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.

 

Clapper- It’s ‘A Good Thing’ FBI Was Spying On Trump Campaign

page: 8
65
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2018 @ 03:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Kharron

What about all the stuff you just set as your hurdle...what if any of that can be shown to be common place and part of how the prior administration, and the DNC candidate, operated?

The kicker: the biggest link to Russia thus far is Manafort, whose links date back to when he was working for John Podesta (yes, that Podesta...).

So who really will wear that stain? Trump, who just hired someone sent to him from other insiders, but who also had been doing dirty deeds while associated with the DNC?


A hurdle? The stuff I set for myself as a hurdle? Are you being serious right now? I can't tell. Are you seriously saying that asking for proof is a hurdle? Asking to know what happened and saying I am waiting for the outcome of the investigation is a hurdle?

If you see that as a hurdle, what is your real goal here?

I waited for almost four years to find out how dirty Clinton was or wasn't. I understand it may take a few more here, but that's ok because my ultimate goal is the search for truth. Can you say the same?




posted on May, 18 2018 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Kharron

Oh and so there is no confusion here as we had in another thread, "Can you say the same?" is a rhetorical question.

I know that you can't as you just called the quest for truth - a hurdle.



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 04:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Kharron

I knew what hyperbole meant, that is why I brought it up! Then when asking Alexa, to see what she would say and Alexa said "Extravagant Exaggeration" which it IS! Your not making your argument better

Also, I did not see one comment on the fact the word hyperbole, was used, and the fact it was, changes the context of what was being said!



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan


The kicker: the biggest link to Russia thus far is Manafort, whose links date back to when he was working for John Podesta (yes, that Podesta...).


That's not correct unless you know something I don't.

Manafort's Russian links date back to 2004 when he first started working for Rinat Akhmetov who was a principal financial backer for Party of Regions which was the pro-Kremlin, pro-ethnic Russian party led by Viktor Yanukovych. By 2005, he was working for Yanukovych/PoR. By 2006, he was also under contact with Oleg Deripaska to lobby for Putin's agenda for like $10 million a year.

I think what you're referring to is the lobbying for Ukraine/PoR/Yanukovych that was being done under the guise of the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine (ECMU). For this, Manafort hired two US lobbying firms, Podesta Group and Mercury (there's actually 6 firms in all but I think 4 of them were European — from memory).

That was all done in 2012-2014. It was briefly a news item when Yanukovych was going down and being ousted and exfiltrated by Putin to Mother Russia.

John Podesta left the Podesta Group in 1993.

So no, Manafort wasn't working for John Podesta when he started developing ties to the Russians. Tony Podesta was however working for him a decade later to lobby for the Russian proxies in Kiev.



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Kharron

I guess i should ask first....between all those statements, should there be "and" or "or"? If its "and", then you are setting a hurdle. If its "or", then you are being reasonable.

Let me explain: Manafort has his russian dealings going back to his work with the DNC.

The FBI already investigated this, and cleared him.

Including that in this case, with your statement regarding communicating with Russia...you see what im talking about?



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 04:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kharron

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: Kharron

Clapper called Trump's tweet hyperbole.


And who said anything otherwise?

Here is his new source:



Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told CNN's Don Lemon Thursday night that the president's claim that the Obama administration spied on his campaign is "hyperbole" but if it is true, it is a "good thing."

"They [the Obama admin's FBI] may have had someone who was talking to them in the campaign, but, you know, the focus here... is not on the campaign, per se, but what the Russians were doing," Clapper said.

But if there was an intelligence agent "observing" the Trump campaign's interactions with Russia, "that's a good thing because the Russians posed a threat to the very basis of our political system."


If what you're assuming is true, that would be terrible, but you're assuming, of course. I am waiting patiently for the investigation to complete, then we will know what was necessary and what was not.

If it is shown that there were signs of interference, collusion, bribery or any of those nefarious actions, then an investigation was necessary... agreed?


Absolutely not. It is not acceptable to start an investigation without strong evidence of a crime. To this day, there has still been no clear crime even articulated never mind found relating to the election. Justice is not served well by a mindset of 'the end justifies the means'. That is a dangerous world where we all could have our entire lives investigated based on gossip, propaganda and rumour. The precedent set here is horrendous.
edit on 18/5/2018 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Kharron

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: Kharron

Clapper called Trump's tweet hyperbole.


And who said anything otherwise?

Here is his new source:



Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told CNN's Don Lemon Thursday night that the president's claim that the Obama administration spied on his campaign is "hyperbole" but if it is true, it is a "good thing."

