oh, I guess not. Just another lie that the Trumps indiscriminately throughs out there to keep the dogs of the scent. So, tell me whatever happened her? Spygate is the same exact thing.

Agree. It was just Manafort who has nothing to do with Trump. Time to end the circus.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/09/18/politics/paul-manafort-government-wiretapped-fisa-russians/index.html

Trump is cornered criminal. He is lashing out as they all do with all sorts of lies.

It is maddening to see people create this new definition of spying on someone, then claiming that your claims are utterly devoid of facts according to the new definition you literally just created.

The government was actively and intentionally collecting intel on the Trump campaign. They weren't just watching the news or looking at records they have access to. They weren't simply receiving the information from people who came to them, such as reporting a crime or something.

They were paying a guy a LOT of money to gather this information under false pretenses and report it back. They were wiretapping. This was occuring before the date they've given for their pretense of the current investigation, which itself was driven off of a foreign intel package that was paid for by oppo research. They were doing this to gather oppo research to use to lessen the likelihood of Trump winning, and also to set the stage for harrassing his administration and anyone from his campaign crew, to send a message to our supposedly democratic nation that you don't run for office without their blessing.

This is vastly bigger than Watergate. Vastly. Objectively bigger. The principle is identical, but the scope of what was done is hundreds if not thousands of times bigger.

And keep in mind, this is just what we know about. Exclusively stuff they have vehemently denied in the past. Most likely we do not know the half of it.

Imagine if Trump was caught doing this crap to an opposition party candidate. Would they just go "oh geez that wasn't really spying. Trump was trying to help!"

Doc Holliday said:

---

It is maddening to see people create this new definition of spying on someone, then claiming that your claims...

---

Well, there it went. My Florida Mike-grade Iron-o-Meter just sputtered and went dead. Fastest I've ever seen it go from zero to ten on this site.

Will talk to the R&D people at Acme Iron-o-Meters tomorrow.

PartyBear said:

---

Trump is cornered criminal. He is lashing out as they all do with all sorts of lies.

---

And what "crime" is there ACTUAL EVIDENCE of that he committed as either a candidate or a sitting POTUS? Please reveal the ACTUAL EVIDENCE. Talking points and what you hope happened don't count, by the way.

bubbadog said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

It is maddening to see people create this new definition of spying on someone, then claiming that your claims...

---

Well, there it went. My Florida Mike-grade Iron-o-Meter just sputtered and went dead. Fastest I've ever seen it go from zero to ten on this site.

Will talk to the R&D people at Acme Iron-o-Meters tomorrow.

---

I don't really care what your make believe meter says, you're on the losing team and you know it.

J.R. said:

---

oh, I guess not. Just another lie that the Trumps indiscriminately throughs out there to keep the dogs of the scent. So, tell me whatever happened her? Spygate is the same exact thing.

---

Why do you say this? Is there new proof his administration didn't?

bubbadog said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

It is maddening to see people create this new definition of spying on someone, then claiming that your claims...

---

Well, there it went. My Florida Mike-grade Iron-o-Meter just sputtered and went dead. Fastest I've ever seen it go from zero to ten on this site.

Will talk to the R&D people at Acme Iron-o-Meters tomorrow.

---

What is the difference between a 'confidential informant' and 'spy'?

I don't think it is unfair to use the words interchangeably in this case

No FBI director would put informants inside a presidential campaign w/o the President authorizing it.

Osodecentx said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

It is maddening to see people create this new definition of spying on someone, then claiming that your claims...

---

Well, there it went. My Florida Mike-grade Iron-o-Meter just sputtered and went dead. Fastest I've ever seen it go from zero to ten on this site.

Will talk to the R&D people at Acme Iron-o-Meters tomorrow.

---

What is the difference between a 'confidential informant' and 'spy'?

I don't think it is unfair to use the words interchangeably in this case

---

Almost by definition, "spy" connotes infilltration -- penetration of another country, an enemy organization, a company from which you intend to steal intellectual property. It also goes to motivation. The purpose of spies is to ferret out information that you hope will be useful against an adversary, whether it's military secrets like the atom spies stole on Russia's behalf or industrial espionage, or simply the more routine and benign information that the CIA gets from spies who are working abroad under the guise of being diplomats.

Neither of those seems to apply here.

First, the informant didn't attempt to infiltrate an organization. He approached several individuals.

