Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phone

[wdmso]

More help from the Russians and their pet Snowden for Trump to assist with his Baseless wire tap claim or just Coincidence

[Ian]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

That they met with them.

When Democratic Senators meet with Russians, they are just doing their job. And doing a damn fine job, at that.

When Senator Jeff Sessions meets with the Russians, he is up to no good. No other possible explanation. Got it?

I thought the left went a bit funny in the head when Bush was president. Now, they have become completely un-glued, non-stop conspiracy theories and tin-foil hat paranoia. They are deep, deep into the Twilight Zone. They are making Howard Dean look rational and grounded.

Thank you, you've proven my point
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

I think you two need to book a room, either make love or kick the political crap out of one another.

Go back and look at whenever I post, he almost always responds to me. I think it is infatuation.

[wdmso]

Trump Loved Snowden as did several people here when the emails were about Clinton.. he was providing a great service exposing Her

Are they still looking Snowden in the same Light ???? with the CIA leaks

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Trump Loved Snowden as did several people here when the emails were about Clinton.. he was providing a great service exposing Her

Are they still looking Snowden in the same Light ???? with the CIA leaks

Now that you bring up leaks, through what light are you looking at the classified leaks being used to imply that Trump colluded with the Russians? Should we find out who the leakers are and prosecute them?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by wdmso

More help from the Russians and their pet Snowden for Trump to assist with his Baseless wire tap claim or just Coincidence

Seems they have taken hold of the Snowden life ring

Senior White House adviser Kellyanne Conway says she doesn’t have any evidence to support President Donald Trump’s claim that Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower phone lines during the election.

Instead, Conway is pointing to recent revelations about other government surveillance to suggest it was possible Obama used a different technique.


She explained on USA Today: “What I can say is there are many ways to surveil each other.

“You can surveil someone through their phones, certainly through their television sets — any number of ways.”

The advisor then claimed monitoring could be done with “microwaves that turn into cameras”, adding: “We know this is a fact of modern life.”

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Now that you bring up leaks, through what light are you looking at the classified leaks being used to imply that Trump colluded with the Russians? Should we find out who the leakers are and prosecute them?

the leaks are not the only thing being used to imply Trumps people may have colluded ... how many different advisors met with the Russian

5 or 6 said no then said yes ?

But seem some see a leak as leak and the contents in that leak have equal weight..

Leaks against Obama ,Hillary, good

Leaks against Trump Bad

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

But seem some see a leak as leak and the contents in that leak have equal weight..

Snowden is charged with two counts of violating the Espionage Act of 1917 and theft of government property.

So you are saying those currently within our government leaking info should be charged similarly ....right?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

Snowden is charged with two counts of violating the Espionage Act of 1917 and theft of government property.

So you are saying those currently within our government leaking info should be charged similarly ....right?

It seems we will have to see how this play out can you commit Treason
by exposing Treason ??

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

It seems we will have to see how this play out can you commit Treason
by exposing Treason ??

you really need to switch to decaf

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by scottw

Snowden is charged with two counts of violating the Espionage Act of 1917 and theft of government property.

So you are saying those currently within our government leaking info should be charged similarly ....right?

I couldn't get him, (or PaulS) to answer that question. Maybe you can.

He accuses others of "verbal gymnastics, yet he regularly does the verbal jumps and flips. He accuses others of the "chicken little" ploy, yet he regularly warns of the dangers of Trump.

So it's no surprise that he'll evade a simple question by playing the equivalency card. After all, the leaks and contacts with Russians IMPLY (as wdmso said) that Trump and his people colluded with the Russians, even though there is no evidence that they did (nor any reason to imply so unless we just want to).

Can't remember, but it seems the leaks re Hillary and the Dems were specific, not mere implications. And the contents of the leaks were provided, not implied. One wonders, if the leaks re Trump had actual content that showed collusion, why was that content not revealed? Oh well, that only leaves us room to imply. And demand investigations to satisfy concocted implications. Gee, I wonder if I'm doing verbal gymnastics.

Not sure, but isn't there a far greater national security threat when our own security agencies leak stuff about us than when the Russians do it? Naahh . . . the implication of each must be equivalent. Even so, it's the Russian stuff that should worry us and must be investigated.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

I couldn't get him, (or PaulS) to answer that question. Maybe you can.

He accuses others of "verbal gymnastics, yet he regularly does the verbal jumps and flips. He accuses others of the "chicken little" ploy, yet he regularly warns of the dangers of Trump.

So it's no surprise that he'll evade a simple question by playing the equivalency card. After all, the leaks and contacts with Russians IMPLY (as wdmso said) that Trump and his people colluded with the Russians, even though there is no evidence that they did (nor any reason to imply so unless we just want to).

