FBI asked Justice Department to reject Trump claim: report (1 Viewer)

[lurchadams]

FBI asked Justice Department to reject Trump claim: report



Clapper and now Comey want no part of Trumps wiretapping delusions.

The problem is is that the Comey asked the DOJ's permission to refute Trump's claim. Since the DOJ is a political office loyal to Trump it's against the DOJ's interest to refute Trump's insane claims. Sessions knows that the intelligence committee, now charged with the responsibility of investigating Trump's claims is under GOP supervision, hence a Trump-friendly result will probably be the result of the committee's investigation.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

Mark Levin is a conservative/far right radio talking-head. His very job depends on supporting Trump and the GOP.

You say that like it makes some sort of sense. Levin is, in fact, a classical liberal like our founders. His, our, political beliefs do not make him/us automatically wrong, by the way. Classical liberal systems survive longer than the socialistic structured systems in the history of the world. Right?

Yes.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

I've listened to that three times now and still don't know what Levin says that's not been discussed on this and related threads many times. What did he say that indicates anyone is "lying." None of what Levin talks about indicates Trump was tapped or anything or anyone in Trump tower. We've all guessed that the October order likely covered SOMEONE or some thing associated with Trump, but we have no idea what that is.



We have no idea if any of it was "overreach" or not. If we 1) know the Russians attempted to influence the election for Trump and we do, and 2) we get reports of contacts between Russians and the Trump campaign and several are unusually close to Russia, then I don't see the "overreach" in figuring out what the hell is going on.

Perfect.

Another instance wherein fact and evidence mean nothing to someone whose belief systems require none of that... and so you cannot understand the importance of what Levin is saying? I never expressed that what he was saying has not been covered in other threads here. I am not personally familiar with every thread on the topic here, I am discussing it in THIS thread.

Where did you start to lose Levin? Was it when he was using all left wing sources to describe events? Or when he showed in each and every instance that the story being promulgated by the left wing media to fit one scenario in an attempt to smear Trump was actually proving something entirely different and serves, instead, to smear the reality behind the former, corrupt duplicity of the O bomb administration?

Facts of the matter are that Flynn was caught up in a snare of some intelligence entity surveilling him, then illegally leaking the story by someone who stands to gain, turning nothing we know so far about him into something bad yet with no evidence that has ever really materialized that anything he did was actually inappropriate nor particularly out of the ordinary. Just like with Sessions A lot of waving in the direction of foreign influence by left wing publications with nothing but the malice of innuendo.

Levin goes on to confirm that the White House was amply aware of what its minions were doing... and there will no doubt, when we get to the bottom of this, find the paper trail on the FISA requests, both the one turned down and the one, apparently, ultimately accepted... which apparently also, proved nothing against Trump and company.

As to lying, some are saying the wire tapng never happened, some, as Levin very pointedly expressed with numerous articles from left wing publications stating these very things, that it is quite apparent that the left wing media believed the surveillance of Trump associates were in progress. So, somebody is lying as you cannot have it both ways... either they were taping, listening in or they were not.

Okay, now tell me exactly how "we 1) know the Russians attempted to influence the election for Trump" and how these instances are anything but normal conduct of business between folks who will have to be meeting, talking, sizing up the situation and their opposing members in another, foreign government when their job calls for them to be doing that in the future should they be so fortunate to be elected to be running this part of the US side of things?

 

[JackA]

what it was doing was pointing out "reportedly" does not mean it is an established fact.

Fourth time you've said that. "What it was doing" was indicating the information came from sources, a common method of news gathering.

 

[Socrates1]

For the record, there is a big difference between tapping Donald J. Trump and/or Trump Tower versus Manafort, Page, Stone, and/or other unnamed individuals that the agencies know WERE in contact with Russians during the campaign. I'm not aware of any story that Donald J. Trump was wiretapped. Can you cite these stories? All the ones I've read make it clear it was NOT DJT, but perhaps someone or ones associated with the campaign.

You will soon learn there are many things you are unaware of BUT that does NOT mean they never happened !

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/us/politics/trump-russia-associates-investigation.html?_r=0
The F.B.I. is leading the investigations, aided by the National Security Agency, the C.I.A. and the Treasury Department’s financial crimes unit. The investigators have accelerated their efforts in recent weeks but have found no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, the officials said. One official said intelligence reports based on some of the wiretapped communications had been provided to the White House.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...9ede3c8cafa_story.html?utm_term=.ba69ad7232c7
U.S. counterintelligence officials are sifting through intercepted communications and financial data as part of a wider look at possible ties between the Russian government and associates of President-elect Donald Trump, officials said.

