Was surveillance of Manafort appropriate?


#61

LOL. Clapper himself said just Tuesday that it was “highly likely” that Trump was “heard” on those wiretaps…wiretaps that he testified under oath last Spring DIDN’T EXIST. How does that happen if he was NOT also wiretapped?

The fact remains that the Antifa/BLM bunch did NOT have a permit to “protest” WHERE they wound up starting those fights and the pro-R.E. Lee protesters DID have a permit to be where they were. Parse it all you like, but the President was RIGHT and didn’t “lie” about it.


#62

LOL. Clapper himself said just Tuesday that it was “highly likely” that Trump was “heard” on those wiretaps…wiretaps that he testified under oath last Spring DIDN’T EXIST. How does that happen if he was NOT also wiretapped?

If you are under surveillance and I call you, then I could be “heard” on a wiretap, but that does not mean that I, myself and the subject of a wiretap.

Again, you stuck so strictly to a definition of words and meaning when it comes to former disgraced Senator Craig, but you are willing to overlook that here.

Hypocrisy at its best. Well, unless you have evidence that Trump was under surveillance. Remember “buildings” don’t get put under surveillance, people do.

The fact that Clapper’s allegedly lied under oath (while wrong in its own right if true) has NOTHING to do with Trumps lie that he was the subject of surveillance.


#63

Isn’t is a CRIME to record conversations between two people without the permission of BOTH parties to the conversation? How is it not also a crime to “wiretap” one party and record their conversations with a second party who is NOT the subject of the wiretap. Didn’t they try to PROSECUTE someone for that during the Clinton scandal in 1998?


#64

Isn’t is a CRIME to record conversations between two people without the permission of BOTH parties to the conversation? How is it not also a crime to “wiretap” one party and record their conversations with a second party who is NOT the subject of the wiretap? Didn’t they try to PROSECUTE someone for that during the Clinton scandal in 1998?

Now you’re moving the goalpost.

Was the question “was Trump under surveillance” as he claims?

The incidental collection, right or wrong, is different than what he claimed which that he (ostensibly) was the subject of the surveillance. We know there is no evidence to that end.

As far as incidental collection, to my knowledge, there is no evidence at this point of that either, though I admit it’s hard to imagine he wasn’t caught up in it.

As far as the legality of it, if you know something I don’t, by all means, share!!


#65

Wanted to say, in retrospect, I think Tillerson has done an admirable job all things considered.


#66

Bob Corker disagrees with you…

Now I remind you all Senator Corker was on a short list for VP and SoS. He sits on the Foreign Relations Committee.

This cannot be hand-waved away as partisan politics.

Senator Corker is unplugged and I think he (and to a lesser degree McCain) are speaking their conscience. He has said he fears the president is courting World War III.

That’s not putting the country first, that’s putting the world last.


#67

Corker is a moron. WHY he ever was elected in the Volunteer State remains a mystery. He’s responsible for ONE “achievement” and one only–the Iran Deal, which he helped Obama draft.


#68

So his legacy and career can be summed up by one action?

Sounds like sour grapes to me.