Not paid them?
Called an entire nation rapists?
Mocked a journalist with a disability?
Been a sex predator?
A narcissistic and pathological liar?
Given Breitbart and assorted hate-mongers a platform?
Reality TV is artifice: we're just seeing the bits of Trump that didn't fall on the cutting room floor.
Hello, hello? What's going on? What's all this shouting, we'll have no trouble here!
- E Tattsyrup.
Pointing out the reality of what Trump has said, done or said he will do is remarkably ineffective. For some reason a whole host of the worlds population just shrug their shoulders and rationalise it all, usually as a media conspiracy.
Author of Never Felt Better (History, Film Reviews).
Interesting. Even after illegally wiretapping his political rival, Obama and the DNC were unable to find anything to take Trump down.
Pathetic really. Obama is the one who was the biggest threat to democracy and individual rights. Scum.
Interesting times ahead.
SkStu, you might feel it's ok for your hero to make accusations without evidence, but it's not ok here. We have rules, and one of them is that we're required to provide evidence for our accusations -- there is no evidence for the accusation you've parrotted above, and until there is you won't make it again.
This is not /r/The_Donald. I won't put up with that sh*t here. Reel it in or I'll toss you out. I mean it. You've had your fun, either get serious or get out.
Toss me out then. I'm not doing this on a wind up or to have fun and to suggest this, just because you don't agree with me or because Obama isn't in jail yet, is disingenuous to the max. Last I've seen throughout this forum is that reasonable speculation is allowed and I don't know why this is any different.
The possibility of wiretapping is being covered by many outlets and is being given credibility by some and being countered by others. My thoughts on Obama's character and integrity are well covered here, I don't think he is above illegal activity. He has previous on wiretapping (Merkel etc). That's my bias. Sorry that doesn't align with your opinion.
Anyway, ban me if you think it's for the best.
What you said is not speculation or opinion, it is an unproven accusation presented as fact, both by Trump and you. I'll ban you from this forum if you do it again. I won't if you don't. Save the passive aggressive nonsense for Reddit.
And that's the other terrifying side of it. Believing whatever he says immediately, regardless of actual proof. The man could say he built the wall and his supporters would back it up. It's almost trite to quote Orwell, but God it fits: We've always been at war with Eurasia.<br>
Author of Never Felt Better (History, Film Reviews).
It is fact. The Trump campaign was spied on by agents and organizations under the Obama executive (FISA x2). The only thing in dispute is the extent (illegal overreach) and what Obama did with the information (leaked etc). I'll refrain from drawing conclusions (definitive statements on illegality etc) but I'll continue to present speculation and express my opinion on issues. I've tried to be careful in what I've posted as I realize I'm in a minority on here but I'll try harder.
Here's a video from Fox News that articulates what is currently known/public about the wiretapping.
If you mean my initial post, I know, I was subsequently saying I'd refrain in future from drawing conclusion like that.
Is that ok?
The above is not evidence. I need evidence for your claim that Obama ordered surveillance of Trump by 6pm tomorrow or you'll be suspended from this forum for 1 week. Don't try to weasel-word your way out of it now, you made by the claim and reiterated it. If you make the claim again without evidence, that'll shortcut you out of here. Don't say you weren't warned.
Even if what Stu says is true, pretty unlikely there's proof especially in the public domain, but the bigger point is an unfetterered Frump appears as if he's going to be far worse to the rest of the world and every minority going in the US.
Which considering he supported his opponent as recently as two elections ago, marks out his staggering hypocrisy at the very least...
I'm not sure what constitutes evidence for the purposes of this charade but the following is a quote from a Guardian article dated January 11th which states:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ussia-contactsThe Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. The Fisa court turned down the application asking FBI counter-intelligence investigators to narrow its focus. According to one report, the FBI was finally granted a warrant in October, but that has not been confirmed, and it is not clear whether any warrant led to a full investigation.
The "one report" mentioned in the quote above links directly to the following source:
https://heatst.com/world/exclusive-f...ies-to-russia/
FISA Act operates under the oversight of the Presidents office therefore anything ordered by, say, the FBI is ordered by the President.
So if you accept the above, the following is known:
1) June - Obama administration applied for FISA warrant to place surveillance on Trump and campaign. Denied.
2) October - Obama administration applies for FISA warrant and, according to the sources in the Heat St article above, is granted permission to examine the activities of ‘U.S. persons’ in Donald Trump’s campaign with ties to Russia, presumably this does not exclude Donald.
So to go back to my subsequent posts, the only question is the extent to which the warrant, if the sources are correct, was used or abused and what happened with the information gathered.
Bear in mind that "unnamed sources" are sufficient to allow most accusations against Trump be published by media outlets so I would expect that I would be held to the same low standard of evidence.
That's as maybe. Why would you want to stand up for him in the first place?
I don't think this makes any sense at all.
Depending on what they want to investigate, the FBI could apply for warrants to a number of different courts. If the FBI wants to investigate what they believe to be foreign spies operating inside the USA, they apply to a FIS court.
I don't see the logic behind the argument that an FBI request for a warrant to a FIS court is on somehow on behalf of the presidential administration.
"The FBI doing it is the same thing as the Obama administration doing it" doesn't make much sense to me at all.
Because America is disgusting and decades of interventionist policy has led to carnage across almost very continent. I think Obama and Clinton pulled the wool over everyone's eyes on a number of big issues and made the world a worse place. Trump ran on a platform of America First and Draining the Swamp and I think he deserves a chance to see what he can do in that regard.
I am not really standing up for him (this started as me being anti-Obama, DNC and Clinton) - I don't think he's an angel and I don't think he's the devil. I agree with some of his policies and I disagree with others. He's ridiculously transparent with his thoughts but he's also a buffoon. I also don't believe everything the mainstream media pushes, I can see their agenda clearly and so I just want to consider other points of view and I think everyone should do the same.
Anyway, Dahamsta ban or not, it would probably be best for me not to post on here anymore. It's difficult to have a conversation about him without getting backed into a corner or painted as something I'm not. It's tiring!
Bookmarks