• 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!

Bug Gate or Obamagate or what shall we call it?

It is clear from this tread that Trumps outburst was more for his loyal followers than anything in reality.

Obama officials, intelligence officials, FBI and even some senior GOPers have all said it did not happen. The White House is also baffled and has been playing catch-up and damage control ever since.

That Trump basically has disappeared ever since he came with the accusations and has to send out his minions to promote another illegal travel ban, shows that he has nothing and he knows it.

Regardless even if there is an investigation because of this accusation, then it is exactly what Trump and his loyal supporters DONT want, as such investigations can rarely be fully controlled and Trumps links to Putin and his allies will be exposed. The irony is that Trump and his minions have tried to protect Trump from an investigation, but these tweets might just have opened Pandoras box..

That's your speculation. But please let's don't deal in speculation that is basically backhanded insults directed at the President, his administration, or others.

Please provide your argument/evidence for why Bug Gate is plausible or not.
 
I don't want personal insults, direct or backhanded please. I want those of you who are sure Trump is delusional to produce any evidence or argument related to Bug Gate that he is wrong in this matter.

I will tell you the same thing I would tell Trump, put on your big boy pants, Trump courts and creates much of his own issues with the press. If you feel slighted because you dont like some of things said about your boy, toughen up. Don insults, and throws wild accusations on an almost daily basis, perhaps those that oppose him, are just following the example Trump is setting. Money does not buy class, something Trump never learnt. To prove my non partisanship, the last few Pres have conducted themselves with the decorum the job requires, something Reagan, both Bushs, and Obama had, and Trump lacks.
 
Last edited:
Argument No. 4:

The NY Times says Comey has rebuked the President for making a false statement in this matter, but we don't have Comey's version of that supposed fact.

Mark Levin has compiled quite a bit of circumstantial evidence that could turn out to be relevant.

If anybody has the guts to actually hear a well developed and articulate story, backed up with physical evidence, in favor of the President's claims. Mark Levin gives a lot to think about here--you have to watch the video to get the information though.

Excerpt:
MARK LEVIN: The evidence is overwhelming. This is not about President Trump’s tweeting. This is about the Obama administration spying, and the question is not whether it spied. We know they went to the FISA court twice. The question is who they did spy on and the extent of the spying that is the Trump campaign, the Trump transition, Trump surrogates...

They were so aggressive, they waited four or five months, they go back in October, weeks before the general election, they narrow their request, all of the sudden we have leaks coming out on Flynn. Then we have a 'Oh horrible' meeting that took place between Sessions and so forth. And I’m telling you as a former chief of staff to a United States attorney general in the Reagan administration, these are police state tactics.


See the video here:

Mark Levin: "The Evidence Is Overwhelming" That Obama Spied On Trump | Video | RealClearPolitics
 
It is clear from this tread that Trumps outburst was more for his loyal followers than anything in reality.

Obama officials, intelligence officials, FBI and even some senior GOPers have all said it did not happen. The White House is also baffled and has been playing catch-up and damage control ever since.

That Trump basically has disappeared ever since he came with the accusations and has to send out his minions to promote another illegal travel ban, shows that he has nothing and he knows it.

Regardless even if there is an investigation because of this accusation, then it is exactly what Trump and his loyal supporters DONT want, as such investigations can rarely be fully controlled and Trumps links to Putin and his allies will be exposed. The irony is that Trump and his minions have tried to protect Trump from an investigation, but these tweets might just have opened Pandoras box..


Much speculation with nothing to back it up.

Expose them all.

The investigation was called for. There will have to be some evidence for it to go forward. Just like any other allegation.
 
I doubt he will do this, but it's up to President Trump to present the evidence, since he made the claim in the first place.

In my opinion, this seems to be just an attempted diversion from the recent Jeff Sessions/Russia debacle. Aside from speculation, I doubt Trump has much of anything to back up his claim.