 

[JasperL]

Perfect.

Another instance wherein fact and evidence mean nothing to someone whose belief systems require none of that... and so you cannot understand the importance of what Levin is saying? I never expressed that what he was saying has not been covered in other threads here. I am not personally familiar with every thread on the topic here, I am discussing it in THIS thread.

If you can point out where I ignored the evidence, point it out. Stupid insults aren't getting you anywhere - kind of make you look pathetic.

Where did you start to lose Levin? Was it when he was using all left wing sources to describe events? Or when he showed in each and every instance that the story being promulgated by the left wing media to fit one scenario in an attempt to smear Trump was actually proving something entirely different and serves, instead, to smear the reality behind the former, corrupt duplicity of the O bomb administration?

Classic! You throw in a gratuitous insult about me ignoring evidence, then make a BS claim you cannot argue from the evidence Levin produced.

Facts of the matter are that Flynn was caught up in a snare of some intelligence entity surveilling him, then illegally leaking the story by someone who stands to gain, turning nothing we know so far about him into something bad yet with no evidence that has ever really materialized that anything he did was actually inappropriate nor particularly out of the ordinary.

Obama didn't throw Flynn under the bus - the WH did. Pence or his office was out at LEAST leaking how upset Pence was about Flynn lying to Pence TWICE, and in the case of with the ambassador sending Pence out to lie for Flynn on all the talk shows.

Levin goes on to confirm that the White House was amply aware of what its minions were doing... and there will no doubt, when we get to the bottom of this, find the paper trail on the FISA requests, both the one turned down and the one, apparently, ultimately accepted... which apparently also, proved nothing against Trump and company.

So what - I've acknowledged that of course Obama almost surely knew several times. What you're not doing and what Levin didn't do is even CONSIDER that it was appropriate to get those warrants. Even if they don't find what they're looking for, I'd think a rational person not blinded by partisanship would accept that given the evidence we had that it was clearly appropriate to investigate. We know Levin is a partisan hack and if Trump was Hillary, he'd be calling for HER head.

As to lying, some are saying the wire tapng never happened, some, as Levin very pointedly expressed with numerous articles from left wing publications stating these very things, that it is quite apparent that the left wing media believed the surveillance of Trump associates were in progress. So, somebody is lying as you cannot have it both ways... either they were taping, listening in or they were not.

The right wing trick here is to conflate all instances of "wire tapping." Which case are liberals saying didn't happen. I'm nearly positive we "wire tapped" essentially the entire Russian delegation, as we should, including the ambassador. It appears that in October an order to "wire tap" something was signed but we don't know what that something was, who it belonged to, etc. but lots of sources say it was NOT Trump himself or "Trump Tower." Maybe a server located in Philly, actually.

So it's very possible to believe multiple things that are all true.

1) Of course we "tapped" the ambassador, which is how we got Flynn's phone calls with him.
2) An October order was signed approving surveillance on something, probably associated with Trump. Perhaps a server, maybe one or more Trump associates with Russian ties
3) That something was NOT Trump or Trump Tower.

Okay, now tell me exactly how "we 1) know the Russians attempted to influence the election for Trump" and how these instances are anything but normal conduct of business between folks who will have to be meeting, talking, sizing up the situation and their opposing members in another, foreign government when their job calls for them to be doing that in the future should they be so fortunate to be elected to be running this part of the US side of things?

OK, I'll restate it - the IC issued a consensus report that concluded the Russians attempted to influence the election. It was in all the news. Here it is: https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

I guess in your world, me relying on that means facts and evidence mean nothing, and any person who respects evidence has to pretend like you did here that this assessment wasn't ever issued!

 

[JasperL]

You will soon learn there are many things you are unaware of BUT that does NOT mean they never happened !

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/us/politics/trump-russia-associates-investigation.html?_r=0
The F.B.I. is leading the investigations, aided by the National Security Agency, the C.I.A. and the Treasury Department’s financial crimes unit. The investigators have accelerated their efforts in recent weeks but have found no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, the officials said. One official said intelligence reports based on some of the wiretapped communications had been provided to the White House.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...9ede3c8cafa_story.html?utm_term=.ba69ad7232c7
U.S. counterintelligence officials are sifting through intercepted communications and financial data as part of a wider look at possible ties between the Russian government and associates of President-elect Donald Trump, officials said.

You cite stories, and quote from them, but I don't see anything that contradicts my post. Are you sure you read my post correctly? If you did, you'll have to be specific about what I left out or got wrong.

Here's essentially what I believe based on the evidence I've seen so far:

1) Manafort/Page/Stone and/or others in the Trump orbit might very well have been subjects of US or foreign surveillance, including "wire taps" related to their Russian contacts re: financial transactions and/or the campaign.

