Donald takes a dump and accuses President Obama of wiretapping him

[DutchJazzer]

dont know why people think this is unthinkable.

obama wirretapped leaders of allied countries, obama wiretapped journalist, obama used the irs to attack right wing groups, and used a slush fund to fund left wing groups.

obama is a true POS he ha sdone things like this in the past so he is capable of wiretapping political opponents.
and he plays the "i did not know it was going on in my administration" card.

i am no believer of privilege but for those left wing people who believe in white privilege, maybe just maybe obama has some black privilege

 

[babe]

Mark Levin

laid out the case on his radio show the day before Trump did his tweet. Mark Levin is a lawyer, besides doing Conservative Review and his talk radio show. He was in the Justice Dept during the Reagan years, under Atty Gen Edwin Meese. No one you want to just imagine is stupid, for sure.

Pres Obama filed for the wiretap and the judge denied it, then Obama filed for a narrower tap and got it. It is unprecedented for a political candidate to be surveilled by the opposing political party. There was no evidence presented that justified the tap, just a corrupt judge caving after a faint effort to resist the demand.

President Obama also gave out an unprecedented order reducing the privacy protection on the wiretap, putting the harvest in the hands of all the intelligence agencies without any level of security classification, so thousands of underlings could have access to it.

I don't know if Trump cares to press the case, really. He has been studying the "leaks" coming out from government "sources" which are felony acts by government underlings. It looks to me like his daughter is friends with Chelsea Clinton and he's decided not to press any of the charges/alegations leveled against Hillary. Hillary acting as Secretary of State, took $35 million from the Russians in consideration of her approving their acquistition of about 20% of known US uranium resources. . . . .

The Democrat media retailers, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS...., are clearly partisan in matters like this, willing to make the most of everything negative about Trump while literally ignoring the offenses of Obama and Clinton. The real problem is, like this forum Jazzfanz Community, hardly anyone but the fully tanked partisans being able to get their material out, just discredits the sources in the eyes of most Americans.

Go ahead, have your little party in here and make yourselves feel real good. Nobody who is thinking clearly is going to believe you, ande in fact most people are turning away in disgust.

The Democratic Party has lost credibility since Bill Clinton sold it out to international fascists lock stock and barrel. Used to be some decent people in there who cared about ordinary folks. Obama did nothing for the minorities except open the borders and depress low skill wages nationally, and hob nob with all the big money people who live off virtual slave labor.

 

[fishonjazz]

this is why trump won!

and this is why he will win a second term if he is running. you keep belittling the other side

So you are saying that Trump supporters are so dumb and easily manipulated that they don't vote for a candidate based on how good they think the candidate is, but rather they vote for a certain candidate just cause they are treated a certain way by "the other side?"

Trump supporters are even dumber than I thought.

 

[DutchJazzer]

So you are saying that Trump supporters are so dumb and easily manipulated that they don't vote for a candidate based on how good they think the candidate is, but rather they vote for a certain candidate just cause they are treated a certain way by "the other side?"

Trump supporters are even dumber than I thought.

no because screaming racist, bigot, nazi and if those dont work call the opposition braindead and stupid. will only make the right come out to vote. while meanwhile gaining some of the left wing people.


for example antifa is recruiting for the right everyday. at berkley yesterday(or friday) the beatg up a guy wearing a trump hat with a sign that says free speech then burning it. only makes the right grow stronger.how can a anti fascist be against free speech

this attitude of belittling the right as either evil or stupid, meanwhile being for limiting the speech of these so called "evil and stupid people" will re-assure another win in 2018 midterm elections. and 2020 elections. but if the left is so smart why do you fail to realize this.

 

[Red]

It will eventually be demonstrated that Obama himself did not order any wire taps of Trump. If people simply research how these things take place, it's rather easy to understand how that could not have taken place. But, that the FBI obtained approval from the FISA court to conduct surveillance in Trump Tower is entirely possible, and has been reported on. Specifically, to monitor a Trump Tower server's communication with certain Russian banks with close ties to Putin.

