Comey Asks Justice Dept. to Reject Trump’s Wiretapping Claim

[DA60]

I don't know what Trump expects to get done when he:

1. pisses on his fellow republicans when they don't agree with him lock-step
2. blames the military for the botched raid in Yemen
3. craps on the intel community repeatedly

I guess he thinks he can just do everything without anybody dictator style. He's going to end up being the most worthless presidency.

I think that is it.

He has been a dictator of his little empire for SO long that he seems to think that he is all-powerful.

His lack of political common sense - since the inauguration - is truly staggering to me.

 

[Henrin]

The IC, which has been caught doing things of questionable legality, should be insulated from all criticism, because ~reasons~.

I have no doubt. They are basically like the Supreme Court where they think they're untouchable and can do whatever they want.

 

[George50]

But, it's ok for Obama to do it?

Yes, for Obama to find out about something he hasn't been briefed on through the news once per year, that's OK with me. For Trump to be getting his "alternative facts" from fringe media or just plain making them up almost daily without checking them out through government channels WE pay for is inexcusable.

 

[Fenton]

Butt-hurt Bush and Obama holdovers but we can't rule out the NYT making stuff up whole-cloth.

Its a really important question, one that HRC supporters have yet to answer.

Recorded telephone calls between US Citizens and foreign agents require a FISA warrant.
So, either the transcripts were obtained through a legal process ( Obama's DOJ requesting FISA approval ) which backs Trumps claims, or they were obtained illegally.
If thats the case those trancripts would be inadmissible in a court of law.

Check out this NYTs article.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/03/01/us/politics/obama-trump-russia-election-hacking.html

In that NYTs article, it says Obama and a few top aides removed highly sensitive intelligence gathered from their investigation when they left the WH.
These are civillians who now possess and are concealing highly sensitive intellegence gathered most likely under a FISA investigation

Thats not legal, and their decsion to remove that intelliegence now makes it inadmissible in a court of law.
Theyve broken the chain of custody and their excuse was to preserve it from the incoming admiinvestigation

Do you buy that BS ? I dont. I think they removed it to cover their asses. That theres something in that intelligence that either proves they did bug a Trump and his associates with FISA approval or worse, they got the info through a illegal wiretap

 

[AlbqOwl]

I'm gonna be honest, the only reason Fox is on Trump's side, is because it's convenient.
That's their viewer base, I don't trust them either, but otherwise agreed.

Another thought on your post. I don't see that Fox is necessarily on Trump's side. They ALL--O'Reilly, Carlson, and almost all other hosts with the possible exception of Hannity who does champion the President--have given full hearing to the opposition and they all have said that Trump should show his evidence for his tweeted charge against President Obama. And all during the campaign, their favorite talking heads such as Krauthammer, Karl Rove, George Will et al were all opposed to the Trump candidacy and gave Trump no chance to win, nor were any of them pulling for Trump. And it is pretty obvious they aren't happy with him now. But they all got and still get their fair share of air time. Shepherd Smith, also no Trump fan, still hosts his own show on Fox as well as being managing editor of the breaking news division.

So Fox isn't so one sided as its critics would lead you to believe.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Another thought on your post. I don't see that Fox is necessarily on Trump's side. They ALL--O'Reilly, Carlson, and almost all other hosts with the possible exception of Hannity who does champion the President--have given full hearing to the opposition and they all have said that Trump should show his evidence for his tweeted charge against President Obama. And all during the campaign, their favorite talking heads such as Krauthammer, Karl Rove, George Will et al were all opposed to the Trump candidacy and gave Trump no chance to win, nor were any of them pulling for Trump. And it is pretty obvious they aren't happy with him now. But they all got and still get their fair share of air time. Shepherd Smith, also no Trump fan, still hosts his own show on Fox as well as being managing editor of the breaking news division.

So Fox isn't so one sided as its critics would lead you to believe.

I really don't watch TV anyway.
The sweeping majority of it is garbage, imo.

I don't keep track of Fox but knew that Hannity was on his side and assumed the rest of was similar.

 

[Rogue Valley]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/05/...st-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

This is all getting to be beyond incredible.

Thread already exists: https://www.debatepolitics.com/brea...ice-department-reject-trump-claim-report.html

 

[Fenton]

Yes, for Obama to find out about something he hasn't been briefed on through the news once per year, that's OK with me. For Trump to be getting his "alternative facts" from fringe media or just plain making them up almost daily without checking them out through government channels WE pay for is inexcusable.

Someone in Obama's administration had to obtain a FISA warrant. How do we know this ?
There are transcripts between Trump aides and alledged Russian Intel.



If there's transcripts how were they obtained ? To obtain them legally there has to be a FISA warrant. Its a American citizen and a Russian agent, and this backs Trumps claims.

If they werent obtained through a FISA investigtion then they were illegally obtained and are inadmissible in a court of law.
Also someone(s) needs to be prosecuted.

 

[AlbqOwl]

I really don't watch TV anyway.
The sweeping majority of it is garbage, imo.

I don't keep track of Fox but knew that Hannity was on his side and assumed the rest of was similar.

Not at all. But unlike all the others, Fox does give the President favorable press when warranted and doesn't present the news in a way to unethically make him look bad. And they do stick with a story like terriers and refuse to just go with the seemingly popular opinion about something. They alone seem to be determined to get it all out there for all to see and then let their viewers conclude what to think about it. For that reason, Fox is accused of being in bed with the President and the left accuses them of lying about everything. As long as the left keeps that up, I will believe Fox is doing pretty much okay.

 

[Gaius46]

I thought Comey is a liar determined to sabotage Hillary?

I never believed nor said that. You must be confusing me with someone else.

