Should Trump Pardon Obama?
- Thread starter Tom B
- Start date
Mr. Obama will be investigated. His communications with the DNC will be parsed in excuisite detail, publically. Surveillance found to be conducted without a FISA warrant will result in indictments.
Hows that whole Russia thing working out for you Dems?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nel-will-address-trump-wiretapping-claim.html
Hows that whole Russia thing working out for you Dems?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nel-will-address-trump-wiretapping-claim.html
Absolutely great .
Trump has been in office less than 2 months and he's in a bigger mess than Obama was in 8 years.
Obama seems to have broken the law. There will certainly be interminable investigations on it.
What law is Trump suspected of breaking? None. Zip. Zero. Zilch.
If you folks want to play Scorched Earth you had better get into your asbestos onesie because the heat just got turned up.
There have been numerous GOP Obama investigations the last 8 years ,how many convictions?None. Zip. Zero. Zilch.No cabinet member resignations or recusals due to scandal either.
Well the Dems sure broke the law now and will have, as private citizens, to pay for their own defense teams. Maybe they can ask George Soros for a loan or maybe they can start a legal defense fund on GoFundMe.
Either way, your team overplayed its hand to an epic degree and some of them are going to jail.
Here are the problematic aspects of the Obama surveillance on Trump’s team. First, it is not apparent FISA could ever be invoked. Second, it is possible Obama’s team may have perjured themselves before the FISA court by withholding material information essential to the FISA court’s willingness to permit the government surveillance. Third, it could be that Obama’s team illegally disseminated and disclosed FISA information in direct violation of the statute precisely prohibiting such dissemination and disclosure. FISA prohibits, under criminal penalty, Obama’s team from doing any of the three.
At the outset, the NSA should have never been involved in a domestic US election. Investigating the election, or any hacking of the DNC or the phishing of Podesta’s emails, would not be a FISA matter. It does not fit the definition of war sabotage or a “grave” “hostile” war-like attack on the United States, as constrictively covered by FISA. It is your run-of-the-mill hacking case covered by existing United States laws that require use of the regular departments of the FBI, Department of Justice, and Constitutionally Senate-appointed federal district court judges, and their appointed magistrates, not secretive, deferential FISA courts.
It is clear abuse of power and highly illegal.
At the outset, the NSA should have never been involved in a domestic US election. Investigating the election, or any hacking of the DNC or the phishing of Podesta’s emails, would not be a FISA matter. It does not fit the definition of war sabotage or a “grave” “hostile” war-like attack on the United States, as constrictively covered by FISA. It is your run-of-the-mill hacking case covered by existing United States laws that require use of the regular departments of the FBI, Department of Justice, and Constitutionally Senate-appointed federal district court judges, and their appointed magistrates, not secretive, deferential FISA courts.
It is clear abuse of power and highly illegal.
Timeline to Obama’s Unlawful Spying on Opposition Party’s Candidate at Trump Tower
Jim Hoft Mar 5th, 2017 1:43 am 60 Comments
Conservative Treehouse released a timeline of the unlawful spying by the Obama administration on the opposition party’s candidate in Trump Tower.
The list includes the revelation that the Obama administration continued to spy on Trump Tower and opposition party after October even after no evidence was found of wrongdoing.
1. June 2016: FISA request. The Obama administration files a request with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) to monitor communications involving Donald Trump and several advisers. The request, uncharacteristically, is denied.
2. July: Russia joke. Wikileaks releases emails from the Democratic National Committee that show an effort to prevent Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) from winning the presidential nomination. In a press conference, Donald Trump refers to Hillary Clinton’s own missing emails, joking: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing.” That remark becomes the basis for accusations by Clinton and the media that Trump invited further hacking.
3. October: Podesta emails. In October, Wikileaks releases the emails of Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, rolling out batches every day until the election, creating new mini-scandals. The Clinton campaign blames Trump and the Russians.
4. October: FISA request. The Obama administration submits a new, narrow request to the FISA court, now focused on a computer server in Trump Tower suspected of links to Russian banks. No evidence is found — but the wiretaps continue, ostensibly for national security reasons, Andrew McCarthy at National Review later notes. The Obama administration is now monitoring an opposing presidential campaign using the high-tech surveillance powers of the federal intelligence services.
5. January 2017: Buzzfeed/CNN dossier. Buzzfeed releases, and CNN reports, a supposed intelligence “dossier” compiled by a foreign former spy. It purports to show continuous contact between Russia and the Trump campaign, and says that the Russians have compromising information about Trump. None of the allegations can be verified and some are proven false. Several media outlets claim that they had been aware of the dossier for months and that it had been circulating in Washington.
The dossier included inaccurate accusations of businessman Trump on Russian hookers. The dossier was complete rubbage.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...ying-opposition-partys-candidate-trump-tower/
If this turns out to be true, that Obama ordered the FISA wiretaps on Trump which yeilded no evidence of criminal activity, he's done.
Clearly a political smear campaign to bring down a political opponent in a representative democracy.
That's it for that cotton picker.
And I rarely use that term.
They want a war, they can have one.,