Something-gate: Trump claims Obama bugged Trump Tower.

[EnglishPete]

Twitter censoring their trending topics list yet again. Tweets with the hashtag #Obamagate are being written at about the rate of two dozen a minute and its not on the trending topics list for the US

[EnglishPete]

To be honest, Trump's tweet sounds as if he were drunk when writing it.

No he was entirely sober (he's a lifelong teetotaler) and it was a smart series of tweets. The conversation was all about #biggerthanwatergate and whether he'd had any improper links to russia and if they interfered in the election improperly. Now, just like he did with #fakenews, he turned around an attack on him into an attack on his opponents. Now the #biggerthanwatergate conversation is whether Obama did anything illegal or interfered in the election improperly.

From Trump'd point of view thats a much better place for the conversation to be.

[EnglishPete]

Quite right. When James Rosen was spied on, when mass spying on US citizens was ordered Obama White House officials never gave the order for that to happen. As a matter of procedure they would have asked DOJ officials to find a suitably complaint judge (i.e. most of them) to authorise it and then to order it to go ahead.

[EnglishPete]

The White House Director of Social Media just tweeted this

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://twitter.com/DanScavino/status/838100183330209794

[EnglishPete]

Quite right. When James Rosen was spied on, when mass spying on US citizens was ordered Obama White House officials never gave the order for that to happen. As a matter of procedure they would have asked DOJ officials to find a suitably complaint judge (i.e. most of them) to authorise it and then to order it to go ahead.

Read it again. Then once more.

I did. They the rule was that the WH never interfered with independent DOJ investigations. Doesn't say how well that rule was adhered to does it. Says they never ordered wiretapping of US citizens. However a nod is as good as a wink and they would have had no difficulty in getting senior DOJ officials to order it for them.

Classic non-denial.

[EnglishPete]

even if the intelligence community did look into the trump campaign...that wouldn't be what trump is suggesting.

The 'intelligence community' clearly did 'look into' the Trump campaign. The non-denial denial from Obama basically confirms this. The 'intelligence community' work for the government so the question is why did the Obama administration order the wiretapping of a political opponent.

[EnglishPete]

even if the intelligence community did look into the trump campaign...that wouldn't be what trump is suggesting.

The 'intelligence community' clearly did 'look into' the Trump campaign. The non-denial denial from Obama basically confirms this. The 'intelligence community' work for the government so the question is why did the Obama administration order the wiretapping of a political opponent.

cause the trump campaign are traitors to the country?

no one really doubts this fact today, not even the well-respected anti-mainstream site "reagan battalion".

I don't know what your weird fascination with the 'Reagan Battalion' is? Of course you know that they're strongly pro-establishment so I don't know what the odd sarcastic "well-respected anti-mainstream" is supposed to be about.

As for the Trump campaign being "traitors to the country" there is absolutely no evidence for this which is why the 'evidence' that keeps being presented for this claim by Trump opponents is weak sauce nothingburgers strung together with smears and innuendo.

The real scandal here is the Obama administration misusing the security services to spy on and spread  false narratives about a political opponent.

[EnglishPete]

[EnglishPete]

]I don't know what your weird fascination with the 'Reagan Battalion' is? Of course you know that they're strongly pro-establishment so I don't know what the odd sarcastic "well-respected anti-mainstream" is supposed to be about.

ofc, they are - other then disgraced mainstream sources with WH credentials and elite access, like breitbart, fox news or inforwars/gateway pundit, an investigative and respected minorstream media for really interested people who want to get the facts without the typical spin.

There is nowhere for people who just want the facts without spin.

Every outlet large or small has a point of view, they all has an agenda. None are entirely trustworthy, all must be treated sceptically and their claims examined based on the evidence and reasoning behind them.

If you want a news outlet who you can just trust to give the facts straight you are out of luck. You will not find such an outlet. Not in the 'mainstream media' not in the 'alternative media' not on 'social media'. Not one.

