Trump accuses Obama administration of wiretapping Trump Tower phones

[kat07]

I think a lot of people are missing the important facts in all of this including Senator Schumer. The problem is the use of FISA and if it was used to spy on Trump or any one in his campaign. FISA matters are very restricted; they have to fit the definition of war sabotage or a grave hostile like war-like attack on the US (FISA, 50, USC 1801, et.seq.) To be used against a US Citizen their needs to be proof of actual criminal espionage of the above, by said person. Information sought can only be on pending or actual attacks against the Country, it’s limited to acts defined in Section 105 of Title 18 of the United States Code. Misuse of FISA procedures, such as not disclosing all material facts to the court, as well as wrongfully distributing it to the public (ordering it to be preserved, shared with the public or ordering and allowing the NSA to search it), in order to obtain surveillance is a crime., and this is what it appears Obama may have done with the FISA his administration sought in October.

They need to release the 2 FISA applications.

 

[Ion]

I think a lot of people are missing the important facts in all of this including Senator Schumer. The problem is the use of FISA and if it was used to spy on Trump or any one in his campaign. FISA matters are very restricted; they have to fit the definition of war sabotage or a grave hostile like war-like attack on the US (FISA, 50, USC 1801, et.seq.) To be used against a US Citizen their needs to be proof of actual criminal espionage of the above, by said person. Information sought can only be on pending or actual attacks against the Country, it’s limited to acts defined in Section 105 of Title 18 of the United States Code. Misuse of FISA procedures, such as not disclosing all material facts to the court, as well as wrongfully distributing it to the public (ordering it to be preserved, shared with the public or ordering and allowing the NSA to search it), in order to obtain surveillance is a crime., and this is what it appears Obama may have done with the FISA his administration sought in October.

They need to release the 2 FISA applications.

Of course, they did not wiretap Trump but only couple of the members of his campaign. No hard evidence of anything but everybody knows that the Russians are spying so just in case …And if Trump and Session were talking arround that’s their fault they were recorded

 

[kat07]

Well it keeps getting more interesting according to the NYT if true Commey is asking the Justice Department to refute Trump’s claim.

They still should release the 2 FISA applications so the public can see what’s going on vs. all the selective leaking.

 

[Culurecatholic]

How interesting that Rump vilifies the press, especially the NYT, when it all publishes stories about what a reprehensible thing he is. It’s “fake news,” and “the enemy of the people” (a quote used by fellow communists). But when a story comes out, and is clarified that there is no proof, he tries to use it (false facts that there are) for an “investigation” of no “conspiracy” that exists. And yet, you Rumpists still defend and support him. How sad. You really think he’s still going to “save babies?”

 

[ProVobis]

This could be the worst political scandal of our lifetime, and a real scandal compared to the one the MSM and Democrats have tried to throw out there, and Trump may have served it right at the perfect time!

I don’t see what good it served him at this time.

 

[sallybutler]

Remember the Patriot Act? If you have done nothing wrong, it shouldn’t bother you to have your phone calls tapped.

 

[ProVobis]

Remember the Patriot Act? If you have done nothing wrong, it shouldn’t bother you to have your phone calls tapped.

 

[Culurecatholic]

I announce the new name for our President is Presidente Chaos His saying things with no evidence is getting old very fast. He has no credibility.

Don’t expect Rumpists to listen. They slavishly adore this immoral, unethical man. They think he’s going to “save babies” and “protect their religious liberty.” They live in trailers and live off of socialism, but are opposed to socialism (it’s their money, according to them, not anyone else’s). He’s a typical, alt-right conmunist who supports Russian communism because it’s all about the rich getting richer. He’d betray our country in a second for the sake of rich people like him. Hey! That’s what he’s doing now.

 

[Culurecatholic]

Here we go again. Dusting off Jesus and saying “I can’t believe any Catholic would XYZ with Trump”…

The credence to Trump’s claims lie in the fact that there were two FISA applications and one which named Trump, these are facts not claims. FISA = counter surveillance.

If you want to call someone a rapid liar back up your statements with facts.

Trump’s tweet is to inform the public of the dirty politics and witch hunt against him.

The only corruption and drama is from the Democrats who keep crying about Russia and attacking Trump on every little thing he does or say. They are acting like children all because Hillary lost.

Also, are you a licensed psychiatrist? Hillary is more of a narcissist sociopath than Trump could ever be, and meets more of the DSM-IV diagnostic criteria of being one. Trump just has an inflated ego, two different things medically speaking.

Another typical “Catholic” who thinks this guy is going to “save babies” and impose a form of Catholicism on others in the name of “religious liberty.” Make sure you keep making those rich people richer in the name of “freedom.” They’re doing that now in Russia where communists have become “capitalists” to keep they money that they have and get even more at the expense of “workers.”

 

[Michael_Mayo]

I announce the new name for our President is Presidente Chaos His saying things with no evidence is getting old very fast. He has no credibility.

:sad_yes:

 

[meltzerboy]

Don’t expect Rumpists to listen. They slavishly adore this immoral, unethical man. They think he’s going to “save babies” and “protect their religious liberty.” They live in trailers and live off of socialism, but are opposed to socialism (it’s their money, according to them, not anyone else’s). He’s a typical, alt-right conmunist who supports Russian communism because it’s all about the rich getting richer. He’d betray our country in a second for the sake of rich people like him. Hey! That’s what he’s doing now.

