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.

 

Clappers claim that FBI was trying to protect trump campaign is wrong

page: 2
40
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2018 @ 08:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: apydomis
Is it possible they were spying on him to sabotage and neutralize his campaign by knowing his secret campaign moves and private intentions?

That is possible
They would probably want that information




posted on May, 23 2018 @ 08:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: apydomis
Is it possible they were spying on him to sabotage and neutralize his campaign by knowing his secret campaign moves and private intentions?


Are you asking that if an agency that has had pretty much everyone one of their leaders become darlings of the anti trump main stream media that had their agencies spy on trump, unmask info, leak to the press in many ways; would share details of the spying they did to hillarys campaign to help her?

OF COURSE NOT!!!!

They were just protecting trump!



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 08:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: apydomis
Is it possible they were spying on him to sabotage and neutralize his campaign by knowing his secret campaign moves and private intentions?


Could be they were "making sure" the name on the Dossier was Trump and not the real name from the FSB field reports.

😉



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 08:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: apydomis
Is it possible they were spying on him to sabotage and neutralize his campaign by knowing his secret campaign moves and private intentions?


I'm thinking along the same lines, but differently. I think they were using these "Spies" to plant false intel about the DNC in the Trump campaign, but things got out of hand and real evidence was being handed around instead. This would explain not only the Seth Rich event, but also those Secret Service Agents that were assigned to Hillary getting killed on their way to DC from up state New York.



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 08:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: apydomis
Is it possible they were spying on him to sabotage and neutralize his campaign by knowing his secret campaign moves and private intentions?


Are you asking that if an agency that has had pretty much everyone one of their leaders become darlings of the anti trump main stream media that had their agencies spy on trump, unmask info, leak to the press in many ways; would share details of the spying they did to hillarys campaign to help her?

OF COURSE NOT!!!!

They were just protecting trump!


You better watch it, the DNC might use "we're here to protect you" as their campaign talking point.



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I wonder if Brennan could point out exactly which Russians he spying on. The weird thing about this whole Russia investigation is how few Russians are involved. No, he was spying on American citizens.



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen


This entire scandal shows us that government had way too little to do when Obama was President. To fabricate exotic multi-departmental schemes for preventing Trump from being elected, when they were sure Hillary would win, means they had nothing to do. Too much idle time on their hands.



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

given half a chance...I would deck Clapper and Brennon. Bastards sold us to AP and Reuters...I wonder who owns them?



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 08:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Grambler

I wonder if Brennan could point out exactly which Russians he spying on. The weird thing about this whole Russia investigation is how few Russians are involved. No, he was spying on American citizens.


Yeah who were they?

Cause everytime I hear of a russian oiigrach with connections to the trump campaign, it truns out they were connected to Hillary as well.

But I guess those dastardly intel people werent interested in "protecting" hillarys campaign.



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

In addition to your point, what is also patently ridiculous is the notion that if the US government thought the Russians were embarked in a massive effort to infiltrate the Trump campaign, all the Feds could do was to muster a single mole to 'protect' Trump?

Right.
edit on 23-5-2018 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 09:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Grambler

The weird thing about this whole Russia investigation is how few Russians are involved.


Yes, so few. 13 Russians Indicted

As far as the rest of the investigation and other meetings, no one knows the details except those conducting it.



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 09:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


This claim is so obviously a lie that it seems that it doesnt even need to be addressed.


I think it's a definite stretch. The first concern would have been for the country. I don't believe that Trump conspired with Putin but I wouldn't bet my life on it and that's with the benefit of knowing what has come out since.

That said, it's not entirely wrong to think that the investigation would also have the effect of protecting Trump from possible foreign influence. You say it as though it's not a thing here but you also know as well as I do that a number of people in Trump's orbit were peddling influence or at least trying to (and possible worse), not least of which Paul Manafort, who was running his campaign and also trying to exploit his position to get a payday from his Russian friend(s).

Do you believe that Trump was aware of any of that? Do you not see a reason for concern with that? I think it's particularly bad with a campaign chief and even more so with a Manafort type chief because they're shaping the candidacy in ways, sometimes subtle, sometimes lining up the VP — something Manafort supposedly did with Pence.

I think that there's room for there to be more than one legitimate purpose in other words.

There are unique circumstances here too. It's a presidential election. There's really no higher stakes except something like a mass casualty attack. This investigation was opened 100 days before the election which is not a great deal of time. And of course, there's an impending transfer of power to somebody who might be an eventual target of the investigation and is going to be the boss's boss.


Now given this, what makes more sense (espceially given how we now know how many of the heads of the intel community hated trump)

The intel community was spying on trump to "protect" him, or they were spying on trump with hopes of being able to bust him.


That's a false dilemma. You and other Trump supporters of course feel that it makes more sense that they had some hopes of being able to bust Trump and that formed the purpose for an investigation. I think that's less plausible than even what Clapper is saying.

And yet, it's EXACTLY what right-wing media outlets are saying repeatedly on blast, all day.


ANd if clapper is so flippant and lying about this, and many in the media are so willing to by it, why should we trust there other beliefs when it comes to possible corruption of the intel community?


See above. Why would you trust anything from the right-wing media? Because you agree with many of them who are promoting the view you share? Are you telling me that they don't buy complete bull# or not really buy it but knowing what their audience wants to hear, just go with it?