"They [the Obama admin's FBI] may have had someone who was talking to them in the campaign, but, you know, the focus here... is not on the campaign, per se, but what the Russians were doing," Clapper said.

But if there was an intelligence agent "observing" the Trump campaign's interactions with Russia, "that's a good thing because the Russians posed a threat to the very basis of our political system."


If what you're assuming is true, that would be terrible, but you're assuming, of course. I am waiting patiently for the investigation to complete, then we will know what was necessary and what was not.

If it is shown that there were signs of interference, collusion, bribery or any of those nefarious actions, then an investigation was necessary... agreed?


Absolutely not. It is not acceptable to start an investigation without strong evidence of a crime. To this day, there has still been no clear crime even articulated never mind found relating to the election. Justice is not served well by a mindset of 'the end justifies the means'. That is a dangerous world where we all could have our entire lives investigated based on gossip, propaganda and rumour. The precedent set here is horrendous.


Absolutely right. Are you suggesting there is no reason for this investigation? And you know that how? How often are charges against presidents publicized before an investigation is complete?

Justice is not served well by the mindset of "well I don't know what's going on so there must be something wrong" either. Let's let these government investigations finish so that we can see the results, because I'm pretty sure that no functioning law enforcement agency, in this entire world, spills the beans on their investigations before they're complete.



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian


No. It was actually a fairly minimal investigation by all accounts.

No, I’ve heard accounts that it wasn’t minimal... Minimal by what standards? edit to add: “Operation Crossfire Hurricane”... Lol, yeah, sounds “minimal.”

I don't think that they ever uncovered evidence of Trump conspiring with the Russian government because I don't think that he did. That's not the same as saying that there wasn't good reason to investigate given the circumstances.

Which specific circumstances? I’ll respond, depending on what you’re referring to...


Trump was warned. They didn't specifically tell him later that they were investigating people involved in his campaign and why would they do that if they didn't know if he or his direct reports were involved? And they couldn't know that he wasn't involved or if there was anything to even be involved in without investigating.

What was the warning, specifically? Oh, so this investigation was to HELP trump. Got it.


They were running a limited, deliberately low profile investigation which was opened three months before the election. They didn't even get the FISA warrant on Page until the month before the election (a month after he'd resigned from the campaign).

They were setting up means for framing and/or blackmailing Trump, because we can’t know that’s not true, unless we investigate)

Clearly they didn't turn up anything actionable regarding the four Trump people they were looking at. But they also hadn't investigated enough to conclude anything satisfactorily.

So, they didn’t have good cause to continue or they didn’t do the job adequately... It seems me that you think that everybody Trump related is guilty until they’re proven innocent... I contend that NOBODY is completely innocent... if you disagree, we need to prove it with an investigation.

I will also say that Trump was briefed after winning the election about Russian interference and he chose to not only disregard what he was briefed on, he took to the podium and denounced Russian interference in the election as a hoax.

He was briefed about some unverified dirt, again to try to put Trump under “their” thumb. What is it that you think the Russians did again? The worst thing I can plausibly think of is hacking/accessing DNC/Podesta/Hillary emails. What didn’t the prez, or Hillary and friends do anything?

Furthermore, Sally Yates warned McGahn that Flynn was lying and potential compromised and the administration did NOTHING about it. Trump did nothing until the leaks that revealed that Flynn was lying were published. Then he attacked the leakers, forced Flynn out and pretended like he'd acted immediately upon discovering that Flynn was lying. Oh, and then he told Comey that the FBI should stop looking at Flynn.

I’m not saying Flynn didn’t lie, but what did he lie about again that we need to be so worried about? Hey, do you think Comey’s a liar?

edit on 5/18/2018 by japhrimu because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Kharron

I guess i should ask first....between all those statements, should there be "and" or "or"? If its "and", then you are setting a hurdle. If its "or", then you are being reasonable.

Let me explain: Manafort has his russian dealings going back to his work with the DNC.

The FBI already investigated this, and cleared him.

Including that in this case, with your statement regarding communicating with Russia...you see what im talking about?



Well, of course it's 'or'. Any of those must have happened for an investigation, not all of them. If any single one of those things that would warrant an investigation happened, then the investigation is warranted, right?

I even added "or whatever other illegal reason..." in there to make sure it is understood as - if either side did anything illegal it would be an outrage.

And it would. If the investigation shows that Trump or his team did something wrong when the investigation is over, we will all be outraged, as we should. And if it shows nothing, and that it was a witch hunt, for no reason at all, then we will all be outraged at that. But we need to let it finish.



