Trump transition members were under surveillance

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by USN_Hokie »

TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote: Looks like we found our idiot.
Yes, you were identified a long time ago. I don't even remember which username it was, but it was well before ag.
Wow, did you just fall back to "I know of you are but what am I?" Good one, Costanza. :mrgreen:
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by USN_Hokie »

TheH2 wrote: No different than your post, just less PC.
Nope.

Your anger is clouding your head. Try to get a little more sleep this weekend.
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by HokieFanDC »

USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:It's coming down to semantics IMO. Trumps accusation is that the Obama administration intentionally electronically eavesdropped on him and his team. What is coming out now is that Trump and his teams electronic communications were swept up in a broader collection effort, not necessarily targeted at them, but that the names, places, specifics, etc. were then disseminated by the Obama administration to multiple intelligence agencies in an attempt to discredit Trump and his team.

So, did Obama wiretap Trump? No, it doesn't appear so. Did the Obama administration gather electronic surveillance on Trumps people and pass it around the intel community? Probably.
People are arguing semantics to cloud the issue, but the accusations are very real.

No, I don't believe some guy climbed up a telephone pole and attached alligator clips to land lines which enter Trump Tower. No sane person interpreted his comments like that.

He said "wires tapped" in Trump Towers. He was quite specific. He then compared what Obama did to Nixon. Is there evidence of "wire tapping" in Trump Towers? This is the same guy that said our president was born in Kenya and millions voted illegally and his dick isn't small and his crowd size was bigger.

The beauty for him is that he says stupid $hit so often. I have someone looking into the birth certificate and you wouldn't believe what they're finding.....

Given everything he says, I would find it hard for sane people to give him the benefit of the doubt.
He quoted "wires tapped".

I know this will never make sense to you because your world view depends upon it not making sense, but when Trump says this, and it's confirmed he was under surveillance, everyone except for the liberal ideologues thinks "Trump was right."

Again, your argument over semantics is irrelevant to the discussion. Obama could go to prison for this and H2 / Politifake would still be calling Trump's claim "Pants on Fire."

WADR, your claim that everyone except liberal ideologues thinks Trump was right, is bullshirt. Most ppl, including a firm Trump supporter in Nunes, are still saying there is no evidence to back up Trump's claims. You, AG, and Jeff Lords, are in a small minority on this one. And you all ignore all the other tweets from Trump that had to do with someone actually electronically surveilling Trump tower. Even your claim above, that he was "under surveillance", is not consistent with what Nunes says has happened.
My comment about Trump being right was meant in future tense, I don't think that's been fully realized yet.

You should listen to Nunes' press conferences this week again. What he's said is perfectly in line with everything I've said.
In Nunes interview with Tapper, which was after the press conferences, Tapper asked him if he now thinks Trump's claims about wiretapping were correct and Nunes said plainly, "No, he's not right about that".

Why is it so hard for some people to say that it appears that something pernicious is going on, but also admit that Trump's claims about being wiretapped are wrong? There is no way to twist the meaning of wiretapping in a way to cover incidental collection.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by awesome guy »

TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:It's coming down to semantics IMO. Trumps accusation is that the Obama administration intentionally electronically eavesdropped on him and his team. What is coming out now is that Trump and his teams electronic communications were swept up in a broader collection effort, not necessarily targeted at them, but that the names, places, specifics, etc. were then disseminated by the Obama administration to multiple intelligence agencies in an attempt to discredit Trump and his team.

So, did Obama wiretap Trump? No, it doesn't appear so. Did the Obama administration gather electronic surveillance on Trumps people and pass it around the intel community? Probably.
People are arguing semantics to cloud the issue, but the accusations are very real.

No, I don't believe some guy climbed up a telephone pole and attached alligator clips to land lines which enter Trump Tower. No sane person interpreted his comments like that.

He said "wires tapped" in Trump Towers. He was quite specific. He then compared what Obama did to Nixon. Is there evidence of "wire tapping" in Trump Towers? This is the same guy that said our president was born in Kenya and millions voted illegally and his dick isn't small and his crowd size was bigger.

The beauty for him is that he says stupid $hit so often. I have someone looking into the birth certificate and you wouldn't believe what they're finding.....