What happens when all these sources have been pushing this "spy" narrative on you for months and nothing comes of it? Do you just keep believing because nobody could prove that it didn't happen?

What about Trump? This is the question I really care more about. You know that Trump, the President of the United States of America is flat out declaring this to be true. (except when he walks it back slightly)

What happens when he's wrong? Do you just shrug it off or do you hold it against Trump like you would a random person in the media? Doesn't he have more influence and a greater obligation to the people?

And you do trust the judgement of a guy who doesn't know that all these people around him are influence peddling? Getting people to pay them to give opinions to him. And how do you honestly know that he doesn't know?

Again, it seems as though there's always more emphasis on the credibility of people in the media, politicians who aren't Trump or pro-Trump or in my experience, I have Trump supporters regularly questioning mine. Trump even has the balls to call other people liars. I can prove objectively that he's lie machine. I can demonstrate to you that Trump and his people have lied about at least three major controversies/scandals right off the top of my head.

So how does Trump maintain credibility while simultaneously lying his ass off? Because people compartmentalize? People say, "Well he only lies about things that don't matter to me."

You're VERY concerned with Clapper being a liar and in this instance, he's arguably "spinning" to potentially far less degree. So when it turns out that he's pushing his supporters to believe in something that's a lie and doing so for his own benefit, will you post a thread about what a liar Trump is and how he can't be trusted about anything?

Because honestly, that's about how half the country feels at any given moment about the President. And I suspect that it's more than half.



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 09:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Grambler

The weird thing about this whole Russia investigation is how few Russians are involved.


Yes, so few. 13 Russians Indicted

As far as the rest of the investigation and other meetings, no one knows the details except those conducting it.


A Russian troll farm memeing black lives matter posts. Brilliant.
edit on 23-5-2018 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 09:25 PM
link   
Meanwhile:



BREAKING: FBI Spy Stefan Halper May Have Bled Info Into Hillary’s Phony Dossier

Hill sources are saying the FBI spy who infiltrated Donald Trump’s campaign in 2016, Stefan Halper bled information into Hillary’s phony dossier, reported Paul Sperry.

...

Paul Sperry tweeted: BREAKING: Hill sources say Halper may have bled into dossier in a positive feedback loop:

FBI —> Halper —> Steele —> dossier —> FBI

edit on 23-5-2018 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

A stretch!!!!

Hahahahaha!!!!

Please dont tell me you are buying this too!

Dude, if they wanted to protect trump, they would have warned him what they though was happening.

Weirdly enough, we see ll sorts of shady characters around all sorts of campaigns (including Hillarys), but only trumps campaign and administration got this special "protection"

I wonder, why wasnt hillary and co., wiretapped and had informants (spies) put around her when Manafort, the Podesta Group, and Mercury LLC was funneling russian influence all around her and many other politicians in 2012?

Nah, they didnt deserve that "protection" did they.

And this wasnt about protecting counrty first.

If it was, what would be the number one priority? Stopping russian influence as quickly as possible.

The best way to do that would have been to tell trump what they believed was happening.

No their priority was instead to hurt trumps campaign first. And that jives withe everything else we have seen, the leaks, the unmasking, the changing policy to spread details of the investigation as far as possible, the heads of the intel community becoming msm contributors that bash trump non stop, etc.

As far as trump being wrong about a spy.

Look Its real simple. If the NYT and washington posts stories are correct, and there was an "Infomrant" instructed to get info about trumps campaign (and I have seen no credible allegations they are wrong) thats a spy.

Now you can call it an informant, or a clandestine public protector of a populace presidents platform, or whatever the hell else you want; but its a spy.

And whatever you call it; its very simpekl to me, THAT (i call it spy, you call it whatever) should not be happening to a Presidential campaign. Because now that the precedent has been set, THAT can be done to any campaign, in the name of "protection"

So i dont think there is a danger of trump being wrong. And if he is, its because the MSM lied.



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 09:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

Yeah who were they?

Cause everytime I hear of a russian oiigrach with connections to the trump campaign, it truns out they were connected to Hillary as well.



Or working with McCabe & Mueller, Or working with Fusion GPS, Or closing Uranium deals with the entirety of the last admin...



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 11:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Operation bullsh#t is underway I see. Does anyone believe this crap?



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 11:50 PM
link   
a reply to: drewlander

yes, all the functioning non CNN/MSNBC minds anyhow



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 12:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Grambler

The weird thing about this whole Russia investigation is how few Russians are involved.


Yes, so few. 13 Russians Indicted

As far as the rest of the investigation and other meetings, no one knows the details except those conducting it.


Like the one who showed up for court and is now counter-suing because his company named in the indictment did not even exist until after the election. And then Mueller crapped his pants when he was called out, tried to request a continuance even though he filed the indictment and the judge told him no?

How about the evidence of Russian collusion via Facebook that they handed over but have no translations for and do not know what it says?

Try some critical thinking sometime, Columbo.



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 12:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Only someplace like MSN, CNN or PBS's "NewsHour." would put a known spook on to tell the latest version of what they want to be the truth... Spooks only tell the truth when it is convenient regardless of who is asking the questions.

Anymore, it would seem there are many government agencies who are afflicted by the same malaise... Russia must be training them !! ?????????







 
40
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join