Can't remember, but it seems the leaks re Hillary and the Dems were specific, not mere implications. And the contents of the leaks were provided, not implied. One wonders, if the leaks re Trump had actual content that showed collusion, why was that content not revealed? Oh well, that only leaves us room to imply. And demand investigations to satisfy concocted implications. Gee, I wonder if I'm doing verbal gymnastics.

Not sure, but isn't there a far greater national security threat when our own security agencies leak stuff about us than when the Russians do it? Naahh . . . the implication of each must be equivalent. Even so, it's the Russian stuff that should worry us and must be investigated.

your to funny looking for answers based on implication of each must be equivalent .. then say I am using the playing the equivalency card.

please show me.... you and Scott are playing that Hand not I

I warned of the pitfalls of the right supporting the Snowden leaks against Hillary and the DNC .. and how the right would react when the barrel of the same gun was pointing at them ... And true to form now they play the victim demanding evidence of wrong doing or its a witch hunt .. burn the leakers at the stake it very telling..

And yes Trump is dangerous

but one must ask are the leaks against Trump Treason if they expose treason ...(we'll find out after the investigation concludes ) then we can move on to prosecution of leakers.. if warranted I love how The right dont like due process

What should happen to Trump if his claim is found to be false
"even though there is no evidence that they did" Tap his phones ??

thats Statement you used to defend Trump about collusion

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

your to funny looking for answers based on implication of each must be equivalent .. then say I am using the playing the equivalency card.

please show me.... you and Scott are playing that Hand not I

Please clarify.

I warned of the pitfalls of the right supporting the Snowden leaks against Hillary and the DNC .. and how the right would react when the barrel of the same gun was pointing at them ... And true to form now they play the victim demanding evidence of wrong doing or its a witch hunt .. burn the leakers at the stake it very telling..

Who the Hades are you talking about? Who is DEMANDING evidence? I am saying what is being said--there is no evidence. That is not a demand for evidence. I am wondering why there is such a frenzied fuss when there is no evidence.

And yes Trump is dangerous

Because you say so? OK . . . that's an opening for you to come up with another of your chicken little accusations.

but one must ask are the leaks against Trump Treason if they expose treason ...(we'll find out after the investigation concludes )

Why must one ask if the leaks are treason? It is illegal to pass classified information to those not authorized to receive it. The investigation does not have to conclude in order to know that classified information has been leaked to unauthorized persons. That it was leaked is the only evidence that a crime has been committed--the leaks.

The leaks, as they are, show NO treason by Trump. If there had been something treasonous discovered by surveilling Trump, why was that not leaked? Why was only innocuous stuff leaked (ILLEGALLY) and not the real supposedly treasonous stuff? And why was the not treasonous stuff, the kind of thing that has happened before even by Democrats, a reason for "implication" and investigation?

then we can move on to prosecution of leakers.. if warranted I love how The right dont like due process

It is not due process to investigate a crime if there is no evidence that a crime has been committed. That is the opposite of due process.

What should happen to Trump if his claim is found to be false
"even though there is no evidence that they did" Tap his phones ??

thats Statement you used to defend Trump about collusion

I don't recall defending Trump if his claim is false. I don't know if he should be prosecuted because a claim of his is false. I don't think someone can be prosecuted for making a false claim unless he is under oath at the time, and actually knew that the claim is false.

I don't know if his claim is passing on classified information. Maybe the investigation will show that his claim has revealed classified information. If so, then, like the leakers against Trump, he and they should be prosecuted.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

I don't recall defending Trump if his claim is false.

me either

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

I don't know if he should be prosecuted because a claim of his is false.

almost never happens in Washington

[wdmso]

I am wondering why there is such a frenzied fuss when there is no evidence.

Ask Trump he made the claim: Trump Administration Asks For More Time To Provide Proof That Obama Wiretapped Trump Talk about move the goal posts

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I am wondering why there is such a frenzied fuss when there is no evidence.

answer the question yourself...you continually bring it up here and it's the "frenzied" leftist media and democrats that "fuss" about it on a daily basis

for Trump...it's like throwing a steak to the guard dog while you do whatever you want

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

answer the question yourself...you continually bring it up here and it's the "frenzied" leftist media and democrats that "fuss" about it on a daily basis

for Trump...it's like throwing a steak to the guard dog while you do whatever you want

that was detbuch quote not mine

and now we have the same old same old now they are again telling us what Trump ment ..

Sean Spicer said Mr Trump had broadly meant "surveillance and other activities" when he made the allegation in a tweet earlier this month.
He also suggested the president was not accusing his predecessor specifically.

I understand it must get getting old to have to defend or excuse trumps comments day in and day out ... heres an Idea maybe he can stop lying every time he opens his mouth or shoots off a Tweet

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

that was detbuch quote not mine

then you should use "quotes"...