More significantly, the purpose of his action involved a completely legitimate investigation. All three of these guys had suspicious ties to the Russians. The Russians had actively tried to recruit Carter Page. Papadapolous was drunk-bragging to foreign diplomats that he knew the Russians were gathering dirt on Hillary. This wasn't like the FBI sent spies to go dig up dirt. There was lots of smoke coming from those guys (mixed metaphor acknowledged) and they were looking to see if there was a fire behind it.

Trump is trying to claim that this was all part of some FBI plot to keep him from winning the election -- that it was all about sinister motives instead of legitimately investigating guys who had suspicious ties to Russia.

bubbadog said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

It is maddening to see people create this new definition of spying on someone, then claiming that your claims...

---

Well, there it went. My Florida Mike-grade Iron-o-Meter just sputtered and went dead. Fastest I've ever seen it go from zero to ten on this site.

Will talk to the R&D people at Acme Iron-o-Meters tomorrow.

---

What is the difference between a 'confidential informant' and 'spy'?

I don't think it is unfair to use the words interchangeably in this case

---

Almost by definition, "spy" connotes infilltration -- penetration of another country, an enemy organization, a company from which you intend to steal intellectual property. It also goes to motivation. The purpose of spies is to ferret out information that you hope will be useful against an adversary, whether it's military secrets like the atom spies stole on Russia's behalf or industrial espionage, or simply the more routine and benign information that the CIA gets from spies who are working abroad under the guise of being diplomats.

Neither of those seems to apply here.

First, the informant didn't attempt to infiltrate an organization. He approached several individuals.

More significantly, the purpose of his action involved a completely legitimate investigation. All three of these guys had suspicious ties to the Russians. The Russians had actively tried to recruit Carter Page. Papadapolous was drunk-bragging to foreign diplomats that he knew the Russians were gathering dirt on Hillary. This wasn't like the FBI sent spies to go dig up dirt. There was lots of smoke coming from those guys (mixed metaphor acknowledged) and they were looking to see if there was a fire behind it.

Trump is trying to claim that this was all part of some FBI plot to keep him from winning the election -- that it was all about sinister motives instead of legitimately investigating guys who had suspicious ties to Russia.

---

Then why THE FU-CK did they leak if this was a legit and honest investigation? God dammit SON.

And even if this was honest...its STILL not ethical or legal.

You would be pissssed off if Trump sent spies to his 2020 opponent, leaked about it etc.
If any of that is true, And they ran a spy ring or an informant ring, and they were paying people within the Trump campaign, if any of that is true, that is an absolute Red Line... That is a Red Line in this country, you can't spy on political campaigns.

so, again...did Obama wire tape Trumps phones and Mr. Trumps claimed? Doc.... yes or no with no deflection would be fine. You are on a roll today fella with lots of fake news. Particularly, the one where you claimed NK was denuclearized. Keep em coming, smart guy.

J.R. said:

---

so, again...did Obama wire tape Trumps phones and Mr. Trumps claimed? Doc.... yes or no with no deflection would be fine. You are on a roll today fella with lots of fake news. Particularly, the one where you claimed NK was denuclearized. Keep em coming, smart guy.

---

I said NK was taking steps to denuclearize.

Doc Holliday said:

---

J.R. said:

---

so, again...did Obama wire tape Trumps phones and Mr. Trumps claimed? Doc.... yes or no with no deflection would be fine. You are on a roll today fella with lots of fake news. Particularly, the one where you claimed NK was denuclearized. Keep em coming, smart guy.

---

I said NK was taking steps to denuclearize.

---

Here's what you wrote:

NK has denuclearized...tell me whose been able to accomplish this before Trump?

Somehow, in this one you left out the part about "taking steps to."

bubbadog said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

J.R. said:

---

so, again...did Obama wire tape Trumps phones and Mr. Trumps claimed? Doc.... yes or no with no deflection would be fine. You are on a roll today fella with lots of fake news. Particularly, the one where you claimed NK was denuclearized. Keep em coming, smart guy.

---

I said NK was taking steps to denuclearize.

---

Here's what you wrote:

NK has denuclearized...tell me whose been able to accomplish this before Trump?

Somehow, in this one you left out the part about "taking steps to."

---

Care to comment on the video where Clapper says they might have picked up on Trump through a wiretap?

