You're the one making fabrications, the very least you could do is link the alleged news reports passing Trump wire taps as fact.
The Ugly Face Of Dementia
- Thread starter Tom B
- Start date
You're the one making fabrications, the very least you could do is link the alleged news reports passing Trump wire taps as fact.
No there is not a spec of remorse or guilt. In the extreme right wing brain the circuits required to feel these things is shorted and burned out. This circuit, unfortunately, was also connected to the part of the brain which can tell the difference between reality and wishful thinking. There is however another circuit operational, one which is not as developed in the left wing brain. The circuit for guilt and remorse has been replaced with one of hate and denial such that any time they should feel remorse they feel hate and see an enemy. Instead of being aware of their own fantasies and delusions, they see a threat which must be destroyed.Which brings us to the ego. Trump said what he said about Obama in attempt to feel better about himself. His self doubt and insecurity was coming to the surface but this energy was turned into a hate of Obama. He can not admit or see the truth else the whole defence mechanism would collapse. He needs to double down to save his ego.
Last edited:
Sure, here you go, I didnt say Trump was tapped,infact i have said repeatedly i dont think that Trump was tapped, what i said was tha the NYT, Washington Post, and BBC reported that people within his administration had been tapped.
The speculation has been on the Russian embassy taps, something that is slowly coming to light as true. This wiretapped data isn't indicative of Americans getting tapped. The closest claims you and I have seen even in the most left leaning media is in inferring that if American taps existed, then legal court orders were obtained as a result of these Russian taps (something that in of itself probably isn't legal as obtaining evidence from accidental taps would probably not fly in a court of law).
The left wing media was the one who produced the story that they went for a FISA warrant to tap people in the trump admin, and it got rejected, (which only about 10% of FISA requests ever get rejected) Then they went back with a new request 5 days before the election, this is straight out of liberal news sources.
Seems like Libs want to have their cake and eat it too, LOL. Not sure how you could possibly deny that liberal networks are trying to claim people in the Trump admin were tapped, they have repeated this claim over and over.
NBC: If FISA Court Approved Taps, Trump Campaign Was ‘Colluding with the Russians'
Appearing to be torn between declaring President Donald Trump a liar and wanting to peg the administration as Russian conspirators, NBC’s Sunday Today decided to mischaracterize the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. “We're throwing around the term FISA court, FISA warrant. Let’s explain a little bit Jeremy, what that means,” explained anchor Willie Geist, “The Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act, 1978, as you suggested in response to Nixonian domestic spying.”
The reason the FISA Court was in discussion Sunday morning, was because on Saturday Trump dubiously claimed that the former administration ordered the phones in Trump Tower to be wiretapped. As NBC national security analyst Jeremy Bash (who was the chief of staff for the CIA and DOD under Obama) told Geist, the president does not have the power to order such taps directly.
According to Bash, if federal investigators had enough evidence against someone they can go to the FISA court to get a wiretap warrant. “The Justice Department and the FBI go to them with a filing that says we suspect someone in the U.S. is a foreign power,” Bash said, “A foreign power say working for the Russians, for example.” Bash assumed what it could say about the Trump campaign:
Well, that would tell me that a federal judge found probable cause, meaning enough evidence to believe that either there was criminal activity or that there was foreign espionage activity in Trump Tower. Specifically, Willie, I think what it means is that a federal judge found that people in Trump's organization were colluding with the Russians.
But Bash’s account of how the FISA Court operates and what their alleged approval of a wiretap means for the Trump Team was designed to paint a very negative narrative.
Bash asserts that “And those federal judges are hard graders and they turn the Justice Department around all the time and say, go back and do more homework. Bring me more evidence.” But that claim is highly misleading. According to The Guardian, “The secretive US foreign intelligence surveillance court did not deny a single government request in 2015 for electronic surveillance orders granted for foreign intelligence purposes, continuing a longstanding trend, a Justice Department document showed.”
On top of that, CNN legal analyst Danny Cevallos admitted that the secrecy of the court has been an issue for the public. “That's been a criticism of the FISA court that it operates almost entirely in secret and on a probable cause standard that is much less than what the regular courts have to deal with,” he stated CNN’s New Day Sunday. Basically, the standard for probable cause is so low in the FISA Court that almost any request is permitted by the court. It’s why the court has the reputation of just being a rubber stamp.
Again, these facts were never brought up in NBC’s reporting. Given the rubber stamp nature of the FISA court, it’s a possibility that in the process of the FBI’s investigation into Russian meddling in the election they requested and were granted such a warrant regardless of probable cause. Which would mean Bash’s declaration of, “What it means is that a federal judge found that people in Trump's organization were colluding with the Russians,” is over the line.
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb...rt-approved-taps-trump-campaign-was-colluding
NBC: If FISA Court Approved Taps, Trump Campaign Was ‘Colluding with the Russians'
Appearing to be torn between declaring President Donald Trump a liar and wanting to peg the administration as Russian conspirators, NBC’s Sunday Today decided to mischaracterize the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. “We're throwing around the term FISA court, FISA warrant. Let’s explain a little bit Jeremy, what that means,” explained anchor Willie Geist, “The Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act, 1978, as you suggested in response to Nixonian domestic spying.”