The wire tap of Flynn, the illegal way it was released, illegally not erasing Flynn's voice off the tape (assuming the Russian was the target). These are all evidence that there was intelligence service corruption under Obama. They would also destroy any potential Obama law suit and establish the Trump campaign was being targeted.
 
Who said I believed Obama or Pelosi? I'm simply stating that if Trump wants to make the claim that Obama wiretapped Trump tower, then he needs to back it up with something.

That's how it works. If you make a claim, then it's up to you to provide the evidence for that claim. Otherwise, there's no reason for me to accept it whatsoever. It's not a preposterous accusation, until there is something behind it, I'm not just gonna take Trump's word for it. Especially since he's made so many false statements before.

Has he made so many 'false statements' before if you put those statement in their full context?

But let's set that aside for a minute.

I will ask you to watch the video in my post #28 and see if you still think there is nothing to this.
 
The truth has to be told to the American People. We (all of us) should demand to know what FISA's were issued, when etc. However, the argument made that the "President couldn't have if he wanted to" - is absolutely false.


(1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that—
(A) the electronic surveillance is solely directed at—
(i) the acquisition of the contents of communications transmitted by means of communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers, as defined in section 1801(a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title; or
(ii) the acquisition of technical intelligence, other than the spoken communications of individuals, from property or premises under the open and exclusive control of a foreign power, as defined in section 1801(a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title;


Wouldn't Trump have to be a foreign intelligence agent for this law to apply?

Are you asking us to seriously entertain the notion that it would be reasonable for someone to reach the conclusion that Trump is a foreign intelligence agent?
That seems outlandish and very wacko conspiracy theory.

Perhaps we should apply Occam's razor to rule out the theory with fewer entities first—namely that Trump said something hyperbolic.

After we rule that out, I'll be more willing to wander down the conspiracy theory path where Trump is subject to FISA actions right alongside you.

fwiw, the evidence from National Review's McCarthy seems to suggest that "Trump associates" are foreign intelligence agents rather than Trump himself.
 
I don't want personal insults, direct or backhanded please. I want those of you who are sure Trump is delusional to produce any evidence or argument related to Bug Gate that he is wrong in this matter.

It's not up to anyone but Trump to prove his claim. He made it, it's up to him to provide the evidence. He has not. He has caused his Trumptards to go into circle jerk mode about it though.
 
I will tell you the same thing I would tell Trump, put on your big boy pants, Trump courts and creates much of his own issues with the press. If you feel slighted because you dont like some of things said about your boy, toughen up. Don insults, and throws wild accusations on an almost daily basis, perhaps those that oppose him, are just following the example Trump is setting. Money does not buy class, something Trump never learnt. To prove my non partisanship, the last few Pres have conducted themselves with the decorum the job requires, something Reagan, both Bushs, and Obama had, and Trump lacks.

There are any number of threads out there to bash the President and I don't CARE about anybody's personal politics here. Please focus on the topic of THIS THREAD that is about Bug Gate. What evidence do you have that President Trump is probably lying about this? What evidence do you have that President Obama probably is not?
 
Argument No. 4:

The NY Times says Comey has rebuked the President for making a false statement in this matter, but we don't have Comey's version of that supposed fact.

Mark Levin has compiled quite a bit of circumstantial evidence that could turn out to be relevant.

If anybody has the guts to actually hear a well developed and articulate story, backed up with physical evidence, in favor of the President's claims. Mark Levin gives a lot to think about here--you have to watch the video to get the information though.

Excerpt:
MARK LEVIN: The evidence is overwhelming. This is not about President Trump’s tweeting. This is about the Obama administration spying, and the question is not whether it spied. We know they went to the FISA court twice. The question is who they did spy on and the extent of the spying that is the Trump campaign, the Trump transition, Trump surrogates...

They were so aggressive, they waited four or five months, they go back in October, weeks before the general election, they narrow their request, all of the sudden we have leaks coming out on Flynn. Then we have a 'Oh horrible' meeting that took place between Sessions and so forth. And I’m telling you as a former chief of staff to a United States attorney general in the Reagan administration, these are police state tactics.

