If they had any fucking proof of any of this Russia bull shit the CIA would of leaked it immediately. Notice how fucking long this dumb ass investigation has gone? It's a fucking disgrace. You dumb fucks are letting congress and trump do horrible things while you're so focused on this stupid Ass investigation.

Or for tv ratings and money.

Riiight because Obama directed the FBI to investigate Manafort in 2014 because he's a psychic and knew Trump would run two years later and pick Manafort to head his campaign.

Can you prove that he was being investigated from 2014-2017? A constant investigation and no closing and re-openings?

I was doing my investigation in this topic and I couldn't find a end date for the first tap. The first wiretapping FICA warrant was in 2014 and ended somewhere in 2016 and was not renewed due to his campaign involvement. August 2016, after he left the campaign the second FICA was issued. If anyone knows when the first ended it would be appreciated.

Did you know that the san bernadino shooter was investigated many times and each was dropped? Yet, he still committed a crime.

Surveying someone, then stopping, does not mean that the investigation has concluded. it means the surveying has stopped for whatever reason but the investigation could still be on going. Whats more, that person can still commit a crime even while being investigated for said crime, its happened.

Trump hired a criminal.

Siri google eric holder and fast n furious scandal.

Siri also google Loretta lynch and the tarmac meeting

I thought this was about Manafort. Are you saying Eric Schmidt and Loretta Lynch are in on this?

Yes, Eric Schmidt the multi millionaire software engineer is involved.

Eris has a penchant for Nothingburger

No, he was commenting on the earlier line about Trump hiring a criminal. It was his Pot calling the kettle black moment

Eric Holder has done a good bit to shake us up, like making corporations get baby gloves when they go in the ring with the government now thanks to him.

fast n furious scandal.

that was started under bush and ran for almost a year under him then was continued under obama.

And?

and it was holder that started it at all doubtful he even knew much about it till the whole thing started falling apart, ATF runs their own shit and keeps to themselves.

Why didn't obama stop it or holder?

seriously doubt obama knew a damn thing about it until after it broke, it was a small operation inside the ATF, holder should have know but again ATF keeps to themselves and might have purposefully kept it hidden or just didn't bother telling him to make someone look bad, or could have been some shady dealings with ATF and cartels or gun stores themselves to run guns. it was later found that a handful of gun stores in AZ and NM close to the border were dealing large shipments to straw purchasers running south of the border with zero oversite as to why these people were making multiple large purchases on a regular basis, why wasn't the ATF on these guys at all?. none of this was investigated properly IMO.

NSA also keeps to themselves, I wonder what they are up to.

they do whatever the fuck they want to

Loretta Lynch will probably get away with that bullshit, and people wonder why there is so much hate for the clintons and their corruption.

Also Google how it gots it's name and when the programs started.

tbf, hard not to in DC

No Presidential candidate had ever put a literal foreign agent in charge of their campaign before. This is not normal.

(Then he made a different foreign agent his National Security Advisor. This is not normal!)

it happens literally every day of every year

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/07/us/politics/foreign-powers-buy-influence-at-think-tanks.html?mcubz=0

This is not analogous to the comment made by /u/Fractal_Soul at all. This article is about foreign powers working with Think Tanks to press their agenda on the US Govt which is not nearly as damning as having your Campaign Chairman/NSA Chief being a Foreign Agent.

sure bud

none of the people at think tanks work in the govt

none of the people at think tanks work in the govt

Did I say that? No I did not. I do not condone anyone in an elected position actively lobbying on behalf of a foreign power.

I feel the same as /u/Fractal_Soul though.

No Presidential candidate had ever put a literal foreign agent in charge of their campaign before. This is not normal.

Do you feel that it is normal? Do you believe that a Senator (who's a foreign lobbyist) on a lesser committee in the Senate would hold as much power/sway with the President as his NSA Chief or Campaign Manager? Or, does it not matter and all positions are considered the same in your eyes regardless of their stature within the Government?

I hope this doesn't come across as antagonistic. I am truly interested in having a real convo with ya.

You should read about the venona files. Or cut to the chase and learn what the Council on Foreign Relations really is.

I'll read up on the Venona Files, thank you.

I already know of the CFR and their shady dealings so I'll hold off on looking further there. I am also aware of Kissinger and the many treasonous actions that he's taken part in.

You've still not answered my questions.

Do you feel that it is normal? Do you believe that a Senator (who's a foreign lobbyist) on a lesser committee in the Senate would hold as much power/sway with the President as his NSA Chief or Campaign Manager? Or, does it not matter and all positions are considered the same in your eyes regardless of their stature within the Government?

No, Presidential candidates don't put foreign agents in charge of their campaigns "every day of every year." That's not logical.

Trump is a criminal.

guilty of the crime of russia stuff

In all honesty this propaganda campaign should be treated as act of treason. allll the shills, alllll the media, all the corrupt politicians, all the fucked "Intelligence" agencies.... All these fucktards deserve to be executed for treason.

Ask yourself, who's the biggest threat? A.) The media that projects downwards hatred to the masses? B.) The Corrupt alphabet agencies who operate outside the constitution with no regard? C.) The "representatives" who we "elect" to sign us up for endless wars and mounds of debt all while attempting to strip away our rights? D.) The dumbfucK shills who attempt to control what you think? Who impede on your freedom of thought? E.) All of the suck dick but you MUST chose one

Why can't we choose all of them? I think most of the people in the media are really just brainwashed/so deep in an echo bubble they genuinely believe most of the stuff they're saying, they just don't think to question the people who give them informationa and 'official' statements, because they think they're their peers. So while the media being so appalling is a big threat, I do think there's hope that if enough journalists get burst out of that bubble and realise what's really going on, then they could help change things.

This is what bootlicking fascism looks like. ^{^}

"Don't report the crimes of my autocrat, or you'll be executed!"

What country are you from that you think this logic is acceptable?

You are just as reactionary as OP.

Dude is just riled up because his countrymen and fellow human beings are being sold out.

What kind of logic is it to completely whitewash an argument without discussing it's merits?

Fact is we are being sold out by the people mentioned above.

The Russia narrative is bullshit and I watched it develop in tandem with some fuckery that took place with wikileaks.

It became the new focal point of the country just like 9-11 did.

Seemingly in order to drum up fear in the public and give big daddy gubbernment the breathing room they need.

Don't berate someone for being reactionary out of fear and then jump to another reactionary scenario of your own that is also based in fear.

It doesn't exactly highlight your deductive reasoning abilities.

Paragraphs dude. Your post is hurting people's brains.

Does Christopher Walken's improper speech pattern perturb you as well?

Why do you see the need to attempt to police others who do not conform to your personal standards?

At best it makes you an egotistical authoritarian who is ignorant and/or scared of the way others are free to and often prefer operate.

At worst it paints you as a manipulator and someone who attempts to hide knowledge with logical fallacies and character attacks.

WEAK ONES.

Like so weak it's worse than the attempt by the guy I was initially responding too.

Regardless, I shall do as I please and you will continue to look pathetic in a public light.

Cheers, mate!

Or you could just use paragraphs. It takes far less effort.

Efficiency is subjective.

Deflect delect deflect!

Thank you! This is why this sub is a place to be

"The CIA would of leaked it immediately." lol on that

lol prove me wrong

Since when is the CIA known for leaking? Your claim has no basis. Perhaps you could back up what you're claiming, by explaining why you think the CIA would leak that. It's an assumption no one else is making but you.

Everyone in this sub knows what the CIA is capable of. I'm assuming you're here to brigade looking at your whole profile. I'm guessing you and the other normie didn't see the vault 7 leaks?

would of

oh boy

How long did the special prosecutor investigate Bill Clinton before they finally tried to remove him for getting a blowjob?

This has just began, and it wouldn't even exist if Trump hadn't fired Comey. Steve Bannon even admitted that firing Comey was the biggest political mistake in modern history.

Fiske was appointed as special counsel in June '93, August of '95 Fiske was replaced with Ken Starr, Impeachment began in Nov '98.

There ya go, five years.

And Trump supporters are crying over a six month investigation.

WMD was pushed by a presidential administration to start a war. Trump is the president. He isn't pushing the Russia narrative. Nice deflection attempt though.

Keep it up folks. They are getting nervous.

lmao 9 months later

"Any day now, trump is gonna be gone. They are so nervous guise"

Watergate took years. I suspect this will be less, but these things take time.

"They don't have anything guys. That why the investigation has 10 special prosecutors and is taking so long! Get it?"

lol

By the time anything happens it will be 2020 and he will be out.

If they had any fucking proof of any of this Russia bull shit the CIA would of leaked it immediately. Notice how fucking long this dumb ass investigation has gone? It's a fucking disgrace. You dumb fucks are letting congress and trump do horrible things while you're so focused on this stupid Ass investigation.

The HRC email investigation has taken longer and has less moving parts than this investigation. FBI investigations take years. HRC email investigation was 3 years + the multiple congressional investigations.

People claiming that its something so simple that it wouldve been released by now are just naive. If you have the criminal case of the century, why would you rush the result? The case needs to be rock solid with lots of evidence. Evidence takes time to gather.

This "Russia hacked our elections" shit is the new weapons of mass destruction and if you're sitting here being a mull for these war mongering fucks you should be ashamed of yourself.

Russia did try to influence our elections. They tried to plant a president who would divide out country. They tried to halt our civil discourse so nothing gets done. Id say they are winning too.

This spin is hilarious. They tapped Manafort who happened to live in trump tower. The tap started in 2014, before anybody knew Trump would run and pick a possible criminal to head his campaign. This had nothing to do with Trump. I hear an indictment is coming soon for Manafort so I understand why you guys are all freaking the fuck out and trying to spin this.

They're criminals and con men. It's really that simple.

oh wow thats it its so obvious

Ya, no point in conspiracy any more. Instead of Politics 2.0, I think we need to start calling it Politics Abracadabra.

We aren't advancing as a society, our number should not reflect the illusion of advancement.

Everyone is "wire tapped."

William Binney (Former high level NSA analyst, also whistleblower pre-Snowden): “At least 80% of fibre-optic cables globally go via the US”, Binney said. “This is no accident and allows the US to view all communication coming in. At least 80% of all audio calls, not just metadata, are recorded and stored in the US. The NSA lies about what it stores.” https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/11/the-ultimate-goal-of-the-nsa-is-total-population-control

Are all telephone calls recorded and accessible to the US government? FBI official says yes. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/04/telephone-calls-recorded-fbi-boston

(automatically transcribed to text perhaps?)

Russel Tice (another NSA whistleblower pre-Snowden): "I Saw The Order To Wiretap Barack Obama In 2004." http://www.businessinsider.com/the-nsa-spied-on-barack-obama-2004-russ-tice-2013-6.

