Politics #ReleaseTheMemo ?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Wiretapped!
One administration spying on a Candidate's people. The ability to do this has to be terminated. Period, end of story.
Then clean up on the bastards that did it. Then jail those that knew about it and lied about it.

You seem to be missing a crucial fact - according to Trump, Carter Page was not part of the campaign at the time the FISA warrant was issued.

Plus your argument is silly - campaign staffers should not be above the law.

barfo
 
The man has no reason to speak out in public, period.

I pointed out why he might in the post you quoted.

It may be a little naive to accept the word of unnamed sources who weren't in the room.

Absolutely true. Who is telling the truth (if anyone is) is not yet clear.

barfo
 
Yes, candidate campaigns should be safe spaces for crooks and spies. And we should jail everyone who doesn't agree with that.

That is an asinine statement. It is the ability to using the power of the Federal government to spy people , ignoring the 4th amendment protections we all should have, that is the issue. Then using bogus data, in the FISA process to enable this shit. That is the issue in my view.

When one administration is able to do this against a candidate and his people upsets the political process for the people to chose the leader. It can not work.

You use the word Crook. There are none convicted. There are none accused without abusing his 4th amendment rights.
I don't give a shit who talked with a Russian! That is not illegal.
 
Taking money from RT does not make a spy! Anymore than taking money from CNN.
 
When one administration is able to do this against a candidate and his people upsets the political process for the people to chose the leader. It can not work.

Given that the warrant was issued just a couple weeks before the election, and was secret, and Page wasn't part of the campaign at the time, please explain how this upset the political process?

I don't give a shit who talked with a Russian! That is not illegal.

It can be, depending on what was discussed. Why else do you think Flynn, Sessions, Trump Jr, etc lied about it?

barfo
 
It is an Ugly American indeed, that will call the American President and ugly American.
 
It is an Ugly American indeed, that will call the American President and ugly American.

The emperor has such beautiful robes!

barfo
 
They should not know what he discussed.

Flynn should have known that calls to Russian officials are subject to surveillance. Are you calling for an end to all intelligence activities?

barfo
 
They have 4th amendment rights just like you.

I'm guessing that you think porch cameras that catch package pirates are an invasion of the thieves privacy?

barfo
 
Flynn should have known that calls to Russian officials are subject to surveillance. Are you calling for an end to all intelligence activities?

barfo

No. I suggest they not abuse it. Then leak it.
 
From the very left wing "The Nation."

https://www.thenation.com/article/russiagate-is-more-fiction-than-fact/

Russiagate Is More Fiction Than Fact
From accusations of Trump campaign collusion to Russian Facebook ad buys, the media has substituted hype for evidence.
ByAaron Maté


The same holds for the question of collusion. Officialsacknowledged to Reutersin May that “they had seen no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion between the campaign and Russia in the communications reviewed so far.” Well-placed critics of Trump—including former DNI chiefJames Clapper, former CIA directorMichael Morrell, RepresentativeMaxine Waters, and SenatorDianne Feinstein—concur to date.

Recognizing this absence of evidence helps examine what has been substituted in its place.Shattered, the insider account of the Clinton campaign, reports that “in the days after the election, Hillary declined to take responsibility for her own loss.” Instead, one source recounted, aides were ordered “to make sure all these narratives get spun the right way.” Within 24 hours of Clinton’s concession speech, top officials gathered “to engineer the case that the election wasn’t entirely on the up-and-up.… Already, Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument.”
 
...

These imperatives have incentivized a compromised set of journalistic and evidentiary standards. In Russiagate, unverified claims are reported with little to no skepticism. Comporting developments are cherry-picked and overhyped, while countervailing ones are minimized or ignored. Front-page headlines advertise explosive and incriminating developments, only to often be undermined by the article’s content, or retracted entirely. Qualified language—likely,suspected,apparent—appears next to “Russians” to account for the absence of concrete links. As a result, Russiagate has enlarged into a storm of innuendo that engulfs issues far beyond its original scope.
 
Oh, so back to 'unmasking', hmm? That seems to have gone the way of 'unskewing'.

It's odd how your standards of proof vary so dramatically depending on whether the charge fits your biases or not.

barfo

You ask the question, you got the answer. Not surprising you don't like it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top