NSA Whistleblower Backs Trump Up on Wiretap Claims[W:364]

[Excon]

Re: NSA Whistleblower Backs Trump Up on Wiretap Claims

No, you just lied about what I said - Excon:"We are talking about eavesdropping in Trump Tower. You said you knew it was going on." I never said it, you made that up, and when confronted won't admit it and move the goal post.

You do not even know what you said and just told an untruth for absolutely no reason, which most likely shows you are confused in regards to the whole exchange.


You did say you knew eavesdropping was going on. Period. You even claimed that no one denies it.

Of course there was "eavesdropping going on." No one denies it.

Does "of course" mean something to you that it does not for others?
So, are you going to sit there and tell another untruth?

I'll pass on responding to the rest because you started off with a lie, and in the rest are making no defensible claim anymore that I can see. For example, the October Slate story based on non-IC data. And you say well there COULD BE another warrant and I can't prove there was NOT this warrant, so it's possible! etc... Sure it is. Anything is possible, such it's possible Trump regular sex with a female staffer in Trump Tower, which is certainly plausible given his womanizing history.

Anyway, I've done this enough to know that with you it's always beating your head against a wall, so I'll quit here. eace

1. You will pass for no other reason than you know you are wrong and can not defend your position.
2. You clearly were not paying attention to what was said.
Not just possible because anything is possible. Doh! Lame.
Plausible given the information being released in the press.
3. You should have watched the video. Too bad, your loss.

 

[tres borrachos]

Re: NSA Whistleblower Backs Trump Up on Wiretap Claims

Second, I'm disappointed in Kucinich. Here's his quote at the end: "When the president raised the question of wiretapping on his phones in Trump Tower, he was challenged to prove that such a thing could happen."

That's a straw man and he should know better than to engage in that kind of rhetorical BS. Trump didn't "raise the question" - he accused Obama of committing specific felonies, for STARTERS. Accordingly the burden has nothing to do with "could happen" but whether Trump's specific assertion of fact - former POTUS Obama tapped Trump - DID happen. !

I snipped out the above part because I couldn't agree with it more. Trump didn't raise the question or say it could happen. He made declarative statements that it happened. Period, no ambiguity, no question.

 

[j-mac]

I understand. I have to make myself read McCarthy at NRO sometimes even though I know he knows his stuff and I've found his factual assertions very reliable.

But she really is good in my experience.

Ok, read through it, and although there were a couple of things she dismissed probably because she either didn't know the answer to, or would have made it impossible to carry on with her analysis without speculation, none the less, she did enlighten me to, if I understand properly that the warrants on the server were not pursued by the FBI because they determined that the tie to the two Russian banks were traced back to a spam source...Also, if I understand correctly that most of this investigation concerning the FISA end of things, was due to monitoring of foreign agents (ie; Kysliak) and some of Trump's people like Flynn, and Sessions were mentioned in them....Among others for other reasons like this Carter Page person, that the Trump people say they don't know, or didn't know at the time...

The parts that I find troubling is that it is possible that nothing improper was done here, in fact likely that this was the case, but what Obama did do, is to expand the 12333 broadening out the number of people in contact with un redacted raw data concerning this, and this, I think was done to allow for nearly untraceable leaks, and formation of damaging narrative against the incoming administration....IF this was the case, and nothing illegal done on the prior administrations part, in the very least what a schmuck Obama, and his gang were....

I don't know at this point, and will watch intently for any conclusion to investigations....

 

[j-mac]

Re: NSA Whistleblower Backs Trump Up on Wiretap Claims

I snipped out the above part because I couldn't agree with it more. Trump didn't raise the question or say it could happen. He made declarative statements that it happened. Period, no ambiguity, no question.

Yep, he did, and to this point it would seem with little more than a lot of smoke....Whether he would come out at this point and clarify, or take back his claim, is unlikely, but the ball is rolling on finding a factual conclusion, so I for one will wait and see where this goes...eace