See the video here:

Mark Levin: "The Evidence Is Overwhelming" That Obama Spied On Trump | Video | RealClearPolitics



Nice case well laid out by a former attorney general deputy.

A convoluted set of stories laid out in a simple logical manner.

At this point I am thinking potus has known for awhile and was waiting to spring it when he wanted to change the news cycle. He is going to need a few more of these cards before its all over.
That former NSA director may have told him months ago and that's why clapper and the usual suspects were calling for his head.
I think it was a mistake to let Flynn go right now unless there was something else going on. Perhaps it is a deeper game with more hidden information.
 
It's not up to anyone but Trump to prove his claim. He made it, it's up to him to provide the evidence. He has not. He has caused his Trumptards to go into circle jerk mode about it though.

This thread is our/your evidence/argument/theory about Bug Gate, not President Trump's duty in this. And I did request that you keep it civil. Referring to the President or his supporters by calling them a derogatory name does not keep the spirit of that request.
 
Nice case well laid out by a former attorney general deputy.

A convoluted set of stories laid out in a simple logical manner.

At this point I am thinking potus has known for awhile and was waiting to spring it when he wanted to change the news cycle. He is going to need a few more of these cards before its all over.
That former NSA director may have told him months ago and that's why clapper and the usual suspects were calling for his head.
I think it was a mistake to let Flynn go right now unless there was something else going on. Perhaps it is a deeper game with more hidden information.

Do you really think those stories convoluted? Or all serious pieces of the puzzle? And yes, I think Flynn got a bum rap and I think it tragic that Sessions recused himself from the Russian investigation because that leaves the Justice Dept. in the hands of career bureaucrats who likely have no interest in getting to the bottom of anything that might absolve the President or Sessions or Flynn, etc. from any wrongdoing.

I do know that if we who demand fair play and honest facts to come out in this matter are not as loud and persistent as those who see blood in the water and intend to close in for the kill, we might as well throw in the towel and call it quits. The leftists/statists/political class/progressives who hate the President and intend to destroy him will have won and there is no hope for anything to get seriously better.
 
TWITTERGATE

RUSSIANGATE

MAGAGATE

2016GATE

- Twittergate is my personal favorite
 
How much evidence does President Trump have that President Obama bugged Trump Tower?

What does President Obama know about that and when did he know it?

The MSM has been bending over backwards to denounce President Trump from saying it. Nancy Pelosi says "We don't do that." President Obama through his spokespeople has said "We didn't do that and couldn't have if we wanted to."

So where do we go to get the truth? Was any part of Trump Tower and/or the Trump campaign bugged? If it was, did the Obama have anything to do with it?

NOTE: Please keep this civil and on topic. There are plenty of threads out there to insult people and the President and/or his people. Here, let's put the best arguments out there that we can make pro or con on this scandal du jour whether it is our own thoughts or thoughtful arguments presented by others that makes the allegations plausible or not, likely or not, fact or not.

That is the problem, when legitimacy is lost to partisan lying, relativistic ethics and ideolo-political justice.
 
The truth has to be told to the American People. We (all of us) should demand to know what FISA's were issued, when etc. However, the argument made that the "President couldn't have if he wanted to" - is absolutely false.


(1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that—
(A) the electronic surveillance is solely directed at—
(i) the acquisition of the contents of communications transmitted by means of communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers, as defined in section 1801(a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title; or
(ii) the acquisition of technical intelligence, other than the spoken communications of individuals, from property or premises under the open and exclusive control of a foreign power, as defined in section 1801(a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title;

Interesting information. If this is accurate then Pelosi and Obama's indignant assertion that 'we don't do that' looks even more shaky doesn't it.
 
