask innocent americans caught on surveillance?

It makes no sense. But hey its legal, so who cares. Just ask people on this thread.

originally posted by: Grambler
Oh and seeing as we we are discussing all of the evil things the russians did to influence the election, its worth point out three congressmen have contacted the FCC demanding them to look into a russian radio station that attempted to influence our elections!

Only problem, the station didn't exist until June 2017.

Just when you thought the 'Russian collusion' narrative couldn't get any more surreal, 3 House democrats decide to write a letter to the FCC which can only be described as 'criminally stupid' and even that seems generous.

According to the letter, signed by Representatives Anna Eshoo (D-CA), Mike Doyle (D-PA) and Frank Pallone (D-N.J), Sputnik Radio, "a radio network funded by the Russian government, was used as part of the Kremlin's effort to influence the 2016 presidential election." As such, these 3 democrats demand that the FCC launch an investigation into Sputnik Radio.

And while it may only seem 'marginally stupid' to suggest that propaganda from a Russian-operated radio station might outweigh the $1.2 billion that Hillary spent on her campaign and/or all of the propaganda spewed by the mainstream media, the argument goes full "criminally stupid" when you realize that Sputnik Radio didn't even start broadcasting in the U.S. until June 2017 (which is about 8 months AFTER the 2016 presidential election...for anyone who may have missed the nuance there).

www.zerohedge.com...

This is false.

Sputnik (news agency)

Radio Sputnik - initially as its predecessor - had broadcast in the Washington DC area on WTOP-HD2 (103.5-HD2) since June 2013 (if not earlier).

In 2014, The Voice of Russia became Radio Sputnik. Starting in 2013, the VOR, and later in 2014, Radio Sputnik, broadcast on one of WTOP's digital subchannels. They moved to analog repeater station W288BS in June, 2017. So to you can't say the "station didn't exist until June 2017." It did exist and was broadcasting via an FCC licensee.

a reply to: nataylor

Not the station the congressmen are reffering to.

From their FCC letter.

We're writing in response to recent troubling press reports that a radio network funded by the Russian government may have used U.S. airwaves to influence the 2016 presidential election. We ask that you investigate these troubling reports and apply all applicable laws and regulations to enforce the public interest standard for licensed stations that broadcast this network.


An article published by the New York Times Magazine (9/13/17) titled "RT, Sputnik and Russia's New Theory of War" suggests that Sputnik, a radio network funded by the Russian government, was used as part of the Kremlin's effort to influence the 2016 presidential election

www.zerohedge.com...

Here is a quote from the NYT piece they are referencing.

It’s hard to imagine Russia’s state-backed media getting any traction in the United States if there wasn’t already an audience for it. For some subset of Americans, the intelligence report singling out RT and Sputnik was just another attack from the supposed “deep state” that Breitbart, for instance, had been fuming about for months — and it was less than surprising when, this spring, Sputnik hired a former Breitbart reporter, Lee Stranahan, to start a radio show in Washington. As Stranahan told The Atlantic, though his paycheck might now come from the Russians, “Nothing about it really affects my position on stuff that I’ve had for years now.”

www.nytimes.com...

and eta from the station itself.

Radio Sputnik Starts Broadcasting in Washington DC on FM Station

01.07.2017(updated 07:22 01.07.2017)
Attention senators, representatives and any fun-loving radio listeners in Washington, DC: Radio Sputnik is now available at 105.5 FM 24/7 and you don’t want to miss a second of its broadcast.

Sputnik News spoke to several members of its radio team to get their perspectives on the new radio station and what it means for the political conversation in DC. Eugene Puryear, whose show By Any Means Necessary draws from a Malcolm X quote about how to achieve black liberation, said that his show is one "that I think really tries to capture a lot of the energy for the movement for black lives, or the climate justice movement, that are moving young progressive people but are also trying to tie that framework into how we look at current events."

sputniknews.com...

a reply to: Grambler

So with Manafort working with the same groups, it was enough for wiretaps. With the Podestas, they were duped. Well prove they didn't know they were working for Russian money, or Manafort did know that.