Given everything he says, I would find it hard for sane people to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Looks like we found our idiot.
Yes, you were identified a long time ago. I don't even remember which username it was, but it was well before ag.
LOL at the "I know what you are, but am I?" Pee Wee Hermon retort. Pathetic.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by USN_Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:[
In Nunes interview with Tapper, which was after the press conferences, Tapper asked him if he now thinks Trump's claims about wiretapping were correct and Nunes said plainly, "No, he's not right about that".

Why is it so hard for some people to say that it appears that something pernicious is going on, but also admit that Trump's claims about being wiretapped are wrong? There is no way to twist the meaning of wiretapping in a way to cover incidental collection.
Again... listen to the press conferences.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by TheH2 »

USN_Hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote: Looks like we found our idiot.
Yes, you were identified a long time ago. I don't even remember which username it was, but it was well before ag.
Wow, did you just fall back to "I know of you are but what am I?" Good one, Costanza. :mrgreen:
No, I was calling him out for having to change his username so many times in the past because he was the fool.
People who know, know.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by awesome guy »

TheH2 wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote: Looks like we found our idiot.
Yes, you were identified a long time ago. I don't even remember which username it was, but it was well before ag.
Wow, did you just fall back to "I know of you are but what am I?" Good one, Costanza. :mrgreen:
No, I was calling him out for having to change his username so many times in the past because he was the fool.
If that were true you'd have a new username each day. Let that hate flow boy.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by HokieFanDC »

USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:[
In Nunes interview with Tapper, which was after the press conferences, Tapper asked him if he now thinks Trump's claims about wiretapping were correct and Nunes said plainly, "No, he's not right about that".

Why is it so hard for some people to say that it appears that something pernicious is going on, but also admit that Trump's claims about being wiretapped are wrong? There is no way to twist the meaning of wiretapping in a way to cover incidental collection.
Again... listen to the press conferences.
I saw the press conferences. What's your point? In his 1st press conference, he said twice, that there was no wiretapping. And he constantly clarifies it was incidental collection. And in the 2nd press conference, he said again that there was no wiretapping. Nunes said, "That never happened". And again, he says many times it was incidental collection, from "normal intelligence reporting".

How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by USN_Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:[
In Nunes interview with Tapper, which was after the press conferences, Tapper asked him if he now thinks Trump's claims about wiretapping were correct and Nunes said plainly, "No, he's not right about that".

Why is it so hard for some people to say that it appears that something pernicious is going on, but also admit that Trump's claims about being wiretapped are wrong? There is no way to twist the meaning of wiretapping in a way to cover incidental collection.
Again... listen to the press conferences.
I saw the press conferences. What's your point? In his 1st press conference, he said twice, that there was no wiretapping. And he constantly clarifies it was incidental collection. And in the 2nd press conference, he said again that there was no wiretapping. Nunes said, "That never happened". And again, he says many times it was incidental collection, from "normal intelligence reporting".

How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
Paraphrasing, he said "yes, it gives credence to Trump’s claims."

He also confirmed that no, nobody climbed a telephone pole and attached a listening device to Trump's land line via alligator clips.
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by HokieFanDC »

USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:[
In Nunes interview with Tapper, which was after the press conferences, Tapper asked him if he now thinks Trump's claims about wiretapping were correct and Nunes said plainly, "No, he's not right about that".

Why is it so hard for some people to say that it appears that something pernicious is going on, but also admit that Trump's claims about being wiretapped are wrong? There is no way to twist the meaning of wiretapping in a way to cover incidental collection.
Again... listen to the press conferences.
I saw the press conferences. What's your point? In his 1st press conference, he said twice, that there was no wiretapping. And he constantly clarifies it was incidental collection. And in the 2nd press conference, he said again that there was no wiretapping. Nunes said, "That never happened". And again, he says many times it was incidental collection, from "normal intelligence reporting".

How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
Paraphrasing, he said "yes, it gives credence to Trump’s claims."

He also confirmed that no, nobody climbed a telephone pole and attached a listening device to Trump's land line via alligator clips.
We all know that Nunes is trying to help Trump out here. And he has no problem saying Trump's claims were wrong, but that there was something nefarious going on, that Trump wasn't aware of. All that still means that Trump tweeted a bunch of stuff that was completely false. The fact that something else was going on, that we know Trump was completely unaware of, doesn't make Trump right.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by cwtcr hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:[
In Nunes interview with Tapper, which was after the press conferences, Tapper asked him if he now thinks Trump's claims about wiretapping were correct and Nunes said plainly, "No, he's not right about that".