Eschelon was on 60 minutes back in the year 2000. The relevant part is 13 minutes. Highly recommended.

Then why spy on them and just arrest them?

Manafort has been told to expect an indictment.

Citation needed.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/us/politics/mueller-russia-investigation.html

What crimes has he been charged with?

Out of nowhere? Manafort met with a former Russian spy in June 2016.

A former Soviet counter-intelligence officer accompanied the Russian lawyer who met with Donald Trump Jr. to dish dirt on Hillary Clinton during the presidential race, according to a report.

http://nypost.com/2017/07/14/former-soviet-spy-attended-don-jrs-meeting-with-russian-lawyer/

And that's just what we know.

We also know Manafort and Podesta worked together in Ukraine funding Antifa and NeoNazis to cause conflict.

We also know

Source?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/09/politics/podesta-manafort-lobbying/index.html

know Manafort and Podesta worked together

Your article says nothing about them working together at the same time, let alone with each other.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/330243-beyond-manafort-both-parties-deal-with-pro-russia

https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2017/02/18/no-one-mentions-that-the-russian-trail-leads-to-democratic-lobbyists/#64c4fd0f3991

Thanks to the Panama Papers, we know that the Podesta Group (founded by John Podesta’s brother, Tony) lobbied for Russia’s largest bank, Sberbank. “Sberbank is the Kremlin, they don’t do anything major without Putin’s go-ahead, and they don’t tell him ‘no’ either,” explained a retired senior U.S. intelligence official.

Nowhere did I indicate that they worked with each other. By together I meant they worked at the same time for the same people. e.g. "simultaneously"

Keep in mind that the Manafort investigation has been ongoing for over a year and tied to the podesta group in nearly every article http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/19/politics/paul-manafort-donald-trump-ukraine/index.html

Was was the podesta group subpoenaed if they have nothing to do with Manafort as you claim?

The unnamed executive told NBC News that six firms participated in the campaign that Manafort coordinated, which was paid for by the European Center for a Modern Ukraine, a non-profit based in Brussels.

Manafort coordinated the campaign that they were involved in and you think they "weren't working together" are you gaslighting?

and tied to the podesta group

This is like saying Obama and Trump worked together because they both worked for the same institution at different times - Podesta worked for the biggest lobbying firm in the US, so did Manafort - that doesn't make them partners or even close to it.

if they have nothing to do with Manafort as you claim?

I didn't say they have nothing to do with, I said they didn't work together and that's Tony Podesta, not John Podesta who was Hillary's campaign chair

Manafort coordinated the campaign that they were involved in and you think they "weren't working together" are you gaslighting?

The only one gaslighting is you - working with a very well known organization over different period means they both worked with each other? Who believes this crap?

The undisclosed lobbying he is involved in is literally the same lobbying contract that the podesta group was working on for him.

AGAIN that's TONY Podesta's firm, not HRC's campaign manager

excellent strawman!

So some guy brings up Tony Podesta and connects it to John Podesta but it was me who posted a strawman?

cause they hardly know each other!

Podesta worked for the biggest lobbying firm in the US, so did Manafort - that doesn't make them partners or even close to it.

No; Podesta's firm was part of a project that Manafort was coordinating. Big difference.

No; Podesta's firm was part of a project that Manafort was coordinating. Big difference.

Yes, TONY Podesta's firm, John Podesta worked for the firm in the 80's and 90's - connecting him to Manafort is nonsense. And Tony Podesta working with Manafort is relevant how?

Manafort was fired as campaign manager as soon as Trump found out. Why not look at both of their associations?

What association did John Podesta have other than being part of the firm in the 90s? And it wasn't just Manafort - Flynn, Page, Trump Jr, Trump hiding his tax returns and his business ties to Russia are all red flags.

I'm sure the Podesta brothers never talked.

I am sure they talked about getting screwed by Russians over this.

They took money from Russia.

If that was the crime then Trump family would be rotting in prison for life.

Source?

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/05/eric-trump-russia-investment-golf-course

And what favor did Clinton do for Russian money?

Borrowing money from a bank isn't the same as lying about accepting foreign donations to your charity.

As Russian interests gradually took control of Uranium One millions of dollars were donated to the Clinton Foundation between 2009 and 2013 from individuals directly connected to the deal including the Chairman of Uranium One, Ian Telfer. Although Mrs Clinton had an agreement with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors to the Clinton Foundation, the contributions from the Chairman of Uranium One were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons.

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/press-release

Borrowing money from a bank

How do you know it was a loan that was paid back? Trump only said they got the funding, it never said on what terms.

lying about accepting foreign donations to your charity.

Where is the lie? They didn't disclose the source - just like Trump doesn't disclose his taxes to hide the Russian money. Both are corrupt and hiding something, what's worse in Trump's case is that he is selling off the country to Russians to get his 'loans' taken care of.

Oh yes? Which candidate did the FBI state they were investigating prior to the election?

And?What has that got to do with what we are discussing? Her email practices were investigated, none of what we discussed so what's with the non-sequitur?

It's the same investigation that Mueller is continuing. Comey was no friend of Clinton. He released those letters to tie the Obama DoJ's hands and stall so Trump could win.

Russia hasn't been "Soviet" for decades.

By many accounts, this former Soviet spy was working for Fusion GPS...the firm hired by top Republicans and later Democrats to dig up dirt on Trump.

Russia hasn't been "Soviet" for decades.

A distinction without a difference, don'tcha think?

If you honestly believe this, it explains a lot.

Please elaborate.

The Collapse of the Soviet Union

The Dissolution of the Soviet Union

Yeah, I heard. Still a distinction without a difference.

If you honestly believe this, it explains a lot.

Why? Write as much as you want, you aren't charged by the keystroke.

If you honestly think that Russia is the same as the Soviet Union then I wouldn't want to waste my time (which I am charged in).

Russia has a market economy, their citizens have free speech and no travel restrictions, the geographical differences are staggering, they have elections (even though those are definitely rigged).

Do you think Slovakia and the Czech Republic are also the Soviet Union? What about Ukraine and Moldova? Is the fact that the they all split up and have different governments and territories just a "distinction without a difference"?

their citizens have free speech

Like Pussy Riot?

Whose accounts?

Don't be so sure! lol https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFNRlvEh7ok

He apparently worked with Fusion to lobby against the Magnitsky Act, which is what the meeting was set up to discuss, under the guise of 'adoptions.' Fusion does not appear to take partisan sides.

He was an intelligence officer for the Soviet Union. I think that's called "a former Soviet counter-intelligence officer" is it not?

The lengths you go to in order to try and deflect. Its impressive.

We have a lot of people who worked for the CIA and are now in the private sector.

I don't have any disagreement there. However if an ex CIA member was having secret meetings with, say, a Russian politician, it's fair to say it would he questioned.

Yo're totally spinning it, changing the facts of both Trump's accusation and Manafort's FBI tap.

Manafort is a crooked man. That's why he was tapped. Even his daughters were recorded saying that they knew their father was getting blood money.

Source?

http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-manafort-daughter-text-messages-ukraine-2017-3

Thanks

You have a copy of the FISA warrant that was granted to allow the tapping to resume in the lead up to the 2016 election? What evidence was used to allow the FISA warrant to be granted?

No, but news outlets are reporting that the FISA warrant was related to the ongoing investigation dating back to 2014. That is much more corroboration than, say, Trump making vague claims about Obama wiretapping him.

"After the 2014 warrant ended, it was renewed again until earlier this year, in order to allow the FBI to investigate ties between Trump campaign associates and suspected Russian operatives."

There is no source listed or reasoning explained as to why the tapping was renewed. Sounds pretty vague to me.

I'm guessing the secret meeting where Manafort, Kushner, and Trump Jr were meeting with a lawyer claiming to represent Russia and her entourage, which included a former Soviet spy. That was June 2016.

I'm guessing they used the pee pee dossier as evidence. Your guess is as good as mine.

The dossier came out after wiretapping had resumed.

You again? Honestly, you NEED TO STOP MAKING UP FACTS.

FBI wire-tapped him, found nothing, as in nothing, as in not a thing, as in no thing was found.

FFS you are unbelievable.

FBI wire-tapped him, found nothing, as in nothing, as in not a thing, as in no thing was found

Actually, all indicators point to the exact opposite, which is why Manafort is going to be indicated.

If anyone is talking of their arse, it's you. That's what you get for slavishly believing fake right-wing news.

Indicated? I assume you mean indicted, and if you mean indicted, no... no, he is not.

The level of fake news in /r/conspiracy nowadays, I tell ya...

Indicated? I assume you mean indicted, and if you mean indicted, no... no, he is not.

Yes, yes he is. Are you going to eat crow when he does? No, because you think that reality is "fake news." You're a perfect useful idiot.

Oh conservative sites, and no... no, the daily caller is not.

What are you talking about? The Daily Caller is a well-known conservative site. Just because you're ignorant of it doesn't mean that you get to change reality.

Huh? The daily caller did not say what you said it said.

Even if did (which it did not), it's still an appeal to authority fallacy, and dismissable out of hand.

Huh? The daily caller did not say what you said it said.

The title literally says, "Mueller Reportedly Plans To Indict Manafort." Do you have reading difficulties?

Even if did (which it did not), it's still an appeal to authority fallacy, and dismissable out of hand.

You're making a strawman argument here by refusing to acknowledge the content of the article while attacking the Daily Caller itself as if that was the topic at hand, which it isn't.

Like i said - "appeal to authority fallacy"

The Daily Caller is not the district atty.

being stopped had began out of nowhere when he was a candidate.

Yes, because they were meeting with Russian spies to collude which the campaign lied about for more than a year.

And unless Trump owns the phone lines, Manafort's wires are not his wires.

Russian spies did not cause Trump to win the election. If you believe that the. You're living in an alternate reality. The Democrats disastrous campaign, which elevated the worst candidate to ever run for president, is what lost them the campaign. It's amazing how people are so bent out of shape that Trump is president that they will believe ANYTHING to get him out of office. Even if it means a complete denial of logic.

Russian spies did not cause Trump to win the election.

Yes, Comey did but Russian spies may have helped, who knows, that's what Mueller is investigating.

which elevated the worst candidate to ever run for president,

Yet, she won the popular vote by 3 million and was narrowly beat after Russian collusion and the Comey debacle. That doesn't sound so worse.

You do live in an alternate universe. Comey did not lose her the election. Her own careless actions and TERRIBLE track record as a politician lost her the election. And stealing the Democratic nomination from the rightful winner didn't help her cause.

If you believe the numbers you seen on your TV screen to be the truth, then there is not much point in us continuing this conversation. The past election was absolutely polluted with fraud and all around fuckery. I don't actually believe she won the popular vote at all.

Please explain to me how this alleged "Russian Collusion" effected the results of our election. I would love to hear it.

