Is Lynch About To Go Down ?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

With all the CONFIDENCE you have surely you would welcome ANY investigation no?

So uh when is the doj going to make that statement comey asked for?

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Why are we talking about what I trust or don't trust? This is about Trump tweeting a VERY serious accusation about an ex-President of the United States. I take that VERY seriously and expect the appropriate evidence to be put forward to prove these allegations or at least give credence to a more thorough investigation.

You are right, Trump's words matter. And when he blatantly lies and demeans a previous President just to distract from his own controversies, it the Presidency acting unpresidential. Plus gullible Trump supporters lamp it up without even second guessing the words. That is also problematic.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Krazysh0t

With all the CONFIDENCE you have surely you would welcome ANY investigation no?

So uh when is the doj going to make that statement comey asked for?

# no. Investigations take up tax money. Produce some evidence that the investigation is worth doing and I'll reconsider. Otherwise it is just a petty witch hunt on Trump's part.

Does anyone have a link showing that the requests have been made (I think I heard 3 of them) to wiretap?

Thanks
JT

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I'm willing to let my reputation ride on this. That is how sure I am that Trump is just manufacturing a scandal here. That's not fear. That's confidence.

I am just going to leave this here.....you know CONFIDENCE and all.

a reply to: RomeByFire

Again i am from England and not a trump supporter merely came here to ask questions and get shut down by krazyshot who thinks i should not ask questions .

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Why are we talking about what I trust or don't trust? This is about Trump tweeting a VERY serious accusation about an ex-President of the United States. I take that VERY seriously and expect the appropriate evidence to be put forward to prove these allegations or at least give credence to a more thorough investigation.

You are right, Trump's words matter. And when he blatantly lies and demeans a previous President just to distract from his own controversies, it the Presidency acting unpresidential. Plus gullible Trump supporters lamp it up without even second guessing the words. That is also problematic.

But we do not know that Trump has lied. I will grant you that we haven't seen proof of his claim that he was being tapped by Obama, but neither have we seen proof this is a lie.

What we do have proof of is that Obama has lied through his spokesman when he claimed they never had a US citizen under surveillance.

You proved that with your own links.

So we have Trunps word against Obamas, and so far the only defense Obama has provided is a known lie.

So why are you ignoring Obamas lie, exspecially when you are the one who brought it up?

I'd think that if he is making a claim of the gravity that he is making, he'd have some evidence to support this accusation that he could present.

So, you are now agreeing with me?

I know that all you need is Trump to say something and you'll believe it like gospel, but others care about facts and evidence before we commit these things.

You literally know nothing about me. I'm not even American.

I know you are able to stay focused if you try, so I'll ask again -

Would releasing the evidence, if it exists, be a smart move with regards to any future court proceedings?

I think you know the answer is no, that would be a very silly thing to do as it would give the defense more opportunity to prepare.

originally posted by: Grambler
But we do not know that Trump has lied. I will grant you that we haven't seen proof of his claim that he was being tapped by Obama, but neither have we seen proof this is a lie.

This tells me we have no reason to believe otherwise.

What we do have proof of is that Obama has lied through his spokesman when he claimed they never had a US citizen under surveillance.

You proved that with your own links.

Again with this spin... The claim is about wiretapping. NOT surveillance in general. Plus a FISA request would make the surveillance legitimate. Which means that Trump just implicated himself in a federal investigation. You really shouldn't be using the FISA request as evidence for your case. It actually damages Trump's claims by making the surveillance look legal.

a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

Releasing some of the evidence would go a LONG way to building support for a more comprehensive investigation. Police don't just pick random people to start investigating if they are a bank robber or anything. They look for actual connections to the crime so they can investigate the person. Well if Trump wants to investigate Obama, he needs to produce some compelling evidence that supports his claims.

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

When have conservatives conspiracies ever yielded any fruit?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

I take that VERY seriously and expect the appropriate evidence to be put forward to prove these allegations or at least give credence to a more thorough investigation.

I don't disagree he probably should have shown evidence or not said anything, but I doubt he'd say something so explosive without at least some half-decent reason to believe it was true. Honestly it's not that far fetched as you seem to believe, the dems would have been desperate to get any dirt on Trump before he was able to take office.

Plus gullible Trump supporters lamp it up without even second guessing the words. That is also problematic.

That is a generalization, I'm sure many of his supporters know not to believe anything without hard proof. Lets just recap some of the things the MSM has recently claimed and the left believed without second guessing: all their polls showed Trump would lose, apparently Trump pissed on a bed the Obama's slept in, also Trump was groomed by Russia despite the fact he's a well know American business tycoon who has been in the public eye for a long time.

You really shouldn't be using the FISA request as evidence for your case. It actually damages Trump's claims by making the surveillance look legal.

So you're admitting some surveillance took place?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

Releasing some of the evidence would go a LONG way to building support for a more comprehensive investigation. Police don't just pick random people to start investigating if they are a bank robber or anything. They look for actual connections to the crime so they can investigate the person. Well if Trump wants to investigate Obama, he needs to produce some compelling evidence that supports his claims.

Publicly?

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
but I doubt he'd say something so explosive without at least some half-decent reason to believe it was true.

You mean like the incident in Sweden that was a Faux News documentary?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Again with this spin... The claim is about wiretapping. NOT surveillance in general. Plus a FISA request would make the surveillance legitimate. Which means that Trump just implicated himself in a federal investigation. You really shouldn't be using the FISA request as evidence for your case. It actually damages Trump's claims by making the surveillance look legal.

Wow I am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but its becoming tough.

Trump said Obama wiretapped him.

Obamas statement denying this is through a spokesman, that you posted in an attempt to show Trumps claim was untrue.

That statement said they didn't tap trump, in fact they never had SURVEILLANCE on any US citizen.

You then posted an article PROVING that Obama had a US citizen under SURVEILLANCE.

Do you see the problem yet?

Obamas defense is he wouldn't wiretap Trump because he never would have any US citizen under SURVEILLANCE. This was the word that Obamas spokesman used to prove that they didn't tap Trump.

Your own article has proven that this is a lie. Yet your partisanship will not allow you to admit this. You now want us to ignore the fact that you posted a statement from Obama to try to prove Trump is a liar, and that statement is 100% verified as a lie by your own source.

I could swear this used to be a board of conspiracy theorists!

There will be no direct links back to Obama even if this claim is true.

Does the term plausible deniability not mean anything to you lot?

Most of the people drooling over the idea that Trump has something here still also believe Obama is a Kenyan-born muslim. You think he could dodge that bullet for 8 years as President but mess up a wiretap?

a reply to: neformore

That's another perfect example of the MSM spinning crap to suite their agenda. He never specifically referenced any attack in Sweden. However there was indeed an attack that took place in Sweden the night Trump spoke about and there are massive issues in Sweden right now due to immigration as Trump mentioned.

a reply to: neformore

fisa leads directly to the potus

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

No evidence no fact.

Trump has just pulled a classic Trump stunt. He is a genius at diverting attention away using sensationalism. The media should love him because Trump is attracting big audiences. I must admit I do find him very refreshing. Politics is fun again. He'll make sure something is always going on even when it isn't. Constant hype and staying in the main frame; the first word on everybody's lips, that is his five card trick.

Is there a man who could be more aptly named "Trump"?



I got an eight years supply of fine bud and popcorn. Yippee.

a reply to: neformore

Muslims are sneaky.