#SwainTheDramp

- BUmma

Doc Holliday said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

J.R. said:

---

so, again...did Obama wire tape Trumps phones and Mr. Trumps claimed? Doc.... yes or no with no deflection would be fine. You are on a roll today fella with lots of fake news. Particularly, the one where you claimed NK was denuclearized. Keep em coming, smart guy.

---

I said NK was taking steps to denuclearize.

---

Here's what you wrote:

NK has denuclearized...tell me whose been able to accomplish this before Trump?

Somehow, in this one you left out the part about "taking steps to."

---

Care to comment on the video where Clapper says they might have picked up on Trump through a wiretap?

---

Good strategy. Try to change the subject when you get caught in a lie.

JR was actually being generous when he said you had zero credibility.
Your credibility is actually way down in minus territory.

bubbadog said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

J.R. said:

---

so, again...did Obama wire tape Trumps phones and Mr. Trumps claimed? Doc.... yes or no with no deflection would be fine. You are on a roll today fella with lots of fake news. Particularly, the one where you claimed NK was denuclearized. Keep em coming, smart guy.

---

I said NK was taking steps to denuclearize.

---

Here's what you wrote:

NK has denuclearized...tell me whose been able to accomplish this before Trump?

Somehow, in this one you left out the part about "taking steps to."

---

Care to comment on the video where Clapper says they might have picked up on Trump through a wiretap?

---

Good strategy. Try to change the subject when you get caught in a lie.

JR was actually being generous when he said you had zero credibility.
Your credibility is actually way down in minus territory.

---

Oh you don't want to answer now that it makes you look bad lol

Go check my comments, all say NK has taken steps to denuclearize.

Practicing faces he's going to make while being sodomized in Federal Pound Me In The Ass Prison

bubbadog said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

It is maddening to see people create this new definition of spying on someone, then claiming that your claims...

---

Well, there it went. My Florida Mike-grade Iron-o-Meter just sputtered and went dead. Fastest I've ever seen it go from zero to ten on this site.

Will talk to the R&D people at Acme Iron-o-Meters tomorrow.

---

What is the difference between a 'confidential informant' and 'spy'?

I don't think it is unfair to use the words interchangeably in this case

---

Almost by definition, "spy" connotes infilltration -- penetration of another country, an enemy organization, a company from which you intend to steal intellectual property. It also goes to motivation. The purpose of spies is to ferret out information that you hope will be useful against an adversary, whether it's military secrets like the atom spies stole on Russia's behalf or industrial espionage, or simply the more routine and benign information that the CIA gets from spies who are working abroad under the guise of being diplomats.

Neither of those seems to apply here.

First, the informant didn't attempt to infiltrate an organization. He approached several individuals.

More significantly, the purpose of his action involved a completely legitimate investigation. All three of these guys had suspicious ties to the Russians. The Russians had actively tried to recruit Carter Page. Papadapolous was drunk-bragging to foreign diplomats that he knew the Russians were gathering dirt on Hillary. This wasn't like the FBI sent spies to go dig up dirt. There was lots of smoke coming from those guys (mixed metaphor acknowledged) and they were looking to see if there was a fire behind it.

Trump is trying to claim that this was all part of some FBI plot to keep him from winning the election -- that it was all about sinister motives instead of legitimately investigating guys who had suspicious ties to Russia.

---

If the FBI was suspicious of someone, wouldn't they let the candidate in on the secret? They weren't investigating the candidate. So why not let them know they're protecting him?

Doc Holliday said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

J.R. said:

---

so, again...did Obama wire tape Trumps phones and Mr. Trumps claimed? Doc.... yes or no with no deflection would be fine. You are on a roll today fella with lots of fake news. Particularly, the one where you claimed NK was denuclearized. Keep em coming, smart guy.

---

I said NK was taking steps to denuclearize.

---

Here's what you wrote:

NK has denuclearized...tell me whose been able to accomplish this before Trump?

Somehow, in this one you left out the part about "taking steps to."

---

Care to comment on the video where Clapper says they might have picked up on Trump through a wiretap?

---

Good strategy. Try to change the subject when you get caught in a lie.

JR was actually being generous when he said you had zero credibility.
Your credibility is actually way down in minus territory.

---

Oh you don't want to answer now that it makes you look bad lol

Go check my comments, all say NK has taken steps to denuclearize.

---

Good lord, son. I found your quote from the other thread and put it over here where you could see it, and you still deny it. And you wonder why you have no credibility?

Should I even bother answering your other question when (a) you can't reason your way out of a wet paper sack and (b) you're likely to just lie about it? Probably not, but I'll do it anyway.