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

that was detbuch quote not mine

why are the media and the Dems making such a frenzied fuss over something for which there is no evidence? Can you answer that? Doubt that you will. As for Trump's fuss over something for which there is no evidence, I am sure you will incessantly have something to say about that

and now we have the same old same old now they are again telling us what Trump ment ..

Sean Spicer said Mr Trump had broadly meant "surveillance and other activities" when he made the allegation in a tweet earlier this month.

That's an answer to a question. Something you mostly avoid doing. Your choice if you don't want to believe it. His answer sounds reasonable to me.

He also suggested the president was not accusing his predecessor specifically.

It was clarified right after he said Obama did it, not only by Trumps staff, but by various media outlets that when the President's name is attached to an action, it most often means his administration, not specifically or only Obama.

I understand it must get getting old to have to defend or excuse trumps comments day in and day out ... heres an Idea maybe he can stop lying every time he opens his mouth or shoots off a Tweet

Not as tiring as having to answer stuff that is politically motivated to make Trump look bad. Even stuff like calling everything he says is a lie . . . that he's a racist . . . a homophobe . . . an anti-Semite . . . blah, blah, blah.

And it gets tiresome to give detailed answers to your questions or posts which refute, point by point, all of your statements, but from which you pick only one point, if any, to respond to--as you did again here.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Not as tiring as having to answer stuff that is politically motivated to make Trump look bad. Even stuff like calling everything he says is a lie . . . that he's a racist . . . a homophobe . . . an anti-Semite . . . blah, blah, blah.

And it gets tiresome to give detailed answers to your questions or posts which refute, point by point, all of your statements, but from which you pick only one point, if any, to respond to--as you did again here.

nm

[wdmso]

why are the media and the Dems making such a frenzied fuss over something for which there is no evidence? Can you answer that? Doubt that you will.

I have.. there is evidence Trumps people spoke to the russians and denied it some have resigned over it whats not Clear or (evidence) what those conversations were about... hence the investigation to see if there was collusion....




As for Trump's fuss over something for which there is no evidence, I am sure you will incessantly have something to say about that

you need to catch up I have all ready been pointing that out from the start of this thread

and now we have the same old same old now they are again telling us what Trump ment ..

Sean Spicer said Mr Trump had broadly meant "surveillance and other activities" when he made the allegation in a tweet earlier this month.

That's an answer to a question. Something you mostly avoid doing. Your choice if you don't want to believe it. His answer sounds reasonable to me.

WOW thats amazing the POTUS comments cary no weight when spoken.. but the explanation a week later sound reasonable when he press Sec says it??

He also suggested the president was not accusing his predecessor specifically.

Here are the actual Tweets how is this not accusing his predecessor specifically???

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Is it legal for a sitting President to be "wire tapping" a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump

I'd bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I have.. there is evidence Trumps people spoke to the russians and denied it some have resigned over it whats not Clear or (evidence) what those conversations were about... hence the investigation to see if there was collusion

Speaking to the Russians, which has been done for years by members of both parties, is not evidence of collusion. No evidence was found.

I'd bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!

You're right, it does sound like he was specifically suggesting Obama had him wire tapped.

[wdmso]

There are "no indications" that Trump Tower was under surveillance by the US government before or after the election, a Senate committee has said.

But White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Mr Trump maintains his claims.

The press secretary refused to accept the Senate Intelligence Committee report, saying "they're not findings".
Mr Spicer quoted at length from an unproven Fox News report suggesting Mr Obama had dodged US restrictions by asking Britain's GCHQ electronic surveillance agency to monitor Mr Trump, an allegation already dismissed as "utterly ridiculous" by the Cheltenham-based complex.

[Got Stripers]

Spicer has a miserable job, can't imagine how he sleeps at night, wondering what Tweet he has to translate at the next press conference. At times as we have seen, he can't even keep a straight face, hard to do that when you know the POTUS quote (er meaning) of the day you are about to relay to the core is total BS.

So ironic that with all Trumps bitching and moaning about fake news, that he is now back peddling on his wire tapping accusation; hey folks I was just relaying whats been reported on several outlets. The POTUS should not be reacting to anything he reads without someone spending some time checking out the source. Clearly he needs to choose his words more clearly, really dumb to accuse the former president personally of an illegal activity if you didn't really mean it. Where is all the extreme feting, due some fact checking before you open your big mouth and say exactly what you mean; you are POTUS for crying out loud.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Clearly he needs to choose his words more clearly, really dumb to accuse the former president personally of an illegal activity if you didn't really mean it. .

THAT is an understatement. He's not a reality TV personality anymore for Gods sake. Who is advising this guy on these tweets?