You do live in an alternate universe. Comey did not lose her the election.

I will go with a renowned statistician analysis than some political nonsense by Trump/Bernie supporters.

And stealing the Democratic nomination from the rightful winner didn't help her cause.

Evidence of this stealing is?

If you believe the numbers you see on your TV screen to be the truth, then there is not much point in us continuing this conversation

I don't believe the TV and I don't believe you, you provide no evidence other than general complaining, where is your evidence.

Please explain to me how this alleged "Russian Collusion" effected the results of our election. I would love to hear it.

Right, Russians spent all that money and manpower because it had no effect on elections.

You're hopeless. Sorry about your luck.

As expected, more rhetoric and zero evidence presented to back up your claims. You advise me not to believe what's on TV but I should trust your rhetoric without evidence? Why?

Because you're literally just spouting the exact narrative that has been fed to us by every major news network since way back when Wikileaks released the DNC emails revealing what corrupt pieces of shit the Democratic Party leadership are. The Russian narrative was made up as nothing more than damage control for their sorry asses, and amazingly, a bunch of naive people who still believe the Democrats give a shit about them, have fallen for it.

The Russian narrative was made up

So Trump Jr and the entire campaign meeting with Russian government representative was made up by the DNC?

a bunch of naive people who still believe the Democrats give a shit about them, have fallen for it.

Trump DOJ and Republican Congress is investigating Trump's collusion, wtf has Democrats got to do with any of this?

Why are you such an obama/deep state apologist

Why are you such an apologist for dear leader?

Gaslight. Obstruct. Project.

Lmao you're exposing yourself more and more dude. I'm a Bernie bro. This whole bull shit is being touted by people who fucked Bernie over. You are my enemy.

Bernie's real supporters don't call themselves "Bernie Bros". You are 100% a brainwashed Trump supporter and have never supported Bernie. Fuck off with your disingenuous bullshit.

I am a Bernie bro. Suck my fucking dick.

Removed. Rule 5.

Because this sub has been overrrun with liberal shills just like /r/politics

When did liberal shills start attacking Hillary constantly and trying to downplay Manafort's super shady ties?

They need to get back on message.

I think it's pretty hilarious that you come to /r/conspiracy expecting people to be agreeing with the establishment and the mainstream media, and when called out for this, you turn to pointing at the fact we discuss an actual anti-establishment topic as proof that the real users are the shills.

Why should Manafort get a pass? There's quite a bit of proof of a conspiracy.

Also, I am still waiting for my paycheck, if you happen to know where to pick that up I'd love to know.

Yeah, we liberals love to bring up Seth Rich and Hillary's emails every day.

What?

Hilarious when the Trumpets cry about liberals invading their safe space, as though they didn't come and infect this sub like the viruses they are themselves

Well in all fairness manafort and his buddys Yanukovych and Putin are corrupt and stole millions from the Ukrainian people. Definitely a guy who should probably be monitored, and extradited to Ukraine to face trial. He is likely a corrupt thief, the type of people we should be against, and hoping for justice to be served if he is guilty of his crimes in Ukraine.

Why ignore that Podesta was working on that contract with him? Gas lighting much?

I have very little knowledge of podesta other than he is a corrupt politician who worked for Clinton. What the hell does gas lighting even mean?

Use google before commenting

Use google before commenting

Here's Chuck Missler dropping 2 minutes of truth about Obama.

Leftovermney from the campaign to pay to DNC stooges to make their party appear relavent to the populace. We may see the end of them if they can't win shit come 2018.

just you wait

Can't wait to see the DNC desintigrate.

It's weird how the wiretap started up again once trump became a candidate for presidency 🤔

It's weird how many contacts the Trump campaign had with Russian spies. Almost likes a connection there

It's weird how Crooked Hillary actually sold all of our uranium to Russia, and had actual business dealing with Russians. Similar to how weird it is that Bill Clinton went to North Korea, and gave those fucking maniacs money for nuclear weapons.

Its weird how no uranium was actually sold to the russians only shares in a uranium mining company.

you still believe all of this - wow

First it was 20% ownership of our uranium mines, then it got morphed into 20% of our uranium stockpile, now it's ALL OF OUR URANIUM. It's like a game of telephone, except each person who retells it intentionally wants to make it more and more outlandish.

The original story is still fucked up though.

I'm certainly not a fan of foreign countries owning large portions of any of our industries, but it's crazy how this story has been twisted and manipulated for political ends. If the story is bad enough to stand on its own, it shouldn't need to be exaggerated every time it is told.

Obviously it shouldn't be exaggerated. I think it is bad enough to stand on its own personally.

I just posted what I remember. Secondly, Crooked Hillary never denied the allegations of the uranium, she never denied the false accusations of the uranium, and Bill Clinton is still a rapists (he didn't deny of those accusations either).

I think she just denies that it was a pay for play scheme, which it was.

And DT literally tells you he walks right up to women and violates them and that's somehow ok?

I do that, too, but he only does it to women he feels comfortable he can do it to. I also do it to women I am comfortable with.

play on playa

Not really, once you read even a little bit beyond the silly headlines.

I completely disagree. It was pretty clearly a conflict of interest considering the amount of money the Clintons received from Russia right around the same time.

Except that the most generally believed opinion is that she wasn't involved at all in the decision and her deputy was the one who made the call for her.

Except that the most generally believed opinion

Yeah not buying your bs.

Holy shit do some actual research

Name one Russian spy linked to the campaign and also the evidence that they are a spy. And no, "because CNN said so" is not valid proof.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rinat_Akhmetshin

The guy that works for Fusion GPS, who the democrats hired to find dirt on Trump?

Not entirely sure that's a fair connection, but ok.

They had them in place for a lot of people. Rand Paul said he had credible information that they were spying on him as well.

They had them in place for a lot of people. Rand Paul said he had credible information that they were spying on him as well.

They stopped tapping him in 2016, then resumed when he joined Trump campaign.

Obama must be sent to prison.

Outright admitting to breaking reddit's site-wide rules by making a new account to circumvent a ban and continue bullshitting in this sub but no, you're totally not the asshole here...right...

Who was it? Post is removed.

What do you mean "this spin"? You people laughed at and mocked the idea that Trump Tower was wiretapped and are now doing a 180 and performing mental gymnastics now that it's been revealed to be true in order to make it look like it's in your favor.

mocked the idea that Trump Tower was wiretapped

Because that's an outright lie

Trump said MY PHONE LINES were ILLEGALLY wiretapped by Obama.

None of that is true.

Unless Trump is Manafort and Trump owns the phone lines and FISA Court is Obama.

Mental gymnastics by Trump supporters is olympic level.

Yeah. But the Podesta group was also being watched because they were working with Manafort. So it looks like they were watching Hillary's team.

So it looks like they were watching Hillary's team.

No it doesn't look like that at all but go with that narrative. I am sure Hillary was colluding with the Russians to lose the election.

feel free to share your opinions on Russia working with someone trying to help make Ukraine part of the EU... I'm sure your reponse will be rooted in logic.

And that's relevant how? 'Someone' work for whoever pays them, you think they have geopolitical goals?

Did they listen to any Manafort calls where Trump was on the line?

None of those questions were answered by the article but the article doesn't prove Trump's claim at all since it wasn't illegal and it wasn't Obama and Trump wasn't the target.

FISA warrants are used to bypass the court system, so it's not exactly legal either... and you can answer at least 2 of my questions with easily available information (hint: the answer to both is YES).

FISA warrants are used to bypass the court system,

Huh? FISA courts exist for that.

(hint: the answer to both is YES).

Nonsense.

mocked the idea that Trump Tower was wiretapped

Because that's an outright lie

Trump said MY PHONE LINES were ILLEGALLY wiretapped by Obama.

None of that is true.

Where did Trump say that?

Here

https://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/259E/production/_95203690_tapp.jpg

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39172635

Neither substantiates the claims I questioned.

That's because you are not reading.

Could you paste the part where Trump claims an illegal wiretap? I didn't see it.

Its quoted in the BBC article, he sent many tweets.

I know, but I didn't see one where he says what you said he said. Can you link to a Tweet where he says what you said he said?

The claim that Obama illegally wiretapped Trump was mocked.

Where's the evidence that Obama illegally wiretapped Trump?

It's funny you are getting tangled up in the words legally/illegally. It was a f'n FISA warrant which was basically setup to bypass regular legal court proceedings. If the constitution still matters, warrants issued by FISA aren't even legal in the first place.

It's funny you are getting tangled up in the words legally/illegally.

I know that may people don't really care much for details but such details are pretty important.

He already told you. He doesn't need to repeat himself, and being snarky about it doesn't change that.

No he didn't. He just claimed that those warrants are illegal but didn't explain why they are.

shut up and get banned. finally.

No indictment is coming. Comey goes to jail, if Manafort gets indicted.

this has nothing to do with Trump.

So who was Manafort working with at the time? The Podesta Group?

So who was Manafort working with at the time?

Russian spies, didn't you read Jr's emails.

Yep; he was also working with the podesta group.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/09/politics/podesta-manafort-lobbying/index.html

No, that article doesn't say that at all, it says Podesta worked for a lobbyist firm (the biggest) which worked for an Ukrainian group and Manafort also worked for that group, that's not same as working together or even knowing each other.

The claim is that he coordinated the campaign. Is this your first time reading about this?

Why was the podesta group subpoenaed?

The claim was being made about JOHN Podesta, but the evidence is for TONY Podesta.

It's not my first time to see such bait and switch, typical gaslighting.

no it's about the Podesta group which was co-founded by John.

no it's about the Podesta group which was co-founded by John.

In 88, John Podesta hasn't been part of them in a long time, which is why saying Manafort and John Podesta working together is a complete bait and switch

against systemic corruption

Nobody is arguing against that, I am pointing out the false narrative as if Hillary and her campaign were working with Manafort.

I didn't say John Podesta.

Yes, you didn't intentionally say that, I know how fake news is spread.

I keep saying Podesta Group, which everyone knows is not legally associated with John. Stop trying to use a straw man to deflect from corruption.

I keep saying Podesta Group

That's not how you started the converstaion

Sure, I'm willing to admit that Trump was in on it with podesta and manafort.

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/70zc5w/julian_assange_trump_i_was_wire_tapped_cnn_haha/dn7ju5a/

Remembering your original premise is a strawman now?

Where did I say John?

Of course you didn't, you said Podesta (not group) and tried to gaslight.

Downvoted for cancerous edit and dumbass comment.

Mueller & Co are the tax scheming money laundering frauds.

Never go full projection.

Unless you understand that tax and money laundering schemes have been used for years as set-up and trap scams. It's pretty much a classic deep state operation.

r/conspiracy should be renamed r/infowarsJr

And yet another in the long list of original "this sub should be renamed"

Solid comment, really helped move us forward.