Everybody knows they were wiretapping Manafort, and everybody knows why. It's been known for a long time now. Your tape with Don Lemon is from last September, for crying out loud. They had a FISA warrant. If that constitutes spying, it's legal spying based on a show of probable cause to a court.

Lemon asks him if it is POSSIBLE that they picked up Trump in the course of audio surveillance of Manafort. In other words, he's asking a hypothetical. Clapper responds that it is "conceivable" and "it is possible." Lemon asks him if he knows whether this hypothetical situation actually happened, and Clapper says "I can't say," which could mean either "I WON'T say" or "I don't know" but based on the context of the nearly 3-minute clip I interpret it as "I don't know."

Bottom line:

There's not even any evidence that they heard Trump when they were surveilling Manafort (with a FISA warrant). What do you think "conceivable" means? It's not about having babies.

Second, happening to pick up a conversation with Trump, if that happened, while wiretapping Manafort is no more a case of "spying" on Trump or his campaign than it would be spying on you if the police happened to be staking out a suspected drug corner and you walked up out of the blue to buy a bag.

bubbadog said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

J.R. said:

---

so, again...did Obama wire tape Trumps phones and Mr. Trumps claimed? Doc.... yes or no with no deflection would be fine. You are on a roll today fella with lots of fake news. Particularly, the one where you claimed NK was denuclearized. Keep em coming, smart guy.

---

I said NK was taking steps to denuclearize.

---

Here's what you wrote:

NK has denuclearized...tell me whose been able to accomplish this before Trump?

Somehow, in this one you left out the part about "taking steps to."

---

Care to comment on the video where Clapper says they might have picked up on Trump through a wiretap?

---

Good strategy. Try to change the subject when you get caught in a lie.

JR was actually being generous when he said you had zero credibility.
Your credibility is actually way down in minus territory.

---

Oh you don't want to answer now that it makes you look bad lol

Go check my comments, all say NK has taken steps to denuclearize.

---

Good lord, son. I found your quote from the other thread and put it over here where you could see it, and you still deny it. And you wonder why you have no credibility?

Should I even bother answering your other question when (a) you can't reason your way out of a wet paper sack and (b) you're likely to just lie about it? Probably not, but I'll do it anyway.

Everybody knows they were wiretapping Manafort, and everybody knows why. It's been known for a long time now. Your tape with Don Lemon is from last September, for crying out loud. They had a FISA warrant. If that constitutes spying, it's legal spying based on a show of probable cause to a court.

Lemon asks him if it is POSSIBLE that they picked up Trump in the course of audio surveillance of Manafort. In other words, he's asking a hypothetical. Clapper responds that it is "conceivable" and "it is possible." Lemon asks him if he knows whether this hypothetical situation actually happened, and Clapper says "I can't say," which could mean either "I WON'T say" or "I don't know" but based on the context of the nearly 3-minute clip I interpret it as "I don't know."

Bottom line:

There's not even any evidence that they heard Trump when they were surveilling Manafort (with a FISA warrant). What do you think "conceivable" means? It's not about having babies.

Second, happening to pick up a conversation with Trump, if that happened, while wiretapping Manafort is no more a case of "spying" on Trump or his campaign than it would be spying on you if the police happened to be staking out a suspected drug corner and you walked up out of the blue to buy a bag.

---

That FISA warrant was based on the Steele Dossier...which Clinton/DNC paid for and was and still is UNVERIFIED. Comey called the dossier unverified, salacious...yet they used it to get the warrant.

The IG is investigating this and will rain down on your parade.

Comey said there was also information other than the dossier that was used in the FISA application to spy on Carter Page because they provided "probable cause" that Page was a foreign agent. Carter Page was only briefly a foreign-policy adviser during the Trump campaign.

I don't buy the "there was other information too" argument.

It seems to me that this dossier was a key part of the FISA warrant application.

If there was strong other information, it should have been able to stand on its own.

If Comey really believed Carter Page to be a Russian "spy" wouldn't Comey have thought it more important to brief Trump on that? instead of making a Memo telling him about pee pee stuff?

Carter Page has never been indicted on anything. Page is long-known to have business ties with Russia (also not illegal). The narrative is - as far as I can tell - that Page was a middleman in quid pro quo - Trump would lift the sanctions in exchange for Russia ensuring he wins.