From your source:

The Podesta Group said it believed its client was an unaffiliated European think tank.

If they thought it was a non-profit think tank, they would not have to disclose their dealing. Once it was found that the think tank had certain ties, Podesta Group filed the appropriate paperwork.

Its only people not connected to democrats that need to be wiretapped for russian connections. Democratic russian connections that were failed to disclosed are all innocent misunderstandings.

I believe Joule is an American company. So they would not have to disclose anything comparable to Manafort.

a reply to: introvert

Yes we know. It was all an innocent mistake.

Prove that they didn't know that in both areas they weren't connected to russsian state officials.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: introvert

Yes we know. It was all an innocent mistake.

Prove that they didn't know that in both areas they weren't connected to russsian state officials.

I don't have to prove anything. For your assertion to stick, you have to prove what they knew and their intent.

Just like you still have to prove the DoJ was instructed to go after Trump's associates because of politics and not their actions.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: introvert

Yes we know. It was all an innocent mistake.

Prove that they didn't know that in both areas they weren't connected to russsian state officials.

I don't have to prove anything. For your assertion to stick, you have to prove what they knew and their intent.

Just like you still have to prove the DoJ was instructed to go after Trump's associates because of politics and not their actions.

Well then how do we prove to know what manaforts intent was?

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: introvert

Yes we know. It was all an innocent mistake.

Prove that they didn't know that in both areas they weren't connected to russsian state officials.

I don't have to prove anything. For your assertion to stick, you have to prove what they knew and their intent.

Just like you still have to prove the DoJ was instructed to go after Trump's associates because of politics and not their actions.

Well then how do we prove to know what manaforts intent was?

We wait for the investigation to conclude and we learn what they have found.

Before you jump to such rash conclusions and assumptions, be patient.

There has been nothing released to indicate this was a political with hunt and your assertions are illogical.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: introvert

Yes we know. It was all an innocent mistake.

Prove that they didn't know that in both areas they weren't connected to russsian state officials.

I don't have to prove anything. For your assertion to stick, you have to prove what they knew and their intent.

Just like you still have to prove the DoJ was instructed to go after Trump's associates because of politics and not their actions.

Well then how do we prove to know what manaforts intent was?

We wait for the investigation to conclude and we learn what they have found.

Before you jump to such rash conclusions and assumptions, be patient.

There has been nothing released to indicate this was a political with hunt and your assertions are illogical.

Thank you for proving my point!

So with Manafort, we wait for an INVESTIGATION to end to see if he was innocent.

But with the Podestas, we take their word for it and no investigation is needed.

Thank you again for showing the bias.

a reply to: Grambler

Thank you for proving my point!

So with Manafort, we wait for an INVESTIGATION to end to see if he was innocent.

Not once have I read that was a point you were trying to make.

I've not decided whether or not he is guilty or innocent. I'll wait till it's all said and done.

But with the Podestas, we take their word for it and no investigation is needed.

Like I said, the two situations do not appear to be comparable. There is much more to the Manafort issue that must be looked at.

Nuance can make a world of difference.

Thank you again for showing the bias.

What bias? My position is the same, whether it's Podesta or Manafort. If there is reason to investigate them...do it.

Where the bias is obvious is your calls of this being a political witch hunt, when there is no evidence to suggest it, and without a proper investigation to find out if a corrupt administration pushed for the witch hunt.

Stepping on your own toes...

originally posted by: Grambler
We keep hearing about how much of a liar Trump was for saying he was wiretapped in Trump tower.

I and others have said all along that while he may have been incorrect in the use of the term wiretap, or that he personally was wiretapped, the unmasking revelations were very troubling and should be looked into.

Well CNN today shows that Manafort, who had a residence at Trump tower, was indeed wirtapped before and after he was campaign chair.

For that reason, speculation has run rampant about whether Manafort or others associated with Trump were under surveillance. The President himself fueled the speculation when in March he used his Twitter account to accuse former President Barack Obama of having his "wires tapped" in Trump Tower.

The Justice Department and the FBI have denied that Trump's own "wires" were tapped.

While Manafort has a residence in Trump Tower, it's unclear whether FBI surveillance of him took place there.

Manafort has a home as well in Alexandria, Virginia. FBI agents raided the Alexandria residence in July.

The FBI also eavesdropped on Carter Page, a campaign associate that then candidate Trump once identified as a national security adviser. Page's ties to Russia, including an attempt by Russian spies to cultivate him, prompted the FBI to obtain a FISA court warrant in 2014.

www.cnn.com...

The article says that sources say that the evidence isn't conclusive that Manafort asked russia for help.

So now it appears that Trump tower may have been wiretaped, and conversations between Trump and manafort may have been wiretapped.

Everyday it is more and more evident at the fabrications of the media and others involving the Russia investigation.

how does wiretapping manafort translate to wiretapping the trump tower?.........and how would that be "fabrications of the media".........

a reply to: introvert

Explain to me the nuance that allows an investigation into Manafort for not disclosing financial ties with Russians but does not call for an investigation into the Podestas for financial ties to the exact same Russian group.

I don't believe I have claimed anywhere that Obama initially ordered a tap on Manafort for political reasons, I said that it could be exploited as such and was as shown by the unmasking and leaks. I said I am worried more than just about Trump, and how this can be exploited even more in the future to go after political opponents.

You are the one who needs a written statement by Obama announcing he did this for political reasons before you think we shouldn't allow it.

I am sure though you would support an investigation into why Obama took all of the actions that he did, so we can PROVE what the reason was.

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Grambler
We keep hearing about how much of a liar Trump was for saying he was wiretapped in Trump tower.

I and others have said all along that while he may have been incorrect in the use of the term wiretap, or that he personally was wiretapped, the unmasking revelations were very troubling and should be looked into.

Well CNN today shows that Manafort, who had a residence at Trump tower, was indeed wirtapped before and after he was campaign chair.

For that reason, speculation has run rampant about whether Manafort or others associated with Trump were under surveillance. The President himself fueled the speculation when in March he used his Twitter account to accuse former President Barack Obama of having his "wires tapped" in Trump Tower.

The Justice Department and the FBI have denied that Trump's own "wires" were tapped.

While Manafort has a residence in Trump Tower, it's unclear whether FBI surveillance of him took place there.

Manafort has a home as well in Alexandria, Virginia. FBI agents raided the Alexandria residence in July.

The FBI also eavesdropped on Carter Page, a campaign associate that then candidate Trump once identified as a national security adviser. Page's ties to Russia, including an attempt by Russian spies to cultivate him, prompted the FBI to obtain a FISA court warrant in 2014.

www.cnn.com...

The article says that sources say that the evidence isn't conclusive that Manafort asked russia for help.

So now it appears that Trump tower may have been wiretaped, and conversations between Trump and manafort may have been wiretapped.

Everyday it is more and more evident at the fabrications of the media and others involving the Russia investigation.

how does wiretapping manafort translate to wiretapping the trump tower?.........and how would that be "fabrications of the media".........

I have alrewady addressed your top question many times on this thread.

As top the second,. there have been many media lies about the russian story. Russia hacking election grids, Clapper saying no one on Trumps campaign was wiretapped, the pee dossier, etc.

a reply to: Grambler

Explain to me the nuance that allows an investigation into Manafort for not disclosing financial ties with Russians but does not call for an investigation into the Podestas for financial ties to the exact same Russian group.

Manafort was directly working for a Ukrainian leader funded by Russia.

Podesta was working with a think tank and, allegedly, they did not know they were receiving funds from Russian interests.