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: kurthall
a reply to: Kharron

I knew what hyperbole meant, that is why I brought it up! Then when asking Alexa, to see what she would say and Alexa said "Extravagant Exaggeration" which it IS! Your not making your argument better

Also, I did not see one comment on the fact the word hyperbole, was used, and the fact it was, changes the context of what was being said!


I did not reply to you, sorry.

On top of my post, where it says - a reply to: UKTruth... that's whose post I replied to. I'm sorry I missed your post, I'll go back and try to find it.

edit: Found your posts. Yeah, I didn't reply to those.
edit on 18-5-2018 by Kharron because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Kharron

meanwhile, in the middle of all that is the fact that the FBI is being accused by their own inspector general of behaving illegally.

So the findings of this investigation, to me, are suspicious before I even know what they are. Its the result of an organization that has a fairly significant air of corruption hanging over them.



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 05:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Kharron

meanwhile, in the middle of all that is the fact that the FBI is being accused by their own inspector general of behaving illegally.

So the findings of this investigation, to me, are suspicious before I even know what they are. Its the result of an organization that has a fairly significant air of corruption hanging over them.


You're referring to the IG's allegation that McCabe shared sensitive info with the media? Right now, it's an allegation, and yes I can't wait to see what happens, and yes it's a breach of protocol if it did happen, and McCabe effed up. And if he did he should be held accountable for it.

On the other hand we have statements from Trump family members, we have confirmations of meetings that were originally denied, we have secret payments and hush money, lies to cover all those other lies up, that in the end failed... and if that is not enough we have people close to Trump who are cooperating with the investigation, meaning they're not cooperating about nothing; and it also means they must have some leverage if their cooperation is being taken seriously. Or at least, that would be logical if we were to guess, and that's all we're doing here.

I don't know how much truth there is to the first one, but I'm looking forward to finding out. The second one definitely looks like there is enough reason there to investigate, but I'm waiting to see the results.
edit on 18-5-2018 by Kharron because: english no good



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 05:14 PM
link   
I wonder if the shills are getting paid overtime? They sure are working overtime.



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 05:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: notsure1
I wonder if the shills are getting paid overtime? They sure are working overtime.


They're being prepped for October.

Practice makes perfect so they think.

😎💡🚬



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 05:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: xuenchen

This is a pattern we see over an over.

First the anti trumpers laughed and said there was no spying.

Then when they have to admit there was; they say that it was a good thing that it happened.

They dont care about corruption and weaponizing the intel community, as long as its their side doing it.

I wish they would just come out and admit that instead of pretending that it didnt happen.


What's become so obvious is how the MSM Lefties closely guard the info and only admit what they have to. Think about it. The #ing journos are running cover for the Left.

Is it any wonder the media giants are hated?



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 05:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: notsure1
I wonder if the shills are getting paid overtime? They sure are working overtime.


For your education, the shills are the ones defending the government, defending the police, defending the establishment.


I've been here long enough to recognize their posting patterns and I've also been here long enough to see many of them leave after the funding is gone. This too shall pass.



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Kharron

Im referring to what we will see next week in the IG report on the Hillary investigation.

Of course its sources say nonsense. But i think its going to be pretty significant



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 05:40 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

If this were 150 years ago, we would be up to the public hangings bit by now - I blame the internet for the delays.

All of the alphabet agencies need to be thoroughly restructured so that from the highest to the lowest a more transparent public oversight process can be put in place to protect them from rogue government because it appears that the Constitution and its meaning has been gang raped for the past 50 years.


He also said it's dangerous to "out" any of those spys because they would be in "danger".


Edward Snowden says hi.

edit on 18/5/2018 by Sublimecraft because: clarification



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Kharron

Im referring to what we will see next week in the IG report on the Hillary investigation.

Of course its sources say nonsense. But i think its going to be pretty significant


Looking forward to that too. I have no doubt there will be wrongdoing there as well. This week we found out the FBI hushed up an investigation into Trump, because they didn't want to hurt his chances of winning. Who knows what next week may bring.

I kid you not, I would not be surprised to find out Trump and Hillary were colluding with each other all along and that is why Trump hasn't started an investigation into her yet, as he said he would.

The truth is stranger than fiction.



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 05:59 PM
link   
There is still zero proof that this actually happened. Just another distraction from the draft dodged in chief, aka sparky ,aka tRump. You people will believe anything if it some how legitimizes having a complete idiot for president.



new topics

top topics



 
65
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join