2) There is no evidence Trump or Trump Tower were "wire tapped."

 

[Rogue Valley]

You say that like it makes some sort of sense. Levin is, in fact, a classical liberal like our founders.

Who do you think you're crapping'? Wikipedia_Mark Levin

:rofl

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

If you can point out where I ignored the evidence, point it out. Stupid insults aren't getting you anywhere - kind of make you look pathetic.



Classic! You throw in a gratuitous insult about me ignoring evidence, then make a BS claim you cannot argue from the evidence Levin produced.



Obama didn't throw Flynn under the bus - the WH did. Pence or his office was out at LEAST leaking how upset Pence was about Flynn lying to Pence TWICE, and in the case of with the ambassador sending Pence out to lie for Flynn on all the talk shows.



So what - I've acknowledged that of course Obama almost surely knew several times. What you're not doing and what Levin didn't do is even CONSIDER that it was appropriate to get those warrants. Even if they don't find what they're looking for, I'd think a rational person not blinded by partisanship would accept that given the evidence we had that it was clearly appropriate to investigate. We know Levin is a partisan hack and if Trump was Hillary, he'd be calling for HER head.

If you ask me to point out the obvious, then I do, but then you still do not get it... To heck with that, too bad if you feel insulted. I find little use for victims these days.

Then you deflect adding insult to injury by not answering if you at all understood the damning evidence, that I will continue to dismiss recounting it as it is all right there, all on the video [ my source explaining it all who have the capacity to understand... of course this requires understanding that which he makes obvious].

Jesus dude, if you can understand plain English Levin quotes the sources, gives the blow by blow of damning reporting... but if you have listened three, now maybe 4 times and still do not understand what he is presenting, it being far beyond prima facie, it is undeniable evidence.

Dispute it, find fault with the reasoning, do something.

Your example stresses the strictness with which we in the other party hold to standards and hold our very own to those standards. Flynn was simply not truthful enough to our VP, so bam boom!! he is out. Hillary can lie to us all, pay for play, forget our guys in Benghazi, lie about snipers in Bosnia, blah blah banal blah ad infinitum and she becomes your party's nominee for highest office.

Stark contrast.

As to the next point, there is not a single shred of evidence, nothing even close to being what Levin nail by nail recapped for us on the wire-tapping. As to where any of the Russian stuff has gotten to us, the reading and listening public? Nowhere. Just all innuendo that, as soon as you make a valid attempt to grasp onto any of it ***poooooof*** the substance evaporates like a weak smoke ring. Smoke covering the vast amount of **** your side is putting out, mass producing if to be described accurately.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

The right wing trick here is to conflate all instances of "wire tapping." Which case are liberals saying didn't happen. I'm nearly positive we "wire tapped" essentially the entire Russian delegation, as we should, including the ambassador. It appears that in October an order to "wire tap" something was signed but we don't know what that something was, who it belonged to, etc. but lots of sources say it was NOT Trump himself or "Trump Tower." Maybe a server located in Philly, actually.

So it's very possible to believe multiple things that are all true.

1) Of course we "tapped" the ambassador, which is how we got Flynn's phone calls with him.
2) An October order was signed approving surveillance on something, probably associated with Trump. Perhaps a server, maybe one or more Trump associates with Russian ties
3) That something was NOT Trump or Trump Tower.



OK, I'll restate it - the IC issued a consensus report that concluded the Russians attempted to influence the election. It was in all the news. Here it is: https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

I guess in your world, me relying on that means facts and evidence mean nothing, and any person who respects evidence has to pretend like you did here that this assessment wasn't ever issued!

So yes, I do want to know where this goes but it is already more damaging long term to the side you think is right. Nobody has shown ANY, any at all, solid evidence of collusion [ compare it to what was done between the Hillary campaign and the DNC, or Hillary and quite a few mainstream media cohorts if you don't understand the concept] between anybody in the Trump camp. What I would say we all need to see is the evidence presented to the FISA judge. That would be a true gold nugget, so please provide.

Yanno, each side watches the other side better, its good reasoning to have two sides to provide us this service... so what is your point precisely? And yes, if it were Trump on the other side, Levin would... so you agree when its on the other side and egregious, we too can, every bit as much as your side, right?

Doesn't matter, this certainly does not your blessing and besides, you too often miss the obvious as proven and agreed to previously.

Intelligence Official: Transcripts Of Flynn's Calls Don't Show Criminal Wrongdoing : The Two-Way : NPR Herein another article in evidence that Flynn's conversations were tapped and again, THEY FOUND ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. This of what we know so far, one of the most botched intelligence operation, this to sink a president, in recent modern times. Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missile Crisis were certainly worse, granted. But wow, this stinks to high heaven.