Big difference.

I don't believe I have claimed anywhere that Obama initially ordered a tap on Manafort for political reasons, I said that it could be exploited as such and was as shown by the unmasking and leaks.

You had said that it appears exploitation has occurred in this case. Here is a quote from earlier:

One of the arguments made as to how bad this could be was that it could lead to the party in power using this process agianst their oppinents; and we now see that is the case.

So you are asserting that the party in power (Obama-Democrats) used this to go after their political opponents.

I said I am worried more than just about Trump, and how this can be exploited even more in the future to go after political opponents.

There are laws in place to cover those that choose to do so. What's even more important, is you can't prove it has ever been exploited.

Your bias makes you lean to such an assertion, but you cannot prove it in the slightest.

You are the one who needs a written statement by Obama announcing he did this for political reasons before you think we shouldn't allow it.

It's already not allowed! How many times does it need to be said?

I need to see proof before I will condemn anyone or believe the unfounded accusations of an internet poster.

I am sure though you would support an investigation into why Obama took all of the actions that he did, so we can PROVE what the reason was.

Sure. If there is evidence to suggest Obama did something out-of-line, investigate it. What we should not do is jump to conclusions and create stupid conspiracies out of thin air, simply because it fits your personal political bias.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler


Manafort was directly working for a Ukrainian leader funded by Russia.

Podesta was working with a think tank and, allegedly, they did not know they were receiving funds from Russian interests.

Big difference.

Yes allegedly. manafort allegedly did nothing wrong to. That was the reason for the investigation. So why none into Podesta?

You had said that it appears exploitation has occurred in this case. Here is a quote from earlier:



So you are asserting that the party in power (Obama-Democrats) used this to go after their political opponents.

I did not claim the original wiretap on Manafort was neccessarily out of politics (it could have been or not). What I have said is that it has resulted in being used for political gain, including exploiting the unmasking and leaking of info.

That is why there should be incredible restraints on being able to wiretap poltical oppoenets, because even if it starts with noble intentions, it can end up being corrupted.

There are laws in place to cover those that choose to do so. What's even more important, is you can't prove it has ever been exploited.

Your bias makes you lean to such an assertion, but you cannot prove it in the slightest.

Was the leak about the unmasking of Flynn used to harm Trump politically. Yes. So it has been exploited.

It's already not allowed! How many times does it need to be said?

I need to see proof before I will condemn anyone or believe the unfounded accusations of an internet poster.

What are you tslking about? Your whole stance is that what Obama did was legal. Now you are saying its not allowed? Are you confused?

I am saying we shouldn't allow scret Fisa warramts for wiretaps on political opponents unless it is the most of extreme circumstances, and that ion that case there should have to be far more over site than just the president and his court appointees.

Sure. If there is evidence to suggest Obama did something out-of-line, investigate it. What we should not do is jump to conclusions and create stupid conspiracies out of thin air, simply because it fits your personal political bias.

I have not created a conspiracy out of thin air. I outlined over three times now all of the shady stuff that happoened, including illegal leaks.

a reply to: Grambler

We all know that no one did anything in that administration without approval from the top. Meaning, O was responsible.

a reply to: introvert

Another interesting development.

It turns out Manafort WANTS all of his recorded calls to go public so that everyone can see what he did.

Former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort is calling on the Justice Department to release transcripts of any intercepted communications he may have had with foreigners.



Manafort, a longtime Republican political consultant, also called on the Justice Department’s inspector general to investigate the leak of details of secret surveillance warrants obtained by U.S. investigators.



“Mr. Manafort requests that the Department of Justice release any intercepts involving him and any non-Americans so interested parties can come to the same conclusion as the DOJ — there is nothing there,” Manafort spokesman Jason Maloni said in a statement.

www.zerohedge.com...

He also says he would like the leaks investigated of who leaked to CNN he was wiretapped as that is a violation of his rights.