The reason the FISA Court was in discussion Sunday morning, was because on Saturday Trump dubiously claimed that the former administration ordered the phones in Trump Tower to be wiretapped. As NBC national security analyst Jeremy Bash (who was the chief of staff for the CIA and DOD under Obama) told Geist, the president does not have the power to order such taps directly.
According to Bash, if federal investigators had enough evidence against someone they can go to the FISA court to get a wiretap warrant. “The Justice Department and the FBI go to them with a filing that says we suspect someone in the U.S. is a foreign power,” Bash said, “A foreign power say working for the Russians, for example.” Bash assumed what it could say about the Trump campaign:
Well, that would tell me that a federal judge found probable cause, meaning enough evidence to believe that either there was criminal activity or that there was foreign espionage activity in Trump Tower. Specifically, Willie, I think what it means is that a federal judge found that people in Trump's organization were colluding with the Russians.
But Bash’s account of how the FISA Court operates and what their alleged approval of a wiretap means for the Trump Team was designed to paint a very negative narrative.
Bash asserts that “And those federal judges are hard graders and they turn the Justice Department around all the time and say, go back and do more homework. Bring me more evidence.” But that claim is highly misleading. According to The Guardian, “The secretive US foreign intelligence surveillance court did not deny a single government request in 2015 for electronic surveillance orders granted for foreign intelligence purposes, continuing a longstanding trend, a Justice Department document showed.”
On top of that, CNN legal analyst Danny Cevallos admitted that the secrecy of the court has been an issue for the public. “That's been a criticism of the FISA court that it operates almost entirely in secret and on a probable cause standard that is much less than what the regular courts have to deal with,” he stated CNN’s New Day Sunday. Basically, the standard for probable cause is so low in the FISA Court that almost any request is permitted by the court. It’s why the court has the reputation of just being a rubber stamp.
Again, these facts were never brought up in NBC’s reporting. Given the rubber stamp nature of the FISA court, it’s a possibility that in the process of the FBI’s investigation into Russian meddling in the election they requested and were granted such a warrant regardless of probable cause. Which would mean Bash’s declaration of, “What it means is that a federal judge found that people in Trump's organization were colluding with the Russians,” is over the line.
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb...rt-approved-taps-trump-campaign-was-colluding
The fucking president tweeted it as FACT, and you're annoyed as to how a news corporation would look into that happening? Also, the BBC report from January was based on the finances of the campaign.
The news reports came out before Trump tweeted it, I have already said i think Trump was wrong, but you seem to be completely unwilling to admit the fact that a bunch of left wing news sources were the ones who spun the bullshit narrative, that led to the breitbart article, that led to Trump making the tweet. Not sure how you could come the conclusion that a bunch of liberal news networks are clean on this one and only Trump is full of shit, when the entire situation is based on the left wing reporting.
This is the breitbart article that came out on March 3rd (day before Trump tweets) that led to the Trump tweets, note the sources that Breitbart is quoting, you would have to be a partisan hack to claim the left wing media comes up smelling like roses and Trumps the only dishonest one here.
Mark Levin to Congress: Investigate Obama’s ‘Silent Coup’ vs. Trump
Radio host Mark Levin used his Thursday evening show tooutline the known steps taken by President Barack Obama’s administration in its last months to undermine Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and, later, his new administration.
Levin called Obama’s effort “police state” tactics, and suggested that Obama’s actions, rather than conspiracy theories about alleged Russian interference in the presidential election to help Trump, should be the target of congressional investigation.
Drawing on sources including the New York Times and the Washington Post, Levin described the case against Obama so far, based on what is already publicly known. The following is an expanded version of that case, including events that Levin did not mention specifically but are important to the overall timeline.
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.
6. January: Obama expands NSA sharing. As Michael Walsh later notes, and as the New York Times reports, the outgoing Obama administration “expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.” The new powers, and reduced protections, could make it easier for intelligence on private citizens to be circulated improperly or leaked.
7. January: Times report. The New York Times reports, on the eve of Inauguration Day, that several agencies — the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Treasury Department are monitoring several associates of the Trump campaign suspected of Russian ties. Other news outlets also report the exisentence of “a multiagency working group to coordinate investigations across the government,” though it is unclear how they found out, since the investigations would have been secret and involved classified information.
8. February: Mike Flynn scandal. Reports emerge that the FBI intercepted a conversation in 2016 between future National Security Adviser Michael Flynn — then a private citizen — and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The intercept supposedly was part of routine spying on the ambassador, not monitoring of the Trump campaign. The FBI transcripts reportedly show the two discussing Obama’s newly-imposed sanctions on Russia, though Flynn earlier denied discussing them. Sally Yates, whom Trump would later fire as acting Attorney General for insubordination, is involved in the investigation. In the end, Flynn resigns over having misled Vice President Mike Pence (perhaps inadvertently) about the content of the conversation.