I think he has the potential to be one of the most productive presidents of the last 40 years, but he needs to start acting a little bit more maturely and responsibly.

That being said, someone leaked the Flynn conversation, and someone leaked his income taxes. There are some circles in the government that are working against him. And the media...I don't even know what to say. He could stop at a red light, and MSNBC would spend 15 minutes speculating on what his sinister intentions were for stopping at the light. They are treating him like a cartoon villain.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Spicer has a miserable job, can't imagine how he sleeps at night, wondering what Tweet he has to translate at the next press conference. At times as we have seen, he can't even keep a straight face, hard to do that when you know the POTUS quote (er meaning) of the day you are about to relay to the core is total BS.

So ironic that with all Trumps bitching and moaning about fake news, that he is now back peddling on his wire tapping accusation; hey folks I was just relaying whats been reported on several outlets. The POTUS should not be reacting to anything he reads without someone spending some time checking out the source. Clearly he needs to choose his words more clearly, really dumb to accuse the former president personally of an illegal activity if you didn't really mean it. Where is all the extreme feting, due some fact checking before you open your big mouth and say exactly what you mean; you are POTUS for crying out loud.

My brother graduated from Connecticut College in 1993 with Sean Spicer (very small school), knew him well. It was a liberal place, my brother tried to start a conservative club and was denied school funding. Spicer, who was a member of the student senate, basically forced the school to give my brother the funding, saying they couldn't give money to liberal clubs and deny money to a conservative club. In response to that, the school newspaper started referring to Sean Spicer as "Sean Sphincter". Very mature. The media picked that up recently, they thought it was great that a student newspaper gave him a derogatory nickname 25 years ago. Ah, those tolerant liberals. The Hartford Courant thought this was "news".

http://www.courant.com/politics/capi...ege-story.html

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

That being said, someone leaked the Flynn conversationHe liked leaks until it happened to him., and someone leaked his income taxesI heard some people think it was related to a law suit where Trump sued a reporter or author who claimed Trump wasn't as wealthy as he said he was. I believe Trump had to provide a tax form in the suit.. There are some circles in the government that are working against him. And the media...I don't even know what to say. He could stop at a red light, and MSNBC would spend 15 minutes speculating on what his sinister intentions were for stopping at the light. They are treating him like a cartoon villain.

Hi is acting like a cartoon villain. He still wasn't realized that everything he says is going to be scrutinized. I guess bc his supports don't care.

I thought it was funny he mentioned McCarthy in his tweet where he accused someone of something w/o any evidence.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Hi is acting like a cartoon villain. He still wasn't realized that everything he says is going to be scrutinized. I guess bc his supports don't care.

I thought it was funny he mentioned McCarthy in his tweet where he accused someone of something w/o any evidence.

"He liked leaks until it happened to him"

It wasn't the US Government that leaked emails from the DNC. Here's a question that no one is asking about the Russians hacking the DNC. Were any of those leaked emails doctored? Was any of it untrue? If revealing things that the DNC did, hurt their campaign, isn't it fair to ask why they were engaging in those activities in the first place? Yes, the hacking was wrong and should be investigated. But if the Democrats weren't playing dirty, there would have been nothing to hack and nothing to leak.

" heard some people think it was related to a law suit where Trump sued "

I also heard Trump is an anti-Semite. Funny given that hos daughter Ivanka, who he clearly adores, is a Jew. So I'm not overly impressed with what you "hear" about him from the media. They have shed all credibility in their coverage of this guy.

"I believe Trump had to provide a tax form in the suit"

It's still illegal for anyone to share that without his permission.

How come all these people going bonkers over his taxes, couldn't care less that Obama didn't release his academic records from college, as most presidents have done? Not any concern at all about that. Have you "heard" anything about why that is.

"He is acting like a cartoon villain"

He is acting like a horse's ass. Very different from a villain. You watch MSNBC from 8:00 - 11:00 any night, and they will devote at least one-third of their air time dedicated to connecting him with the Russians. There is no evidence. There's no more evidence connecting him to the Russian hack of the DNC, than there is that Obama tapped Trump tower. Yet everyone is blasting Trump for accusing Obama for tapping him without evidence, bit no one is blasting the media for saying he is a KGB plant without evidence.

No double standard there. Nope.

Here is a crazy idea, Paul. How about we hold politicians to task when they are wrong, and we praise them when they do good. And we do that similarly, to people of both sides. Do you have any appreciation for how far away we are, from that? That only thing that comes close to that is on Foxnews, excluding Sean Hannity, who is a Trump puppet.

I watched Lawrence O'Donnell interview Shirley McLane last night, the two of them talking about how Trump is the second coming of Hitler. It was like taking a trip deep into the Twilight Zone.

[scottw]

funny that when he acts in the way that democrats portray every republican...the democrats get upset