Levin Proved Obama Spied on Trump – Six Months Before CNN Reported It

a reply to: shooterbrody

So you are in favor of never ending investigations by our government? Manafort gets spied on for the rest of his life?

and then

when was hillary the subject of a fisa investigation?

People call that moving the goal posts back. I call that trying to worm your way out of putting your foot in your mouth.

a reply to: Gryphon66

are you in favor of never ending fisa investigations?
is 3 years of complete access to all voice and data not enough?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

when was hillary the subject of a fisa investigation?

a reply to: shooterbrody

If you'd bother to update yourself on the situation instead of just peddling right wing talking points, you'd know that the 2014 investigation ended with not enough evidence. It wasn't until the election silliness did the FBI reapproach the court for another wiretap for more information. So no, there hasn't been enough time to collect all the evidence. Since when were their time limits on how long investigators are allowed to pursue a case to begin with? Do you even realize how ridiculous you would sound if you were to apply this reasoning to a police officer using a wire tap on a drug gang? "Welp we looked at them for 3 years, we are close to cracking the case, but we reached that time limit. I guess they are off the hook now. Next case!"

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Gryphon66

are you in favor of never ending fisa investigations?
is 3 years of complete access to all voice and data not enough?

You're stuck; get someone to reboot you.

glad to know the both of you are for never ending fisa investigations

I'd say I'm glad to know you have no intention of having an honest argument, but I already knew that was the case.

If manafort or any other broke the law I am all for them being prosecuted to the FULLEST extent of the law.
When the ic had full access to his data for 3 years and still no indictments have been filed; either the investigators are incompetent or there is nothing there.

If manafort was used as a proxy to obtain "inadvertant collection" from other americans in his circle then we have a very large problem.
It appears to me that is the case with respect to manafort.
There are paper trails for this; the truth will come out.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Greven
It appears that Manafort was under surveillance since 2014, before Trump's campaign existed.
He joined Trump's campaign in March 2016, and was campaign manager from June 2016 to August 2016, when he left the campaign.

Please explain how the surveillance was targeted at Trump or his campaign when the surveillance was already in effect for a long time against Manafort who subsequently joined Trump's campaign and then left the campaign a few months later.

As long as you are on record saying that it is okay for the political party in charge of the Executive branch to eavesdrop on the conversations of their opponents during an election campaign, we shouldn't hear any complaints if Trump does the same thing.
And it is okay to unmask those people that were incidental in the recordings made too... right?

It is very easy to say that they were not targeting the campaign.

I am not okay with it.

Yeah, no.

Are you okay with political campaigns dealing repeatedly with foreign agents?

Because this seems like highly selective outrage here.

Are you okay with Podesta dealing with foreign agents (Russians)? Was he (+Hillary) being wiretapped by the DOJ too?
Yes, lets talk about being selective.

Given that I'm a Republican, what do you think?

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Greven

You mean like HRC'S campaign and the Ukrainians?

Clinton can burn for all I care.

Stop with this idiotic tu quoque crap when you don't even seem to recall that I'm a Republican.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Nucleardoom

See how easy it is to remember those two lies? So much easier than trying to keep track of oh I don't know let's say two lies an hour from the dishonest lying piece of crap in there now?
You can list Obama's lies from his whole eight years on one hand.
You can't even do that for one day with this slimeball criminal.

When the lies actually affect your health insurance and cast serious doubt to the integrity of multiple government agencies they tend to be quite memorable.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Greven
It appears that Manafort was under surveillance since 2014, before Trump's campaign existed.
He joined Trump's campaign in March 2016, and was campaign manager from June 2016 to August 2016, when he left the campaign.

Please explain how the surveillance was targeted at Trump or his campaign when the surveillance was already in effect for a long time against Manafort who subsequently joined Trump's campaign and then left the campaign a few months later.

