Random Politics & Religion #20

I dunno vic, sounds like he did the classic dem play of "just deny it and let the media clean up your mess".

This might just be the first time you simply don't have enough cognitive dissonance fuel to successfully run your defense mechanism.

At this point there is no contesting that he was "tapped". Obama's FBI did it, and found nothing. When did Obama know about it? How much was Obama really involved?

9. If you learned of this alleged surveillance from media outlets, did you or anyone on your staff check with any responsible law enforcement or intelligence officials or agencies before making public allegations against your own government?

10. What exactly does any of this have to do with Arnold Schwarzenegger?

1. To the extent any wiretap you revealed yesterday was previously classified, your tweets have declassified the fact of its existence. Do you agree that the FBI, DOJ, and the FISA Court are now at liberty to confirm the existence of any FISA surveillance that may have been taking place at Trump Tower or against its occupants?


..

9. To the extent no such surveillance took place or you have grossly mischaracterized it, do you have any concerns that you might have imputed grave misconduct to your predecessor—in the language of New York Times v. Sullivan—with “‘actual malice’—that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not”?

10. If so, have you or your counsel considered the question of whether a tweet from the @realDonaldTrump Twitter account that contains a slander or a libel is an official presidential act for which you are immune from liability under Nixon v. Fitzgerald or whether it is personal conduct for which you might be subject to suit under Clinton v. Jones?

Since the FISA warrant was granted there is no wrong doing on the previous administrations behalf.

You're boxing yourself into a corner here. If there was SOMETHING bad there, then why didn't it pan out? Couldn't have been that bad or else it would have happened before the election. We can pretty much assume this. So what was the nature of the "evidence" could it have been something fabricated? You know like that fake dossier that had Trump pissing on hotel beds with Russian hookers? Cause if it's something like that where partisan hacks just made up justification for wiretaps, then we got a pretty big *** problem with Obama's administration spying on it's political adversaries.

Because we pretty much know there was wiretapping and because we pretty much know it came up with NOTHING, that second option is looking more and more likely everyday.

Or, you know, they are collecting evidence to build a case. An investigation isn't going to keep revealing what they find one piece at a time until they are ready to bring charges.

Or, you know, they are collecting evidence to build a case. An investigation isn't going to keep revealing what they find one piece at a time until they are ready to bring charges.

You're boxing yourself into a corner here. If there was SOMETHING bad there, then why didn't it pan out? Couldn't have been that bad or else it would have happened before the election. We can pretty much assume this. So what was the nature of the "evidence" could it have been something fabricated? You know like that fake dossier that had Trump pissing on hotel beds with Russian hookers? Cause if it's something like that where partisan hacks just made up justification for wiretaps, then we got a pretty big *** problem with Obama's administration spying on it's political adversaries.

Because we pretty much know there was wiretapping and because we pretty much know it came up with NOTHING, that second option is looking more and more likely everyday.

But at the end of the day Trump is president. He can order any executive branch agency to declassify and release anything he wants.

President Donald Trump's allegation on Twitter that former President Barack Obama ordered wiretaps of his phones during the election caught senior federal law enforcement officials completely off-guard, sources close to the matter have told Fox News.

Those sources said that the officials in question had no idea what Trump was talking about when the president made the allegation on social media Saturday morning. The sources also told Fox that Trump did not consult with senior officials who would have been advised of any such wiretapping operations before posting the messages.

Trump claimed in a series of tweets without evidence Saturday that his predecessor had tried to undermine him by tapping the telephones at Trump Tower, the New York skyscraper where Trump based his campaign and transition operations, and maintains a home.
"How low has President Obama gone to tapp [sic] my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!" he tweeted.

Trump's charge also left many in the White House and Justice Department confused and scrambling over the weekend to find any kind of factual backup for the president's accusations.

Also Sunday, the New York Times reported that FBI Director James Comey asked the Justice Department to publicly reject Trump's assertion. According to the Times, Comey argued that Trump's claim falsely implied that the FBI had broken the law. The Justice Department had not issued any such statement as of Sunday evening.

Earlier Sunday, Obama's director of national intelligence, James Clapper, told NBC's "Meet the Press" that nothing matching Trump's claims had taken place.

"Absolutely, I can deny it," said Clapper, who also said that he had “no knowledge” of a request for a FISA, or Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court Act, order for a wiretap, which requires at least some evidence of illegal activity.

White House press secretary Sean Spicer said without elaborating Sunday that Trump's instruction to Congress was based on "very troubling" reports "concerning potentially politically motivated investigations immediately ahead of the 2016 election." Spicer did not respond to inquiries about the reports he cited in announcing the request.

Spicer said the White House wants the congressional committees to "exercise their oversight authority to determine whether executive branch investigative powers were abused in 2016." He said there would be no further comment until the investigations are completed, a statement that House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., took offense to and likened to autocratic behavior.

"It's called a wrap-up smear. You make up something. Then you have the press write about it. And then you say, everybody is writing about this charge. It's a tool of an authoritarian," Pelosi said.

As it goes on what left.

If Obamas got nothing to hide, he's got nothing to fear!

The audacious tactic was a familiar one for Trump, who has little regard for norms and conventions. When he wants to change a subject, he often does it by touching a match to the dry tinder of a sketchy conspiracy theory.

But the stakes have gotten higher, and the consequences more real and serious, as questions mount over Moscow’s reported attempts to interfere with last year’s presidential election.

Trump’s response also has deepened doubts about his own judgment, not just in the face of the first crisis to confront his young presidency but in dealing with the challenges that lie ahead for the chief executive of the world’s most powerful nation.

His tweets may have been an effort to distract from revelations that his aides and associates had contact with Russian officials during the election and transition, as well as to deflect criticism onto Obama.

But instead, the president has invited more scrutiny to the larger controversy over Russian interference. The issue shows no signs of fading.

What would she know...she's a woman !

Lol, I do like how the media is going nuts over nothing and after Trump dares to say or do anything related to it, it's him that's inviting the scrutiny.

Again it's already known that FISA requests were put in - this means the Obama administration did try to spy on Trump.

And it's already know that the second FISA request was granted - this means the Obama admin DID spy on Trump in some fashion.

Couple this with all the internal leaks that have occurred within Trump's administration post the point of the FISA request, and there is something most certainly needing investigation.

Lol, I do like how the media is going nuts over nothing and after Trump dares to say or do anything related to it, it's him that's inviting the scrutiny.

Just like when they were saying that they're not unbiased, it's just that Trump is so bad that they have to abandon all journalistic integrity to take him out.

I guess the media has to justify its bad behavior one way or another.