The fact is Trump has really painted himself into a corner. Already, at least two Republicans are insisting he put up or shut up. And, if Trump is correct that this surveillance took place, it is not Obama who has to worry. It's Trump....

https://www.wired.com/2017/03/feds-wiretap-trump-tower-not-obama-worry/

"Trump’s wiretap claims, then, carry presumably inadvertent implications. First, based on previous reporting and the nature of FISA courts, any wiretaps within Trump Tower would be legal. And they would stem from overwhelming evidence that the Trump campaign, or someone within it, has unsavory ties to Russia or another foreign power. Otherwise, it’s unlikely those wiretaps would exist at all.

If federal authorities did have cause to listen in on Trump Tower, though, and they provided enough evidence for a FISA court to approve the snooping, Obama is not the one who ought to worry."

--------------------------------

It would be wise for Trump to actually think before he tweets. He has, without a doubt, simply increased the likelihood now of either a special prosecutor or independent commission to examine the entire Russian story. Methinks that was not too bright on his part...

 

[Red]

In one respect, Trump's latest tweet storm is typical of how his mind works:

https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/04/opinions/trump-conspiracy-theories-zelizer/

"The use of conspiracy by the President of the United States as a central part of his discourse is extraordinarily dangerous. By doing so President Trump gives credence and legitimacy to these kinds of arguments which generate anger and distrust, as well as total misinformation -- in this case making an unfounded accusation against a former president of the United States. Ironically, he is employing a main strategy of McCarthyism at the very time he is claiming to be a victim of those kinds of tactics."

 

[DutchJazzer]

It will eventually be demonstrated that Obama himself did not order any wire taps of Trump. If people simply research how these things take place, it's rather easy to understand how that could not have taken place. But, that the FBI obtained approval from the FISA court to conduct surveillance in Trump Tower is entirely possible, and has been reported on. Specifically, to monitor a Trump Tower server's communication with certain Russian banks with close ties to Putin.

The fact is Trump has really painted himself into a corner. Already, at least two Republicans are insisting he put up or shut up. And, if Trump is correct that this surveillance took place, it is not Obama who has to worry. It's Trump....

https://www.wired.com/2017/03/feds-wiretap-trump-tower-not-obama-worry/

"Trump’s wiretap claims, then, carry presumably inadvertent implications. First, based on previous reporting and the nature of FISA courts, any wiretaps within Trump Tower would be legal. And they would stem from overwhelming evidence that the Trump campaign, or someone within it, has unsavory ties to Russia or another foreign power. Otherwise, it’s unlikely those wiretaps would exist at all.

If federal authorities did have cause to listen in on Trump Tower, though, and they provided enough evidence for a FISA court to approve the snooping, Obama is not the one who ought to worry."

--------------------------------

It would be wise for Trump to actually think before he tweets. He has, without a doubt, simply increased the likelihood now of either a special prosecutor or independent commission to examine the entire Russian story. Methinks that was not too bright on his part...

so

tl;dr OBAMA did not know what was going on in his administration?

i hope now you dont blame trump for flyn! if obama gets to play that card don't be a hypocrite and let trump play that card also

 

[Red]

At the very least, it's going to be highly entertaining to see Trump or his surrogates prove that Obama ordered surveillance illegally. And actually got away with it. The ball's in Trump's court, although he's good at changing the subject whenever it suits him. We're all eagerly awaiting actual evidence that any surveillance of Trump Tower was the result of illegal actions on Obama's part. This latest tweet storm strikes me as the most obvious example of desperate flailing about yet by Trump. He and his surrogates just keep making things look more and more suspicious. Sooner or later, more and more people will understand that this emperor has no clothes....

