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.

 

More Never Trumpers waking up to the Russia collusion farce, when will you?

page: 8
58
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2018 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: underwerks

For about the millionth time, the Cmey admitted he reopened the hillary investigation to help her, because he assumed she would win and didnt want that investigation not being reopened to deligitimize her presidency.

An error in judgement, but nonetheless taken in an attempt to help hillary.

There are tons and tons of articles showing the FBI did this, again its basically only being disputed by you as far as I can see.

The fbi even argued that outing the name of their informant would put his life in jeopardy, all but confirming there was indeed an informant.

Rather Obama ordered this or not is irrelevant to rather the FBI spied on the trump campaign. However, it should be investigated into exactly what Obama ordered, and ultimately he was in charge.

Now here is the kicker.

I would be willing to say,as I did earlier, thats fine, I am confident the investigation will eventually come out that the FBI did send in halper, and if that occurs, would you at that point then admit they spied on trumps campaign.

But I already know the answer based on this thread, you will argue semantics and say its an informant and not a spy, and you will say it was justified for various reasons.

which is exactly what the OP article is saying; some people will cheer for any corruption and move goal posts so long as the intel agencies are going after trump

Those are still all assumptions you’re making, in the belief that the Obama admin was working to stop Trump. Which is an assumption as well.

The reality is that the only people in politics who fight each other are the followers of the political parties. The Obama administration helped Trump get elected through it’s own actions. That should be obvious to everyone.

If you buy the partisan angle fed to you by the media (right, left, whatever you choose) I can see how you’d believe there is some kind of war between the two parties. There isn’t a battle between the parties anymore than there is a battle between the two wings on a bird.

If I see any actual objective evidence of what you’re talking about, I’ll change my tune. But assumptions based on this false media driven notion of an imaginary war between the left and right don’t cut it.

Evidence and truth don’t need spin, or to be interpreted a certain way for it to make sense.




posted on May, 29 2018 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Gandalf77

We have seen people that not only had a bias against trump, but act on it.

For example, at thos point, we know just about every head of the major intel communities disliked trump.

we know that they charged trump connected people with crimes that they left hillary connected people off for (Manafort to Podesta group, or mills and abedin lying to the FBI)

We know that comey leaked info to get to the press to hurt trump.

And so forth.

Look the first Ig report is coming ouyt, and all reports are that it is going to say there was wrong doing by the FBI in their handling of the hillary investigation.

Will their bias and opinions matter to you then? Or will it just be "Well ok they liked hillary and hated trum,p, and the Ig said they acted inappropriately in the investigation of hillary, but its just a coincidence

Again, if this was just about stopping russian influence, the fbi would have talked to trump and his campaign on record, and saw what they knew and warned them of possible influence peddling.

Instead they sent a spy.

And lets not forget things like the unmasking and leaking to the media to make the trump team look bad as a result of all of the spying (such as pen registries and wiretaps)

Just a coincidence that the heads of the intel agencies hated trump though.

The reason its important to discuss this is because ensuring the intel community acts properly is more important than one president.

If this becomes the norm, then trump and every other president will be allowed to place spies, oops i mean informants, as long as they claim outside countries are trying to influence elections.



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

A spy would be Obama placing someone close to Trump with the express purpose of relaying damaging information back to him. In an effort to hurt the Trump campaign.

Nothing like that happened, and a couple of Trumps shady confidants accidentally speaking to an informant isn’t the same thing.




What if, now stay with me through this because it will be difficult, what if the spy didn't relay any damaging information back to Obama because. . . . now here's the kicker. . . because Trump didn't do anything wrong!



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

So now you are claiming Obama helped Trump get elected?

well in the sense he was such a crappy president that people voted for trump, you are right.

But if you are claiming he used his adminstartion to intentionaly help Trump, you are so delusional its absurd.

Lets remember what your initial claim was again.


Hey I’m willing to change my mind. All you have to do is show me any evidence (ANY) that the Obama administration planted a “spy” in Trumps campaign, and that people in the Trump campaign didn’t just get swept up in surveillance because of the shady people they were communicating with.


There is no spin needed, you are the one spinning trying to argue semantics about the word spy.

Obamas fbi sent a spy to trumps team to get info on people in his campaign.

Period.



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Gandalf77

We have seen people that not only had a bias against trump, but act on it.

For example, at thos point, we know just about every head of the major intel communities disliked trump.

we know that they charged trump connected people with crimes that they left hillary connected people off for (Manafort to Podesta group, or mills and abedin lying to the FBI)

We know that comey leaked info to get to the press to hurt trump.

And so forth.

Look the first Ig report is coming ouyt, and all reports are that it is going to say there was wrong doing by the FBI in their handling of the hillary investigation.