This makes zero sense because had Hillary Clinton taken her ex-President husband's advice and campaigned just a little harder in the Rust Belt states (or even set foot in Wisconsin) - she would have won. That she didn't was HER choice.

bubbadog said:

---

Almost by definition, "spy" connotes infilltration -- penetration of another country, an enemy organization, a company from which you intend to steal intellectual property. It also goes to motivation. The purpose of spies is to ferret out information that you hope will be useful against an adversary, whether it's military secrets like the atom spies stole on Russia's behalf or industrial espionage, or simply the more routine and benign information that the CIA gets from spies who are working abroad under the guise of being diplomats.

Neither of those seems to apply here.

First, the informant didn't attempt to infiltrate an organization. He approached several individuals.

More significantly, the purpose of his action involved a completely legitimate investigation. All three of these guys had suspicious ties to the Russians. The Russians had actively tried to recruit Carter Page. Papadapolous was drunk-bragging to foreign diplomats that he knew the Russians were gathering dirt on Hillary. This wasn't like the FBI sent spies to go dig up dirt. There was lots of smoke coming from those guys (mixed metaphor acknowledged) and they were looking to see if there was a fire behind it.

Trump is trying to claim that this was all part of some FBI plot to keep him from winning the election -- that it was all about sinister motives instead of legitimately investigating guys who had suspicious ties to Russia.

---

I'm not convinced, yet. Was he reporting his findings to the FBI? Did his reports turn up in the application for the FISA warrants? On this issue Trump always promises more and delivers less.
Halper was looking for intel out of the Trump campaign. He was looking for intel out of the Carter campaign.

This is from a Washington Post article:
After the 1980 race, Halper was caught up in a scandal concerning alleged political spying. Aides to Reagan, including Halper, were accused of having spied on Carter's campaign and obtaining private documents that Carter was using to prepare for a debate. Some Reagan White House officials later alleged that Halper had used former CIA agents to run an operation against Carter. Halper called the reports at the time "absolutely false" and has long denied the accusations.
Halper's contacts with Trump advisers around the start of the FBI's counterintelligence investigation have come under scrutiny in recent weeks by House allies of President Trump. Late last month, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) issued a subpoena to the Justice Department requesting all documents related to the FBI informant.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/who-is-stefan-a-halper-the-fbi-source-who-assisted-the-russia-investigation/2018/05/21/22c46caa-5d42-11e8-9ee3-49d6d4814c4c_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.5dd5267f424a

Quote:

---

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) issued a subpoena to the Justice Department requesting all documents related to the FBI informant.

---

They don't want to give it up.

Doc Holliday said:

---

That FISA warrant was based on the Steele Dossier...which Clinton/DNC paid for and was and still is UNVERIFIED. Comey called the dossier unverified, salacious...yet they used it to get the warrant.

The IG is investigating this and will rain down on your parade.

Comey said there was also information other than the dossier that was used in the FISA application to spy on Carter Page because they provided "probable cause" that Page was a foreign agent. Carter Page was only briefly a foreign-policy adviser during the Trump campaign.

I don't buy the "there was other information too" argument.

It seems to me that this dossier was a key part of the FISA warrant application.

If there was strong other information, it should have been able to stand on its own.

If Comey really believed Carter Page to be a Russian "spy" wouldn't Comey have thought it more important to brief Trump on that? instead of making a Memo telling him about pee pee stuff?

Carter Page has never been indicted on anything. Page is long-known to have business ties with Russia (also not illegal). The narrative is - as far as I can tell - that Page was a middleman in quid pro quo - Trump would lift the sanctions in exchange for Russia ensuring he wins.

This makes zero sense because had Hillary Clinton taken her ex-President husband's advice and campaigned just a little harder in the Rust Belt states (or even set foot in Wisconsin) - she would have won. That she didn't was HER choice.

---

There are at least two falsehoods in your very first sentence. Cleaning out the Augean stables is a job for Hercules. I've got other priorities.

bubbadog said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

That FISA warrant was based on the Steele Dossier...which Clinton/DNC paid for and was and still is UNVERIFIED. Comey called the dossier unverified, salacious...yet they used it to get the warrant.

The IG is investigating this and will rain down on your parade.

Comey said there was also information other than the dossier that was used in the FISA application to spy on Carter Page because they provided "probable cause" that Page was a foreign agent. Carter Page was only briefly a foreign-policy adviser during the Trump campaign.

I don't buy the "there was other information too" argument.

