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

Merc14

Looks like even David Nunes thinks Powers had no business unmasking a person a day for teh last year of Obama's administration

http://thefederalistpapers.org/us/un-ambassador-samantha-power-unmasked-americans-almost-daily-obamas-last-year

House Intelligence Chair Devin Nunes stated that there does not appear to be anything legitimate about the motives of this unmasking campaign, in spite of Rice’s claims.

The most recent development, as discovered by Fox News, indicates that this surveillance may have been used as a weapon against the Trump campaign and transition team. Power made an unprecedented number of unmasking requests, the vast majority of them towards the end of the year:

Samantha Power, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, was ‘unmasking’ at such a rapid pace in the final months of the Obama administration that she averaged more than one request for every working day in 2016 – and even sought information in the days leading up to President Trump’s inauguration, multiple sources close to the matter told Fox News.

Two sources, who were not authorized to speak on the record, said the requests to identify Americans whose names surfaced in foreign intelligence reporting, known as unmasking, exceeded 260 last year. One source indicated this occurred in the final days of the Obama White House.

The details emerged ahead of an expected appearance by Power next month on Capitol Hill. She is one of several Obama administration officials facing congressional scrutiny for their role in seeking the identities of Trump associates in intelligence reports – but the interest in her actions is particularly high.

Back in July, Nunes sent a letter to the Director of National Security Dan Coats stating that an official without intelligence function had made hundreds of request to reveal identities during that final year of the Obama administration.

That official is suspected to be Samantha Power.

Congressman Trey Gowdy pressed CIA Director John Brennan about the suspicion, but did not single out Power by name.

Gowdy: Do you recall any U.S. ambassadors asking that names be unmasked?

Brennan: I don’t know. Maybe it’s ringing a vague bell but I’m not — I could not answer with any confidence.

Gowdy continued, asking: On either January 19 or up till noon on January 20, did you make any unmasking requests?

Brennan: I do not believe I did.

Gowdy: So you did not make any requests on the last day that you were employed?

Brennan: No, I was not in the agency on the last day I was employed.

Other UN Ambassadors have made unmasking requests for intelligence purposes, so that in and of itself is not the strange thing. A spokesman for Power stated that a UN Ambassador has an intelligence function, as a member of the National Security Council.

However, the sheer number of requests, and the time frame in which they took place, all cause a great deal of suspicion about the nature of requests.

 
Edited by Merc14
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

I read there were indictments against Manafort last page and had to go look it up. Manafort simply Expects to be indicted... Oh, that's not a fact then. 

So, no actual indictments yet....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
On 9/19/2017 at 11:59 PM, and then said:

Gee, I wonder if the media that ridiculed Trump for weeks over his claim will admit they were wrong?  Manafort is being subjected to police state tactics to force him to tell Mueller's people what they want to hear.  Can you imagine what would have happened if he'd heard the fearless minions of the Effa Bee Eye slipping into his house and mistaken them for burglars?  If he'd fired on them, he'd be dead and there wouldn't even be a real investigation, just a jazzed up story about his desperation to avoid telling the truth.  Our nation is in DEEP trouble and if traditional, law-abiding citizens don't stand up and DEMAND justice, we're done.  I'm really beginning to believe that G. Gordon Liddy had it right.  Aim for the head when they storm through your door unannounced.

All retractions go on the last page of the newspaper, and are posted in out of the way corners of a media sources online site, but never are aired, or put out as an article.

Share this post


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

I read there were indictments against Manafort last page and had to go look it up. Manafort simply Expects to be indicted... Oh, that's not a fact then. 

So, no actual indictments yet....

Keep in mind Mr Manafort could very well be indicted for things he did long before he even joined Trump's election team. If Mr Manafort's illegal actions were not common knowledge then his past bad behaviors would not apply to team Trump. Think of it this way, if you hire somebody and unbeknownst to you they robbed a bank a couple of years ago and finally the authorities catch up to him, are you somehow guilty of robbery too because you hired the guy?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
16 hours ago, Lilly said:

Keep in mind Mr Manafort could very well be indicted for things he did long before he even joined Trump's election team. If Mr Manafort's illegal actions were not common knowledge then his past bad behaviors would not apply to team Trump. Think of it this way, if you hire somebody and unbeknownst to you they robbed a bank a couple of years ago and finally the authorities catch up to him, are you somehow guilty of robbery too because you hired the guy?

