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 -
Lilly

Trump Tower Wiretapped?

2,038 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Claire.

Clapper denies wiretap of Trump Tower:

   

Quote

James Clapper: "There was no such wire tap activity amounted against" Donald Trump. #MTP pic.twitter.com/eNGFKe0vxY


    — Meet the Press (@MeetThePress) March 5, 2017

Former Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper on Sunday denied President Trump's allegations that former President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower before the election.

During an interview on NBC's "Meet The Press," Clapper was asked if he would be aware if something like that had happened.

"I would certainly hope so ... Obviously I can't speak officially anymore," Clapper said on NBC's "Meet The Press."

"But I will say that for the part of the national security apparatus that I oversaw as DNI, there was no such wiretap activity mounted against the president-elect at the time, as a candidate, or against his campaign."

Source: The Hill

Edited by Claire.
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
White Unicorn
4 hours ago, Lilly said:

As it's already been pointed out, a President doesn't order a wiretap, but that doesn't mean a cabinet official couldn't order it and the President would most certainly know all about it. Also, it appears that obtaining one of these FISA orders doesn't require a ton of evidence, just something that doesn't seem 'quite right'. And, as much as we'd like to think that all judges are totally objective and not influenced by politics this is simply not so.

As for who's in hot water here, that depends on what the actual evidence shows. If team Trump was not involved with the Russians to pull off anything questionable and it can be demonstrated that team Obama (on Clinton's behalf) was actually more interested in political spying (a la Watergate) then Obama needs to worry. If team Trump was in cahoots with the Russians to mess with the election and team Obama actually does have evidence of this then team Trump needs to worry. However, (and this is a big however) if team Obama has this strong irrefutable evidence and has had it since before the election it makes no sense that they wouldn't have dropped this bomb before the election took place. Also, if they obtained this evidence after the election why are they still dilly dallying now? I mean, why keep playing around, just bring out the evidence and nail Trump before he can even begin to govern.

Personally, I don't think team Obama has any strong evidence. As for the wiretapping, it really depends upon what was used as probable cause for getting that FISA order.

 

FBI was doing investigation into hacks. If more evidence and investigations into multiple connections is required it would take more time. Comey himself worries me since he went against protocol with comments about Hillary investigation and timing.

Let's say they also found links to international money laundering by some they were investigating, guess what, international agencies besides US would also become involved in their own investigations. Some of our allies work with some of our other Intel  agencies  hand in hand. So a lot of the findings or leaks wouldn't necessarily be US. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claire.

Trump’s ‘evidence’ for Obama wiretap claims relies on sketchy, anonymously sourced reports.

Read more: The Washington Post

In the article, the Washington Post examines the media reports cited by Spencer as 'evidence.' Their conclusion:

"While the Trump White House cited five news reports to justify its request for a congressional investigation, only two actually are relevant.

It’s certainly ironic that the Trump White House — which has heavily criticized articles relying on anonymous sources — now relies on articles based on anonymous sources that cite information that has not been confirmed by any U.S. news organization. It would be amusing if it were not so sad.

After all, Clapper, who presumably would be aware of a FISA court order, has issued an on-the-record denial.

Even if these media reports are accepted as accurate, neither back up Trump’s claims that Obama ordered the tapping of his phone calls. Moreover, they also do not back up the administration’s revised claim of politically motivated investigations.

We’re still waiting for the evidence."

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly

We should be very careful about just up and believing James Clapper. Remember, he testified to a Senate panel in 2013 that U.S. spy agencies were not collecting data on American citizens . This claim was later contradicted by information leaked by none other than Edward Snowden. Clapper resigned from office soon after.

I prefer to wait and see what the actual evidence reveals.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
7 minutes ago, Claire. said:

Trump’s ‘evidence’ for Obama wiretap claims relies on sketchy, anonymously sourced reports.

Read more: The Washington Post

In the article, the Washington Post examines the media reports cited by Spencer as 'evidence.' Their conclusion:

"While the Trump White House cited five news reports to justify its request for a congressional investigation, only two actually are relevant.

It’s certainly ironic that the Trump White House — which has heavily criticized articles relying on anonymous sources — now relies on articles based on anonymous sources that cite information that has not been confirmed by any U.S. news organization. It would be amusing if it were not so sad.

After all, Clapper, who presumably would be aware of a FISA court order, has issued an on-the-record denial.

Even if these media reports are accepted as accurate, neither back up Trump’s claims that Obama ordered the tapping of his phone calls. Moreover, they also do not back up the administration’s revised claim of politically motivated investigations.

We’re still waiting for the evidence."

I love the 4 Pinocchio's at the end of the article :lol: 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claire.
11 minutes ago, Lilly said:

We should be very careful about just up and believing James Clapper. Remember, he testified to a Senate panel in 2013 that U.S. spy agencies were not collecting data on American citizens . This claim was later contradicted by information leaked by none other than Edward Snowden. Clapper resigned from office soon after.

Clapper did not resign soon after (or even as a result of) his testimony to the Senate panel. He submitted his letter of resignation last November, but stayed on until the end of Obama's term. But yes, he wasn't entirely forthcoming during that testimony.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly
Just now, Claire. said:

Clapper did not resign soon after (or even as a result of) his testimony to the Senate panel. He submitted his letter of resignation last November, but stayed on until the end of Obama's term. But yes, he wasn't entirely forthcoming during that testimony.

Ok, it wasn't soon after (time flies when one gets older).

