Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Trump Tower Wiretapped?


Lilly

Recommended Posts

Just now, Lilly said:

Sessions may indeed end up being given the boot as well. However, whether or not he will be found guilty of any criminal action has yet to be determined.

As much as it saddens me to say so (for my own reasons) I dont think there is a case for actual perjury, at least not a provable one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think we really overestimate what nsa does, if they were all over each call/email, we would not have neither 911, nor Boston marathon,.along with other acts of terror, and mass shootings, nsa helped stop exactly 0 of them. so what's all their data worth?

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Farmer77 said:

Well in theory but its the intelligence agencies telling us that Trump and co had inappropriate contact with the Russkies not Obama. 

I must have missed something...which agency has said that the Trump campaign had inappropriate contact with the Russians? Last I heard team Trump was only under investigation and no evidence had been found as of yet.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Lilly said:

So if it turns out Trump had nothing to do with the Russians trying to mess with the election, and Obama got his info from team Hillary instead of the CIA.

Should there be consequences for throwing out such allegations?

See how it works both ways.

Wait so Hillary was the first to find out that Russians hacked her and the first to bring it to public's attention? I thought the CIA and FBI found this out.  You are claiming the Obama administration was basing their information on Russian meddling on what Hillary said. That is news to me.

Also I have never heard Obama or Hillary claim they know Trump is in collusion with the russians. Unike like Trump  who claims to know that Obama hacked him.  Hillary and Obama have been silent about all this since they left power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Lilly said:

I must have missed something...which agency has said that the Trump campaign had inappropriate contact with the Russians? Last I heard team Trump was only under investigation and no evidence had been found as of yet.

You are correct its the intelligence agencies who believe it has happened and are thusly investigating they have not yet provided evidence of said claim. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Lilly said:

The point is that no one was found guilty of a criminal action (not really a petty point).

Sessions may indeed end up being given the boot as well. However, whether or not he will be found guilty of any criminal action has yet to be determined.

He has already opened himself up to perjury. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so they are investigating based on evidence that everyone wants to see, but they wont show it  to anyone?, add too much stink about it from every msm, and it looks just like a lie that can not be substantiated, but so beneficial to one  side, the side that is doing the lying, and stalling. 

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BlackBearWolf said:

 

Also I have never heard Obama or Hillary claim they know Trump is in collusion with the russians. Unike like Trump  who claims to know that Obama hacked him.  Hillary and Obama have been silent about all this since they left power.

Yep, back in the campaign Clinton was indeed talking about the Russians. Take a look here (scroll down to the video of July 2016): http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-hillary-clinton-campaign-raises-1469368571-htmlstory.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, aztek said:

so they are investigating based on evidence that everyone wants to see, but they wont show it  to anyone?, add too much stink about it from every msm, and it looks just like a lie that can not be substantiated, but so beneficial to one  side, the side that is doing the lying, and stalling. 

I will give you that, there's certainly been no evidence shown.

Now, which side is doing the lying...I have no idea. This is why I want to see the evidence!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, aztek said:

so they are investigating based on evidence that everyone wants to see, but they wont show it  to anyone?, add too much stink about it from every msm, and it looks just like a lie that can not be substantiated, but so beneficial to one  side, the side that is doing the lying, and stalling. 

You're right of course, I mean all criminal investigations include the investigators laying the evidence they have to the public before charges are even filed :rolleyes::rofl: ..........its just sounding desperate at this point amigo. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just had one hell of a thought...What if everyone is guilty? I mean, what if Trump et al really are in cahoots with the Russians? What if Obama et al really are guilty of violating the Constitution?

What a mess that would be. Oh, and Paul Ryan would be President (unless he's done something too?).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

You're right of course, I mean all criminal investigations include the investigators laying the evidence they have to the public before charges are even filed :rolleyes::rofl: ..........its just sounding desperate at this point amigo. 

there was plenty of evidence made public when Clinton was investigated, because evidence did exist,. yet here, not a single evidence, plenty of stink, get real amigo.

you keep saying desperate, but it is really you who is desperate. i'm otoh, indifferent, my life will not change in any way regardless who is in the office. 

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Well in theory but its the intelligence agencies telling us that Trump and co had inappropriate contact with the Russkies not Obama. 

Actually the intelligence agencies have all come forward and stated unequivocally that no evidence of collusion has been found.  Do a search.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The time is fast approaching the point where some kind of actual evidence needs to be shown. People are starting to just 'lose it' and the end result could be civil unrest beyond what this country has ever seen. So, either show the evidence that Trump has colluded with the Russians or knock off the allegations and just accept that he's now the POTUS.