Well, there's never been a more accurate recommendation.

Honestly, not really. I'm sure you feel proud of it though.

There is enough partisan bullshittery in here all the time, I know you've probably got a kick out of it but you're like a drop in the bucket of that exact same comment but replace the punchline with: The_Donald, Politics, EnoughTrumpSpam, Conservative, Far Right, TopMindsofReddit. You're just bogging the sub down with this banal repeat. I do hope you came across it organically, because it'd be fairly lame and low effort to just copy it again.

It'll always get upvoted, because there are always partisan trolls searching the corners of every post that says one of their favorite buzzwords.

I do hope you came across it organically, because it'd be fairly lame and low effort to just copy it again.

Those are some high hopes. These guys aren't original. I'm surprised he hasn't called you drumph yet.

Because this post is highly controversial and the top comment disagrees wildly with it?

Fuck off!

It's a mini PSYOP. Nothing else.

"REE WHY ARE PEOPLE DISCUSSING THINGS I DONT LIKE"

Don't care either way, it's a sideshow routine in the vaudeville show. Politics has officially TRUMPED Hollywood lol

Hollywood killed itself but whatever

I used to develop PSYOPS so I know.

You can tell by the pixels and I've seen a lot of PSYOPS in my time.

No there is no proof that Trump was wiretapped and you are gas lighting.

Quick web search doesn't support my claim but I pretty distinctly remember Obama admitting it

You won't find that because it didn't happen

Trump never admitted he was wire tapped, he admitted that his wires were tapped. Key distinction. And the CNN report confirms. You are the one gaslighting.

Trump never admitted he was wire tapped, he admitted that his wires were tapped

Nope.

I'd bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!

He claimed that he was wiretapped. There is no proof yet that he was. The CNN report confirms Manafort was wiretapped. Trump's claims are still lies, according to the now available information.

Ah, the mental gymnastics. Please, keep it up.

How about this: "His phones" meaning the phones in his tower, Trump Tower.

And once again we are left debating the true meaning of Trump's words because he chooses to make bold statements like this in a format that is limited to 140 characters.

There is no way to unironically decry mental gymnastics after being shown a quote that disputes your claim and then immediately contorting your argument to ey and work around that quote.

I was providing another example of mental gymnastics. Geez, this sub is toxic!

I'm kind of amazed by the "oh, he meant Trump Tower had lines tapped" angle. There must really be no other way to positively spin this. The desperation is palpable.

Why do you claim to know that the reference to his personal possessions shouldn't be interpreted as his affairs in his own building?

I love how you are accusing this guy of mental gymnastics when you are the one claiming that when Trump said, "Obama was tapping my phones in October" he meant the phones of anyone who occupied one of his buildings. Do realize how ridiculous you sound?

Misquoting won't help your cause.

I didn't misquote. That was a direct quote from the President's tweet. I guess I technically forgot to put an ellipsis before Obama...

Citation needed cause you can't read.

Because apparently you are too lazy to read the earlier comments in the thread you are responding to...https://mobile.twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/837994257566863360

Why do you claim to know that the reference to his personal possessions shouldn't be interpreted as his affairs in his own building?

Because the words that he used don't have an ambiguous meaning. So either he meant what he said or he doesn't understand how the English language works. Or it is possible that he just doesn't care if he is right and is only trying to rile up his base.

So Trump owns all the phones of private citizens residing in his tower?

That's semantics bullshit and you know it. The bottom line is that people were listening in on his calls.

Yeah usually with legal proceedings semantics are important because one wrong word can fuck you over.

Yes, but you're not shitting on Trump because of legal proceedings. You're shitting on him because of a tweet.

Yes and his tweet was factually wrong and legally wrong so what is there to defend?

It's actually factually correct. I'm not sure what you even think was wrong about it.

Well for one Obama had nothing to do with this wiretap like Trump claimed

The clear implication is that he was ordering it behind the scenes.

Fair enough, it might not be correct, but I'm pretty sure it was more of an accusation than a statement of fact.

And you find no fault in accusations that end up not being correct?

I think it's an entirely fair theory though.

Just look at the news surrounding Susan Rice. It's lining up pretty well actually.

No none of it is lining up. You can theorize all you want but Trumps tweet was wrong. Trump wasn't wiretapped, manafort was. If Trump is upset about conversations he had with Manafort being picked up maybe he shouldn't have picked a guy as objectively corrupt as Manafort to work on his campaign

No none of it is lining up.

You're simply wrong. Refusing to see the bigger story here doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

If Trump is upset about conversations he had with Manafort being picked up maybe he shouldn't have picked a guy as objectively corrupt as Manafort to work on his campaign

This is true, but Manafort was hardly the only person wiretapped last fall. Rand Paul said he also had information that he was tapped as well.

No I'm not. If I'm wrong don't you think the actual president of the United States would be actually putting in time and effort to bring the people to justice for authorizing illegal wiretaps? Also manafort was being tapped before he was on the campaign so unless the feds can see the future they weren't going after Trump. Trump hired a prety nefarious dude and then is surprised Manafort was being investigated by the fbi for doing nefarious shut

If I'm wrong don't you think the actual president of the United States would be actually putting in time and effort to bring the people to justice for authorizing illegal wiretaps?

I think you wouldn't know if he was doing it unless you had clearance.

Also manafort was being tapped before he was on the campaign so unless the feds can see the future they weren't going after Trump. Trump hired a prety nefarious dude and then is surprised Manafort was being investigated by the fbi for doing nefarious shit

I agree with that, but that doesn't mean he didn't overstep the bounds of the wiretap on purpose and use it to unmask people on the Trump campaign.

He didn't say it was illegal in the original tweet. He asked if it was legal.

Unmask people on the campaign? How are they supposed to know who Manafort is if they don't unmask them. The simple fact that they had ro unmask anybody shows they weren't plotting against Trump. If they don't know who they people are how do you plot against them? Even Republicans have come out and said nothing Susan Rice did was illegal. She literally was just doing her job on dealing with the wiretap placed on Manafort

How are they supposed to know who Manafort is talking to if they don't unmask them.

I think you may be ignorant of the concept.

I think I'm not the ignorant one trying to defend a guy who made a factually incorrect tweet

Again, you have no basis to call it factually incorrect.

Except for reality

It's not our fault if you're too lazy to understand the importance of semantics and nuance.

I understand what you're trying to say, but again it's semantic bullshit.

That's semantics bullshit and you know it. The bottom line is that people were listening in on his calls.

"admitted," Trump accused President Obama of wirtapping him.

An outright lie.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/837989835818287106

Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!

Additional tweets from Trump on the false claims.

Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017

Is it legal for a sitting President to be "wire tapping" a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017

I'd bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017

How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017

Trump's own DOJ says Trump was not wiretapped.

Gotta love this sub - some guy come in here and makes all sorts of claims about Trump's lying. Except that guy himself is lying.

No DOJ ever came out and said "Trump was not wiretapped": the notion is absurd that the DoJ (Department of Justice) would ever make a comment about such a thing.

Moreover, Trump doesn't "have" a DOJ, the DoJ (Department of Justice) is a wholly separate department, independent of the Office of the President of the United State of America.

So, I just caught you in TWO huge-ass lies, but you'll just double down on your banality.

No DOJ ever came out and said "Trump was not wiretapped": the notion is absurd that the DoJ (Department of Justice) would ever make a comment about such a thing.

Except that's exactly what the DOJ said:

"There is no evidence to support President Donald Trump's claim that President Barack Obama ordered the wiretapping of Trump Tower during the 2016 presidential campaign, the Justice Department said in a new court filing."

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/02/obama-trump-tower-wiretap-no-evidence-242284

Did you even try to research this before making this post?

Moreover, Trump doesn't "have" a DOJ, the DoJ (Department of Justice) is a wholly separate department, independent of the Office of the President of the United State of America.

Just like Obama didn't "have" an FBI, so he can't just whimsically order a tap on Trump, which is why the current president was talking out of his arse.

Do you have a Department of Justice official letter-head announcing of said "findings" ? No... no, you do not as the DoJ would never in a million years discuss anything about investogations.

Alos, megasuperkoreaLUL for using Politico as a source - you might as well have cited some guy from Hawai'i who sold pot in gay bathhouses before becoming senator from a random state.

Do you have a Department of Justice official letter-head announcing of said "findings" ? No... no, you do not as the DoJ would never in a million years discuss anything about investigations.

Yes, yes I do:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3985960-DOJ-Motion-for-Summary-Judgment-in-Trump-Tower.html

Read section 8 on page 5.

Alos, megasuperkoreaLUL for using Politico as a source - you might as well have cited some guy from Hawai'i who sold pot in gay bathhouses before becoming senator from a random state.

It's obvious you didn't try to research this topic because it's many sources that have reported on it, including Fox News, which had a headline that said, "DOJ: No evidence Trump Tower was wiretapped"

Other sources:

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/348987-justice-dept-says-it-has-no-evidence-of-trump-tower-wiretapping

http://www.businessinsider.com/justice-department-no-evidence-obama-wiretapped-trump-tower-2017-9

BTW, Politico is a perfectly good resource to use, though I I wouldn't expect someone as poorly informed as you to realize it.

You don't give up do you?

You haven't answered any of my questions. Politico... I should have never replied to you.

Politico, smh

You haven't answered any of my questions.

I just gave you the DOJ document that you claimed didn't exist along with other sources, and you are STILL talking about Politico?

You're waving the white flag here. Your ego just prevents you from admitting that you are wrong.

What Ego? The "source" you cite does not say what you say it says.

Literally done with you.

The "source" you cite does not say what you say it says.

It says exactly what I said it does as clearly marked on the document itself. You're unable to make that admission because your entire argument would fall apart.

Wave that white flag.

I read that document, it doesn't say (and I'm tired of telling you this) what you say it says.

Even if there was a DOJ (which there isn't) it would be forbidden from discussing matter; the fact there is a DoJ is the same thing, they are forbidden by law from discussind said things.

The report you cite simply doesn't say what you say it says, and that's final. Why don't you quote the exact line in that report that says what you it says...

Stop with your re-writting history, we can all see past it.

I read that document, it doesn't say (and I'm tired of telling you this) what you say it says.

Hilarious.

Even if there was a DOJ (which there isn't)

WTF? DOJ = Department of Justice, you half-wit. Now I know you're just dumb as a bag of rocks.

Puerile. That's all you are. You tried your churlish baby shit, it no workie, so you become even less mature, and go for one-word replies.

I'm still waiting for you to post, where in the report you cite, the Department of Justice says what you say they said.

Thing is, we'll be here til the cows come home, coz they didn't...

I'm still waiting for you to post where, in the report you cite, the Department of Justice says what you say they said.

Hilarious.

Puerile. I love putting infants like you in your place.