Will their bias and opinions matter to you then? Or will it just be "Well ok they liked hillary and hated trum,p, and the Ig said they acted inappropriately in the investigation of hillary, but its just a coincidence

Again, if this was just about stopping russian influence, the fbi would have talked to trump and his campaign on record, and saw what they knew and warned them of possible influence peddling.

Instead they sent a spy.

And lets not forget things like the unmasking and leaking to the media to make the trump team look bad as a result of all of the spying (such as pen registries and wiretaps)

Just a coincidence that the heads of the intel agencies hated trump though.



The intel agencies haven't charged anyone with a crime. That's not their job. Given some of Trump's asinine comments about them, it's not to hard to see how the heads of those agencies might have an unfavorable opinion of him, though.

The hillary investigation was a separate investigation, and if there was inappropriate behavior, let justice be done. I'm no fan of hillary. When the hillary investigation was wrapping up, the FBI found itself having to launch another investigation into Trump. Texts show that, contrary to the right-wing narrative, Strzok was actually pushing for more aggressive tactics in BOTH of those investigations.

If the FBI felt that this was all on Russia, they may very well have just warned the Trump campaign. However, the intel they were receiving from our allies suggested that it might not be one sided. There was a troubling pattern of Trump campaign officials meeting with known operatives. And then Papadopoulas got drunk and ran his mouth about it. Oopsie.

Mueller's investigation has resulted in several indictments and guilty pleas, and it's a good bet there will be more. Let's see where it goes. As long as he's allowed to pursue every angle and run the entire web to the ground, I'll be satisfied with his report.


edit on 29-5-2018 by Gandalf77 because: Typo



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

Crickets, I see.




posted on May, 29 2018 @ 02:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: loam

Crickets, I see.



Are you really surprised?




posted on May, 29 2018 @ 02:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: loam

Crickets, I see.



Well i for one am worried about these abuses happening again, even if its someone like trump who I voted for doing them.

Thats the key difference; I dont want any side doing this, whereas many anti trumpers are fine with Obamas admin having informants (spies), but will scream how authoritarian trump is if he does it.
Same with the special counsel. Just let it go on, let it be endless and look into decades old crimes, let it raid trumps lawyer, etc.

But no, we cant have a spcial counselor into hillary or mueller or the fbi, etc.

All I am asking for is equal treatement for everyone.

Why does it seem like some people are all for any negative impact to trump no matter how ludicrous from investogators, but will fight tooth and nail to have the same treatment be given to the other side?

well, I know why, and so do they.

Because they are not interested in justice; they want to take trump down by any means neccessary.



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
Because they are not interested in justice


Exactly.



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 03:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: loam

Crickets, I see.




Same with the special counsel. Just let it go on, let it be endless and look into decades old crimes, let it raid trumps lawyer, etc.



If you're referring to Manafort, looking into his past crimes is spelled out in Mueller's mandate from Rosenstein. Like it or not. It should be obvious why too: IF there were direct requests for assistance from the Trump campaign, Manafort would be in an excellent position to do so given all of his shady connections with the Ukraine.

And the special counsel didn't raid Cohen's office. That's a separate investigation.



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: underwerks

So now you are claiming Obama helped Trump get elected?

well in the sense he was such a crappy president that people voted for trump, you are right.

But if you are claiming he used his adminstartion to intentionaly help Trump, you are so delusional its absurd.

Lets remember what your initial claim was again.


Hey I’m willing to change my mind. All you have to do is show me any evidence (ANY) that the Obama administration planted a “spy” in Trumps campaign, and that people in the Trump campaign didn’t just get swept up in surveillance because of the shady people they were communicating with.


There is no spin needed, you are the one spinning trying to argue semantics about the word spy.

Obamas fbi sent a spy to trumps team to get info on people in his campaign.

Period.



I’m not spinning anything, actually quite the opposite. I’m asking for evidence that is valid without being spun. Objective, clear evidence of what you are accusing.

I just believe this is where our source of disconnect over this subject is. I don’t start off with the idea that the leaders of the two parties are at war with each other, because what’s the point? The other side will be back in power in 4-8 years. I don’t follow the media (any media) so I see this whole notion of some battle between the parties as an invented farce.

Believe whatever you want. I just need actual evidence that Obama worked behind the scenes to mess up Trumps chances at winning. Because what actually happened, speaks to the opposite of that.



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Gandalf77

Yes Mueller handed off the raid to the NY feds, but it was his investigation that led to it it has been reported.

Its not just manafort, there are reports that trumps finances going back years have been looked at.

And if we are looking at manafort, why not the podesta group?

Oh thats right, only trump teams connections to russians needs investigated!