 

[DutchJazzer]

At the very least, it's going to be highly entertaining to see Trump or his surrogates prove that Obama ordered surveillance illegally. And actually got away with it. The ball's in Trump's court, although he's good at changing the subject whenever it suits him. We're all eagerly awaiting actual evidence that any surveillance of Trump Tower was the result of illegal actions on Obama's part. This latest tweet storm strikes me as the most obvious example of desperate flailing about yet by Trump. He and his surrogates just keep making things look more and more suspicious. Sooner or later, more and more people will understand that this emperor has no clothes....

will it be as enternaing to see obama and his failing democrat party prove that russia is in collusion with the trump adminsitration.

because ther eis 0 evidence, yet the very fake news media runs with it for 4 months

 

[The Thriller]

no because screaming racist, bigot, nazi and if those dont work call the opposition braindead and stupid. will only make the right come out to vote. while meanwhile gaining some of the left wing people.


for example antifa is recruiting for the right everyday. at berkley yesterday(or friday) the beatg up a guy wearing a trump hat with a sign that says free speech then burning it. only makes the right grow stronger.how can a anti fascist be against free speech

this attitude of belittling the right as either evil or stupid, meanwhile being for limiting the speech of these so called "evil and stupid people" will re-assure another win in 2018 midterm elections. and 2020 elections. but if the left is so smart why do you fail to realize this.

So basically you just proved fishonjazz's point. So rather than vote for the best candidate they vote out of spite because the left is mean.

lol

 

[green]

laid out the case on his radio show the day before Trump did his tweet. Mark Levin is a lawyer, besides doing Conservative Review and his talk radio show. He was in the Justice Dept during the Reagan years, under Atty Gen Edwin Meese. No one you want to just imagine is stupid, for sure.

Pres Obama filed for the wiretap and the judge denied it, then Obama filed for a narrower tap and got it. It is unprecedented for a political candidate to be surveilled by the opposing political party. There was no evidence presented that justified the tap, just a corrupt judge caving after a faint effort to resist the demand.

President Obama also gave out an unprecedented order reducing the privacy protection on the wiretap, putting the harvest in the hands of all the intelligence agencies without any level of security classification, so thousands of underlings could have access to it.

I don't know if Trump cares to press the case, really. He has been studying the "leaks" coming out from government "sources" which are felony acts by government underlings. It looks to me like his daughter is friends with Chelsea Clinton and he's decided not to press any of the charges/alegations leveled against Hillary. Hillary acting as Secretary of State, took $35 million from the Russians in consideration of her approving their acquistition of about 20% of known US uranium resources. . . . .

The Democrat media retailers, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS...., are clearly partisan in matters like this, willing to make the most of everything negative about Trump while literally ignoring the offenses of Obama and Clinton. The real problem is, like this forum Jazzfanz Community, hardly anyone but the fully tanked partisans being able to get their material out, just discredits the sources in the eyes of most Americans.

Go ahead, have your little party in here and make yourselves feel real good. Nobody who is thinking clearly is going to believe you, ande in fact most people are turning away in disgust.

The Democratic Party has lost credibility since Bill Clinton sold it out to international fascists lock stock and barrel. Used to be some decent people in there who cared about ordinary folks. Obama did nothing for the minorities except open the borders and depress low skill wages nationally, and hob nob with all the big money people who live off virtual slave labor.

So, I looked into Levin's story, because if it is true, it's horrific.

Here is what Levin said, through Brietbart:

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.

https://www.breitbart.com/big-gover...ma-used-police-state-tactics-undermine-trump/

So, according to Levin, not only Obama was 100% wiretapping Trump. No, if's, and's or but's about it. Where does Levin get his idea from? In his quote, he has a source: Andrew McCarthy. So, I follow the link to his source. Here is what his source says:

A FISA application in which Trump was “named” was rejected by the FISA court as overbroad, notwithstanding that the FISA court usually looks kindly on government surveillance requests. A second, more narrow application, apparently not naming Trump, may have been granted five months later;

https://www.nationalreview.com/article/443768/obama-fisa-trump-wiretap

WHAT?!?! McCarthy doesn't say that wire taps have been going on. McCarthy says they MAY HAVE BEEN...