Care to show me where the DOJ says what you say it says? Still waiting...

Care to show me where the DOJ says what you say it says? Still waiting...

Hilarious.

lol:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/09/02/doj-no-evidence-trump-tower-was-wiretapped.html

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/02/obama-trump-tower-wiretap-no-evidence-242284

http://time.com/4926141/barack-obama-donald-trump-wiretap-doj/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/09/02/doj-confirms-no-evidence-supporting-trump-claim-obama-wiretapped-him/628758001/

Trump does have a DOJ, Jeff Sessions is the head of it, he was appointed by Donald Trump.

Here are all his cabinet level departments and the people Trump appointed to head each one.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/politics/donald-trump-administration.html

Placing you on ignore. No such thing as DOJ, and the DoJ (Department of Justice) is an an independent department that doesn't consult, ever, with anyone not in that dep't.

Trump, like as presidents doesn't have a DOJ or a DoJ or anything similar.

Bye.

O can I play the semantics game too?!

Lets see... if Manafort was living in Trump Tower... and Trump owned the tower... isn't Trump techincally the owner of the lines, and Manafort was just renting them from him?

What do I win?

The flexibility to stick your head up your own ass?

I already have your mother for that

Trump never admitted he was wire tapped, he admitted that his wires were tapped.

Double-plus good, comrade!

Trump is wiretapped -> All of his devices are tapped

Trump's wires were tapped -> Feds tap Manafot's phone line, which connects to Trump's phones when the two speak.

Comprende, dumbass?

Manafort's "wires" were tapped. Let's pretend I tap my own phone line. If I call Trump, does that mean I've tapped Trump's wires? No, that's stupid.

What if you lived in the Trump Tower while doing it.

Here is a tweet that came after the original "wires tapped" claim:

How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!

I guess you could do some mental gymnastics and say "my wires" involves the literal wires going to every private citizen in his building. However, he then said "my phones". He certainly doesn't own all the phones of his renters.

You and I both know he meant Obama was spying on him personally. Not someone who happened to live at Trump Tower. Regardless, this is all moot since Trump already blew his load by claiming he was referring to the unmasking; not a literal wiretap.

Well maybe Trump shouldn't have had a criminal that's under FBI investigation as a tenant in his own building.

This might be the dumbest thing I've ever read.

You're right, I'm not Donald Trump and I'm not allowing criminals rent from my properties. Truly is a stupid thing to do.

I don't think you have properties to rent, but if you did, I don't think you'd be liable for your tenants actions.

Well you would be wrong, as landlords can bear some responsibility for the illegal actions of tenants.

At the very worst the landlord can be charged for public nuisance, in the case that they let their rental property turn into a crack den. Safe to say Trump Tower is not a crack den.

I feel you're a real person and not paid for that comment I'm amazed.

Thanks man, it's actually not that hard to think for yourself. Although you wouldn't be able to tell by some of the comments in this thread.

CNN asked Trump for proof and even suggested an investigation of wiretapping, but noooo the president didnt want to do that

Better yet, his own department of justice eventually released an official statement that said there was no evidence to support Trumps claim. His own DoJ said that, but people still think he's been vindicated. The only amazing part of this story to me is how Trump supporters took a decidedly negative story about their candidate and so amazingly fast turned it around into proof that he was right.

This is the biggest projection I've ever seen on Reddit.

You guys. Seriously.

I very much disagree with this. Manafort, who happened to live in Trump Tower was wiretapped, starting well before Trumps presidential campaign.

Let's play wordplay: the party in power was secretly spying on their opposition's campaign manager until after the election. This was made legal by secret courts and it is unknown how the information was used.

See how our biases paint different color pictures?

Manafort was investigated starting in 2014, a year before Trump announced his campaign, and before Manafort was drafted in any way to be involved.

Keep going...

and the investigation was dropped because they didnt find anything. Then he becomes campaign manager and the taps start again?

Not that they didn't find anything, but that they didn't find anything that resulted in charges. That doesn't mean he didn't do anything suspicious. He then started communicating with a known Russian spy in 2016. Given his previous record, that was why they reopened the investigation.
And just because I know what is coming, closing a previous investigation doesn't mean that someone isn't a criminal or won't be. The Pulse Nightclub shooter was investigated by the FBI on suspicions of being radicalized. They found nothing at the time and closed the investigation.

Not that they didn't find anything, but that they didn't find anything that resulted in charges

Care to explain the difference?

The Pulse nightclub shooter was an example to show how charges don't always come up after an investigation, but shit can go down regardless.
The difference is that they might find suspicious communications and suspicious activity that raises red flags, but important information is missing and they can't prove a link, if that information was relayed in person, for instance. The red flags didn't prove anything illegal and so they would have to close the investigation without charges being filed, while suspecting there is more.
I have no knowledge about any information that Rinat Akhmetshin was hired by the Democratic party. Source?

And try to stay on topic. We're not talking about the Pulse nightclub.

Rinat Akhmentshin was working for Fusion GPS, who the Democrats hired to dig up dirt on Trump

Per my understanding, Rinat Akhmetshin is well-established to have been a member of Soviet intelligence and is believed to have worked for Russian intelligence after the fall. US intelligence is pretty adamant that he is involved with Russian intelligence. As for Fusion GPS, everything I've read is that the dossier was the result of Republican opposition work during the primaries. Nor is it unusual for someone to work in different industries. Nor was he paid to associate with Trump. Nothing I've seen indicates that he worked on the dossier and the dossier didn't involve associating with Trump at all, but collecting information from disparate parties.

Fusion GPS, headed by a former Wall Street Journal journalist known for his dogged reporting, Glenn Simpson, most often works for business clients. But in presidential elections, the firm is sometimes hired by candidates, party organizations or donors to do political “oppo” work — shorthand for opposition research — on the side.

It is routine work and ordinarily involves creating a big, searchable database of public information: past news reports, documents from lawsuits and other relevant data. For months, Fusion GPS gathered the documents and put together the files from Mr. Trump’s past in business and entertainment, a rich target.

After Mr. Trump emerged as the presumptive nominee in the spring, the Republican interest in financing the effort ended. But Democratic supporters of Hillary Clinton were very interested, and Fusion GPS kept doing the same deep dives, but on behalf of new clients.

I can understand why it would be suspicious. At the same time, the world of politics is actually quite small. Everyone knows each other and is connected in some way.

That sounds like convenient bullshit to me.

Convenient and true. It is suspicious until you realize it is expected, like politicians taking money from donors and then appointing them to positions they aren't qualified for.

So then Hillary also knew this Russian Spy? And Obama? And Bush?

I have no idea who knew him, but I'd imagine their communications with him were also recorded. My guess is those communications weren't suspicious enough to warrant a wiretap. I'd say it is safe to assume that Comey would have avoided communications/meeting with him as much as possible.

I have no idea who knew him

You just said it was convenient and true and that "the world of politics is actually quite small. Everyone knows each other and is connected in some way."

So was that just untrue? You're contradicting yourself.

If you want to take everything I say as exact, then yes, I contradicted myself. The world of politics is small and everyone knows who everyone else is. Do they all know each other intimately and engage on a regular basis? Unlikely.
And that's fine. That's normal political work. The fact is that he is a former spy, who is believed to still be a spy, who met with and communicated with Manafort after Manafort was already known to have Russian contacts that raised red flags.

But it doesn't raise any red flags that he worked for a firm that was paid by the Democrats to find information that would smear Trump, and he's now being used to smear Trump?

there is serious damage control going on all over reddit. the conversation is almost impossible to have. they fucking did it, lied about it, and got caught, yet there are hundreds of accounts on this site denying all of it. that shit really makes me uncomfortable.

/r/Conspiracy is ground zero for the conspiracy. Its crazy.

They were also spying on him before he was campaign manager though too. The wiretaps go all the back to 2014, and in Trump's own words "He was with the campaign, as you know, for a very short period of time, relatively short period of time." So they've been wiretapping Manafort for much longer than he has been with the campaign. And they were doing so legally, even if you think the FISA warrants were garbage. So instead of using any biases to spin this in any direction, why not just stick to the facts?

Funny how democrats dont talk about about sticking to the facts when they're trying to smear a Republican politician

Don't blame me, I'm not a Democrat. I'll call out BS whenever I see it.

Because I agree with what you've said, I just also think that it is important that they WERE wiretapping the man who WAS Trump's campaign manager, before AND during the campaign, and flat out denied there was ANY wiretapping going on. Not to mention Manafort was never charged with anything which without more information (which I'm sure will come just slowly), lends a LOT of credence to Trump's accusation of political abuse of power.

I'm trying to keep an open mind with this because it is possible these wiretaps were used beyond the extent they were intended for. But we can pretty safely assume they weren't originally requested and approved for political reasons because the timeline shows they were in place well before Manafort had any connection with a presidential campaign.

I just also think that it is important that they WERE wiretapping the man who WAS Trump's campaign manager, before AND during the campaign, and flat out denied there was ANY wiretapping going on.

They didnt deny it. FISA warrants arent something we regularly tell the public about. Should we give out secrets and classified intel instantly or do an investigation and report on it so we can disclose the right information tot he public? Thats whats going on now. Susan Rice told congress about the FISA warrants with flynn. These are just now coming out about manafort. Idiots think that because there is not instant disclosure of every fact the second they want it, there is some cover up. Chill out homes. Republican congress will cause a stink about any perceive impropriety, so you get you visiblity.

James Clapper and Susan Rice did. Just because they don't "regularly tell" the public about doesn't mean they didn't deny it and deny they did.

So what you are saying is that I am right? Clapper and Rice did explain the Fisa warrants in public and in congress.

Whats your beef then? They legally complied with the FISA warrants and that is corroborated with congress. If they legally complied with the warrants , a judge signed off, and congress investigated them, there is no misdeeds.

Are you suggesting that they re-opened the FISA warrant for manafort only for purely political purposes on DJT? And is that your feeling or a fact?

I'm saying the exact opposite. My beef is that they said the opposite until they got found out. I'm not accusing Obama of grand le Watergate 2.0 I'm just not rationalizing the deceit regarding the wiretapping.

The re opening, I don't feel that way and it certainly isn't a fact. Try again

So should they disclose all secret surveillance whenever asked by random citizens? So you are upset with the way FISA works or what? Should we revise FISA so its a completely public transparent process?

You know they dont make it a habit of telling everyone at the drop of a hat what secret surveillance they are doing? It defeats the purpose of secret surveillance.

At what point did they deny it? Trump claims he was wiretapped, he was not and thus the denial. There was no denial about manafort or flynn, unless you have proof?

Incidental collection is not wiretapping and any parsed words around the FISA warrant is strictly because of the sensitive nature of the program.

