Jump to content

Obama Performed Espionage on Trump prior to election


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 508
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Why didn't you include this from the article? Kind of shows how lenient the law is to spy on people.

 

The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything. This suggests Rice's unmasking requests were likely within the law.

 

Maybe we can attribute Rice's requests to another plume of smoke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Maybe we can attribute Rice's requests to another plume of smoke.

 

And Bloomberg personally held a reception for her when she was UN Ambassador (in 2011), Just before she became National Security Advisor.

 

Now, I'm not going to state that Bloomberg arranged to get her in to that position specifically to put her in a place where she could conduct this sort of political operation to further his agenda. But...drip, drip, drip...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And Bloomberg personally held a reception for her when she was UN Ambassador (in 2011), Just before she became National Security Advisor.

 

Now, I'm not going to state that Bloomberg arranged to get her in to that position specifically to put her in a place where she could conduct this sort of political operation to further his agenda. But...drip, drip, drip...

 

Meanwhile, last week I saw a Bloomberg reporter spill a cup of coffee at the WTC Transit Hub, which is you know where.

 

Coincidence? I think not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

espionage is a part of life

 

it's bad news if it goes well beyond the bounds of decency in non-emergency situations

 

nothing to see here, nothing to make hay out of when the Dems were just as bad (and also non-indictable)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

espionage is a part of life

 

it's bad news if it goes well beyond the bounds of decency in non-emergency situations

 

nothing to see here, nothing to make hay out of when the Dems were just as bad (and also non-indictable)

Yeah. I've said from the start nothing substantial will come out of Russia/Trump FBI and committee investigation and the same goes for the espionage by the Obama administration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah. I've said from the start nothing substantial will come out of Russia/Trump FBI and committee investigation and the same goes for the espionage by the Obama administration.

 

you need a severe provable crime to push anything forward, and a country willing to try to destroy the office of the Presidency to back this up for a year or so.

 

Nixon was a perfect storm on those two fronts.

 

Hopefully I don't have to see the US go through all that again in my lifetime....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Meanwhile, last week I saw a Bloomberg reporter spill a cup of coffee at the WTC Transit Hub, which is you know where.

 

Coincidence? I think not.

 

So you're saying that Susan Rice pulled building 7 so that Silverstein could make an insurance claim?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

espionage is a part of life

 

 

Espionage is a part of life as a nation state.

 

Mass surveillance of US citizens is still new, highly dubious in nature, and completely counter to the notion of living in a free society. It undercuts the very foundation of democracy by eliminating (through conditioning and practice) private spaces for people to express contrary or controversial views -- both of which are necessary ingredients for true progress, education, and democracy itself.

 

Accepting mass surveillance as a "part of life" -- which many millions of Americans now do -- is one of the most horrifying developments within our nation in the past two decades.

 

/rant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Espionage is a part of life as a nation state.

 

Mass surveillance of US citizens is still new, highly dubious in nature, and completely counter to the notion of living in a free society. It undercuts the very foundation of democracy by eliminating (through conditioning and practice) private spaces for people to express contrary or controversial views -- both of which are necessary ingredients for true progress, education, and democracy itself.

 

Accepting mass surveillance as a "part of life" -- which many millions of Americans now do -- is one of the most horrifying developments within our nation in the past two decades.

 

/rant

 

the balance between national security and privacy of the individual is always on a see-saw

 

i accept it's a sorta lean towards national security at this time in our history

 

using the IRS for bogus political attacks is bad news, using whispy security reports as proven fact is just as bad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

the balance between national security and privacy of the individual is always on a see-saw

 

i accept it's a sorta lean towards national security at this time in our history

 

using the IRS for bogus political attacks is bad news, using whispy security reports as proven fact is just as bad

 

Like I said, this attitude is one of the most horrifying developments within our national zeitgeist in the past two decades.

 

Privacy is FUNDAMENTAL to the health of a democratic state. Without privacy, there's no freedom of thought or expression. Without freedom of thought and expression there is no progress. Without freedom of thought and freedom of expression there is no freedom.

 

The biggest trick pulled on the American public in our life time is convincing the masses that this surveillance is necessary to protect citizens from terrorism when it does no such thing. These systems aren't designed for our security. To date they've prevented ZERO terrorist attacks.

 

These programs are designed for a very different reason than fighting the war on terror. They're designed to protect the government and the status quo from the people. That's not a democratic notion. It's a fascist one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Like I said, this attitude is one of the most horrifying developments within our national zeitgeist in the past two decades.

 

Privacy is FUNDAMENTAL to the health of a democratic state. Without privacy, there's no freedom of thought or expression. Without freedom of thought and expression there is no progress. Without freedom of thought and freedom of expression there is no freedom.

 

The biggest trick pulled on the American public in our life time is convincing the masses that this surveillance is necessary to protect citizens from terrorism when it does no such thing. These systems aren't designed for our security. To date they've prevented ZERO terrorist attacks.

