Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:House Intelligence Committee chair, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said the allegations will become part of his panel's investigation. The committee 'will make inquiries into whether the government was conducting surveillance activities on any political party's campaign officials or surrogates,' Nunes' statement read.

While on the Senate side, Intelligence Committee member, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said 'I’m sure that this matter will be a part of that inquiry,' during a discussion on Fox News Sunday.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4283584/White-House-asks-Congress-look-wire-tapping-claims.html#ixzz4aU6umnHM

Things are not looking good for Barack Obama.

Things are not looking good for someone, that's for sure. Can you guess who?

The question is not whether the wiretaps were legal. The question is whether or not they continued to tape even when they found nothing. What's damning is Obama relaxing the rules on how the information can be viewed and used two weeks before he left office.

Dems are walking back their statements to keep themselves from being caught in the web. Interesting times.

I listened to Clapper on MTP yesterday and what I heard him saying was that the rules were relaxed so that intelligence already gathered could be shared in investigation. The concern was that if only one entity had the intelligence, it could easily disappear after Trump was sworn in. The word he used when talking about relaxing the rules on collected intelligence was preserve.

I also heard him say that evidence of collusion was not included in his report to Obama and Trump in January. I'll have to go back and listen to it again, but I could swear he said it twice: not included in his report. That doesn't mean the evidence doesn't exist.

So what's damning is Trump's concern about surveillance of his Tower of Sauron. Clapper stated it plainly several times: there was no FISA warrant. If Trump heard the report that there was Russian interference, but no evidence of his campaign's involvement, why would he be so worried as to make an unfounded claim that his offices had been under surveillance?

You know Clapper denied the existence of FISA warrants, right?

Yes. Go back and read the bolded in my post. Chuck Todd asked him more than once and he said it emphatically. No FISA warrant while he was in charge.

He also said his report included no evidence of Trump's campaign colluding with Russians. So why would Trump be worried that there was surveillance - legal or otherwise?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:House Intelligence Committee chair, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said the allegations will become part of his panel's investigation. The committee 'will make inquiries into whether the government was conducting surveillance activities on any political party's campaign officials or surrogates,' Nunes' statement read.

While on the Senate side, Intelligence Committee member, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said 'I’m sure that this matter will be a part of that inquiry,' during a discussion on Fox News Sunday.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4283584/White-House-asks-Congress-look-wire-tapping-claims.html#ixzz4aU6umnHM

Things are not looking good for Barack Obama.

Things are not looking good for someone, that's for sure. Can you guess who?

The question is not whether the wiretaps were legal. The question is whether or not they continued to tape even when they found nothing. What's damning is Obama relaxing the rules on how the information can be viewed and used two weeks before he left office.

Dems are walking back their statements to keep themselves from being caught in the web. Interesting times.

I listened to Clapper on MTP yesterday and what I heard him saying was that the rules were relaxed so that intelligence already gathered could be shared in investigation. The concern was that if only one entity had the intelligence, it could easily disappear after Trump was sworn in. The word he used when talking about relaxing the rules on collected intelligence was preserve.

I also heard him say that evidence of collusion was not included in his report to Obama and Trump in January. I'll have to go back and listen to it again, but I could swear he said it twice: not included in his report. That doesn't mean the evidence doesn't exist.

So what's damning is Trump's concern about surveillance of his Tower of Sauron. Clapper stated it plainly several times: there was no FISA warrant. If Trump heard the report that there was Russian interference, but no evidence of his campaign's involvement, why would he be so worried as to make an unfounded claim that his offices had been under surveillance?

You know Clapper denied the existence of FISA warrants, right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like they are baiting Comey at this point.

But why? If Trump is innocent there'd be no need to bait anyone. Or make accusations about surveillance.

Or lie about contact with Russians.

There would be no need to be spinning this at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:House Intelligence Committee chair, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said the allegations will become part of his panel's investigation. The committee 'will make inquiries into whether the government was conducting surveillance activities on any political party's campaign officials or surrogates,' Nunes' statement read.

While on the Senate side, Intelligence Committee member, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said 'I’m sure that this matter will be a part of that inquiry,' during a discussion on Fox News Sunday.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4283584/White-House-asks-Congress-look-wire-tapping-claims.html#ixzz4aU6umnHM

Things are not looking good for Barack Obama.

Things are not looking good for someone, that's for sure. Can you guess who?

The question is not whether the wiretaps were legal. The question is whether or not they continued to tape even when they found nothing. What's damning is Obama relaxing the rules on how the information can be viewed and used two weeks before he left office.

Dems are walking back their statements to keep themselves from being caught in the web. Interesting times.

I listened to Clapper on MTP yesterday and what I heard him saying was that the rules were relaxed so that intelligence already gathered could be shared in investigation. The concern was that if only one entity had the intelligence, it could easily disappear after Trump was sworn in. The word he used when talking about relaxing the rules on collected intelligence was preserve.