You just surmised 3 things. Now give me any reporting of these three things. In other word, sources please.

Now, as to your source giving a 'consensus" report by three intelligence groups, all three headed by Presidential [Obama] appointments, we read and see nothing at all incriminating except against the Russian government and its acolytes. Who disagrees with this? Where does that prove that Trump was in collusion with? How does one get from there to allowing the tapping of an opposing rival political ideology.

And of course Putin didn't want Hillary to win, only the crazily biased in the Democrat Party actually felt she was prepared and of a quality sufficient to be up for that office.

Simply stated, she, Hill, cannot/does not and did not pass the sniff test.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

Who do you think you're crapping'? Wikipedia_Mark Levin

:rofl

Absolutely.

I embrace all that in the wiki article. It does not mention and maybe you do not know, that American conservatives are classical libs. What can one say but admit the truth?

So... what exactly was your point? Me, I am guessing someone is currently located in an area where it is not now against the law to smoke certain substances. Best guess based upon limited yet incriminating evidence. A big silly laugh almost always is a sure sign.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Absolutely. I embrace all that in the wiki article. It does not mention and maybe you do not know, that American conservatives are classical libs.

Levin is a Limbaugh/Hannity conservative and a Trump supporter.

 

[Fenton]

Levin is a Limbaugh/Hannity conservative and a Trump supporter.

And the narrative Levin laid out using Liberal Media sources like the NYTs is gaining credibillity by the day.

The Trump collusion narrative ? Not so much, and Ive noticed the Left wing MSM retreat over the last few days from their absolute assertion that this was all a lie and Trump tower wasnt wiretapped.

O'reilly had a interesting discussion with Sen Cotton yesterday. Cotton is heading up the investigation into Russia's alledged hacking AND into who leaked the calls and trasncripts.

When O'reilly pushed Cotton to divulge the identity of the leakers Cotton said he couldnt specifically divulge names but if he wanted to know who illegally leaked the calls look no further than recently departed Obama political appointees at agencies like the DOJ

The fact that Cotton knows who leaked the transcripts is good news, it means he' making progress in his investigation and hopefully a Federal grand jury's is onithe way

 

[akyron]

Yeah, not so much. He was head of the DOI, meaning he was supervising 16 intelligence agencies. The chances of someone ordering FISA warrants on Trump, or major players in the campaign, is pretty much zero.

Attempt to spin his words is pretty sad.

The best you can do is cast doubt on his veracity, which starts to fail when Comey says it didn't happen; Chaffee says he hasn't heard anything; when the original source is a right-wing conspiracy theory; and of course, the original source doesn't even say what Trump claims it does.

Are you really just going to parrot a bunch of right-wing garbage?

Actually clapper is a well known liar.

Did you see that video?

He had to write an apology letter and he kept his job.

How about that?

 

[akyron]

Re: Chaffetz. I don't know that I'd rely on his moral compass on this issue. If his interview on Fox and Friends is anything to go by, the zeal for ongoing investigations he was famous for prior to the current administration has found cause to re-awaken, and it ain't to investigate Trump's Russia connections.

Chaffetz: House Will Take 'Hard Look' at Trump's Wiretap Allegations Against Obama | Fox News Insider

So he directly contradicting his stance given in the CBS interview.

I saw that interview. He seemed to hold the whole situation at arms length and placed the onus squarely on Nunez.

He seemed a bit measured in his statements as well.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

Levin is a Limbaugh/Hannity conservative and a Trump supporter.

Uh huh.

So those words strung together are supposed to mean something impressive? Look closely, those are the guys that explained [read: destroyed] what the Democrat party was doing and helped the O bomb pretty much decimate the party nationally. Brought overwhelming electoral victories at absolutely all poltical levels. Really hard to estimate what an empty suit president can do in damage that is already so readily apparent. Even to the everyday very busy with life folk. low information but not bad people voting type. Those three guys, as well as girls [ Ingram, Coulter, Larin, Loesch, Conway, etc...] and others were like human Geiger counters tickety clackety- clacking exposing the glowing ripples of radiation stiffling. buring good cells instead of the bad.

Seems a particularly grave self inflicted wound, that. While we on this side welcome that, we do still need an honest opposing party. Y'all lettin everbody down. ..not just your own side.

And to paraphrase, out of context, Blood Sweat and Tears, lets hope "...there'll be one party born in this world... to carry on to carry on..."

