A top Obama official just confirmed the surveillance of the Trump team.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

It "seems" that way?

Or do you have evidence?

. Oh snap!!!!! m.facebook.com...

a reply to: xuenchen

Hmmm, after actually watching that entire interview with those three, I feel decidedly less intelligent....for being sucked into watching anything on MSNBC. But, like Hillary used to say, "It takes a village." and my Mama used to say, "Every village has its idiots."

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

It "seems" that way?

Or do you have evidence?

. Oh snap!!!!! m.facebook.com...

Oh snap!!!!! Gotta have a Facebook account.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichiganA top Obama official just confirmed the surveillance of the Trump team.

I'm thinking that......

which emoji is the eye roll emoji?

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

It is NOT speculation that Trump lied about his wiretap claim. That has been completely confirmed.

You (and Democrats) are quibbling over semantics. Trump was being monitored by the intelligence community. Obama's own officials have now admitted that. They only way Dems can still say Trump's claim was false was by placing an absurd emphasis on whether or not the IC's actions fit the technical definition of 'wiretapping.'

But doncha know that Dems define words in their own way? "Depends on what "is" means....or what "sex" means.

Claims of surveillance on Trump going back to the Bush years have been presented by an informant. My theory remains that we will never see any of this "evidence" officially because too many people in high places would be doing the perp walk. The claim will be that national security would be compromised if the information is released.

We all assume that both parties do dirty deeds to the opposition. These guys know what those deeds are and neither party wants that kind of exposure so they'll agree to calling it "in the interest of national security" to keep the corruption hidden.

Draw a vertical line down Paul Begala's forehead and it would look just like an AZZ.

His head is so full of poop, that he can't even argue in favor of Evelyn Farkas logically..

www.rawstory.com...

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

It "seems" that way?

Or do you have evidence?

. Oh snap!!!!! m.facebook.com...

Oh snap!!!!! Gotta have a Facebook account.

yah and it didn't come up when I tried to go to it so here's something else ..... an article about McCain distributing that little dossier....www.google.com...
But that was the gist of the story... that MCCain had info fake or not

double post but golly she's tried to walk it back now...oops she realized she was in hot water. www.newsbusters.org... um=marketing&utm_campaign=farkas-stumbles

As an independent reading this thread, I gotta say all the tit-for-tat is sad. The vast majority of comments basically point the finger at the opposition and ignore/dismiss their party's possible wrong doings.

Consider yourselves divided and conquered.

originally posted by: diggindirt

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

It is NOT speculation that Trump lied about his wiretap claim. That has been completely confirmed.

You (and Democrats) are quibbling over semantics. Trump was being monitored by the intelligence community. Obama's own officials have now admitted that. They only way Dems can still say Trump's claim was false was by placing an absurd emphasis on whether or not the IC's actions fit the technical definition of 'wiretapping.'

But doncha know that Dems define words in their own way? "Depends on what "is" means....or what "sex" means.

Claims of surveillance on Trump going back to the Bush years have been presented by an informant. My theory remains that we will never see any of this "evidence" officially because too many people in high places would be doing the perp walk. The claim will be that national security would be compromised if the information is released.

We all assume that both parties do dirty deeds to the opposition. These guys know what those deeds are and neither party wants that kind of exposure so they'll agree to calling it "in the interest of national security" to keep the corruption hidden.

I think you are firgetting the fact that it is Trumps DOJ now.. he can have anyone he wants investigated..

So assuming your right, why isn't trump doing anything ??

Is he in on it too then??


Conspiracy theories only work if your NOT the party in power lmao!

originally posted by: RedParrotHead
As an independent reading this thread, I gotta say all the tit-for-tat is sad. The vast majority of comments basically point the finger at the opposition and ignore/dismiss their party's possible wrong doings.

Consider yourselves divided and conquered.

Trump is president and gets to make all such calls...

So why hasnt trump prosecuted anyone??

It is his government now.... his DOJ head.. his FBI..