Possibly... According to the court of public opinion... Stirred up by the Media.... <_< :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kurzweil

Starting to think anything and everything slips through the fingers of even the highest court in the land. Why is that? Everything that is brought to them is pretty much a non issue. I never read about punishments dealt out but only on going investigation...really how long does it take? Until we're no longer interested in the story I guess. I really can't believe my tax dollars pay for these people's jobs. I'd like results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
preacherman76
On ‎9‎/‎30‎/‎2017 at 8:38 AM, Lilly said:

Keep in mind Mr Manafort could very well be indicted for things he did long before he even joined Trump's election team. If Mr Manafort's illegal actions were not common knowledge then his past bad behaviors would not apply to team Trump. Think of it this way, if you hire somebody and unbeknownst to you they robbed a bank a couple of years ago and finally the authorities catch up to him, are you somehow guilty of robbery too because you hired the guy?

According to Roger Stone, who is best friends with Manafort, They are trying to scare him into lying about Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
On 9/30/2017 at 8:38 AM, Lilly said:

Keep in mind Mr Manafort could very well be indicted for things he did long before he even joined Trump's election team. If Mr Manafort's illegal actions were not common knowledge then his past bad behaviors would not apply to team Trump. Think of it this way, if you hire somebody and unbeknownst to you they robbed a bank a couple of years ago and finally the authorities catch up to him, are you somehow guilty of robbery too because you hired the guy?

The reason for digging up all of that is to push him to fully cooperate with the investigation into Trump. Thats why the NY Atty General is involved, so Trump cant simply offer Manafort a pardon for his silence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly

The inherent problem with threatening someone unless they offer up dirt on another person is that often they will lie. You know, "If you don't tell us exactly what we want to hear then we will destroy you", so of course the person then says exactly what they want to hear. This is generally why unsupported allegations (especially when beneficial to the person making the allegations) are not considered to be the best form of evidence.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
4 minutes ago, Lilly said:

The inherent problem with threatening someone unless they offer up dirt on another person is that often they will lie. You know, "If you don't tell us exactly what we want to hear then we will destroy you", so of course the person then says exactly what they want to hear. This is generally why unsupported allegations (especially when beneficial to the person making the allegations) are not considered to be the best form of evidence.

It seems that given the present toxic atmosphere that is fine with many folks.  farmer has been particularly upset which has puzzled me given his hatred for political types yet Trump is a true outsider and he is off the wall angry!  very puzzling.

Share this post


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

The inherent problem with threatening someone unless they offer up dirt on another person is that often they will lie. You know, "If you don't tell us exactly what we want to hear then we will destroy you", so of course the person then says exactly what they want to hear. This is generally why unsupported allegations (especially when beneficial to the person making the allegations) are not considered to be the best form of evidence.

Anything Manafort says will still have to be proven to a jury, judge or the senate. 

 

13 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

It seems that given the present toxic atmosphere that is fine with many folks.  farmer has been particularly upset which has puzzled me given his hatred for political types yet Trump is a true outsider and he is off the wall angry!  very puzzling.

Well I argue that the only thing "outsider" about Trump is his social awkwardness , beyond that he is just another oligarch out to help his business interests and partners. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
32 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Anything Manafort says will still have to be proven to a jury, judge or the senate. 

 

Well I argue that the only thing "outsider" about Trump is his social awkwardness , beyond that he is just another oligarch out to help his business interests and partners. 

 

Oh please!!!  The man has, literally, never served in office yet you find fault.  I put it to you that you will never be happy with any elected official.  Your hatred for Trump is off the wall and you have continuously fabricated crimes he has committed with zero evidence of said crimes.  You are still claiming he colluded with the Russians to throw the election, which has become laughable. You are now promoting federal law enforcement to illegally force a person to falsely implicate someone in a crime they have not committed to get your way.  You have become the very thing you rail against and should be ashamed of yourself, I certainly am.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
1 hour ago, Merc14 said:

Oh please!!!  The man has, literally, never served in office yet you find fault

The man has literally spent his entire life rubbing elbows with the exact same people whom you claim are insiders. The only difference is that until 2016 his political aspirations have failed. He is no outsider. 