Currently, there's no empirical evidence either way, so until there is, I have to say I don't know if it's true or not, but that it is very possible.
I do find it interesting that we have Senator Coons and Representative Schiff saying there are transcripts of conversations (via some sort of surveillance), and former DNI Clapper saying that they they no evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russians, yet they say no one tapped the phones of the Trump campaign. Those positions don't logically fit together. How can there be transcripts without taps, and how can the former DNI say that they didn't find any evidence if there were no taps?
There're multiple scenarios where there were not taps on Trump's phones nor one Trump's campaign's phones but there are still transcripts.
I don't know anything about the scenarios other than it's possible to imagine them.

ferinstints
If someone from Trump's campaign called (or was called from) a line which was being monitored, then there could be a transcript of a call w/o there being a tap on Trump's campaign's phones.

Some evidence indicates that "Trump associates" under FISA jurisdiction—so presumably foreign intelligence agents—were the targets of the monitoring.
The BBC article cited as one of the origins of the story indicates that electronic banking records, not phone calls, were the target of the initial, failed FISA application.

I have read that there were multiple investigation going on.

It seems very easy to conflate one with the other.
 
Wouldn't Trump have to be a foreign intelligence agent for this law to apply?

Are you asking us to seriously entertain the notion that it would be reasonable for someone to reach the conclusion that Trump is a foreign intelligence agent?
That seems outlandish and very wacko conspiracy theory.

Perhaps we should apply Occam's razor to rule out the theory with fewer entities first—namely that Trump said something hyperbolic.

After we rule that out, I'll be more willing to wander down the conspiracy theory path where Trump is subject to FISA actions right alongside you.

fwiw, the evidence from National Review's McCarthy seems to suggest that "Trump associates" are foreign intelligence agents rather than Trump himself.

Read the law - it simply gives the President along with the DOJ the power to wire tap any line that is related to someone outside of the country that is not a US citizen. In this scenario, they do not need a FISA order. Who's to say they did not bug the phone of someone that comes into contact with Trump towers on a regular basis outside of the US who is not a US citizen. Surely the Trump Corporation works with numerous people across the world who fit this bill.

The overall heading of the slide, published for the first time today by The Washington Post, is 'FAA 702 Operations,' which refers to a 2008 law that allowed collection on U.S. soil for foreign intelligence purposes of communications of foreigners thought to be overseas without the need to get a warrant from a court.
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence told The Sunday Post that legally authorized data collection 'has been one of our most important tools for the protection of the nation's - and our allies' - security. Our use of these authorities has been properly classified to maximize the potential for effective collection against foreign terrorists and other adversaries.'
Whistleblower: The tapping of cables extends from what NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden already made public about the use of PRISM
Whistleblower: The tapping of cables extends from what NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden already made public about the use of PRISM
It added that the intelligence and law enforcement communities would continue to work will all members of Congress to ensure a proper balance is struck between privacy and protection for citizens.
It is not known how many American's emails or phone calls have been monitored because they are communicating with a potential foreign target.
The world's hundreds of undersea cables, many of which lie across the ocean floor, now carry 99 per cent of all intercontinental data including most international phone calls, The Post reports.


Read more: NSA leaks: How U.S. government is tapping internet and phone calls from international undersea cables | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 
Has he made so many 'false statements' before if you put those statement in their full context?

Uh, yeah. Of course he has.

But let's set that aside for a minute.

I will ask you to watch the video in my post #28 and see if you still think there is nothing to this.

Sure.
 
Hard to say how much hard evidence he has. It may be carefully constructed circumstantial same. I'm pretty sure Obama or his administration would have insulated him quite carefully from any incriminating behavior. BUT the culture of an administration does count. Wink-wink-nudge-nudge is a mindset. And, of course, its where the buck stops.

All by itself re Nancy Pelosi. She's a wicked witch. I wouldn't believe her if her tongue came notarized.

As far as Obama's denial, couldn't have Done it if we wanted to . . . Well, that makes the assumption it was done quasi legally. I doubt the Watergate crew had warrants.