MAY HAVE BEEN??? What does that mean?!? It means NOTHING. It means you have NOTHING. "May have been" is the most useless phrase in the world.

So, let's recap:

McCarthy says "May Have Been", which means he has NOTHING. His whole 2,000 essay is garbage. All the time he spent scouring records for his theory is GARBAGE.

BUT, that is not the bad part. The bad part is that Levin takes the phrase "MAY HAVE BEEN" and turns it into "BUT THE WIRETAPS CONTINUE".

Levin instantly loses 100% of his credibility. He has nothing. He's a liar.

 

[Red]

Unless one has been hiding under a rock since last October, we all should know by now that agencies of our IC have been investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election, as well as possible contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence. Foreign intelligence agencies of our allies have provided info on Trump associates meeting with Russian individuals in European cities.

Now, Trump has thrown out one of his diversionary tweet storms, as "Deflector-in-Chief", claiming Obama ordered wire taps on him, which is illegal. So, let's let an independent commission sort through all of it. The American people will see much more of what these investigations reveal if it's a commission independent of Congress.

So, let's not be afraid of what such a commission uncovers. Just do it, and let the chips fall where they may. Trump has made very serious accusations against a former President. If his reliance on Levin and Breitbart is nothing but reliance on Trump supporting conspiracy theorists with no basis in fact, let Trump live with that fact. If there was in fact legally obtained surveillance of Trump associates in Trump tower, or if there was surveillance of foreign agents, and contact with Trump associates was swept up by that surveillance, let's get to the bottom of it.

It's a huge story if Obama ordered wire taps against Trump, since that is illegal. And if the surveillance was actually legal, and actually happened, and, remember, we know our IC was investigating both Russian interference and Trump associates contacts, that too is a huge story, since it suggests our IC agencies had reason to be suspicious of improper contact between Trump's campaign and agents of Russia, or there would have been no need or justification for such surveillance.

The NY Times did report that the Obama administration left a trail of bread crumbs to make it easier for our IC to dig deeper where Trump campaign-Russian contact was concerned. As far as I am concerned, thank you Obama administration. If, by the final weeks of the Obama administration, it was becoming clearer that there might have been actual collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, then the Obama administration did the right thing for our democracy by leaving a trail of bread crumbs for our IC to follow.

The truth may ultimately hurt Trump. It may ultimately hurt the Democrats. I'm not afraid of a special prosecutor or independent commission. Sunday Trump asked for an investigation of his claim Obama acted illegally. Fine, make digging into that claim a part of the investigation.

 

[Stoked]

Who gives a **** about the quality of the speech tho?

Oh I agree that one speech is meaningless in context.

Just disagreeing with the way green tried to make his point.

 

[fishonjazz]

So basically you just proved fishonjazz's point. So rather than vote for the best candidate they vote out of spite because the left is mean.

lol

Yup

 

[babe]

It seems to me that Trump has a "style" of dealing with things publicly which is quite different in some specifics from that of any official who is standing on protocol, on some idea of "the way things should be done". Call it confrontational, brash, whatever. When he's in a fight, he does fight back.

Of course any criminal charge needs to be based on objective evidence. Where is the evidence on Flynn, on Sessions, and on Trumps alleged involvement in, conspiracy with, any Russian operation seeking to assert political influence into our politics?

If anyone, American citizen or not, is seeking an overt political "revolution" outside of the legal process of public discussion and voter choices, we have no obligation to respect the methods. Obama is a "community organizer" by profession. Allegations are flying about Hillary deploying Clinton Foundation funds to pay organizers of protests since the election. Allegations are flying that Obama has set up his posh DC pad as command central to coordinate political establishment hacks and federal bureacrats' efforts to undermine the Trump Presidency. Allegations are flying that George Soros is funding the organization and deployment of paid agitators and demonstration organizers, and such.