Why is it so hard for some people to say that it appears that something pernicious is going on, but also admit that Trump's claims about being wiretapped are wrong? There is no way to twist the meaning of wiretapping in a way to cover incidental collection.
Again... listen to the press conferences.
I saw the press conferences. What's your point? In his 1st press conference, he said twice, that there was no wiretapping. And he constantly clarifies it was incidental collection. And in the 2nd press conference, he said again that there was no wiretapping. Nunes said, "That never happened". And again, he says many times it was incidental collection, from "normal intelligence reporting".

How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
Paraphrasing, he said "yes, it gives credence to Trump’s claims."

He also confirmed that no, nobody climbed a telephone pole and attached a listening device to Trump's land line via alligator clips.
We all know that Nunes is trying to help Trump out here. And he has no problem saying Trump's claims were wrong, but that there was something nefarious going on, that Trump wasn't aware of. All that still means that Trump tweeted a bunch of stuff that was completely false. The fact that something else was going on, that we know Trump was completely unaware of, doesn't make Trump right.
This argument you are having with USN is freaking hilarious, If I "incidentally" know what communication you are having your privacy has been invaded, what the hell you call it is stupid. The info is dribbling out, the moron dems should have dropped the russia crap long ago as it is going to end up sweeping them up into activities that are PLAINLY illegal. But being dumb this way is their MO, see Bernie getting shafted out of the nomination
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by HokieFanDC »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:[
In Nunes interview with Tapper, which was after the press conferences, Tapper asked him if he now thinks Trump's claims about wiretapping were correct and Nunes said plainly, "No, he's not right about that".

Why is it so hard for some people to say that it appears that something pernicious is going on, but also admit that Trump's claims about being wiretapped are wrong? There is no way to twist the meaning of wiretapping in a way to cover incidental collection.
Again... listen to the press conferences.
I saw the press conferences. What's your point? In his 1st press conference, he said twice, that there was no wiretapping. And he constantly clarifies it was incidental collection. And in the 2nd press conference, he said again that there was no wiretapping. Nunes said, "That never happened". And again, he says many times it was incidental collection, from "normal intelligence reporting".

How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
Paraphrasing, he said "yes, it gives credence to Trump’s claims."

He also confirmed that no, nobody climbed a telephone pole and attached a listening device to Trump's land line via alligator clips.
We all know that Nunes is trying to help Trump out here. And he has no problem saying Trump's claims were wrong, but that there was something nefarious going on, that Trump wasn't aware of. All that still means that Trump tweeted a bunch of stuff that was completely false. The fact that something else was going on, that we know Trump was completely unaware of, doesn't make Trump right.
This argument you are having with USN is freaking hilarious, If I "incidentally" know what communication you are having your privacy has been invaded, what the hell you call it is stupid. The info is dribbling out, the moron dems should have dropped the russia crap long ago as it is going to end up sweeping them up into activities that are PLAINLY illegal. But being dumb this way is their MO, see Bernie getting shafted out of the nomination

No one is arguing that someone's privacy wasn't invaded, if Nunes is correct.
Last edited by HokieFanDC on Fri Mar 24, 2017 10:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by USN_Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:[
In Nunes interview with Tapper, which was after the press conferences, Tapper asked him if he now thinks Trump's claims about wiretapping were correct and Nunes said plainly, "No, he's not right about that".

Why is it so hard for some people to say that it appears that something pernicious is going on, but also admit that Trump's claims about being wiretapped are wrong? There is no way to twist the meaning of wiretapping in a way to cover incidental collection.
Again... listen to the press conferences.
I saw the press conferences. What's your point? In his 1st press conference, he said twice, that there was no wiretapping. And he constantly clarifies it was incidental collection. And in the 2nd press conference, he said again that there was no wiretapping. Nunes said, "That never happened". And again, he says many times it was incidental collection, from "normal intelligence reporting".

How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
Paraphrasing, he said "yes, it gives credence to Trump’s claims."

He also confirmed that no, nobody climbed a telephone pole and attached a listening device to Trump's land line via alligator clips.
We all know that Nunes is trying to help Trump out here. And he has no problem saying Trump's claims were wrong, but that there was something nefarious going on, that Trump wasn't aware of. All that still means that Trump tweeted a bunch of stuff that was completely false. The fact that something else was going on, that we know Trump was completely unaware of, doesn't make Trump right.
Completely false? What bullshít.