As long as you are on record saying that it is okay for the political party in charge of the Executive branch to eavesdrop on the conversations of their opponents during an election campaign, we shouldn't hear any complaints if Trump does the same thing.
And it is okay to unmask those people that were incidental in the recordings made too... right?

It is very easy to say that they were not targeting the campaign.

I am not okay with it.

Yeah, no.

Are you okay with political campaigns dealing repeatedly with foreign agents?

Because this seems like highly selective outrage here.

Are you okay with Podesta dealing with foreign agents (Russians)? Was he (+Hillary) being wiretapped by the DOJ too?
Yes, lets talk about being selective.

Given that I'm a Republican, what do you think?

I am not a mind reader, so your thinking something is not the same as saying it.
Was the Obama DOJ pulling FISA warrants on Hillary's campaign team members that were dealing with Russia behind closed doors?

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Greven
It appears that Manafort was under surveillance since 2014, before Trump's campaign existed.
He joined Trump's campaign in March 2016, and was campaign manager from June 2016 to August 2016, when he left the campaign.

Please explain how the surveillance was targeted at Trump or his campaign when the surveillance was already in effect for a long time against Manafort who subsequently joined Trump's campaign and then left the campaign a few months later.

As long as you are on record saying that it is okay for the political party in charge of the Executive branch to eavesdrop on the conversations of their opponents during an election campaign, we shouldn't hear any complaints if Trump does the same thing.
And it is okay to unmask those people that were incidental in the recordings made too... right?

It is very easy to say that they were not targeting the campaign.

I am not okay with it.

Yeah, no.

Are you okay with political campaigns dealing repeatedly with foreign agents?

Because this seems like highly selective outrage here.

Are you okay with Podesta dealing with foreign agents (Russians)? Was he (+Hillary) being wiretapped by the DOJ too?
Yes, lets talk about being selective.

Given that I'm a Republican, what do you think?

I am not a mind reader, so your thinking something is not the same as saying it.
Was the Obama DOJ pulling FISA warrants on Hillary's campaign team members that were dealing with Russia behind closed doors?

Hell if I know.

What I do know is that Manafort was targeted in 2014, years before he joined Trump's campaign for all of 6 months.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: rickymouse

Trump's claim was soundly refuted:
DOJ: No evidence Trump Tower was wiretapped
The OP's claim is just idiocy since Manafort wasn't working with Trump when he was being tapped in 2014.

Read what that says, they have found no evidence that Obama ordered wiretapping. That just says Obama did not order it.

So they have found no evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians yet the left says "oh, we know he did and if they keep digging they will find he did". Spoiler, if it goes one way it goes the other.

I can read legal paperwork, why didn't the justice department say Trump campaign communications were not collected. Because then they would not be able to deny it, they limited it to just Obama ordered and Just wiretapping specifically.

First statement from link you posted.....The Department of Justice said in a court filing Friday it has no evidence that former President Obama ordered the wiretapping of Trump Tower, despite President Trump’s assertions.

originally posted by: Nucleardoom

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Nucleardoom

See how easy it is to remember those two lies? So much easier than trying to keep track of oh I don't know let's say two lies an hour from the dishonest lying piece of crap in there now?
You can list Obama's lies from his whole eight years on one hand.
You can't even do that for one day with this slimeball criminal.

Youre kidding right?

a reply to: rickymouse

www.abovetopsecret.com...
You may want to check this story out.
It deals with alot discussed in this thread.

Here is what we now know, per intelligence gleaned form federal law enforcement sources with insider knowledge of what amounts to a plot by U.S. intelligence agencies to secure back door and illegal wiretaps of President Trump’s associates:

Six U.S. agencies created a stealth task force, spearhead by CIA’s Brennan, to run domestic surveillance on Trump associates and possibly Trump himself. To feign ignorance and to seemingly operate within U.S. laws, the agencies freelanced the wiretapping of Trump associates to the British spy agency GCHQ. The decision to insert GCHQ as a back door to eavesdrop was sparked by the denial of two FISA Court warrant applications filed by the FBI to seek wiretaps of Trump associates. GCHQ did not work from London or the UK. In fact the spy agency worked from NSA’s headquarters in Fort Meade, MD with direct NSA supervision and guidance to conduct sweeping surveillance on Trump associates. The illegal wiretaps were initiated months before the controversial Trump dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele. The Justice Department and FBI set up the meeting at Trump Tower between Trump Jr., Manafort and Kushner with controversial Russian officials to make Trump’s associates appear compromised. Following the Trump Tower sit down, GCHQ began digitally wiretapping Manafort, Trump Jr., and Kushner. After the concocted meeting by the Deep State, the British spy agency could officially justify wiretapping Trump associates as an intelligence front for NSA because the Russian lawyer at the meeting Natalia Veselnitskaya was considered an international security risk and prior to the June sit down was not even allowed entry into the United States or the UK, federal sources said. By using GCHQ, the NSA and its intelligence partners had carved out a loophole to wiretap Trump without a warrant. While it is illegal for U.S. agencies to monitor phones and emails of U.S. citizens inside the United States absent a warrant, it is not illegal for British intelligence to do so. Even if the GCHQ was tapping Trump on U.S. soil at Fort Meade. The wiretaps, secured through illicit scheming, have been used by U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe of alleged Russian collusion in the 2016 election, even though the evidence is considered “poisoned fruit.”

pretty damning

a reply to: Greven

I just want to get you on record now, that when manafort takes the fall in the mueller probe for his shady dealings before his dealings with trump, it had nothing to do with trump. You're making that distinction here to protect your ideological slant but I guarantee that when that same distinction flies in the face of said slant, you won't be making that distinction. In fact, you'll probably be trying to cover it up.

originally posted by: xuenchen

He used several "sources" and had it down to just about what we now "know" from a CNN story a couple of days ago.

No...not even remotely close..the only common factor in claims is "Spying!".

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Greven

I just want to get you on record now, that when manafort takes the fall in the mueller probe for his shady dealings before his dealings with trump, it had nothing to do with trump.

???

What makes you think that is where it is leading?


Manafort offered to give Russian billionaire ‘private briefings’ on 2016 campaign
LINK

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Greven
It appears that Manafort was under surveillance since 2014, before Trump's campaign existed.
He joined Trump's campaign in March 2016, and was campaign manager from June 2016 to August 2016, when he left the campaign.

Please explain how the surveillance was targeted at Trump or his campaign when the surveillance was already in effect for a long time against Manafort who subsequently joined Trump's campaign and then left the campaign a few months later.

As long as you are on record saying that it is okay for the political party in charge of the Executive branch to eavesdrop on the conversations of their opponents during an election campaign, we shouldn't hear any complaints if Trump does the same thing.
And it is okay to unmask those people that were incidental in the recordings made too... right?

It is very easy to say that they were not targeting the campaign.

I am not okay with it.

Yeah, no.

Are you okay with political campaigns dealing repeatedly with foreign agents?

Because this seems like highly selective outrage here.

Are you okay with Podesta dealing with foreign agents (Russians)? Was he (+Hillary) being wiretapped by the DOJ too?
Yes, lets talk about being selective.

Given that I'm a Republican, what do you think?

I am not a mind reader, so your thinking something is not the same as saying it.
Was the Obama DOJ pulling FISA warrants on Hillary's campaign team members that were dealing with Russia behind closed doors?

Hell if I know.

What I do know is that Manafort was targeted in 2014, years before he joined Trump's campaign for all of 6 months.

Amd yet given a security clearance under the otbama admin. Anyone see a problem with this claiming through the FISA court he was a Russian agent but gives him a security clearance? Something isn't right in Denmark. If he was a security threat like they are making him out two be then they purposely cleared him meaning they purposefully used him.