But trust them, they are just trying to stop russian collusion!

Just like what clapper said, they had informants in trumps campaign to protect trump!

Hillarys team that had connections to russians though, they didnt need that protection for some reason!

If trump and his team are going to have investigations going back years looking at their finances because they met russians, why shouldnt hillarys team?



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 03:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: underwerks

So now you are claiming Obama helped Trump get elected?

well in the sense he was such a crappy president that people voted for trump, you are right.

But if you are claiming he used his adminstartion to intentionaly help Trump, you are so delusional its absurd.

Lets remember what your initial claim was again.


Hey I’m willing to change my mind. All you have to do is show me any evidence (ANY) that the Obama administration planted a “spy” in Trumps campaign, and that people in the Trump campaign didn’t just get swept up in surveillance because of the shady people they were communicating with.


There is no spin needed, you are the one spinning trying to argue semantics about the word spy.

Obamas fbi sent a spy to trumps team to get info on people in his campaign.

Period.



I’m not spinning anything, actually quite the opposite. I’m asking for evidence that is valid without being spun. Objective, clear evidence of what you are accusing.

I just believe this is where our source of disconnect over this subject is. I don’t start off with the idea that the leaders of the two parties are at war with each other, because what’s the point? The other side will be back in power in 4-8 years. I don’t follow the media (any media) so I see this whole notion of some battle between the parties as an invented farce.

Believe whatever you want. I just need actual evidence that Obama worked behind the scenes to mess up Trumps chances at winning. Because what actually happened, speaks to the opposite of that.


There will be no proof good enough for you, no matter what.

You believe that Obama wanted trump to win and helped him, which is surreal and there is no evidence at all for.

As a result, when evidence of Obamas admin placing a spy to report on trumps team comes up, you assume this couldnt be the case because Obama wanted trump to win.

And this you spin the definition of the word spy and say this was just an informant.



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 03:20 PM
link   
I disbelieved the story from the start. Obama treated the entire US Government like his personal goon squad. I already knew of the deep levels of corruption surrounding HRC. I knew it was BS due to Obama's reaction towards "hacking the election" when he thought HRC would win.

People here watch/believe CNN and their mainstream cronies? I find that hard to believe.



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: ltdan08
I disbelieved the story from the start. Obama treated the entire US Government like his personal goon squad. I already knew of the deep levels of corruption surrounding HRC. I knew it was BS due to Obama's reaction towards "hacking the election" when he thought HRC would win.

People here watch/believe CNN and their mainstream cronies? I find that hard to believe.


Been watching Fox much?



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 03:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Hillary and Obama colluded with the media to sway an election.


And no one says a word.

Including Burney. What a shmuck. He caught them red-handed working against him and then became a supporter. Makes me wonder what kind of deal he made since I'm sure he too thought Hillary was bound to win. He probably had a cabinet position lined up.



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 03:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: underwerks

So now you are claiming Obama helped Trump get elected?

well in the sense he was such a crappy president that people voted for trump, you are right.

But if you are claiming he used his adminstartion to intentionaly help Trump, you are so delusional its absurd.

Lets remember what your initial claim was again.


Hey I’m willing to change my mind. All you have to do is show me any evidence (ANY) that the Obama administration planted a “spy” in Trumps campaign, and that people in the Trump campaign didn’t just get swept up in surveillance because of the shady people they were communicating with.


There is no spin needed, you are the one spinning trying to argue semantics about the word spy.

Obamas fbi sent a spy to trumps team to get info on people in his campaign.

Period.



I’m not spinning anything, actually quite the opposite. I’m asking for evidence that is valid without being spun. Objective, clear evidence of what you are accusing.

I just believe this is where our source of disconnect over this subject is. I don’t start off with the idea that the leaders of the two parties are at war with each other, because what’s the point? The other side will be back in power in 4-8 years. I don’t follow the media (any media) so I see this whole notion of some battle between the parties as an invented farce.

Believe whatever you want. I just need actual evidence that Obama worked behind the scenes to mess up Trumps chances at winning. Because what actually happened, speaks to the opposite of that.


There will be no proof good enough for you, no matter what.

You believe that Obama wanted trump to win and helped him, which is surreal and there is no evidence at all for.

As a result, when evidence of Obamas admin placing a spy to report on trumps team comes up, you assume this couldnt be the case because Obama wanted trump to win.

And this you spin the definition of the word spy and say this was just an informant.


Again, please point me to evidence. Not your interpretation of an article that you claim as evidence.

Real evidence stands up by itself without you having to interpret it for everyone. Either you have irrefutable evidence, or you don’t.

It’s simple. And doesn’t require page upon page of you trying to discredit me.

Still waiting.