To summarize, when Nunes says something that supports Trump's claim, that means he must be just saying stuff to help Trump. But when he says something that supports your view you go with that and disregard everything else. Got it.

It's pretty much hopeless trying to have a conversation with you on this any further.
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by HokieFanDC »

USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:[
In Nunes interview with Tapper, which was after the press conferences, Tapper asked him if he now thinks Trump's claims about wiretapping were correct and Nunes said plainly, "No, he's not right about that".

Why is it so hard for some people to say that it appears that something pernicious is going on, but also admit that Trump's claims about being wiretapped are wrong? There is no way to twist the meaning of wiretapping in a way to cover incidental collection.
Again... listen to the press conferences.
I saw the press conferences. What's your point? In his 1st press conference, he said twice, that there was no wiretapping. And he constantly clarifies it was incidental collection. And in the 2nd press conference, he said again that there was no wiretapping. Nunes said, "That never happened". And again, he says many times it was incidental collection, from "normal intelligence reporting".

How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
Paraphrasing, he said "yes, it gives credence to Trump’s claims."

He also confirmed that no, nobody climbed a telephone pole and attached a listening device to Trump's land line via alligator clips.
We all know that Nunes is trying to help Trump out here. And he has no problem saying Trump's claims were wrong, but that there was something nefarious going on, that Trump wasn't aware of. All that still means that Trump tweeted a bunch of stuff that was completely false. The fact that something else was going on, that we know Trump was completely unaware of, doesn't make Trump right.
Completely false? What bullshít.

To summarize, when Nunes says something that supports Trump's claim, that means he must be just saying stuff to help Trump. But when he says something that supports your view you go with that and disregard everything else. Got it.

It's pretty much hopeless trying to have a conversation with you on this any further.
Try again. Nunes directly said that with regard to Trump's wiretap claims, Trump is not right. I'm not disregarding the other stuff, I've said several times that something fishy is going on. That gives credence to Trump's belief that someone is/was out to get him.
It doesn't give credence to his tweets that completely missed the mark on what was actually fishy. We're talking about the person who has THE most access to intelligence info. making claims that completely missed the mark.

What do you think isn't false about Trump's claim. Can you at least state what you think is correct about his tweets?

And just remember, Trump knew nothing about the incidental collection stuff when he made those tweets, or when he followed up on the tweets. You're trying to say Trump's tweets were correct, because stuff he had no clue about, was actually happening.
How does that make sense to you?

As I've said before, Trump can be completely wrong about someone wiretapping him, or Trump tower, while also being right that someone was doing something fishy with regard to him and his transition team. Both of those things can exist. You are the one who can't admit that Trump was wrong about wire tapping (or as he called it, tapping my phones, or tap my phones), or Obama doing it.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by awesome guy »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:[
In Nunes interview with Tapper, which was after the press conferences, Tapper asked him if he now thinks Trump's claims about wiretapping were correct and Nunes said plainly, "No, he's not right about that".

Why is it so hard for some people to say that it appears that something pernicious is going on, but also admit that Trump's claims about being wiretapped are wrong? There is no way to twist the meaning of wiretapping in a way to cover incidental collection.
Again... listen to the press conferences.
I saw the press conferences. What's your point? In his 1st press conference, he said twice, that there was no wiretapping. And he constantly clarifies it was incidental collection. And in the 2nd press conference, he said again that there was no wiretapping. Nunes said, "That never happened". And again, he says many times it was incidental collection, from "normal intelligence reporting".

How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
Paraphrasing, he said "yes, it gives credence to Trump’s claims."