 

[apdst]

This is a serious accusation. It is one thing to say the Democrats have increased our national debt but to come out and say this individual did this illegal activity, you better have your facts straight.

I know there is this knee jerk reaction to quickly google something the other side did but this is a huge accusation. The scary part is that it looks as if he didn't even discuss this with his team.

Flashback=> NY Times Front Page Headline: "Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides"

 

[apdst]

Yes, for Obama to find out about something he hasn't been briefed on through the news once per year, that's OK with me. For Trump to be getting his "alternative facts" from fringe media or just plain making them up almost daily without checking them out through government channels WE pay for is inexcusable.

You're ok with Obama finding out about veterans dying, while waiting in line at the VA, from a newspaper?

 

[j-mac]

Yes, for Obama to find out about something he hasn't been briefed on through the news once per year, that's OK with me. For Trump to be getting his "alternative facts" from fringe media or just plain making them up almost daily without checking them out through government channels WE pay for is inexcusable.

:lol: Man, this is funny stuff....Trump needs to check with overseers? Are you for real?

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

So you have this, Then you had obama's EO in the middle of the night allowing multiple agencies to share data frome the NSA making it hard to track. There is evidence here. Which NY TImes was right?

 

[chuckiechan]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/05/...st-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

This is all getting to be beyond incredible.

He's talking about the FBI. We have dozens of intelligence agencies, and as Snowden pointed out aren't shy about who they snoop on. It's entirely possible Trump and Obama are both right. Obama may not know, and Trump may have been surveiled.

Sessions deputy can appoint a special investigator to investigate both Trump/Russia and Obama/surveillance at the same time under the same umbrella. (Snowden may get his amnesty yet).

 

[George50]

Someone in Obama's administration had to obtain a FISA warrant. How do we know this ?
There are transcripts between Trump aides and alledged Russian Intel.



If there's transcripts how were they obtained ? To obtain them legally there has to be a FISA warrant. Its a American citizen and a Russian agent, and this backs Trumps claims.

If they werent obtained through a FISA investigtion then they were illegally obtained and are inadmissible in a court of law.
Also someone(s) needs to be prosecuted.

You response to my statement "For Trump to be getting his "alternative facts" from fringe media or just plain making them up almost daily without checking them out through government channels WE pay for is inexcusable." doesn't seem to apply to my statement.

 

[tres borrachos]

View attachment 67214855


So you have this, Then you had obama's EO in the middle of the night allowing multiple agencies to share data frome the NSA making it hard to track. There is evidence here. Which NY TImes was right?

There is evidence of Obama tapping Trump's phone in that January article? How come Trump didn't see it until yesterday?

 

[George50]

:lol: Man, this is funny stuff....Trump needs to check with overseers? Are you for real?

Overseers?? What are you talking about?? The president has no overseers! The president only has underlings. And yes, if he reads something on the internet, he damn well should check it out with his underlings before he tweets it to the world.

 

[Fenton]

You response to my statement "For Trump to be getting his "alternative facts" from fringe media or just plain making them up almost daily without checking them out through government channels WE pay for is inexcusable." doesn't seem to apply to my statement.

Youre missing the point. 16 Days before Obama leaves office, Lunch signs off on a order that gave the NSA the ability to share its raw data with 16 other agencies.
Why ??
Originally the NSA recieved raw data from intelligence gathering and then passed it on to the appropriate agency.
After she signed off on that order, 16 agencies had access to raw data from Obama's Russian Intelligence gathering operation.
And since then we've had multiple illegal leaks of wiretapped conversations from Obama cronies at these agencies.
Each leak is a felony by the way. So i find it hard to take Trump haters selective outrage seriously.

Theres a orchestrated, UNPRECENTED, sinister and illegal attempt that was started by the previous administration to undermine a Democratically elected President and to stall his agenda happening right before your eyes but your'e to partisan to care.

Its the kind of **** that happens in banana republic hell holes and corrupt backwards Comunist Govts and all the Left can focus on is Trumps tweets

 

[j-mac]

Overseers?? What are you talking about?? The president has no overseers! The president only has underlings. And yes, if he reads something on the internet, he damn well should check it out with his underlings before he tweets it to the world.

:roll: I just love how he ties you guys in knots....

 

[George50]

:roll: I just love how he ties you guys in knots....

Like Lindsey Graham said, he's a jackass.

 

[Crosscheck]

Flashback=> NY Times Front Page Headline: "Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides"

From the article

Mr. Trump’s demand for a congressional investigation appears to be based, at least in part, on unproved claims by Breitbart News and conservative talk radio hosts that secret warrants were issued authorizing the tapping of the phones of Mr. Trump and his aides at Trump Tower in New York.

Well Breitbart News says so, so it must be true.

Trump has supreme power with the Republicans controlling both houses. He should be able to have this all investigated and I hope they do.

 

[apdst]

From the article

Well Breitbart News says so, so it must be true.

Trump has supreme power with the Republicans controlling both houses. He should be able to have this all investigated and I hope they do.

This is from the NYT piece fron 20 Jan 17:

The F.B.I. is leading the investigations, aided by the National Security Agency, the C.I.A. and the Treasury Department’s financial crimes unit. The investigators have accelerated their efforts in recent weeks but have found no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, the officials said. One official said intelligence reports based on some of the wiretapped communications had been provided to the White House.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/us/politics/trump-russia-associates-investigation.html

 

[Crosscheck]

This is from the NYT piece fron 20 Jan 17:

Then let the investigation begin. Either Trump or FBI Director Comey is a blatant liar and needs to be discharged.

 

[apdst]

Then let the investigation begin. Either Trump or FBI Director Comey is a blatant liar and needs to be discharged.

Or, maybe Obama is a liar? According to NYT, this sounds mighty Watergate'ish.