 

These programs are designed for a very different reason than fighting the war on terror. They're designed to protect the government and the status quo from the people. That's not a democratic notion. It's a fascist one.

 

Nah, sometimes you have to put the clamps down, but as specified and ratified and for a limited time before further review.

 

The US and the rest of the free first-nations countries are under a large threat from terrorism, so the level of surveillance will go up.

 

That's how it is kiddo....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Nah, sometimes you have to put the clamps down, but as specified and ratified and for a limited time before further review.

 

The US and the rest of the free first-nations countries are under a large threat from terrorism, so the level of surveillance will go up.

 

That's how it is kiddo....

Thank God the Obama administration was able to save us from a terror attack by James Rosen (and his parents), the Senate Intelligence Committee and that dangerous Angela Merkel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank God the Obama administration was able to save us from a terror attack by James Rosen (and his parents), the Senate Intelligence Committee and that dangerous Angela Merkel.

 

Don't forget the Tea Party non-profits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank God the Obama administration was able to save us from a terror attack by James Rosen (and his parents), the Senate Intelligence Committee and that dangerous Angela Merkel.

 

thank goodness Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's shoe bomb didn't go off on the flight out of Detroit, they didn't even bother to search him before boarding...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

thank goodness Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's shoe bomb didn't go off on the flight out of Detroit, they didn't even bother to search him before boarding...

 

 

 

I'm not sure how pertinent this is to the discussion. Did they prevent the bomb going off due to secret surveillance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how pertinent this is to the discussion. Did they prevent the bomb going off due to secret surveillance?

 

shows how USELESS all of it is, they can collect 2 billion boring facts but it doesn't add up to much, sorry to disappoint those on here convinced it means much in the end

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Nah, sometimes you have to put the clamps down, but as specified and ratified and for a limited time before further review.

 

The US and the rest of the free first-nations countries are under a large threat from terrorism, so the level of surveillance will go up.

 

That's how it is kiddo....

Yeah. I've always been for the Patriot Act for that reason. It's the same reason I support Trump's ban of immigrants from high risk countries. You see terrorist attacks rapidly rising in European countries, here, and apparently the bomb in Russia today that killed at least 10 people was in retaliation for Syria. I find it funny people are so self involved that the government actually cares to listen in on your calls or e-mails. "Gee, Jim usually orders pizza on Wednesday, not Thursday. Think we should brief the president?"

 

My freedom and liberty hasn't been taken away from me since the Patriot Act became a law. The security line at the airport and ball games are a little bit longer, but that's about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah. I've always been for the Patriot Act for that reason. It's the same reason I support Trump's ban of immigrants from high risk countries. You see terrorist attacks rapidly rising in European countries, here, and apparently the bomb in Russia today that killed at least 10 people was in retaliation for Syria. I find it funny people are so self involved that the government actually cares to listen in on your calls or e-mails. "Gee, Jim usually orders pizza on Wednesday, not Thursday. Think we should brief the president?"

 

My freedom and liberty hasn't been taken away from me since the Patriot Act became a law. The security line at the airport and ball games are a little bit longer, but that's about it.

 

sounds good, i'm past the age of unbridled enthusiasm for political slogans, they mean nothing at all

 

at the same time i encourage the young to get interested and involved in politics at the local level (and charities) and put their minds and energy into making the world a better place, at least something better than calling for perfection of mankind on the political fringe of an NFL team message board...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Nah, sometimes you have to put the clamps down, but as specified and ratified and for a limited time before further review.

 

:wallbash:

 

Yeah, because the government has a long and distinguished track record of giving back civil liberties after they've snatched them away. Fear sells -- which is how they convinced you that these programs are necessary to keep you safe. These programs have NOTHING to do with keeping you safe and everything to do with keeping themselves (the government) safe.

 

There is a giant difference between the government working to protect itself and the government working to protect its people. Wars have been fought over that difference -- and seemingly will have to be fought again.

 

 

 

The US and the rest of the free first-nations countries are under a large threat from terrorism, so the level of surveillance will go up.

 

:wallbash:

 

Again, one of the most horrific developments in modern America is this mentality. Thank you for exemplifying that. You've been beaten down by the fear mongers to believe that surrendering your civil liberties to the government is necessary to fight a nebulous, undefined, and never ending war on "terrorists". And you've done so without implementing any limitations, oversight, or applying any degree of foresight.

 

You've been had, along with millions of others. Team Cheney thanks you.

 

 

shows how USELESS all of it is, they can collect 2 billion boring facts but it doesn't add up to much, sorry to disappoint those on here convinced it means much in the end

 

How can anyone be watching the news these days and say the information they're collecting on US citizens is useless?? That's an absurdly ignorant statement to make in light of current events.

 

We are literally watching the US IC use information gleaned from mass surveillance to undercut a sitting US President and his administration.

 

...In other words, the IC is using the system as it was always designed: to protect the government from the people.

My freedom and liberty hasn't been taken away from me since the Patriot Act became a law.

 

It absolutely has.

 

You just haven't realized it yet because you're blinded by fear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...