I also heard him say that evidence of collusion was not included in his report to Obama and Trump in January. I'll have to go back and listen to it again, but I could swear he said it twice: not included in his report. That doesn't mean the evidence doesn't exist.

So what's damning is Trump's concern about surveillance of his Tower of Sauron. Clapper stated it plainly several times: there was no FISA warrant. If Trump heard the report that there was Russian interference, but no evidence of his campaign's involvement, why would he be so worried as to make an unfounded claim that his offices had been under surveillance?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like they are baiting Comey at this point.

But why? If Trump is innocent there'd be no need to bait anyone. Or make accusations about surveillance.

Or lie about contact with Russians.

There would be no need to be spinning this at all.

Anonymous wrote:It seems like they are baiting Comey at this point.

Anonymous wrote:Spokes Huckabee Sanders pushing back against Comey this AM, again without a scintilla of proof of surveillance, illegal or otherwise. So much for Spicer's lockdown. He's vanished and she can't keep her mouth shut.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:House Intelligence Committee chair, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said the allegations will become part of his panel's investigation. The committee 'will make inquiries into whether the government was conducting surveillance activities on any political party's campaign officials or surrogates,' Nunes' statement read.

While on the Senate side, Intelligence Committee member, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said 'I’m sure that this matter will be a part of that inquiry,' during a discussion on Fox News Sunday.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4283584/White-House-asks-Congress-look-wire-tapping-claims.html#ixzz4aU6umnHM

Things are not looking good for Barack Obama.

Things are not looking good for someone, that's for sure. Can you guess who?

The question is not whether the wiretaps were legal. The question is whether or not they continued to tape even when they found nothing. What's damning is Obama relaxing the rules on how the information can be viewed and used two weeks before he left office.

Dems are walking back their statements to keep themselves from being caught in the web. Interesting times.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:House Intelligence Committee chair, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said the allegations will become part of his panel's investigation. The committee 'will make inquiries into whether the government was conducting surveillance activities on any political party's campaign officials or surrogates,' Nunes' statement read.

While on the Senate side, Intelligence Committee member, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said 'I’m sure that this matter will be a part of that inquiry,' during a discussion on Fox News Sunday.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4283584/White-House-asks-Congress-look-wire-tapping-claims.html#ixzz4aU6umnHM

Things are not looking good for Barack Obama.

I am not worried about Barack Obama. I doubt he did anything wrong. And if he *did* do something wrong, the I am fine with him accepting the consequences of that.
Do you think we are afraid of what Obama may or may not have done? Because I'm not.

I actually am a little bit worried about Obama, not that he did anything wrong but that nothing is too low for trump and his comrades including malicious prosecution and kangaroo courts. And that's apart from inspring some lone, crazy deplorable to try to harm him though obviously he has secret service protection.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:House Intelligence Committee chair, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said the allegations will become part of his panel's investigation. The committee 'will make inquiries into whether the government was conducting surveillance activities on any political party's campaign officials or surrogates,' Nunes' statement read.

While on the Senate side, Intelligence Committee member, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said 'I’m sure that this matter will be a part of that inquiry,' during a discussion on Fox News Sunday.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4283584/White-House-asks-Congress-look-wire-tapping-claims.html#ixzz4aU6umnHM

Things are not looking good for Barack Obama.

I am not worried about Barack Obama. I doubt he did anything wrong. And if he *did* do something wrong, the I am fine with him accepting the consequences of that.
Do you think we are afraid of what Obama may or may not have done? Because I'm not.

I actually am a little bit worried about Obama, not that he did anything wrong but that nothing is too low for trump and his comrades including malicious prosecution and kangaroo courts. And that's apart from inspring some lone, crazy deplorable to try to harm him though obviously he has secret service protection.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe it will be, but Comey has asked DOJ to publicly state that there was no wiretapping of Trump, saying it didn't happen.

If they do, it will be a remarkable rebuke of a sitting president.

"The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, asked the Justice Department this weekend to publicly reject President Trump’s assertion that President Barack Obama ordered the tapping of Mr. Trump’s phones, senior American officials said on Sunday. Mr. Comey has argued that the highly charged claim is false and must be corrected, they said, but the department has not released any such statement.

Mr. Comey made the request on Saturday after Mr. Trump leveled his allegation on Twitter. Mr. Comey has been working to get the Justice Department to knock down Mr. Trump’s claim because there is no evidence to support it and it insinuates that the F.B.I. broke the law, the officials said."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/05/us/politics/trump-seeks-inquiry-into-allegations-that-obama-tapped-his-phones.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Red herring ... Trump never said Obama personally "ordered" the wiretapping. The allegation was that the Obama administration engaged eavesdropping on political campaign during national election.

Now the congress has agreed to investigate it - let's wait for the facts from the formal investigation.

Try again

I still don't see the word Obama "ordered" it. You do know DOJ/FBI, NSA and all other IC agencies worked for Obama. Obama was ultimately responsible for things happened under his administration. His non-denial denial yesterday was playing the same word game NY Times is playing.