I agree that too many followers of Trump are under the illusion that he really cares about them and the issues they care about. But I seriously doubt that most of them “live in trailers and live off of socialism.” As to Trump’s support of communism, I don’t think so: if anything, he is the uber-capitalist gone awry. I also don’t think ANY President would “betray our country.” That is one of the few idealistic notions I retain. Regarding Trump’s ethics, I believe there is much room for improvement. But I hesitate to judge the morality of another person.

 

[mwigs]

Another typical “Catholic” who thinks this guy is going to “save babies” and impose a form of Catholicism on others in the name of “religious liberty.” Make sure you keep making those rich people richer in the name of “freedom.” They’re doing that now in Russia where communists have become “capitalists” to keep they money that they have and get even more at the expense of “workers.”

And that’s what you got from my post you quoted. Wow.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

youtube.com/watch?v=kyqA1sJGUv4

Let me just say that usually I do not care for Mark Levin, but here he seems to make a case for this rigmarole being worth at least investigating. Look at the above video.

Here he is again in Fox and Friends:

youtube.com/watch?v=R2ZyHbDGJS0

And yes, I know Fox and Friends is basically “Donald J. Trump----God Emperor of Earth” territory.

But there might be something in here after all.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Don’t expect Rumpists to listen. .

Besides being ill-mannered and vulgar, use of this epithet on Trump or people who support him is likely to get a person sanctioned by the moderators or banned. And it’s hard to think it wouldn’t be deserved.

 

[Thorolfr]

and this is what it appears Obama may have done with the FISA his administration sought in October.

Obama’s spokesperson already said that Obama (or anyone in the White House) did not do or order anything. If someone in the FBI sought a wiretap using FISA (and I haven’t seen any solid proof they did), this does not mean that the president was in any way involved and indeed, the president should not be involved in such decisions.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Remember the Patriot Act? If you have done nothing wrong, it shouldn’t bother you to have your phone calls tapped.

it wouldn’t bother me to have my phone calls tapped, because nobody would be interested in the content or be able to use it to harm me. I’m just not all that interesting. Others, however, would be to some.

But I have, from the very beginning said it’s dangerous to the country. It was passed under George Bush, who was a benign sort of character, but it always seemed to me all it took for it to be dangerous would for someone of a vicious or totalitarian mindset to be in that office.

And so, it seems I was right from the outset.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

it wouldn’t bother me to have my phone calls tapped, because nobody would be interested in the content or be able to use it to harm me. I’m just not all that interesting. Others, however, would be to some.

But I have, from the very beginning said it’s dangerous to the country. It was passed under George Bush, who was a benign sort of character, but it always seemed to me all it took for it to be dangerous would for someone of a vicious or totalitarian mindset to be in that office.

And so, it seems I was right from the outset.

:sad_yes::sad_yes::sad_yes:

 

[Culurecatholic]

Keep defending the immoral, unethical Rump, you Rumpists. He’ll “save babies” and “protect religious liberty” according to your kind. How many “wives” does he have to cheat on and marry before he’s no longer considered a good man, according to you? Oh, it doesn’t matter. He’s going to “save babies” and “protect religious liberty.” So long as they rape women and exchange wives like socks, they’re good men when they claim their going to “save babies” and “protect religious liberty.” Oh, and for the trailer-trash living off of socialism while opposing socialism, he’s going to get them “jobs.” Any of you get a job from Rump? If you did, speak up. Did he save any of your babies? Speak up. As for “religious liberty,” well, we all know what that means. Don’t say you don’t.

 

[TMC]

I think a lot of people are missing the important facts in all of this including Senator Schumer. The problem is the use of FISA and if it was used to spy on Trump or any one in his campaign. FISA matters are very restricted; they have to fit the definition of war sabotage or a grave hostile like war-like attack on the US (FISA, 50, USC 1801, et.seq.) To be used against a US Citizen their needs to be proof of actual criminal espionage of the above, by said person. Information sought can only be on pending or actual attacks against the Country, it’s limited to acts defined in Section 105 of Title 18 of the United States Code. Misuse of FISA procedures, such as not disclosing all material facts to the court, as well as wrongfully distributing it to the public (ordering it to be preserved, shared with the public or ordering and allowing the NSA to search it), in order to obtain surveillance is a crime., and this is what it appears Obama may have done with the FISA his administration sought in October.

They need to release the 2 FISA applications.

So are you saying that you believe that the head of FBI counterintelligence, the head of the FBI, the Attorney General, and at least one, maybe two FISA judges all conspired to issue an illegal FISA warrant? What is your basis for that incredible position?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Obama’s spokesperson already said that Obama (or anyone in the White House) did not do or order anything. If someone in the FBI sought a wiretap using FISA (and I haven’t seen any solid proof they did), this does not mean that the president was in any way involved and indeed, the president should not be involved in such decisions.

The argument seems to be that the actual “ordering” would not need to come from Obama himself or anyone working in the White House. It would be applied for by someone lower down in the government food chain and “ordered” by the FISA court. But such orders would not be sought without the knowledge of the president and as the chief executive, he could prevent it.

The way the white house worded this denial makes me think all the more that it was done by a Dem operative within one of the departments, and with at least the tacit approval of the White House, and likely Obama himself.

“Plausible deniability” is nothing new.