Okay Maggie. At least one thwap with a very thin limp noodle. If I am to admonish members for calling the President or others names in the interest of keeping it civil, I have to admonish you to do the same re Nancy Pelosi (however difficult that may be. :) )

But yes, as Eva Peron posted, the idea that the President cannot order the Justice Dept. to check out somebody is simply absurd. The AG serves at the pleasure of the President and while he/she has a lot of latitude to act independently, he/she also takes orders from the President.
 
Currently, there's no empirical evidence either way, so until there is, I have to say I don't know if it's true or not, but that it is very possible.

I do find it interesting that we have Senator Coons and Representative Schiff saying there are transcripts of conversations (via some sort of surveillance), and former DNI Clapper saying that they they no evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russians, yet they say no one tapped the phones of the Trump campaign. Those positions don't logically fit together. How can there be transcripts without taps, and how can the former DNI say that they didn't find any evidence if there were no taps?

Again, there's no empirical evidence yet either way, just talking heads that are contradicting themselves.

Interesting perception. That indeed may become an issue in all this.
 
The NSA has confirmed that it is searching Section 702 data to access American’s communications without a warrant, in what is being called the "back door search loophole." In response to questions from Senator Ron Wyden, former NSA director General Keith Alexander admitted that the NSA specifically searches Section 702 data using "U.S. person identifiers," for example email addresses associated with someone in the U.S.
The NSA has used Section 702 to justify programs in which the NSA can siphon off large portions of Internet traffic directly from the Internet backbone. These programs exploit the structure of the Internet, in which a significant amount of traffic from around the world flows through servers in the United States. In fact, through Section 702, the NSA has access to information stored by major Internet companies like Facebook and Google.
Section 702 is likely used for computer security operations. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper noted Section 702's use to obtain communications "regarding potential cyber threats" and to prevent "hostile cyber activities." Richard Ledgett, Deputy Director of NSA, noted the use of intelligence authorities to mitigate cyber attacks.
The FISA Court has little opportunity to review Section 702 collection. The court approves procedures for 702 collection for up to a year. This is not approval of specific targets, however; "court review [is] limited to 'procedures' for targeting and minimization rather than the actual seizure and searches." This lack of judicial oversight is far beyond the parameters of criminal justice.
Not only does the FISA Court provide little oversight, Congress is largely in the dark about Section 702 collection as well. NSA spying defenders say that Congress has been briefed on these programs. But other members of Congress have repeatedly noted that it is incredibly difficult to get answers from the intelligence community, and that attending classified hearings means being unable to share any information obtained at such hearings. What’s more, as Senator Barbara Mikulski stated: "'Fully briefed' doesn’t mean that we know what’s going on." Without a full picture of Section 702 surveillance, Congress simply cannot provide oversight.


https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/05/way-nsa-uses-section-702-deeply-troubling-heres-why
 
I will tell you the same thing I would tell Trump, put on your big boy pants, Trump courts and creates much of his own issues with the press. If you feel slighted because you dont like some of things said about your boy, toughen up. Don insults, and throws wild accusations on an almost daily basis, perhaps those that oppose him, are just following the example Trump is setting. Money does not buy class, something Trump never learnt. To prove my non partisanship, the last few Pres have conducted themselves with the decorum the job requires, something Reagan, both Bushs, and Obama had, and Trump lacks.

Again the topic is not your opinion of President Trump. The topic is what evidence you think exists to prove or disprove the President's and or President Obama's claims regarding Bug Gate.
 
As usual I think Donald was just stirring up **** in order to distract us from something far more sinister that he is up to.

I think you give the Donald too much credit.
 
Okay Maggie. At least one thwap with a very thin limp noodle. If I am to admonish members for calling the President or others names in the interest of keeping it civil, I have to admonish you to do the same re Nancy Pelosi (however difficult that may be. :) )

But yes, as Eva Peron posted, the idea that the President cannot order the Justice Dept. to check out somebody is simply absurd. The AG serves at the pleasure of the President and while he/she has a lot of latitude to act independently, he/she also takes orders from the President.

My humble apology to you and to the opposition. Double shame on Maggie.
 
Back
Top Bottom