[EnglishPete]

Serious question EnglishPete are you from America or ever lived here? Cause if you did you'd know if Trump was tapped it wasn't Obama but the FBI who are separate from Obama's administration

Oh please, that's not how things work at that level of politics, in the US or anywhere else.

[EnglishPete]

Senator Ben Sasse is calling on Trump to present evidence:

Yep. All these nonsense 'russia' allegations were coming out in well timed dribs and drabs. Now the water tank and its going to have to get drained all at once. Lets see what's lurking inside.

[EnglishPete]

Serious question EnglishPete are you from America or ever lived here? Cause if you did you'd know if Trump was tapped it wasn't Obama but the FBI who are separate from Obama's administration

Oh please, that's not how things work at that level of politics, in the US or anywhere else.

Yes it is the FBI can go to the FISA an get a warrant to tape Trump's phone by themselves

In theory.

In reality that's not how things work at that level of politics. In the US or anywhere else.

[EnglishPete]

Serious question EnglishPete are you from America or ever lived here? Cause if you did you'd know if Trump was tapped it wasn't Obama but the FBI who are separate from Obama's administration

Oh please, that's not how things work at that level of politics, in the US or anywhere else.

Yes it is the FBI can go to the FISA an get a warrant to tape Trump's phone by themselves

In theory.

In reality that's not how things work at that level of politics. In the US or anywhere else.

Nope but nice try if you are going to dismiss all the evidence against Trump to in turn believe his baseless accusation against Obama because of "in reality" is beyond partisan hypocrisy

What evidence against Trump? There hasn't been any, just some weak sauce nothingburgers.

As for 'baseless accusations' no one is disputing that the Trump campaign was wiretapped. The only question is is it believable that that would happen at that level of politics without being politically driven.

[EnglishPete]

Serious question EnglishPete are you from America or ever lived here? Cause if you did you'd know if Trump was tapped it wasn't Obama but the FBI who are separate from Obama's administration

Oh please, that's not how things work at that level of politics, in the US or anywhere else.

Yes it is the FBI can go to the FISA an get a warrant to tape Trump's phone by themselves

In theory.

In reality that's not how things work at that level of politics. In the US or anywhere else.

Nope but nice try if you are going to dismiss all the evidence against Trump to in turn believe his baseless accusation against Obama because of "in reality" is beyond partisan hypocrisy

What evidence against Trump? There hasn't been any, just some weak sauce nothingburgers.

As for 'baseless accusations' no one is disputing that the Trump campaign was wiretapped. The only question is is it believable that that would happen at that level of politics without being politically driven.

Umm many top level officials despite he's be wiretapped but nice try

Is that even English?

[EnglishPete]

[EnglishPete]

Well, "hope and change" did increase the NSA's destruction of the 4th amendment right before leaving office.

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/01/obama-expanding-nsa-powers/513041/

As for points 3 and 4 this report appeared in Reuters in November

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-security-intelligence-idUSKBN13E0SF

[EnglishPete]

LOL, as already pointed out, he just tries to (but fails) distract from the fact that his so-called administration is in deep trouble. But it won't work.

Its working just fine.

[EnglishPete]

Latest tweets from the President

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/838351476401520640

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/838353481526312961

[EnglishPete]

Spicer: WH/President will not comment further until "politically motivated investigations" are looked into by Congress alongside Russian influence

https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/838386005459763200 (1/4 in a thread)

In other words:

President Trump says he will not comment further on wiretap claims until Congress do something he knows they won't do

Why wouldn't the Congressional Intelligence Committees widen there investigation to cover the possible abuse of executive branch investigative powers? A very serious accusation has been made by the sitting President about the previous President concerning the misuse of intelligence gathering powers. They can't very well pretend that that hasn't happened and that they are not willing to find out the truth of the matter. Interesting essay here from yesterday that spells out the issue

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/yes-obama-could-be-prosecuted-if-involved-with-illegal-surveillance/

These are very serious issues and I don't know why you think the Congressional Committees will think they can simply ignore them.

