Wow, did you just fall back to "I know of you are but what am I?" Good one, Costanza.TheH2 wrote:Yes, you were identified a long time ago. I don't even remember which username it was, but it was well before ag.awesome guy wrote: Looks like we found our idiot.
Trump transition members were under surveillance
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
Nope.TheH2 wrote: No different than your post, just less PC.
Your anger is clouding your head. Try to get a little more sleep this weekend.
-
- Posts: 18547
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
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".USN_Hokie wrote:My comment about Trump being right was meant in future tense, I don't think that's been fully realized yet.HokieFanDC wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:He quoted "wires tapped".TheH2 wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:People are arguing semantics to cloud the issue, but the accusations are very real.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.
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.
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.
You should listen to Nunes' press conferences this week again. What he's said is perfectly in line with everything I've said.
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.
- 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
LOL at the "I know what you are, but am I?" Pee Wee Hermon retort. Pathetic.TheH2 wrote:Yes, you were identified a long time ago. I don't even remember which username it was, but it was well before ag.awesome guy wrote:Looks like we found our idiot.TheH2 wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:People are arguing semantics to cloud the issue, but the accusations are very real.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.
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.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
Again... listen to the press conferences.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.
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
No, I was calling him out for having to change his username so many times in the past because he was the fool.USN_Hokie wrote:Wow, did you just fall back to "I know of you are but what am I?" Good one, Costanza.TheH2 wrote:Yes, you were identified a long time ago. I don't even remember which username it was, but it was well before ag.awesome guy wrote: Looks like we found our idiot.
People who know, know.
- 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
If that were true you'd have a new username each day. Let that hate flow boy.TheH2 wrote:No, I was calling him out for having to change his username so many times in the past because he was the fool.USN_Hokie wrote:Wow, did you just fall back to "I know of you are but what am I?" Good one, Costanza.TheH2 wrote:Yes, you were identified a long time ago. I don't even remember which username it was, but it was well before ag.awesome guy wrote: Looks like we found our idiot.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
-
- Posts: 18547
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
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".USN_Hokie wrote:Again... listen to the press conferences.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.
How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
Paraphrasing, he said "yes, it gives credence to Trump’s claims."HokieFanDC wrote: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".USN_Hokie wrote:Again... listen to the press conferences.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.
How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
He also confirmed that no, nobody climbed a telephone pole and attached a listening device to Trump's land line via alligator clips.
-
- Posts: 18547
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
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.USN_Hokie wrote:Paraphrasing, he said "yes, it gives credence to Trump’s claims."HokieFanDC wrote: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".USN_Hokie wrote:Again... listen to the press conferences.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.
How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
He also confirmed that no, nobody climbed a telephone pole and attached a listening device to Trump's land line via alligator clips.
-
- Posts: 13399
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
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 nominationHokieFanDC wrote: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.USN_Hokie wrote:Paraphrasing, he said "yes, it gives credence to Trump’s claims."HokieFanDC wrote: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".USN_Hokie wrote:Again... listen to the press conferences.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.
How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
He also confirmed that no, nobody climbed a telephone pole and attached a listening device to Trump's land line via alligator clips.
-
- Posts: 18547
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
cwtcr hokie wrote: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 nominationHokieFanDC wrote: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.USN_Hokie wrote:Paraphrasing, he said "yes, it gives credence to Trump’s claims."HokieFanDC wrote: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".USN_Hokie wrote:Again... listen to the press conferences.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.
How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
He also confirmed that no, nobody climbed a telephone pole and attached a listening device to Trump's land line via alligator clips.
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.
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
Completely false? What bullshít.HokieFanDC wrote: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.USN_Hokie wrote:Paraphrasing, he said "yes, it gives credence to Trump’s claims."HokieFanDC wrote: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".USN_Hokie wrote:Again... listen to the press conferences.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.
How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
He also confirmed that no, nobody climbed a telephone pole and attached a listening device to Trump's land line via alligator clips.
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.
-
- Posts: 18547
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
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.USN_Hokie wrote:Completely false? What bullshít.HokieFanDC wrote: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.USN_Hokie wrote:Paraphrasing, he said "yes, it gives credence to Trump’s claims."HokieFanDC wrote: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".USN_Hokie wrote:Again... listen to the press conferences.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.
How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
He also confirmed that no, nobody climbed a telephone pole and attached a listening device to Trump's land line via alligator clips.
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.
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.
- 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
Yepcwtcr hokie wrote: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 nominationHokieFanDC wrote: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.USN_Hokie wrote:Paraphrasing, he said "yes, it gives credence to Trump’s claims."HokieFanDC wrote: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".USN_Hokie wrote:Again... listen to the press conferences.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.
How many times does someone have to say there was no wiretap of Trump, before you'll believe it?
He also confirmed that no, nobody climbed a telephone pole and attached a listening device to Trump's land line via alligator clips.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
If even half of this is true, Trump was right and this should be bigger than Watergate.
- HokieHam
- Posts: 26682
- 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
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......USN_Hokie wrote: If even half of this is true, Trump was right and this should be bigger than Watergate.
"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
- 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
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.USN_Hokie wrote: If even half of this is true, Trump was right and this should be bigger than Watergate.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
- UpstateSCHokie
- Posts: 11998
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:31 pm
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
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:
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:
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…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.”
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/04 ... ons-video/
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire (1694 – 1778)
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
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.
- HokieHam
- Posts: 26682
- 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
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.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.
"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
-
- Posts: 18547
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
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.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.
- UpstateSCHokie
- Posts: 11998
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:31 pm
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
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
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire (1694 – 1778)
-
- Posts: 18547
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm
Re: Trump transition members were under surveillance
Not so sure about that.HokieHam wrote: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.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.
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles ... s-in-intel