 

1 hour ago, Merc14 said:

 Your hatred for Trump is off the wall and you have continuously fabricated crimes he has committed with zero evidence of said crimes.  You are still claiming he colluded with the Russians to throw the election, which has become laughable

Ive not fabricated a single thing, simply commented on the reported stories. Generally speaking fabrications dont get their own special council investigation. 

1 hour ago, Merc14 said:

You are now promoting federal law enforcement to illegally force a person to falsely implicate someone in a crime they have not committed to get your way.  You have become the very thing you rail against and should be ashamed of yourself, I certainly am.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander right? What you're describing isnt illegal, its standard law enforcement operating procedure. If it were a gang of "thugs" we were discussing I dont think you would have a problem with the tactic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
17 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

The man has literally spent his entire life rubbing elbows with the exact same people whom you claim are insiders. The only difference is that until 2016 his political aspirations have failed. He is no outsider. 

I don't claim anything, you are the conspiracy nut

17 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Ive not fabricated a single thing, simply commented on the reported stories. Generally speaking fabrications dont get their own special council investigation. 

LMAO.  Special counsels aren't appointed because you are guilty, they are appointed because the democrats are lunatics who think the Russians stole the election from Hillary.    Your statement is tantamount to if the police detective interviews you then you committed murder.  

17 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

What is good for the goose is good for the gander right? What you're describing isnt illegal, its standard law enforcement operating procedure. If it were a gang of "thugs" we were discussing I dont think you would have a problem with the tactic. 

When have I EVER promoted that behavior?    So basically you are now so far down the rabbit hole that you no longer care about innocence or guilt.  Very sad and I am glad I called you on it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Just now, Merc14 said:

LMAO.  Special counsels aren't appointed because you are guilty, they are appointed because the democrats are lunatics who think the Russians stole the election from Hillary.    Your statement is tantamount to if the police detective interviews you then you committed murder.

  The special council was convened because of Trump's firing of Comey, obstruction of justice being illegal and all that. 

 

2 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

So basically you are now so far down the rabbit hole that you no longer care about innocence or guilt

Of course I care about innocence or guilt. Like I said though, whatever Manafort has to say must be proven to a judge, jury and or senate committee. Its not like impeachment/imprisonment will hinge solely on his testimony without it being corroborated. 

The truth is you're not wrong, Mueller will eventually find something to hang Trump on and it will be done legally.  I totally understand why that would p*** off a Trump supporter 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
8 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

  The special council was convened because of Trump's firing of Comey, obstruction of justice being illegal and all that. 

Nope, Mueller was appointed to investigate Trump's supposed collusion with the Russians.  https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump/former-fbi-chief-mueller-appointed-to-probe-trump-russia-ties-idUSKCN18D1XT

Quote

Of course I care about innocence or guilt. Like I said though, whatever Manafort has to say must be proven to a judge, jury and or senate committee. Its not like impeachment/imprisonment will hinge solely on his testimony without it being corroborated. 

No, you really don't, as shown in your below statement, you simply want Trump ramrodded regardless of guilt or innocence.   You didn't like the outcome of the election and want the results changed, no matter the method, to meet your ridiculous desires which, as far as I can see, will never be satisfied.  

 

Quote

The truth is you're not wrong, Mueller will eventually find something to hang Trump on and it will be done legally.  I totally understand why that would p*** off a Trump supporter 

My support or lack thereof is irrelevant as I simply don't like illegal activities in our government.  Mueller has gone far beyond his assigned duties and is now threatening people with indictments to get them to say anything to make his case against Trump.  

Edited by Merc14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Just now, Merc14 said:

No, you really don't, as shown in your below statement, you simply want Trump ramrodded regardless of guilt or innocence

Nah , I care about truth. Like I said the reality is Trump will get nailed for something.  That something will be something he actually did. 