As to the wiretapping, same applies...we need to see some evidence pronto.

 

Edited by Lilly
addition
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, aztek said:

there was plenty of evidence made public when Clinton was investigated, because evidence did exist,

That doesnt make it standard  practice and its a tad bit disingenuous , or naive i suppose,  to insinuate otherwise . I mean if all you care about is getting over "the other side" then run with it 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

Actually the intelligence agencies have all come forward and stated unequivocally that no evidence of collusion has been found.  Do a search.

Folowed your advise and this was the second link: 

 

US spies have 'considerable intelligence' on high-level Trump-Russia talks, claims ex-NSA analyst 

A former National Security Agency (NSA) counterintelligence officer says US agents have “considerable intelligence” of high-level Russians discussing collusion with Donald Trump’s election team

 

Edited by Farmer77
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

That doesnt make it standard  

lol, it is pretty much standard, if evidence is present it is always made public, especially if case is big enough, when entire country watching it.

your reaction reminds me how cops are handling  police misconduct investigations, when they know they are at fault, they will never provide anything, saying we can not comment on active investigation, yet if there is an evidence, or a video showing they are in the right, they make it public right away.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lilly said:

Yep, back in the campaign Clinton was indeed talking about the Russians. Take a look here (scroll down to the video of July 2016): http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-hillary-clinton-campaign-raises-1469368571-htmlstory.html

The claim you made is Hillary told the Oboma administration that Trump was in collusion with Russia.

 The Article just quotes Hillary saying that here "Email leaks are helping Trump." 

It then quotes Manafort saying "These a just obfuscations, the Russians have nothing to do with it."

Then Manafort resigned

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, aztek said:

lol, it is pretty much standard, if evidence is present it is always made public, especially if case is big enough, when entire country watching it.

your reaction reminds me how cops are handling  police misconduct investigations, when they know they are at fault, they will never provide anything, saying we can not comment on active investigation, yet if there is an evidence, or a video showing they are in the right, they make it public right away.

All personal goals and desires aside I really do think this is too important of an issue to have any evidence, if it does exist, flaunted in the open where it could give a potential traitor to the US a chance to prepare a defense. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Farmer77 said:

SInce the president cant be sued for his actions in office

So he cannot be held responsible and accused for defamation, which is a criminal offence in the US as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Farmer77 said:

US spies have 'considerable intelligence' on high-level Trump-Russia talks, claims ex-NSA analyst 

A former National Security Agency (NSA) counterintelligence officer says US agents have “considerable intelligence” of high-level Russians discussing collusion with Donald Trump’s election team

 

Maybe it is time we stop listening to these unnamed sources.  I repeat, all intelligence chiefs have come forward and said there is no evidence to present because they found nothing.   Post a link to your evidence and I'll be glad to look but that is a link to an unnamed source  with no evidence to show saying things he can't back up.  In other words it is utter BS and you believe it because you want to.  Let me ask you a question, with all these former Obamaites leaking info left and right wouldn't we have seen this so called evidence by now if it existed?   Why didn't your incredible source produce this proof? 

We are going on two months of this garbage now and to date, not one piece of evidence has been presented to back up your accusation.  None.  Zilch, Nada.   Podesta's emails account was hacked using the oldest trick in the book and to top it off the moron was using "password" as his password.  My 11 year old could've hacked that account because password is the first word you use when you try and get into someone's account.  That is all we know at this point in time so al the rest is garbage, rumors and innuendo.   

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

All personal goals and desires aside I really do think this is too important of an issue to have any evidence, if it does exist, flaunted in the open where it could give a potential traitor to the US a chance to prepare a defense. 

 

lol, so he is a traitor now? now that is desperate .lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BlackBearWolf said:

The claim you made is Hillary told the Oboma administration that Trump was in collusion with Russia.

 

I didn't make any claims. My response was just an attempt (using humor which I gather didn't work) to show how one can blame this one or that one...but without any evidence all one has is finger pointing

Who knows for sure if what this one or that one actually said about the other one is true or not...we've been shown no evidence for goodness sakes!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, toast said:

So he cannot be held responsible and accused for defamation, which is a criminal offence in the US as well?

I have to be honest I did not realize that defamation was a criminal offense. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
  • The topic was unlocked

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.