It seems to me that this dossier was a key part of the FISA warrant application.

If there was strong other information, it should have been able to stand on its own.

If Comey really believed Carter Page to be a Russian "spy" wouldn't Comey have thought it more important to brief Trump on that? instead of making a Memo telling him about pee pee stuff?

Carter Page has never been indicted on anything. Page is long-known to have business ties with Russia (also not illegal). The narrative is - as far as I can tell - that Page was a middleman in quid pro quo - Trump would lift the sanctions in exchange for Russia ensuring he wins.

This makes zero sense because had Hillary Clinton taken her ex-President husband's advice and campaigned just a little harder in the Rust Belt states (or even set foot in Wisconsin) - she would have won. That she didn't was HER choice.

---

There are at least two falsehoods in your very first sentence. Cleaning out the Augean stables is a job for Hercules. I've got other priorities.

---

Comey testified under oath on 1/6/17 that portions of the dossier were salacious and unverified.

The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence report shows that the FBI and the Department of Justice under President Obama secured a FISA warrant targeting Carter Page, including how they relied on the discredited "dossier" paid for by Hillary Clinton's campaign to be president and the Democratic National Committee, but failed to tell the court this when making the request

You can read it right here: https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/democrat_memo_charge_and_response.pdf

J.R. said:

---

oh, I guess not. Just another lie that the Trumps indiscriminately throughs out there to keep the dogs of the scent. So, tell me whatever happened her? Spygate is the same exact thing.

---

He used his fake birth certificate that proved he was born in Benghazi to sale uranium one Trump Tower bugs to send in an FBI spy.

It's all in Hillary's email. When will they investigate it?

Doc Holliday said:

---

It is maddening to see people create this new definition of spying on someone, then claiming that your claims are utterly devoid of facts according to the new definition you literally just created.

The government was actively and intentionally collecting intel on the Trump campaign. They weren't just watching the news or looking at records they have access to. They weren't simply receiving the information from people who came to them, such as reporting a crime or something.

They were paying a guy a LOT of money to gather this information under false pretenses and report it back. They were wiretapping. This was occuring before the date they've given for their pretense of the current investigation, which itself was driven off of a foreign intel package that was paid for by oppo research. They were doing this to gather oppo research to use to lessen the likelihood of Trump winning, and also to set the stage for harrassing his administration and anyone from his campaign crew, to send a message to our supposedly democratic nation that you don't run for office without their blessing.

This is vastly bigger than Watergate. Vastly. Objectively bigger. The principle is identical, but the scope of what was done is hundreds if not thousands of times bigger.

And keep in mind, this is just what we know about. Exclusively stuff they have vehemently denied in the past. Most likely we do not know the half of it.

Imagine if Trump was caught doing this crap to an opposition party candidate. Would they just go "oh geez that wasn't really spying. Trump was trying to help!"

---

So true. It's become more and more apparent over the last year that Obama and his Justice Department worked to sabotage Trump's presidency. This is very much in keeping with Obama's violation of the WARN Act and his flagrant abuse of the IRS for political purposes, but it surpasses anything he did before--let alone what Nixon did.

Doc Holliday said:

---

That FISA warrant was based on the Steele Dossier...which Clinton/DNC paid for and was and still is UNVERIFIED.

---

Also sad but true.

tommie said:

---

J.R. said:

---

oh, I guess not. Just another lie that the Trumps indiscriminately throughs out there to keep the dogs of the scent. So, tell me whatever happened her? Spygate is the same exact thing.

---

He used his fake birth certificate that proved he was born in Benghazi to sale uranium one Trump Tower bugs to send in an FBI spy.

It's all in Hillary's email. When will they investigate it?

---

Why did Hill smash phones and computers with a hammer?

Michael Gerson's take:

"The current flashpoint is the FBI probe of Russian influence on the Trump campaign an investigation that has made use of an informant in pursuit of information from suspicious Trump associates. Trump has transformed this person into a "spy" who was "implanted, for political purposes, into my campaign," constituting one of the "biggest political scandals in history."

"This is accurate, except there was no spy, who was not implanted in the Trump campaign, in the course of an entirely legitimate investigation. And Trump's charge of political motivation is absurd on its face, since the FBI investigation of Trump advisers was not made public before the 2016 election."

So, did Obama wire tap Trumps phones as he angrily said? Still waiting. Oh, just another lie from POTUS. Sad but true.