However, I'm still not comfortable just believing what Mr Clapper says about this stuff.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Derek Willis

Here's something strange. I noticed how in one of the tweets President Trump spelled the word "tap" as "tapp". Just for fun I googled "tapp" and the first entry is TAPP TV, a company run by two people who were pioneers of reality television!

https://www.tapptv.com/

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
White Unicorn
7 minutes ago, Lilly said:

We should be very careful about just up and believing James Clapper. Remember, he testified to a Senate panel in 2013 that U.S. spy agencies were not collecting data on American citizens . This claim was later contradicted by information leaked by none other than Edward Snowden. Clapper resigned from office soon after.

I prefer to wait and see what the actual evidence reveals.

All done in the name of National Security. But there should be more vetting processes for all of our fearless leaders in high political offices that help make the policies and law. 

Some complain about getting FBI clearances or the long confirmation hearings under oath. Holy moly, some of us in federal positions had to go through that and Interpol for clearance that was a much broader back ground check than the  FBI not excluding IRS reviews for any foreign monetary links! 

They all seem to want to make the rules to favor and protect themselves while in office. 

I'm totally upset with the circus that this has become because of all the big money in the political games. I'm all for keeping investigations under wrap but as a Democracy we are owed some transparency since they are supposed to be representing we the people not themselves!

Then they wonder about why leakers do it and even call to get rid of any whistleblower protection laws in place. Much of what the public has learned has been because leaking to investigative reporters in the press. It's sad to think we need that in order for any transparency and things to be uncovered.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly
25 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

I love the 4 Pinocchio's at the end of the article :lol: 

 

Careful, Clapper himself should be awarded a few Pinocchios.

I'm still opting to wait for some actual evidence.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
White Unicorn
2 minutes ago, Derek Willis said:

Here's something strange. I noticed how in one of the tweets President Trump spelled the word "tap" as "tapp". Just for fun I googled "tapp" and the first entry is TAPP TV, a company run by two people who were pioneers of reality television!

https://www.tapptv.com/

 

 

Freudian slip, you can tell where his mind is at LOL

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly
1 minute ago, White Unicorn said:

Freudian slip, you can tell where his mind is at LOL

Or he just got confused by the past tense of the verb 'to tap', that being 'tapped' (one doubles the consonant).

Like Groucho Marx once said about Freud, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar".

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
White Unicorn
1 minute ago, Lilly said:

Or he just got confused by the past tense of the verb 'to tap', that being 'tapped' (one doubles the consonant).

Like Groucho Marx once said about Freud, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar".

 

On the lighter side, a cigar is just a cigar unless you're Bill Clinton LOL 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LV-426
1 hour ago, Claire. said:

Clapper denies wiretap of Trump Tower:  

I hope he's lying.

The monicker "Tapper Clapper" has too much potential to go unused in headline news :yes:

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky
4 hours ago, Lilly said:

Just like I thought...this all appears to be heading toward 'put up or shut up'. I highly suspect the DOJ (under AG Lynch) ordered the wiretap and President Obama most certainly knew about it. This will all come down to what evidence they had that the Trump campaign was behaving as an "agent of a foreign power" (Russia). Basically, Trump has now forced their hand into having to show what they have for evidence.

Sounds more like Trump is on a fishing trip. He has no proof. He has only a suspicion, one that breitbart also shares and Trump is throwing it out there in the hope that something sticks. It's meant to deflect from the scandals gripping his own administration. I think Trump's timing for tweeting is impeccable.   

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky
53 minutes ago, Claire. said:

Trump’s ‘evidence’ for Obama wiretap claims relies on sketchy, anonymously sourced reports.

Read more: The Washington Post

In the article, the Washington Post examines the media reports cited by Spencer as 'evidence.' Their conclusion:

"While the Trump White House cited five news reports to justify its request for a congressional investigation, only two actually are relevant.

It’s certainly ironic that the Trump White House — which has heavily criticized articles relying on anonymous sources — now relies on articles based on anonymous sources that cite information that has not been confirmed by any U.S. news organization. It would be amusing if it were not so sad.

After all, Clapper, who presumably would be aware of a FISA court order, has issued an on-the-record denial.

Even if these media reports are accepted as accurate, neither back up Trump’s claims that Obama ordered the tapping of his phone calls. Moreover, they also do not back up the administration’s revised claim of politically motivated investigations.

We’re still waiting for the evidence."

Trump is now getting his intelligence briefings from reading the morning papers... that's just great. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly

Proof verses suspicion...it appears both sides in this particular fiasco have this problem.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claire.
16 minutes ago, Lilly said:

Careful, Clapper himself should be awarded a few Pinocchios.

I'm still opting to wait for some actual evidence.

Clapper has no reason to lie at this point, especially over something that can easily be proved one way or the other. The likelihood that he is lying to cover up illegal activity is slim next to none. There was already an investigation underway and if they deemed it necessary to wiretap Trump or any of his people, it would have been easy enough to get authorization from a judge with sufficient evidence to justify it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly
Just now, Claire. said:

Clapper has no reason to lie at this point...

We just can't know that now can we.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore

Trump could have been bugged still. Clapper just stated Obama did not order such. As rightly pointed out by others in the course of these investigations another party  could have made a case for a wiretap. 

Too bad he probably was not. If so the chances of getting the goods on Trump & Co. would be higher. 

Edited by Avatar Samantha Ai
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claire.
7 minutes ago, Lilly said:

Proof verses suspicion...it appears both sides in this particular fiasco have this problem.

The burden of proof is on no one but Trump.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky

Trump is now calling for a congressional hearing and apparently he won't comment any further. The bloke is a comedian. :lol:  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly
Just now, Claire. said:

The burden of proof is on no one but Trump.

And upon those who are saying the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
13 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

Trump is now calling for a congressional hearing and apparently he won't comment any further. The bloke is a comedian. :lol:  

His ineptitude is being revealed more and more. What about the congressional investigations and hearings he has called for leakers and voter fraud.

Edited by Avatar Samantha Ai
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.