Some say there is a war going on against Trump. Some call it "The Resistance", or a revolution, and are fully committed to doing whatever can be done to disrupt the Trump Presidency.

Trump uses his tweets to bring attention to a problem. If there have been illegal activities or felonious actions by his opponents, or if he or his associates have been doing similar illegal stuff, or anything that is actually a betrayal of public duty to preserve, defend, and protect American citizen's rights to pursue lawfully their public political objectives through elections, all that needs to be evaluated based on what evidence we can legally acquire and put into the judicial/congressional enquiry/action hopper.

American values include free speech, even for Presidents. But if he says something illegal has happened, he needs to pursue the case with evidence. That kind of evidence doesn't fit well with the tweet format. He can say what he wants, just as you can, or the Media can. But our judicial and congressional actions need a factual basis.

Of course, CNN and other media retailers are going to demand evidence for Trumps claims, just as Trump has the right to demand evidence for News feed, and in the absence of actual evidence for the news, he should call it false "news".

 

[DutchJazzer]

So basically you just proved fishonjazz's point. So rather than vote for the best candidate they vote out of spite because the left is mean.

lol

no i may have not been clear with my point, i will explain now and then i accept your apology for calling me a hypocrite regarding the email


the right is for smaller government.
they tend to be in higher number in local elections, but the right ussually votes less. me myself have never voted, because all it does is increase government powers

pollsters know this that's why democrats get a larger representation in certain presidential polls, because they account for the turn out numbers!
for example there was this big story about polls being rigged because they sampled 26% repubs and 41% dems and the rest independents! link to the article https://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/27/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-debate-poll/ and the PDF about their methodology is here https://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2016/images/09/27/poll.pdf i know CNN is very fake news, but their is some scientific accuracy in the turnout numbers.


so yeah usually in national elections right wingers turn up less! on the contrary in midterm elections dems turn up less(although i have a feeling next mid terms they will come out in full force, but also the right will come out so who will win remains to be seen).

so where am i going with this, while for 8 years government expanded into tyranny for example obummercare, gun control expansion, wire tapping also for example government taking businesses for refusing service but lets not forget globalisation! when they opposed this they where being called those evil words.

so when the right gets mad to tend to go out and vote, in greater numbers than before. me myself am still on the edge!


and between Clinton and trump the best candidate is trump. they did not vote for trump out of spite. trump promised those things they want, Obamacare gone, borders(which screws globalization) etc etc.


so yeah those who ussually votes get mad then they go OUT AND VOTE!

also dont forget trump snagged a lot of independents and dems in certain places!

 

[Gameface]

It seems to me that Trump has a "style" of dealing with things publicly which is quite different in some specifics from that of any official who is standing on protocol, on some idea of "the way things should be done". Call it confrontational, brash, whatever. When he's in a fight, he does fight back.

Of course any criminal charge needs to be based on objective evidence. Where is the evidence on Flynn, on Sessions, and on Trumps alleged involvement in, conspiracy with, any Russian operation seeking to assert political influence into our politics?

If anyone, American citizen or not, is seeking an overt political "revolution" outside of the legal process of public discussion and voter choices, we have no obligation to respect the methods. Obama is a "community organizer" by profession. Allegations are flying about Hillary deploying Clinton Foundation funds to pay organizers of protests since the election. Allegations are flying that Obama has set up his posh DC pad as command central to coordinate political establishment hacks and federal bureacrats' efforts to undermine the Trump Presidency. Allegations are flying that George Soros is funding the organization and deployment of paid agitators and demonstration organizers, and such.

Some say there is a war going on against Trump. Some call it "The Resistance", or a revolution, and are fully committed to doing whatever can be done to disrupt the Trump Presidency.