So should they disclose all secret surveillance whenever asked by random citizens? So you are upset with the way FISA works or what? Should we revise FISA so its a completely public transparent process?

strawman off to see the wizard

At what point did they deny it? Trump claims he was wiretapped, he was not and thus the denial. There was no denial about manafort or flynn, unless you have proof?

as a matter of fact! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKY9wAMZTiQ

Incidental collection is not wiretapping

your argument has been reduced to wordplay

lol funny you mention word play, because thats very important for legal matters. a words meaning has alot of significance. There is major difference between incidential collection and someone illegally wiretapping them. This is why people parse words on this subject that lead to your perceived deceit.

as a matter of fact! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKY9wAMZTiQ

So in the interview you can hear clapper say to his knowledge and that he has no idea of the other agencies. Its not a denial. Its anecdotal evidence by clapper that he has not done any or seen any. Thats not the Obama administration, thats a single guy reporting from his post who didnt even oversee the matters pertaining to the counter intelligence investigation. You can misconstrue that as OBAMA himself claiming there was no illegal wiretapping all you want but that is just your feels.

Was the opposition's campaign manager doing something illegal? If yes, was the means of spying legal? If yes, then what's the issue?

...and then manafort had many coversations and private phone conversations with trump. They were after recording...yep, trump.

I don't think anyone ever claimed they wiretapped the WHOLE Trump tower.

Yes, in 2014 a warrant was obtained for Manafort well before the candidacy of Trump. Yes, Trump may have gotten some of his phone calls swept up into that surveillance. Don't hire someone under investigation and then act like you were being investigated because you hired poorly.

Yeah that's a fun game of semantics you're playing there.

It's no 4D Chess, but words matter. Especially when accusing someone of illegal wire tapping done legally.

Obama isn't the FBI, and Manafort was involved in crooked activity, so, no, Trump's accusation is still "unproven."

Seeing how Trump lied about his campaign meeting with the Russians, claiming that it never happened, that it was all "fake news," we should take what Trump says with a grain of salt.

Out of curiosity do you feel that Trump deserves more grains of salt than the Obama administration? It seems to me that more lies get uncovered every week. It also seems like Donny has an exaggerated but overall accurate version of events so far.

Look at this case for instance, he was called "crazy" and "unpresidential" for his original tweets all over the web and yet here you are, months later, clarifying that since the FBI wiretapped the campaign at Trump Tower, and he said Obama did that, and there's no solid link between Obama and the FBI, he's a liar.

Weird

Out of curiosity do you feel that Trump deserves more grains of salt than the Obama administration?

The Obama administration didn't seem to lie out of habit. In comparison, Trump himself seems like a serial liar, even going out of his way to fuss over minor things, such as the inauguration crowd size.

It seems to me that more lies get uncovered every week.

To me, this sentence really pertains to Trump more than anyone else.

It also seems like Donny has an exaggerated but overall accurate version of events so far.

He has done more than exaggerated. Instead, when it comes to the whole Russia story, Trump has lied about a number of things, from his campaign meeting with the Russians, which he called "fake news" when it turned out to be true, and his business investments in Russia, claiming that he didn't have any at all when his lawyers said he has at least $100 million worth.

You don't lie that much unless you have something to hide.

. . . here you are, months later, clarifying that since the FBI wiretapped the campaign at Trump Tower

The recent story is about Paul Manafort getting wiretapped by the FBI for his activity in the Ukraine. Now, while this may tie into the Trump scandal. it's different than Trump's broad claim that Obama was wiretapping Trump, which would be a totally different situation, especially if Obama had personally ordered the FBI to target Trump for political reasons (which doesn't seem to be the case at all).

So, no, nothing is being clarified here, except that Manafort is part of an ongoing federal investigation dating back to 2014.

The Obama administration didn't seem to lie out of habit

Unbelievable!

im laffin'

IF YOU LIKE YOUR DOCTOR YOU CAN KEEP YOUR DOCTER

REPEAT TIMES 10000

IF YOU LIKE YOUR DOCTOR YOU CAN KEEP YOUR DOCTER

How was that a lie? Be specific.

It wasn't true

It was true. No mechanism in ObamaCare itself forced people to change doctors. Otherwise, can you show me precisely why it isn't true?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/nov/06/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-what-hed-said-was-you-could-keep/

That only shows issues with one particular statement from Obama. It doesn't how where he said "you can keep your doctor" or how ObamaCare is forcing people to change doctors.

Anyway, the original statement that people has disputed is, "If you like your health care, you can keep it."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPNs7Y2HPwY

All you did was show a montage of Obama making statements. Show me where the ACA forces patients to change doctors. Do you even realize that a large portion of the ACA comprises private insurers?

A montage of Obama saying the specific statement that you say he did not say...

A montage of Obama saying the specific statement that you say he did not say...

I never claimed that. What I did dispute was how that statement was untrue. What is the precise mechanism in the ACA that would force people to change doctors?

Your reading comprehension needs some work

Not really. While no presidency has been 100% honest, most of them don't lie just to lie. Instead, they usually lie when it matters the most or when it's strategic to lie or when they can afford the political capital to lie.

Lying about a crowd size is just stupid and politically clumsy.

Hahahahahaha! Wow. I guess you can keep your doctor and muh scandal free dindu nuffin president never lied.

They lied perpetually.

Remember"you can keep your doctor"?

Or "The steel industry is producing as much steel in the United States as it ever was. It’s just (that) it needs one-tenth of the workers that it used to."

Says Mitt Romney "called the Arizona law a model for the nation."

The "most realistic estimates" for jobs created by Keystone XL are "maybe 200 jobs during the construction of the pipeline."

"We’ve got close to 7 million Americans who have access to health care for the first time because of Medicaid expansion."

"More young black men languish in prison than attend colleges and universities across America"

"We signed into law the biggest middle-class tax cut in history"

and millions of others

They lied perpetually. Remember"you can keep your doctor"?

Nothing about that was a lie. ObamaCare doesn't have requirements that force people to leave their doctors as the bill's opponents claimed. That being said, ObamaCare also can't control if someone's private insurance plan forces them to change doctors or to drop coverage altogether, either.

I don't know why you're bringing up Mitt Romney now and I don't where you're getting your quotes since you've provided no sources and no contexts. For example, are you trying to claim that seven million Americans haven't been enrolled in Medicaid, or are you trying to say that the quoted figure is too low? And who claimed the seven million Medicaid figure in the first place?

You have to make an argument before randomly throwing things out.

Ezcept people DID lose there doctor as a RESULT of obamacare

if that's your definition OF A truth than trumpcare won't force anybody off healthcare either

I got the quoyes from obama. Its well known reported by major newspapers like Washington post and even leftwing politifact

I couldve done more but i got tired

Ezcept people DID lose there doctor as a RESULT of obamacare

IF anyone "lost" their doctor due to ObamaCare, and you haven't provided anything to back up your argument here, it wasn't due to ObamaCare itself forcing them to change doctors.

Can you provide the circumstances and instances when people have lost their doctors under ObamaCare?

if that's your definition OF A truth than trumpcare won't force anybody off healthcare either

Totally different situation. TrumpCare is reducing spending to programs that will directly lead to states (pertaining to Medicaid) kicking millions of people off the rolls, according to the CBO and one of the TrumpCare versions. There is a direct correlation here.

I got the quoyes from obama. Its well known reported by major newspapers like Washington post and even leftwing politifact

You provided no sources for your quotes.

I couldve done more but i got tired

Pick a few and build an argument around them. That's the best approach to keep this debate from spiraling into a quote war.

OK cool. So if Obama Care didn't cause people to lose there doctor than trump card didn't cause ppl to lose coverage. I dont care about spending. I know u like debt

Anyone not covered under trumpcarw chose to. So its nots trumps fault

So if Obama Care didn't cause people to lose there doctor than trump card didn't cause ppl to lose coverage. I dont care about spending. I know u like debt

Let's get this straight: Trump said that he was "going to take care of everybody" when it came to health care, and now he has totally flip-flopped on this campaign promise -- and you're defending him for it while trying to attack Obama for a "lie" when you didn't even get Obama's quite right in the first place.

And you're still making a poor equivocation because it's about coverage, not, doctors. That's what you don't get.

Any cut in Medicaid, or SCHIP, or Medicare funding has direct effects. That's one of the principle issues with TrumpCare.

Anyone not covered under trumpcarw chose to. So its nots trumps fault

That statement doesn't even make any sense whatsoever.

And Obama said he was going to take care of everybody

So if ppl not having care isn't Obamas fault. U dont Get to make it trumps fault just because he's white

Wrong

All you did was show a montage of Obama making statements. Show me where the ACA forces patients to change doctors. Do you even realize that a large portion of the ACA comprises private insurers?

Thanks for responding. I disagree with you on a bunch of stuff but I always appreciate a fleshed out conversation.

Obama administration: over the past year or so I have experienced quite the opposite. I do not trust a word from them. For me, that started back with Edward Snowden and the NSA lies but over time there have been an ASTOUNDING number of discrepancies between what they've said and what has actually happened. Eric Holder, Benghazi, now Loretta Lynch, tons of lying going in IMO.

I think the "more every week" speaks to both of our media's biases.

Regarding the Russia meetings and investments, I have yet to see ANY proof that ANY of that was actually relevant past the witch hunt. To me it has seemed since the election that the CNNs and the DNC have been conflating Trump's business career with his political career and making a fuss out of (gigantic international) business as usual. Looking for crossed i's and dotted t's.

"You don't lie that much unless you have something to hide" that right there is confirmation bias. Where there's smoke, there may be fire, but when all the smoke is coming from the opposition party and media, I'd definitely wait to see a flame before I panic.

Manafort: it's amazing to me how differently both sides see this. We have the exact same facts but draw nearly opposite reactions based on the part we see as most important. You see it as more evidence of criminality in the Trump campaign and I see it as more evidence of govt abuse of power. Scott Adams writes about this, the "two movies on one screen" phenomenon.

Regarding the Russia meetings and investments, I have yet to see ANY proof that ANY of that was actually relevant past the witch hunt.

Unless you're Robert Mueller III no one gives a shit you do or don't see.

I give a shit what I do or don't see

Great, but no one else does.

That hurts my feelings and I consider it hate speech

Trump had a series of tweet about Obama illegally wiretapping him because he was running for president. That is still untrue. And the "this is like Watergate" approach Trump took is why he was mocked for it. That and the fact that he brought it up via a series of early morning tweets, like an angsty teenager.

Here is the pattern I see:

Donald whines on Twitter, exaggerates (WATERGATE 2.0!)

The media and Democrats completely and totally dismiss him, point and laugh at "crazy" Donald

Months later, the courts finally spit out information, in this case, most certainly NOT confirming Watergate 2.0, but DEFINITELY confirming the flat out denial of wiretapping to be misleading or a lie.

Media has to explain more details and or backtrack, Donald can claim an (exaggerated again) vindication to his camp.

Finally, Donald tweets Sunday morning memes while the whole world clutches their tendies.

Makes sense. I'm not totally sure why the general public thinks the FBI or whoever is just going to say "yes, we have a wiretap on that person" when asked. Of course they're going to say no.

Of course they would say no, but when they have said no and then the answer is yes, people have a shit ton more questions that need answers, and this time they may not buy a second "no"

Sure. But it doesn't really matter if they buy the no or not. The FBI or whoever probably don't give a shit if the general public knows exactly who is being investigated. It's certainly in their best interest for the individuals being investigated to not think they are.

I didn't realize we were trying to determine what the FBI gave a shit about.

Many people seem to think that if they ask the FBI if they've been wiretapped, the FBI is going to answer honestly. They have no incentive to do that and people certainly shouldn't be surprised when they're lied to about it.

People certainly shouldn't be surprised when they're lied to about it.

Why not? Is it not surprising that Trump was correct in his assessment? Is it not surprising that the head of Trump's campaign would be wiretapped?

Seems strange that you're trying to dictate what our expectations of government should be. Of course I don't think the FBI should come out and tell people they're being investigated, but I also think that when that shit gets found out... people are gonna be surprised.

With knowledge about Manafort now, no, it's not surprising to hear that he was being investigated.

And Trump claimed he was illegally wiretapped by Obama. That still remains false.

DEFINITELY confirming the flat out denial of wiretapping to be misleading or a lie

Trump said he had his "wires tapped" in Trump Tower. That's false. Trump was never a target of surveillance.

Media has to explain more details and or backtrack, Donald can claim an (exaggerated again) vindication to his camp.

It's Trump that has to keep going back and revising history. First it was "wires tapped". Then he tried to claim that unmasking and incidental collection is what he meant by "wires tapped". Now he's back to claiming actual wiretapping and trying to use Manafort as a proxy. No, it's still not true.

If the government was secretly"wiretapping" HIS conversations with HIS campaign manager.......

How would that not be wiretapping? It wasn't all of his communications as far as we know, but they DID tap his communications with his manager.

If the government was secretly"wiretapping" HIS conversations with HIS campaign manager...

The government was wiretapping a person who wasn't Trump. If that person calls Trump, they are still only wiretapping that person. If Trump calls someone who is wiretapped, that does not make Trump wiretapped.

To put this another way, let's pretend I am wiretapped. If I call you, that doesn't make you wiretapped.

It wasn't all of his communications as far as we know, but they DID tap his communications with his manager.

This is such a stupid conspiracy theory. If Obama was doing unethical things to spy on Trump, why wouldn't he just spy on Trump? An unethical president doesn't even need a warrant. He just needs to instruct someone to do it off the books. The reason it came from the FISA court and has a record is because it's not what you are making it into.

It isn't a conspiracy theory, it's a fact that you have even stated. You're adding a bunch of strawman stuff and calling it a stupid conspiracy theory, on r/conspiracy.

:)

The conspiracy theory is that Obama targeted Trump during the campaign. The fact is that Manafort was a target, and he was a target even before Trump announced his campaign. I explained how this doesn't constitute Trump being wiretapped. You can't seem to dispute that. It's amazing how people are ignoring the actual conspiracy here.

2 movies 1 screen

thanks for that. I was wondering how the spin of "he wasn't actually wiretapped" was gonna be explained now. I look forward to CNN pushing this technicality point now.

What technicality? The fact that it was literally someone else, not Trump, who was wiretapped?

Did he actually say anything about it though?

It also seems like Donny has an exaggerated but overall accurate version of events so far.

That's as accurate as the truck of lies he and his whole administration have told about Russia connections. Over and over and over and over again. And not just lies to the media, but lies on forms to get security clearance, lies on the forms to correct the lies on the forms you originally submitted. Lies, lies, lies. Its all we get out of these clowns.

How do people fall for blatant, repeated, admitted lies. They are admitting them. Wtf does it take to call a lie a lie?

Good question. What's your take on James Clapper saying there were no FISA warrants when now we know there most definitely were?

I'm not familiar enough with that to comment.

https://youtu.be/ZKY9wAMZTiQ

Not gonna let you sidetrack the conversation, sorry. If you can react to what I said in response, feel free. Otherwise, I'm not interested in whataboutism.

wtf does it take to call a lie a lie and a liar a liar?

Have a great day! Don't let the "whataboutism" bite!

Out of curiosity do you feel that Trump deserves more grains of salt than the Obama administration?

I don't know why someone would put trust in any politician who isn't very widely regarded as "clean"

Fair enough. Who would you say is regarded cleaner, Trump or Obama? And who would you say is evidenced cleaner? (Illuminati aspects aside)

• I can't possibly have an opinion on who is technically cleaner as I don't, and never will know everything about them.

• That's far too subjective, for example Obama might do something I regard as clean that someone else might see as scummy.

• My gut feeling is that the vast majority of politicians aren't clean (who is), and that if there is any dirt on someone, there is likely a lot more additional dirt.

• The way people see things comes into this, as Trump/Obama being unpopular/popular doesn't necessarily mean he is dirty/clean. Yet of course mr. unpopular will be seen as more dirty by virtue of people strongly disagreeing with his opinions (regardless of whether there is real dirt).

If it wasn't clear enough already, I'm neutral in this

Oh I see you're neutral. I'm not trying to bait you. I just find threads like these amazing, because people have the same logic and the same reasoning but it's a 50/50 split on who they're referring to.this Manafort stuff, while I lean Trump, it looks like somehow both sides see the same facts as a win for themselves. Crazy

Cool kinda seems like you're fishing for responses you can be annoyed at

I wouldn't say fishing but definitely cutting to the chase, know what I mean. It's hard to tell why people have the views they have when you can agree logically but find out later you're staunchly opposed on the facts. Plus the shill level in this thread is crazy

If he was so crooked why drop the surveillence for lack of evidence?

"Obama wire tapped Trump Tower" ... seriously???

Because the FBI said it was important to their investigation. Obviously Obama shouldn't impede the processes of the law.

Not bad easily two thirds of the frontpage occupied with similar threads by trump supporters. Nothing to see here :D

The shilling in this thread is insane.

Seriously - what the fuck happened to this sub? Everything devolves into political Team A vs. Team B mudslinging in an instant.

Trump supporters are desperate since their Supreme Leader keeps looking worse and worse.

Democrat fans are desperate since its clear there supreme leaders have been lying about trump for years

You both fucking suck

Bro my side is better than your side!!! Woooooooahh America!!!

Your lack of self-awareness is baffling.

Not really

Idk, yeah look at all those jobs, Drumpf is such a doofus!

So at the risk of getting downvoted hard, I'll lend some potential insight as to why that happens here, at least for me. On Reddit there are strong political opinions, and I have one. There's r/politics, that is decidedly liberal and while Trump supporters can participate, they are often downvoted heavily though so their points aren't seen by the masses. Then there's the_donald, where ONLY pro Trump comments are allowed. The very first comment I made there got me perma banned many months ago. I still read it daily and get frustrated at what I see as decidedly incorrect information. The latest example is that the CNN story vindicated Trumps claim that he himself was wiretapped illegally. To me, the story does not at all vindicate Trump, and if in fact does the exact opposite. It says that Manafort, not Trump, was tapped and it says that the tapping came over a year before Manafort came on as campaign manager, removing the implication that it was politically motivated.

That brings us to r/conspiracy, which has a healthy mix of both left and right politics, and both sides are free to argue their points. I think a lot of people on the left see this subreddit as the only way to productively engage with supporters on the other side, and so you see what you see here. It's not shilling, it's just that by deduction this is where people go. To me, people complaining about shilling are just upset that their echo chambers aren't being applied to all of Reddit. I'd say that if the community doesn't like the back and forth politics discussion then moderators would have to make policy changes to not allow it. Unfortunately for r/conspiracy, there just isn't another good place to actually engage with each other.

Politics is suppose to be a neutral sub, the_donald is solely for Trump supporters. I don't see what point you're trying to make with them.

You misinterpreted my comment. I don't care that the_donald is a self proclaimed echo and propaganda center. That's their prerogative. I'm just saying that r/conspiracy is the best place on Reddit to engage with Trump supporters without getting banned.

Just curious, where in the rules does it say r/politics should be neutral?

It was created to be a place to discuss all sides of a debate. Why would being neutral be a rule and how would that even be enforced?

That's my point, maintaining that sub as neutral would be impossible. Why do people claim r/politics should be neutral when it would be impossible to maintain it as such?

You seem to misunderstand. The sub isn't organically "not neutral", it is enforced and anything positive about Trump and negative about the opposition is removed instantly. There used to be a website late last year about the most removed and downvoted stuff on reddit, and it was clearly organized and botted to remove any negative articles about H.Clinton. Then reddit made it not work anymore, like it does to all sites showing this happening.

It's like going to a club where all the people are robots wearing human skinsuits. That's what politics has been like since late 2016.

bashing the_donald

thinks he will be downvoted

do you know of any subs where most people know that picking sides is counterproductive?

The voting in here must be crazy if your one hour old comment with only two points is somehow at the top of the thread.

Sorting by best is weird.

Pretty obvious who is doing lots of the shilling.

For what side? The side that thinks that thinks Obama is the FBI and that Manafort is a building? Or the ones calling out the OP's "fully proven" theory?

Do I have to answer that question for you? Or are you trying to discern what side of politics I am on?

That strawman is a stretch to a ridiculous extent.

Trump Tower is not owned by Trump

What do you expect? The post itself is shilling

We are constantly over the target. So yeah, that's gonna happen now.

Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump%E2%80%93Russia_dossier

^{HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 112852}

In what world was natalia veselnitskaya in obama's "inner circle"?

stupid lies.

Fisa reinstated because they met with a russian spy working to undo the magnitsky act. This would be the case if anyone met with someone who was marked as a russian spy, since they always record russian spies. Without looking at the FISA, there could be a good reason to re-open the warrant. Remember that the san bernadino shooter was wire tapped and investigated many times, each time dropped. Does not mean a crime wasnt committed or that they should never re-open investigation should the offended behavior come up again.

said spy(veselnitskaya) was allowed into the country without a visa by the DOJ, not obama. Its important because she was to be there as a lawyer representing a case.

Veselnitskaya's application for a visa to travel to the U.S. to work on the case was denied, she said in a later court filing.

Instead, the Department of Justice granted Katsyv and Veselnitskaya immigration parole. In later arguments before a federal judge, a government attorney described immigration parole as "a discretionary act that the statute allows the attorney general to do in extraordinary circumstances."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/did-the-obama-doj-let-russian-lawyer-natalia-veselnitskaya-into-the-u-s/

They just denied the visa to allow her in for these court cases only.

So given that, your stupid conspiracy there falls apart.

OP you can't say something is fully proven and then provide no proof

FBI wiretapped Manafort != Obama wiretapped Trump Tower

Fully proven, lmao.

If Manafort lives in Trump Tower that actually makes it true.

If Manafort lives in Trump Tower that actually makes it true.

No, it really doesn't.

Oh, I guess you're the arbiter of truth now. Thanks for clearing that up.

You say that as if you are.

I'm certainly not. I'm fine with making that perfectly clear.

Trump Tower does not belong to Trump

Everyone is "wire tapped."

William Binney (Former high level NSA analyst, also whistleblower pre-Snowden): “At least 80% of fibre-optic cables globally go via the US”, Binney said. “This is no accident and allows the US to view all communication coming in. At least 80% of all audio calls, not just metadata, are recorded and stored in the US. The NSA lies about what it stores.” https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/11/the-ultimate-goal-of-the-nsa-is-total-population-control

Are all telephone calls recorded and accessible to the US government? FBI official says yes. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/04/telephone-calls-recorded-fbi-boston

(automatically transcribed to text perhaps?)

Russel Tice (another NSA whistleblower pre-Snowden): "I Saw The Order To Wiretap Barack Obama In 2004." http://www.businessinsider.com/the-nsa-spied-on-barack-obama-2004-russ-tice-2013-6.

Eschelon was on 60 minutes back in the year 2000. The relevant part is 13 minutes. Highly recommended.

William Binney is the real deal and tells it like it is now that quit the NSA. He helped create this monster, and they have abused the supposed original intention. Everyone should listen to what he has to say about it.

I eat CHEESE PIZZA! must mean children All pizza is children!

#chickenlovers #hotard

killroom totally just for fun guys! Look a haiti charity across the street, time for some haitian pizza and walnut sauce. Then playing some dominoes on cheese or pasta? Hard choice.

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Semantics. I doubt Trump meant Obama himself physically handled the wire tapping. Is that what is being claimed here?

Way to shift the goal posts on this one.

its not fully proven its a case for

Trump is still being wiretapped to this day. The government is keeping tabs on him at every point of the way, making sure he is following orders.

That dumb fuck needs to be babysat anyways.

You want that little hand on the button? I don't.

And everyone bought Trump was a moron for saying Trump tower was wiretapped.

He's a moron for many reasons.

That's your opinion, but this clearly should not be one of those reasons.

They hate him cause they ain't him.

He's a hell of a lot smarter than you buddy.

I sincerely doubt it, buddy.

And everyone bought Trump was a moron for saying Trump tower was wiretapped.

Two things:

1. How did Trump find out his building was wiretapped?
2. How is tax evasion treason?

The conversations that exist in this thread are shining examples of how shitty this sub has become.

Was there every any doubt?

the FBI / CIA has wiretapped all of us through our phones, tvs, etc lol but for real, it's funny to see all the articles about this being false and absurd then it's proven true.

And still, the worst thing they could come up with was "grab 'em right by the pussy" from over 10 years ago.

And yet they couldn't find anything. If there was anything real to this whole Russia narrative we'd have something of substance by now. The entire establishment is gunning for him, how can there be nothing yet?

This is so bizarre, Trump supporters are happy that a person in his campaign team was being wiretapped. They are so desperate to hear something true from their leader that they think this is good news.

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

• [/r/betternews] So fully proven that Obama wire tapped Trump Tower up until he won the election. This is kind of fucked up.

^{If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)}

But all the shills in this sub that's a distraction from MuhRussia and Manafort frying for TREASON OMG.

Is it confirmed that his Trump Tower residence was wire tapped and not his home in VA? Or both?

The FBI wiretapped Manafort. Nothing to do with Obama, and Mr. Trump was not wiretapped. "Trump Tower" is where Manafort lived.

Manafort was wiretapped because he's working with with Russians. Trump was not the one wiretapped.

Manafort violated the law plain and simple. It was a legal wire tap. I don't read anything from the donald. Toxic subreddit.

The warrant for the wiretap was for Manafort.

It wasn't obama stop spreading false information

Except no they didn't wiretap Trump Tower they wiretapped Paul Manafort who is a Russian spy

Wrong

Trump hired a criminal.

In all honesty this propaganda campaign should be treated as act of treason. allll the shills, alllll the media, all the corrupt politicians, all the fucked "Intelligence" agencies.... All these fucktards deserve to be executed for treason.

Ask yourself, who's the biggest threat? A.) The media that projects downwards hatred to the masses? B.) The Corrupt alphabet agencies who operate outside the constitution with no regard? C.) The "representatives" who we "elect" to sign us up for endless wars and mounds of debt all while attempting to strip away our rights? D.) The dumbfucK shills who attempt to control what you think? Who impede on your freedom of thought? E.) All of the suck dick but you MUST chose one

Thank you! This is why this sub is a place to be

"The CIA would of leaked it immediately." lol on that

would of

oh boy

it happens literally every day of every year

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/07/us/politics/foreign-powers-buy-influence-at-think-tanks.html?mcubz=0

How long did the special prosecutor investigate Bill Clinton before they finally tried to remove him for getting a blowjob?

This has just began, and it wouldn't even exist if Trump hadn't fired Comey. Steve Bannon even admitted that firing Comey was the biggest political mistake in modern history.

Why ignore that Podesta was working on that contract with him? Gas lighting much?

We also know

Source?

http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-manafort-daughter-text-messages-ukraine-2017-3

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/330243-beyond-manafort-both-parties-deal-with-pro-russia

https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2017/02/18/no-one-mentions-that-the-russian-trail-leads-to-democratic-lobbyists/#64c4fd0f3991

Thanks to the Panama Papers, we know that the Podesta Group (founded by John Podesta’s brother, Tony) lobbied for Russia’s largest bank, Sberbank. “Sberbank is the Kremlin, they don’t do anything major without Putin’s go-ahead, and they don’t tell him ‘no’ either,” explained a retired senior U.S. intelligence official.

Nowhere did I indicate that they worked with each other. By together I meant they worked at the same time for the same people. e.g. "simultaneously"

Keep in mind that the Manafort investigation has been ongoing for over a year and tied to the podesta group in nearly every article http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/19/politics/paul-manafort-donald-trump-ukraine/index.html

Was was the podesta group subpoenaed if they have nothing to do with Manafort as you claim?

The unnamed executive told NBC News that six firms participated in the campaign that Manafort coordinated, which was paid for by the European Center for a Modern Ukraine, a non-profit based in Brussels.

Manafort coordinated the campaign that they were involved in and you think they "weren't working together" are you gaslighting?

Seriously - what the fuck happened to this sub? Everything devolves into political Team A vs. Team B mudslinging in an instant.

The voting in here must be crazy if your one hour old comment with only two points is somehow at the top of the thread.

For what side? The side that thinks that thinks Obama is the FBI and that Manafort is a building? Or the ones calling out the OP's "fully proven" theory?

It's funny you are getting tangled up in the words legally/illegally. It was a f'n FISA warrant which was basically setup to bypass regular legal court proceedings. If the constitution still matters, warrants issued by FISA aren't even legal in the first place.

The original story is still fucked up though.

What do you expect? The post itself is shilling

You won't find that because it didn't happen

Russian spies did not cause Trump to win the election. If you believe that the. You're living in an alternate reality. The Democrats disastrous campaign, which elevated the worst candidate to ever run for president, is what lost them the campaign. It's amazing how people are so bent out of shape that Trump is president that they will believe ANYTHING to get him out of office. Even if it means a complete denial of logic.

I think I'm not the ignorant one trying to defend a guy who made a factually incorrect tweet

It wasn't true

WMD was pushed by a presidential administration to start a war. Trump is the president. He isn't pushing the Russia narrative. Nice deflection attempt though.

Keep it up folks. They are getting nervous.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/nov/06/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-what-hed-said-was-you-could-keep/

I'm not familiar enough with that to comment.

If they had any fucking proof of any of this Russia bull shit the CIA would of leaked it immediately. Notice how fucking long this dumb ass investigation has gone? It's a fucking disgrace. You dumb fucks are letting congress and trump do horrible things while you're so focused on this stupid Ass investigation.

The HRC email investigation has taken longer and has less moving parts than this investigation. FBI investigations take years. HRC email investigation was 3 years + the multiple congressional investigations.

People claiming that its something so simple that it wouldve been released by now are just naive. If you have the criminal case of the century, why would you rush the result? The case needs to be rock solid with lots of evidence. Evidence takes time to gather.

This "Russia hacked our elections" shit is the new weapons of mass destruction and if you're sitting here being a mull for these war mongering fucks you should be ashamed of yourself.

Russia did try to influence our elections. They tried to plant a president who would divide out country. They tried to halt our civil discourse so nothing gets done. Id say they are winning too.

You say that as if you are.

Oh I see you're neutral. I'm not trying to bait you. I just find threads like these amazing, because people have the same logic and the same reasoning but it's a 50/50 split on who they're referring to.this Manafort stuff, while I lean Trump, it looks like somehow both sides see the same facts as a win for themselves. Crazy

It isn't a conspiracy theory, it's a fact that you have even stated. You're adding a bunch of strawman stuff and calling it a stupid conspiracy theory, on r/conspiracy.

:)

2 movies 1 screen

Could you paste the part where Trump claims an illegal wiretap? I didn't see it.

lol funny you mention word play, because thats very important for legal matters. a words meaning has alot of significance. There is major difference between incidential collection and someone illegally wiretapping them. This is why people parse words on this subject that lead to your perceived deceit.

as a matter of fact! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKY9wAMZTiQ

So in the interview you can hear clapper say to his knowledge and that he has no idea of the other agencies. Its not a denial. Its anecdotal evidence by clapper that he has not done any or seen any. Thats not the Obama administration, thats a single guy reporting from his post who didnt even oversee the matters pertaining to the counter intelligence investigation. You can misconstrue that as OBAMA himself claiming there was no illegal wiretapping all you want but that is just your feels.

thanks for that. I was wondering how the spin of "he wasn't actually wiretapped" was gonna be explained now. I look forward to CNN pushing this technicality point now.

We are constantly over the target. So yeah, that's gonna happen now.

No he didn't. He just claimed that those warrants are illegal but didn't explain why they are.

What Ego? The "source" you cite does not say what you say it says.

Literally done with you.

I'm sure the Podesta brothers never talked.

Borrowing money from a bank

How do you know it was a loan that was paid back? Trump only said they got the funding, it never said on what terms.

lying about accepting foreign donations to your charity.

Where is the lie? They didn't disclose the source - just like Trump doesn't disclose his taxes to hide the Russian money. Both are corrupt and hiding something, what's worse in Trump's case is that he is selling off the country to Russians to get his 'loans' taken care of.