So if all these stories from unaccredited conspiracy sites are all true, why is trump allowing it to continue ??

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
double post but golly she's tried to walk it back now...oops she realized she was in hot water. www.newsbusters.org... um=marketing&utm_campaign=farkas-stumbles

Then why isn't the leader of the free world and the DOJ doing anything???

It is trumps government now..

His DOJ head...

His congress, his senate..

And he can't seem to actually prosecute ANYONE???

His first act was gonna be to "lock her up.."

The fawned over her amazing contributions to America in his speech and never budged tward actually keeping his promis..

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
double post but golly she's tried to walk it back now...oops she realized she was in hot water. www.newsbusters.org... um=marketing&utm_campaign=farkas-stumbles

Then why isn't the leader of the free world and the DOJ doing anything???

It is trumps government now..

His DOJ head...

His congress, his senate..

And he can't seem to actually prosecute ANYONE???

His first act was gonna be to "lock her up.."

The fawned over her amazing contributions to America in his speech and never budged tward actually keeping his promis..

nobody's prosecuted anybody for how long now? Oh wait bin Ladin and that other guy obama sent the drone in for. Otherwise everybody got away with all the corruption but we will see. I mean the democrats won't even approve Trumps cabinet and half the GOP is rino progressives. The CFR been running things a while and even Obama been trying to run the WH from down the block lol what a freakin usurper he is.

Anyone who thinks Obama did not put Trump (and a slew of others) under surveillance are either woefully ignorant or dishonest with themselves. Perhaps both.

Obama isn't a pillar of virtue as many believe, he has shown this time and time again. In fact, I'd be more surprised if he didn't put Trump under surveillance.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

If she had said the Obama admin ILLEGALLY obtained information on Trump, I'd agree with the OP, that she incriminated herself. But, that not what she said, is it?

a reply to: Aegeus

I will say this once more.

EVERY Presidential candidate, every person who even puts themselves up in the primaries, gets a THOROUGH sifting from the intelligence services. Everyone. You do not get to lead arguably the most powerful nation on the entire planet, without getting heavily vetted first, and mostly without your necessarily being aware of it. If the intelligence services looked into Trump at all, it would have been as a matter of procedure for them to do so. Furthermore, his people meeting with Russian agents is a cause for concern, not something to support. If his people and indeed the Marmalade nightmare himself, were caught out having discussions with Russian agents, then...

a) They had every reason to record those conversations, and its Trump's peoples fault they were caught out doing it.

b) The intelligence services would have been duty bound to pass that information on to the current administration, no matter how few days they had left on the clock at the time.

And as an aside, there has been ZERO suggestion or implication that Obama ever ordered ANYTHING. There is, in fact, a damned sight less to suggest that Obama ordered surveillance on Trump, than there is to suggest that Trump's business ties to Russia make him unfit to lead, that his businesses are STILL under his control through his human glove puppet of a son (one wonders where the thumb and pinky finger end up in that scenario, although one does not have to wonder for too long), AND that Trump is a pathological liar who lies over seventy percent of the time. Given that there is far more evidence to damn Trump in SEVERAL ways, than there is anything probative to aim at Obama in the matter of the spying issue, I really wonder how it is that Trumpeters can possibly keep a straight face when defending their idiot leader.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
I really wonder how it is that Trumpeters can possibly keep a straight face when defending their idiot leader.

I imagine it comes with copious amounts of alcohol.

Something seems off here, Frakas left the administration in Sept 2015 and the alleged collusion occurred in 2016, how would she know all this stuff or am I missing something, unless this was "planted " or "planned" information somehow. I thought Flynn took the monies in December of 2016

It was just reported that the person who ordered the spying and unmasking of the Trump Administration was a top Obama official that is well-known.

originally posted by: carewemust
It was just reported that the person who ordered the spying and unmasking of the Trump Administration was a top Obama official that is well-known.

I'm gonna go with Loretta Lynch.