He also confirmed that no, nobody climbed a telephone pole and attached a listening device to Trump's land line via alligator clips.
We all know that Nunes is trying to help Trump out here. And he has no problem saying Trump's claims were wrong, but that there was something nefarious going on, that Trump wasn't aware of. All that still means that Trump tweeted a bunch of stuff that was completely false. The fact that something else was going on, that we know Trump was completely unaware of, doesn't make Trump right.
This argument you are having with USN is freaking hilarious, If I "incidentally" know what communication you are having your privacy has been invaded, what the hell you call it is stupid. The info is dribbling out, the moron dems should have dropped the russia crap long ago as it is going to end up sweeping them up into activities that are PLAINLY illegal. But being dumb this way is their MO, see Bernie getting shafted out of the nomination
Yep
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by USN_Hokie »

If even half of this is true, Trump was right and this should be bigger than Watergate.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by USN_Hokie »

User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26373
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by HokieHam »

USN_Hokie wrote: If even half of this is true, Trump was right and this should be bigger than Watergate.
Yup. The MoT will bury it. It won't be front page on any of the sauces of the Unusuals.....just like the rape of the girl in MD, the kids murdered in Bedford......
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."

ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by awesome guy »

USN_Hokie wrote: If even half of this is true, Trump was right and this should be bigger than Watergate.
The Unusual people won't care and will pivot to something else. They're morons and focused only on destroying Trump, not saving our nation.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
UpstateSCHokie
Posts: 11907
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:31 pm

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by UpstateSCHokie »

So....its looking like Susan Rice is the one behind the unmasking of Trump's campaign members. If true, I'm sure Obama had no knowledge or involvement with these actions (wink wink).

This is what happens when you put actual racists and radicals in high level positions of power. They abuse their position to push their racist agenda.
https://medium.com/@Cernovich/susan-ric ... 085b5cff16
====================================

FLASHBACK – Susan Rice: Too Many White People in Top National Security Positions (VIDEO)
Cristina Laila
Apr 2nd, 2017 11:52 pm

It is being reported that former National Security Advisor, Susan Rice was behind the ‘unmasking’ of Trump and his private associates.

Reminder: Susan Rice said back in 2016 that there are too many white people in important national security posts. Lovely!

Via Fox News:
U.S. National Security Advisor Susan Rice said Wednesday that there are too many white people in important national security posts.

Rice made the comments during her commencement address at Florida International University, saying that a lack of diversity in the those positions puts our country at risk, because they all think alike.

Referring to the criticism that the U.S. national security workforce is “white, male and Yale,” Rice told the graduates, “In the halls of power, in the faces of our national security leaders, America is still not fully reflected.”

“By now, we should all know the dangers of ‘groupthink,’ where folks who are alike often think alike,” she said. “By contrast, groups comprised of different people tend to question one another’s assumptions, draw on divergent perspectives and experiences, and yield better outcomes.”
Interesting that she said that there are too many white people in national security posts and then went on to reportedly unmask Trump’s team. Hmmmm…
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/04 ... ons-video/
Image

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire (1694 – 1778)
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by USN_Hokie »

I don't trust the MSM here, and there's a real story with some really shady stuff to be reported, but I'll sit on Susan Rice being the "unmasker" until someone besides cernovich is reporting it.
User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26373
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by HokieHam »

USN_Hokie wrote:I don't trust the MSM here, and there's a real story with some really shady stuff to be reported, but I'll sit on Susan Rice being the "unmasker" until someone besides cernovich is reporting it.
Yeah. He's shady......still, I'm sure the MoT is not going to look into this as they should and even if they find something, they will hide it to protect their side.
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."

ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by HokieFanDC »

USN_Hokie wrote:I don't trust the MSM here, and there's a real story with some really shady stuff to be reported, but I'll sit on Susan Rice being the "unmasker" until someone besides cernovich is reporting it.
Makes perfect sense. No one knew about Rice until Obama started using her to do his dirty work. She's been his tool for doing shady things for a long time. Of course, because of that, there is no way to claim that anything she does wasn't with full knowledge and agreement from Obama.
User avatar
UpstateSCHokie
Posts: 11907
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:31 pm

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by UpstateSCHokie »

USN_Hokie wrote:I don't trust the MSM here, and there's a real story with some really shady stuff to be reported, but I'll sit on Susan Rice being the "unmasker" until someone besides cernovich is reporting it.

Bloomberg now reporting on some of this...

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles ... s-in-intel
Image

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire (1694 – 1778)
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance

Post by HokieFanDC »

HokieHam wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:I don't trust the MSM here, and there's a real story with some really shady stuff to be reported, but I'll sit on Susan Rice being the "unmasker" until someone besides cernovich is reporting it.
Yeah. He's shady......still, I'm sure the MoT is not going to look into this as they should and even if they find something, they will hide it to protect their side.
Not so sure about that.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles ... s-in-intel
Post Reply