[EnglishPete]

Spicer: WH/President will not comment further until "politically motivated investigations" are looked into by Congress alongside Russian influence

https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/838386005459763200 (1/4 in a thread)

In other words:

President Trump says he will not comment further on wiretap claims until Congress do something he knows they won't do

Essay today in the 'National Review'

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Full article here http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/445504/obama-camp-disingenuous-denials-fisa-surveillance-trump

[EnglishPete]

So... are we ever getting that evidence? No? Cool, tells me all that I need to know.

You can see the evidence here if you're interested

https://youtube.com/watch?v=91fNfGjZdM0

The evidence above isn't disputed and certainly warrants further investigation. Its certainly more solid  than the deeply flimsy 'evidence' for the alleged Trump/Russian hacking links accusations.

The question now is are Congressional Republicans going to protect Obama and his administration from serious investigation of these matters whilst going after Trump? Its not just Trump supporters but even well known conservative commentators from the 'Trump sceptic' wing of the party, like Hugh Hewett and National Review who are saying that the evidence against Obama here merits further serious investigation.

How are Republicans facing mid term primary and general election campaign next year going to explain it if they support protecting Obama from such investigation?

[EnglishPete]

So... are we ever getting that evidence? No? Cool, tells me all that I need to know.

You can see the evidence here if you're interested

https://youtube.com/watch?v=91fNfGjZdM0

The evidence above isn't disputed and certainly warrants further investigation. Its certainly more solid  than the deeply flimsy 'evidence' for the alleged Trump/Russian hacking links accusations.

The question now is are Congressional Republicans going to protect Obama and his administration from serious investigation of these matters whilst going after Trump? Its not just Trump supporters but even well known conservative commentators from the 'Trump sceptic' wing of the party, like Hugh Hewett and National Review who are saying that the evidence against Obama here merits further serious investigation.

How are Republicans facing mid term primary and general election campaign next year going to explain it if they support protecting Obama from such investigation?

Your unbalanced standard of evidence is the cutest things ever, really.

Doesn't matter what my standard of evidence is or your standard of evidence is. Various major Republican commentators such as Hugh Hewitt, Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh all think that the evidence heavily indicates serious wrongdoing on the part of Obama that merits further serious investigation. You might not like any of those people but they are more popular and well read and well respected amongst Republican supporters than others like Bill Kristel and David Brooks who might disagree. The former are likely to be much more representative of popular opinion on this matter amongst Republican voters than the latter. I suspect that when the first polling evidence comes out on this question it will confirm that.

Republican lawmakers are going to come under significant pressure to extend the investigation into questions of possible wrongdoing by the Obama administration. I'm really not sure what you think their great motivation for resisting that pressure would be?

[EnglishPete]

Spicer: WH/President will not comment further until "politically motivated investigations" are looked into by Congress alongside Russian influence

https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/838386005459763200 (1/4 in a thread)

So, they're gagging Pussygrabber and putting him in a straightjacket?

Either way, I'm pretty sure that going a week without ranting on twitter or in public will give him a stroke. So, win for the good guys, I guess?

No. They're putting pressure on Congressional Republicans to extend their investigations to questions of the Obama administration's role and possible wrongdoing in all this. If Congressional Republicans get growing pressure both from the White House and from the party in the country (which they will) then what on earth do you think will be their big motivation for resisting that pressure?

[EnglishPete]

Pete, you seem to be mixing up politics and evidence. Just who is popular with Trump fans and/or enablers, and who is not, does not seem to have any nexus, as to who is more creditable as to the current lay of the land as to the gravitas of Trump's so far undocumented allegations.

I've already linked to the evidence. As for who is more credible the question is who is more credible with whom. The people pushing the line that these are baseless accusations are liberal media outlets (NBC, CNN, NYT etc) which polling shows have extremely low credibility with Republican voters.

[EnglishPete]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/03/hillary-tipped-off-trump-wiretap-tweeted-one-week-prior-election/