Confirmed: The Obama White House Received Intel Reports On Trump

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: network dude

I think the main point here is that Trump was right that his wires were tapped.

Why is that constantly being repeated as if it were true? There is no evidence that Trump was right. Comey said no evidence. Nunes said no evidence.


It was the phones of others which were monitored, legally. Apparently, sometimes those others were talking to Trump associates and sometimes they were talking about Trump associates.




the information coming out shows that incidental information was gathered. And you still have to wonder where Trump came up with the idea that Obama wire tapped him. I doubt it came to him in a dream or a peyote induced vision. Somebody told him. So if its true, it's damning, if it's bull#, he was set up. But for all those who hate him, they disregard those facts and jump on the "derp, Trump lied" train. It's a shame logic isn't used anymore.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: digital01anarchy

Some of the people here are extremely obtuse for a conspiracy message board.

I suspect it is obtuseness by design, strictly by design. The real story isn't about the truth for the partisans on the left, it is clearly about winning at all costs and not allowing the truth to stop them.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: network dude

I think the main point here is that Trump was right that his wires were tapped.

Why is that constantly being repeated as if it were true? There is no evidence that Trump was right. Comey said no evidence. Nunes said no evidence.


It was the phones of others which were monitored, legally. Apparently, sometimes those others were talking to Trump associates and sometimes they were talking about Trump associates.

Because it appears to pretty much to BE the truth, even if you and I can say maybe not tapped with alligator clips like in a "Mission Impossible" show but the modern way. AH but you can play semantics, now I get it.

DP

a reply to: Dfairlite

Confirmed? You mean Nunes is incapable of lying?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Dfairlite

Confirmed? You mean Nunes is incapable of lying?

No it means the Leftist commie types are SO very untrustworthy that anybody with any proof the commies hate will be bashed and he is smarter than them and is presenting the evidence safely so it cannot be tampered with. We ALL know, or most anyway understand, how the left likes to tamper with the things to make a truth doubt-able. BERNIE BERNIE was cheated, Donna Brazil, Bill Clinton lies are all facts for the world to see. ANYBODY going against that pack of liars has their work cut out for them.

a reply to: Justoneman

Could you repeat that in the form of a syntactically meaningful statement?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Justoneman

Could you repeat that in the form of a syntactically meaningful statement?

The LEFTIST lie to gain lots of power and get away with CRIMES and HIGH TREASON so any against THOSE LIARS have to be careful....

AND,sorry for the caps , emphasis mine.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Justoneman

Could you repeat that in the form of a syntactically meaningful statement?

The LEFTIST lie to gain lots of power and get away with CRIMES and HIGH TREASON so any against THOSE LIARS have to be careful....

AND,sorry for the caps , emphasis mine.

Got it: you are more concerned with the lies from the left than the treason from the right.

a reply to: tothetenthpower

The interception may be legal, it's what was done after that is highly suspect.

a reply to: network dude

Lied?
Or just made an idiotic claim? Repeatedly. I'll go with the later.

And you still have to wonder where Trump came up with the idea that Obama wire tapped him.

He told us where he came up with the idea. He saw an article in the New York Times. An article which, apparently, he didn't actually read.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

And, meanwhile, the Committee's investigation of Russia gets derailed.
Let's cancel that meeting. Here's something shiny.

a reply to: Phage

The investigation was derailed the moment it began because Democrats already had their minds made up.

I am all for an actual fair investigation into all of these allegations. Clintons emails, Obama's use of intel on Trump, and Russian connections to both Dem and Repubs.

Did the other members receive this info and decide it was not their best interest to share because it wasn't good for their agenda. Do not both R & D have same clearance status as ranking members.

I haven't seen what he's seen because he didn't show it me, is not the same as I have no clue because I didn't want to.

Why were democrats trying to hide this.

a reply to: Dfairlite

Talking to foreigners is not illegal. There is more proof that hillary is a predator lesbian pedophile than there is proof the Russians manipulated this election. Which seems more likely: 1) Trump and the Russians decided to team up to beat hillary knowing that it could mean dire ends if they were caught, or, 2) a crank like obama used the DNC initiated accusation that the Russians were meddling in the election to justify spying on Trump to get information for the chosen one, hillary...

The first never seemed likely to me and to date there is no proof, only bs. But I could easily see scum like obama and hillary pulling a stunt like that. Remember, this woman had a chance to PROVE she was honest and trustworthy when she was given questions from the debate ahead of time. All she had to do was walk out on stage on live TV and tell people she had received them and they should be replaced with questions neither candidate had seen before. Instead, she went right along with it, scripted and recited her canned answers, and acted like it was all off the cuff.

Scum.

originally posted by: introvert


Ok.

What your point? Was their a law broken?

Have you ever heard of "Watergate"?... Only sources within the Obama administration could have made these "leaks". My guess is that they did that because of the damaging info on the DNCLeaks and wikileaks. Even though the allegations "that Trump and his team are puppets of the Russians" are false, more so since Hillary's team and Obama's administration also met with the Russian ambassador and other Russian officials. Yet just by making false allegations the Obama administration and Hillary's team shifted the attention from the real scandals to an imaginary one.

Hey, isn't Evelyn Farkas-Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense in the Obama Admin, admitting that the OBAMA ADMIN was "spying" on Trump's team? What "sources and methods" is she referring to? What kind of surveillance?

Listen carefully,

a reply to: talisman


Nice find Talisman!

I think somebody should be "inviting" Ms. Farkas to appear before the Intelligence Committee to give testimony.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Only sources within the Obama administration could have made these "leaks".

Or career officers and agents, AKA "the Deep State."

a reply to: DJW001

DJW001

Hi there, Mein Herr. This is the classic 'big lie' technique of the Twentieth Century. To cover up your own B.S., go down the road, screaming that its the other guy who created this B.S. Blaming imaginary Russian Hacking, is only to cover up your own "Russian false flag hacking". But as the Wikileaks percolates through the alt. news, we are getting most, but not all, of what was going on. Pres. Trump is going to have to declassify some touchy stuff in the I.C. in order to bring this over to Nunez, in the House of Representatives. First counterpoint is that their Skff room was in the old executive office bldg., which while on the White House grounds, is across the street from the real White-House.

Obviously, the POTUS doesn't have to cross the street, in order to get a classified briefing.