 

[Socrates1]

You cite stories, and quote from them, but I don't see anything that contradicts my post. Are you sure you read my post correctly? If you did, you'll have to be specific about what I left out or got wrong.

Here's essentially what I believe based on the evidence I've seen so far:

1) Manafort/Page/Stone and/or others in the Trump orbit might very well have been subjects of US or foreign surveillance, including "wire taps" related to their Russian contacts re: financial transactions and/or the campaign.

2) There is no evidence Trump or Trump Tower were "wire tapped."

The TRUMP tower server was breached by the FBI , sorry you are WRONG !

 

[JasperL]

The TRUMP tower server was breached by the FBI , sorry you are WRONG !

LOL, then quote a source that proves me wrong.

I could be, I've just not seen any evidence, and your sources didn't support what you're claiming there.

 

[Visbek]

Actually clapper is a well known liar.

So is Trump. And you believe him anyway, despite no evidence and no one backing him up, because.... reasons?

 

[j-mac]

That's not true at all. Based on your link, it's clear the vast majority apparently don't donate to anyone - of 90,000 employees in DoE for example, total contributions were $134k. If the average donation was $10, the total would be $900k or more. The average donation for State was roughly $10, indicating again that a small minority contributed to either party. That makes sense because career people in fact shouldn't be on record as supporting one candidate over another.

We also don't know who leaked or why. There is a lot of opposition to Trump from retired GOP leaning employees of the various agencies. Essentially the professional workforce is pretty united against the guy, regardless of party.

And, like I said, if we can't trust the consensus report from the IC on the matter, then there is nothing that will satisfy you other than Dear Leader himself acknowledging it on air, or maybe with a tweet...



No, I'm not going to prejudge and announce a sentence before we know really ANYTHING. Besides, it's highly unlikely that "Obama" did anything illegal anyway. He's not the one doing the wiretaps or leaking the information etc. I think what you're proposing is if Mr. Jones of the FBI or NSA leaked something, Obama should go to jail, which I certainly won't agree with on the front end in a state of near total ignorance of the facts.



That's funny. Let me quote your "empty partisan rhetoric" that I responded to.

"No, any of this is nothing better than Nixon's hacks breaking into DNC headquarters to bug it....It is one political party, going after their political opponents in a police state manner to smear, and discredit them....It is worthy of being called out, and prosecuted....So, I'll say this, IF this is found to be going all the way to Obama, and he slipped up in any manner at all in this BS, I support the first time ever seeing a former President being prosecuted, and going to jail."

So you don't know and cannot prove any of that. I'm just pointing out that based on what we KNOW or that the Speaker has accepted as fact, there are lots of scenarios where wiretapping individuals close to Trump would clearly be the correct call.



Correct, but I was responding to your faux outrage over the FBI/IC investigating possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russians who the IC determined DID try to swing the election in favor of Trump. If you want to assert that you'd be just as outraged if these allegations were against Hillary and were being investigated, you can do that and I'll still LOL at the absurdity.

The only thing the Russians did, if anything was to expose liberal corruption, collusion, and dirty tricks...aw, poor little demos got outed, and now that is "throwing an election"...

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

 

[Rogue Valley]

So those words strung together are supposed to mean something impressive?

Levin/Limbaugh/Hannity clique is hardly impressive, but definitely talking-heads of the same ilk.

 

[j-mac]

The Hill story was what your first article sourced.

It isn't at all surprising that the government employees who worked for Obama and his very liberal Cabinet members were Democrats. I would think that Reagan's staffers were Republicans, and so were both Bushes, and so on.

Really, do you think that "career" employees change ideologically when new Presidents take office?

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

 

[j-mac]

Mark Levin is a conservative/far right radio talking-head. His very job depends on supporting Trump and the GOP.

Levin endorsed Cruz. But, as he puts it, he did vote for Trump, as Trump was the nominee, and he's not...you know...CRAZY.

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

 

[JasperL]

The only thing the Russians did, if anything was to expose liberal corruption, collusion, and dirty tricks...aw, poor little demos got outed, and now that is "throwing an election"...

It's unbelievable we have right wingers now basically cheering foreign meddling in our elections so long as they like the results.

The problem is if you hacked into, say, Rove or Bannon's or the Koch brothers or Walker's email and released it all unfiltered, there's a 100% chance you'd discover 'corruption, collusion and dirty tricks.' The only way you can't know that is if you're a hopeless partisan who believes that one side is pure as snow and the other side EVIL. But of course that's nonsense.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

Levin/Limbaugh/Hannity clique is hardly impressive, but definitely talking-heads of the same ilk.

Sure beat the crap outta your side's ilk...:lamo:2wave: