• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What if Pres. Obama did wiretap Trump?

It's fortunate that president Trump has you to interpret his childish and insane communications to the world. What's weak is being an apologist for Trump's behavior. He's the leader of the free world behaving like a child.

So we have a sitting president and his admin at the end of their term using the nation's intelligence services to wiretap and surveil the presidential candidate of the opposing political party. If that's not bad enough . . . .

This same president issues an EO which grants access to this previously closely held and confidential signal intelligence to all the 16 or 17 intelligence agencies, increasing the number of people who have now have access by a factorial increase, clearly not concerned in the least with the right to privacy of the electorate. One might ask that if this was such an important EO to issue, why hadn't it be done years earlier in this administration. If that's not bad enough . . . .

Previously held classified and confidential signals intelligence now, predictably - one could legitimately say purposefully, are leaked to the press and public, damaging the now sitting president and his administration, since given the factorial larger potential number of leakers the EO grants them anonymity to continue to continue to leak classified intelligence, a heinous federal crime.

And you call the objection to this as childish.
I suppose that had this happened to Obama, it'd have been childish then as well?
I suppose that the next Democrat president has this inflicted on him, then that's OK with you as well?

Somehow I rather doubt it.
 
So we have a sitting president and his admin at the end of their term using the nation's intelligence services to wiretap and surveil the presidential candidate of the opposing political party. If that's not bad enough . . . .

I don't believe this to be true. But today's the due date for Trump to provide whatever evidence he has that he tweeted to the world last weekend about "Obama tapping his phones".

This same president issues an EO which grants access to this previously closely held and confidential signal intelligence to all the 16 or 17 intelligence agencies, increasing the number of people who have now have access by a factorial increase, clearly not concerned in the least with the right to privacy of the electorate. One might ask that if this was such an important EO to issue, why hadn't it be done years earlier in this administration. If that's not bad enough . . . .

I'm not sure what you're referring to here. Are you talking about the evidence Obama had that Russia was responsible for interference in the 2016 election? If so, I'm behind this 100%. Trump's cronies continue to lie about their connections to Russian dignitaries.

Previously held classified and confidential signals intelligence now, predictably - one could legitimately say purposefully, are leaked to the press and public, damaging the now sitting president and his administration, since given the factorial larger potential number of leakers the EO grants them anonymity to continue to continue to leak classified intelligence, a heinous federal crime.

And you call the objection to this as childish.
I suppose that had this happened to Obama, it'd have been childish then as well?
I suppose that the next Democrat president has this inflicted on him, then that's OK with you as well?

Somehow I rather doubt it.

Hardly unprecedented. There are leaks in every administration.

And yes, I call the way the president behaves, "childish". (lying about crown sizes, calling his predecessor "bad" and "sick", tweeting stupid things about his successor on this TV show). Totally childish. Yep.
 
I don't believe this to be true. But today's the due date for Trump to provide whatever evidence he has that he tweeted to the world last weekend about "Obama tapping his phones".

So all the reporting in the media about the FISA warrants, not withstanding? Hmm. Your position is 'still didn't happen'?

I'm not sure what you're referring to here. Are you talking about the evidence Obama had that Russia was responsible for interference in the 2016 election? If so, I'm behind this 100%. Trump's cronies continue to lie about their connections to Russian dignitaries.

I think that's been pretty well debunked by now due to lack of any shred of evidence, and a number of investigations, FBI and CIA I believe, which came back with a great big nothingburger.

In fact, if you want to find out more about Russian connections, you should check out Hillary, her campaign, and Podesta. From what I hear they are neck deep in Russian contact, including during the campaign, something so many are worried about.

Hardly unprecedented. There are leaks in every administration.

And yes, I call the way the president behaves, "childish". (lying about crown sizes, calling his predecessor "bad" and "sick", tweeting stupid things about his successor on this TV show). Totally childish. Yep.
 
Even if the evidence is as strong as this:



Disclaimer: Some of our friends here at DP may not have ordered or installed my "insert sense of humor" software yet, so be prepared.


It almost sounds like the beginning of Tosh.0 ;)
 
I don't believe this to be true. But today's the due date for Trump to provide whatever evidence he has that he tweeted to the world last weekend about "Obama tapping his phones".



I'm not sure what you're referring to here.
Specifically:
N.S.A. Gets More Latitude to Share Intercepted Communications
By CHARLIE SAVAGE JAN. 12, 2017
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/...tude-to-share-intercepted-communications.html
WASHINGTON — In its final days, the Obama administration has expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.

The new rules significantly relax longstanding limits on what the N.S.A. may do with the information gathered by its most powerful surveillance operations, which are largely unregulated by American wiretapping laws. These include collecting satellite transmissions, phone calls and emails that cross network switches abroad, and messages between people abroad that cross domestic network switches.

The change means that far more officials will be searching through raw data. Essentially, the government is reducing the risk that the N.S.A. will fail to recognize that a piece of information would be valuable to another agency, but increasing the risk that officials will see private information about innocent people.

Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch signed the new rules, permitting the N.S.A. to disseminate “raw signals intelligence information,” on Jan. 3, after the director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper Jr., signed them on Dec. 15, according to a 23-page, largely declassified copy of the procedures.
Previously, the N.S.A. filtered information before sharing intercepted communications with another agency, like the C.I.A. or the intelligence branches of the F.B.I. and the Drug Enforcement Administration. The N.S.A.’s analysts passed on only information they deemed pertinent, screening out the identities of innocent people and irrelevant personal information.

Now, other intelligence agencies will be able to search directly through raw repositories of communications intercepted by the N.S.A. and then apply such rules for “minimizing” privacy intrusions.
Now aren't you just glad that Obama has such a low regard for the right to privacy of the electorate? Huge numbers of people now have access to what was formerly private information, no longer is. This EO makes leaking all the easier and anonymous, as well as eliminating the electorate's privacy protections. Boy. What a guy, eh?
Are you talking about the evidence Obama had that Russia was responsible for interference in the 2016 election? If so, I'm behind this 100%. Trump's cronies continue to lie about their connections to Russian dignitaries.



Hardly unprecedented. There are leaks in every administration.

And yes, I call the way the president behaves, "childish". (lying about crown sizes, calling his predecessor "bad" and "sick", tweeting stupid things about his successor on this TV show). Totally childish. Yep.
 
I'm putting this in CT because as of right now it's purely theoretical:
Let's say that tomorrow, absolute proof positive came out that Obama wire-tapped Trump. We're talking about physical evidence, multiple witnesses and a note saying "Wire tap Trump and send me everything. - Barack Hussein Obama" written in his own blood. In this scenario, what should happen to former Pres. Obama?

First off the fake mass news media is owned and controlled by the DNC, simply look at what wikileaks revealed with CNN providing Hillary Clinton with debate questions prior to a Presidental Debate. Why is CNN even allowed in the White House after that incident, by the way where is the outrage & riots over CNN? Anyways... knowing that they have an agenda (the fake mass news media such as CNN, NBC/MSNBC, ABC & CBS not just their news by the way but even satire like SNL owned by NBC where actors are encouraged to go after Republicans yet to leave Democrats alone or to be very soft on them), so keep that in mind when ever the news says something about Trump!

The fake news is trying to say that OUR President lied when he tweeted about Obama wiretapping him, but heres the thing if they used their brains the real story from that beside wondering why a former president was so corrupt (but hey they avoided going after anything bad Obama did for 8 years why would they start now).. is that our President tweeted out something told to him in confidence (probably Top Secret, because of his vanity/pride). That's the real story.. of course Obama did it, and they should report on that but they wont.. but if they truly wanted to attack Trump they would say if Obama did why would our President divulge TS via twitter.
 
In todays tech world nothing surprises me, nothing.
 
Back
Top Bottom