 

3 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

Nope, Mueller was appointed to investigate Trump's supposed collusion with the Russians.  https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump/former-fbi-chief-mueller-appointed-to-probe-trump-russia-ties-idUSKCN18D1XT

I stand corrected. It was because of the obstruction of justice that he was appointed to investigate the Russia thing.....which kinda brings up another point, do you really not see how the Trump administrations own actions are what kept the story going long enough to have a special council named? To claim this is all partisan nonsense is to ignore the repeated shenanigans of the regime in a very Clintonista fashion.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
4 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Nah , I care about truth. Like I said the reality is Trump will get nailed for something.  That something will be something he actually did. 

You have been saying that since teh election and frankly it is BORING.   You don't even know why you hate teh man so much as all you repeatedly say is he rubs elbows with other rich people betraying your ludicrous hatred for successful people.

4 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

I stand corrected. It was because of the obstruction of justice that he was appointed to investigate the Russia thing.....which kinda brings up another point, do you really not see how the Trump administrations own actions are what kept the story going long enough to have a special council named? To claim this is all partisan nonsense is to ignore the repeated shenanigans of the regime in a very Clintonista fashion.  

Nope, not even close, Mueller was tasked to investigate the Russia meddling in the election which looks like it never happened.    Comey was a corrupt puppet of the DNC and should've been fired an hour after Trump was sworn in, he is an idiot for allowing that man to serve well into his presidency and I said as much at the time.  Mueller is string arming Manafort because he doesn't have anything on Trump and is now in the process of inventing crimes just as was done to Scooter Libby by Patrick Fitzgerald re. Valerie Plame in order to get something on Bush.   The Special Counsel KNEW that Libby had nothing to do with outing Plame but threw him in jail anyways.   You should look into it, you'd approve I am sure.

BTW, Mueller is a Special Counsel, he is not a council

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
3 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

You have been saying that since teh election and frankly it is BORING

Perhaps im wrong, we'll find out once Mueller wraps up 

4 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

You don't even know why you hate teh man so much as all you repeatedly say is he rubs elbows with other rich people betraying your ludicrous hatred for successful people.

He's a rude, racist, sexist oligarch with no firm political convictions who scammed a large percentage of the population into thinking he was something else, something good. That is why I am actively rooting for his ruin.  

Trump's "success" is highly debatable, regardless I dont hate successful people, but I certainly dont trust anyone who has never had to work a day in their life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
19 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

He's a rude, racist, sexist oligarch with no firm political convictions who scammed a large percentage of the population into thinking he was something else, something good. That is why I am actively rooting for his ruin.  

Trump's "success" is highly debatable, regardless I dont hate successful people, but I certainly dont trust anyone who has never had to work a day in their life. 

Well it was a Giant Douche or Crap Sandwich situation. I don't think all those people voted FOR Trump, as many of them... Including myself... were voting Against Clinton. There's a distinction there.

I never thought that Trump was going to be "Something Good", but I did think that he'd not do much damage, and at least Clinton would not be in Office.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
1 minute ago, DieChecker said:

Well it was a Giant Douche or Crap Sandwich situation. I don't think all those people voted FOR Trump, as many of them... Including myself... were voting Against Clinton. There's a distinction there.

I never thought that Trump was going to be "Something Good", but I did think that he'd not do much damage, and at least Clinton would not be in Office.

Oh i totally understand why people voted for him. No matter how frustrated I might become with folks who still support him I definitely understand choosing him over Hillary in 2016.  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly
On ‎3‎/‎4‎/‎2017 at 2:46 PM, Lilly said:

Something tells me that the FBI (and other agencies) already know about the wiretapping. Since the manure is now hitting the proverbial fan I'm betting there will be some type of 'inquiry' into it.

Ok folks, it's now 10 months later and we know quite a bit more than we did last March. Oh boy did the FBI already know about the 'wiretapping'. That manure pile is far larger and the FBI itself is smack in the middle of it hitting a very large fan.

I often say, "Time will tell" ...and it's currently becoming very telling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

A minor thought... .DID the FBI know about the surveillance, or was it done by the rogue elements in the NSA ? (see logs passim).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly
On ‎3‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 8:14 AM, 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.

 

I think my comments here could invoke some further discussion (considering what we now know).

  • Like 1

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.