Trump uses his tweets to bring attention to a problem. If there have been illegal activities or felonious actions by his opponents, or if he or his associates have been doing similar illegal stuff, or anything that is actually a betrayal of public duty to preserve, defend, and protect American citizen's rights to pursue lawfully their public political objectives through elections, all that needs to be evaluated based on what evidence we can legally acquire and put into the judicial/congressional enquiry/action hopper.

American values include free speech, even for Presidents. But if he says something illegal has happened, he needs to pursue the case with evidence. That kind of evidence doesn't fit well with the tweet format. He can say what he wants, just as you can, or the Media can. But our judicial and congressional actions need a factual basis.

Of course, CNN and other media retailers are going to demand evidence for Trumps claims, just as Trump has the right to demand evidence for News feed, and in the absence of actual evidence for the news, he should call it false "news".

I knew some people who went to the Chaffetz town hall. They were going there to give him a piece of their mind. No one paid them. They went in organically agitated.

The notion that someone needed to pay agitators for these town halls is dumb. People are angry and they are expressing that anger. It's real.

 

[fishonjazz]

no i may have not been clear with my point, i will explain now and then i accept your apology for calling me a hypocrite regarding the email


the right is for smaller government.
they tend to be in higher number in local elections, but the right ussually votes less. me myself have never voted, because all it does is increase government powers

pollsters know this that's why democrats get a larger representation in certain presidential polls, because they account for the turn out numbers!
for example there was this big story about polls being rigged because they sampled 26% repubs and 41% dems and the rest independents! link to the article https://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/27/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-debate-poll/ and the PDF about their methodology is here https://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2016/images/09/27/poll.pdf i know CNN is very fake news, but their is some scientific accuracy in the turnout numbers.


so yeah usually in national elections right wingers turn up less! on the contrary in midterm elections dems turn up less(although i have a feeling next mid terms they will come out in full force, but also the right will come out so who will win remains to be seen).

so where am i going with this, while for 8 years government expanded into tyranny for example obummercare, gun control expansion, wire tapping also for example government taking businesses for refusing service but lets not forget globalisation! when they opposed this they where being called those evil words.

so when the right gets mad to tend to go out and vote, in greater numbers than before. me myself am still on the edge!


and between Clinton and trump the best candidate is trump. they did not vote for trump out of spite. trump promised those things they want, Obamacare gone, borders(which screws globalization) etc etc.


so yeah those who ussually votes get mad then they go OUT AND VOTE!

also dont forget trump snagged a lot of independents and dems in certain places!

So the left made fun of the right and hurt their little feelings and so they went out and voted for trump according to you.
Point remains the same. According to you the right was manipulated into voting for trump because the left hurt their feelings.

 

[babe]

I knew some people who went to the Chaffetz town hall. They were going there to give him a piece of their mind. No one paid them. They went in organically agitated.

The notion that someone needed to pay agitators for these town halls is dumb. People are angry and they are expressing that anger. It's real.

If you know some people who show up to protest Chaffetz, say, or anyone else deemed in cahoots with the Trump Presidency, the percent of "Paid" attendance on the schema I referred to, would be oh, maybe 1% tops. And not to say there aren't a lot of folks who woke up worried November 9 who are willing to be "organic" angry public demonstrators. That's why marginal efforts to organize "Resistance" by a few monied operators can produce impressive results.

But please note, it has generally been a trend in American politics that elections produce meaningful, and publicly-accepted results. Our system of government sorta needs people to respect election results, and try to understand why the election results were what they are. If people start undermining elections as a fundamental tool for the public to provide guidance or input into their governance, they are undermining the best tool they've ever had for changing things.

Fine if people want to talk and say stuff, but if their thinking goes to "revolution" to de-legitimize an election, they have a problem. We have a problem.

 

[green]

So, let's not be afraid of what such a commission uncovers. Just do it, and let the chips fall where they may.

I think this is a great idea. Let's uncover this, good and bad, and get better.