9. February: Times claims extensive Russian contacts. The New York Times cites “four current and former American officials” in reporting that the Trump campaign had “repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials. The Trump campaign denies the claims — and the Times admits that there is “no evidence” of coordination between the campaign and the Russians. The White House and some congressional Republicans begin to raise questions about illegal intelligence leaks.
10. March: the Washington Post targets Jeff Sessions. The Washington Postreports that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had contact twice with the Russian ambassador during the campaign — once at a Heritage Foundation event and once at a meeting in Sessions’s Senate office. The Post suggests that the two meetings contradict Sessions’s testimony at his confirmation hearings that he had no contacts with the Russians, though in context (not presented by the Post) it was clear he meant in his capacity as a campaign surrogate, and that he was responding to claims in the “dossier” of ongoing contacts. The New York Times, in covering the story, adds that the Obama White House “rushed to preserve” intelligence related to alleged Russian links with the Trump campaign. By “preserve” it really means “disseminate”: officials spread evidence throughout other government agencies “to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators” and perhaps the media as well.
In summary: the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.
Levin called the effort a “silent coup” by the Obama administration and demanded that it be investigated.
In addition, Levin castigated Republicans in Congress for focusing their attention on Trump and Attorney General Sessions rather than Obama.
Mark Levin to Congress: Investigate Obama’s ‘Silent Coup’ vs. Trump
Radio host Mark Levin used his Thursday evening show tooutline the known steps taken by President Barack Obama’s administration in its last months to undermine Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and, later, his new administration.
Levin called Obama’s effort “police state” tactics, and suggested that Obama’s actions, rather than conspiracy theories about alleged Russian interference in the presidential election to help Trump, should be the target of congressional investigation.
Drawing on sources including the New York Times and the Washington Post, Levin described the case against Obama so far, based on what is already publicly known. The following is an expanded version of that case, including events that Levin did not mention specifically but are important to the overall timeline.
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.
6. January: Obama expands NSA sharing. As Michael Walsh later notes, and as the New York Times reports, the outgoing Obama administration “expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.” The new powers, and reduced protections, could make it easier for intelligence on private citizens to be circulated improperly or leaked.
7. January: Times report. The New York Times reports, on the eve of Inauguration Day, that several agencies — the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Treasury Department are monitoring several associates of the Trump campaign suspected of Russian ties. Other news outlets also report the exisentence of “a multiagency working group to coordinate investigations across the government,” though it is unclear how they found out, since the investigations would have been secret and involved classified information.
8. February: Mike Flynn scandal. Reports emerge that the FBI intercepted a conversation in 2016 between future National Security Adviser Michael Flynn — then a private citizen — and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The intercept supposedly was part of routine spying on the ambassador, not monitoring of the Trump campaign. The FBI transcripts reportedly show the two discussing Obama’s newly-imposed sanctions on Russia, though Flynn earlier denied discussing them. Sally Yates, whom Trump would later fire as acting Attorney General for insubordination, is involved in the investigation. In the end, Flynn resigns over having misled Vice President Mike Pence (perhaps inadvertently) about the content of the conversation.
9. February: Times claims extensive Russian contacts. The New York Times cites “four current and former American officials” in reporting that the Trump campaign had “repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials. The Trump campaign denies the claims — and the Times admits that there is “no evidence” of coordination between the campaign and the Russians. The White House and some congressional Republicans begin to raise questions about illegal intelligence leaks.
10. March: the Washington Post targets Jeff Sessions. The Washington Postreports that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had contact twice with the Russian ambassador during the campaign — once at a Heritage Foundation event and once at a meeting in Sessions’s Senate office. The Post suggests that the two meetings contradict Sessions’s testimony at his confirmation hearings that he had no contacts with the Russians, though in context (not presented by the Post) it was clear he meant in his capacity as a campaign surrogate, and that he was responding to claims in the “dossier” of ongoing contacts. The New York Times, in covering the story, adds that the Obama White House “rushed to preserve” intelligence related to alleged Russian links with the Trump campaign. By “preserve” it really means “disseminate”: officials spread evidence throughout other government agencies “to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators” and perhaps the media as well.
In summary: the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.
Levin called the effort a “silent coup” by the Obama administration and demanded that it be investigated.
In addition, Levin castigated Republicans in Congress for focusing their attention on Trump and Attorney General Sessions rather than Obama.
You're confusing two separate issues.
This report
https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf
and the controversy surrounding it led to this "liberal" report which claim no taps on trump whatsoever
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38589427
BTW: the right wingers first reported it here in november:
https://heatst.com/world/exclusive-fbi-granted-fisa-warrant-covering-trump-camps-ties-to-russia/
And why are you spinning Trump being an idiot? No sane person came to the same conclusion he did, only the ones consuming the conspiracy garbage at Breitbart et. al. are eating this shit up.
What should be of concern is the CIA and NSA stonewalling the requests from the House Intelligence Committee on clearing this up. I guess we'll hear it from Comey himself on Monday.