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: underwerks

So now you are claiming Obama helped Trump get elected?

well in the sense he was such a crappy president that people voted for trump, you are right.

But if you are claiming he used his adminstartion to intentionaly help Trump, you are so delusional its absurd.

Lets remember what your initial claim was again.


Hey I’m willing to change my mind. All you have to do is show me any evidence (ANY) that the Obama administration planted a “spy” in Trumps campaign, and that people in the Trump campaign didn’t just get swept up in surveillance because of the shady people they were communicating with.


There is no spin needed, you are the one spinning trying to argue semantics about the word spy.

Obamas fbi sent a spy to trumps team to get info on people in his campaign.

Period.



I’m not spinning anything, actually quite the opposite. I’m asking for evidence that is valid without being spun. Objective, clear evidence of what you are accusing.

I just believe this is where our source of disconnect over this subject is. I don’t start off with the idea that the leaders of the two parties are at war with each other, because what’s the point? The other side will be back in power in 4-8 years. I don’t follow the media (any media) so I see this whole notion of some battle between the parties as an invented farce.

Believe whatever you want. I just need actual evidence that Obama worked behind the scenes to mess up Trumps chances at winning. Because what actually happened, speaks to the opposite of that.


There will be no proof good enough for you, no matter what.

You believe that Obama wanted trump to win and helped him, which is surreal and there is no evidence at all for.

As a result, when evidence of Obamas admin placing a spy to report on trumps team comes up, you assume this couldnt be the case because Obama wanted trump to win.

And this you spin the definition of the word spy and say this was just an informant.


Again, please point me to evidence. Not your interpretation of an article that you claim as evidence.

Real evidence stands up by itself without you having to interpret it for everyone. Either you have irrefutable evidence, or you don’t.

It’s simple. And doesn’t require page upon page of you trying to discredit me.

Still waiting.


I dont know what is so hard for you to understand.

I you asked for evidence that the Obama admin put spies on the trump campaign

I provided you evidence that they sent a man in in secret, to get info on trumps campaign, and report back to them.

You say "Well thats not spying"

And you then have the nerve to say I am spinning stuff.



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 04:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: face23785

Threads like this do more to make me believe you guys want to end the investigation illegitimately than it does to convince me that the actual investigation is illegitimate.


This is the take I get, too. Most of the conservative pieces about a corrupt DOJ are spun more than my laundry in the dryer. I am in the third group mentioned in the O.P.



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 04:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: underwerks

So now you are claiming Obama helped Trump get elected?

well in the sense he was such a crappy president that people voted for trump, you are right.

But if you are claiming he used his adminstartion to intentionaly help Trump, you are so delusional its absurd.

Lets remember what your initial claim was again.


Hey I’m willing to change my mind. All you have to do is show me any evidence (ANY) that the Obama administration planted a “spy” in Trumps campaign, and that people in the Trump campaign didn’t just get swept up in surveillance because of the shady people they were communicating with.


There is no spin needed, you are the one spinning trying to argue semantics about the word spy.

Obamas fbi sent a spy to trumps team to get info on people in his campaign.

Period.



I’m not spinning anything, actually quite the opposite. I’m asking for evidence that is valid without being spun. Objective, clear evidence of what you are accusing.

I just believe this is where our source of disconnect over this subject is. I don’t start off with the idea that the leaders of the two parties are at war with each other, because what’s the point? The other side will be back in power in 4-8 years. I don’t follow the media (any media) so I see this whole notion of some battle between the parties as an invented farce.

Believe whatever you want. I just need actual evidence that Obama worked behind the scenes to mess up Trumps chances at winning. Because what actually happened, speaks to the opposite of that.


There will be no proof good enough for you, no matter what.

You believe that Obama wanted trump to win and helped him, which is surreal and there is no evidence at all for.

As a result, when evidence of Obamas admin placing a spy to report on trumps team comes up, you assume this couldnt be the case because Obama wanted trump to win.

And this you spin the definition of the word spy and say this was just an informant.


Again, please point me to evidence. Not your interpretation of an article that you claim as evidence.

Real evidence stands up by itself without you having to interpret it for everyone. Either you have irrefutable evidence, or you don’t.

It’s simple. And doesn’t require page upon page of you trying to discredit me.

Still waiting.


I dont know what is so hard for you to understand.

I you asked for evidence that the Obama admin put spies on the trump campaign

I provided you evidence that they sent a man in in secret, to get info on trumps campaign, and report back to them.

You say "Well thats not spying"

And you then have the nerve to say I am spinning stuff.


The FBI sent the source as part of their investigation. There's no evidence the Obama admin had anything to do with it. That's partisan spin.
edit on 29-5-2018 by Gandalf77 because: Typo



new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join