Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Rotation Advertisements



We hope you enjoy your visit to this forum.


If you are reading this then it means you are currently browsing the forum as a guest, we don’t limit any of the content posted from guests however if you join, you will have the ability to join the discussions! We are always happy to see new faces at this forum and we would like to hear your opinion, so why not register now? It doesn’t take long and you can get posting right away.


Click here to Register!

If you are having difficulties validating your account please email us at admin@dbzf.co.uk


If you're already a member please log in to your account:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
Obama's NSA Susan Rice Unmasked Trump's Staff; Will she go to jail?
Topic Started: Apr 3 2017, 06:34 PM (793 Views)
Political Piper
Member Avatar


https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-03/top-obama-adviser-sought-names-of-trump-associates-in-intel

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/03/susan-rice-requested-to-unmask-names-trump-transition-officials-sources-say.html

We do know that Trump's staff's communication was indeed monitored, either incidentally or purposefully. The potential for a massive scandal seems to be increasing every day, especially with Representative Nunes verifying the claim that Trump's communications were monitored, and Evelyn Farkas basically admitting to it on MSNBC. Now, I understand people are playing semantics and are focusing on Trump's phrasing of "Obama" and "wiretap", but I don't think playing semantics debunks Trump's claims. The reality is that this potential scandal could be explosive, and would make Watergate look like (insert metaphor here).

So, what are your thoughts regarding these new revelations? Should Farkas, Rice, and Obama be subpoened to testify? Should there be an investigation into the alleged illegal activity of the Obama admin? At the very least, this should reinforce the popular belief that these surveillance programs such as the Patriot Act are unconstitutional and should immediately be investigated and destroyed - you know, 4th amendment and all..


My Youtube Channel With More Political and Breaking News Videos

FOOD FOR THOUGHT:
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daemon Keido
Member Avatar
Warmaster of Chaos

If the collection was incidental I see no reason why any beyond the FBI could be called since only they would have had a hand in the collection.

While there may be a scandal, I am not so sure you have the target of the scandal correct.
A Shadow is merely Darkness in the presence of Light


Posted Image

Thanks Kid Buu for this awesome sig!

The Emperor Protects
Member Online View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tinny
Member Avatar


Considering the current storm about just how deep the connection to Russia is, if anything it may give more fuel as to why we need a more powerful NSA, after all, If the President can be bought by Russia, why should our intelligence services answer to him?

By no means do I consider this a good thing, and in any other administration this would be a scandal (democrat or republican), but consisting how unpopular and scandalous the first administration is, and so quickly, and so constantly, I think it's very likely this'll just lend credence to those strategies and the former administration, especially when you keep in mind many are questioning if Nunes is even capable of being unbiased here. Tbh considering how they're allowing companies to buy our information, I imagine this won't even be making big splashes, anyone who is outraged was probably already a Trump fan to begin with.
Edited by Tinny, Apr 3 2017, 06:48 PM.
Posted Image
Above signature created by Graffiti

Posted Image
Member Online View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Political Piper
Member Avatar


Tinny
Apr 3 2017, 06:46 PM
Considering the current storm about just how deep the connection to Russia is, if anything it may give more fuel as to why we need a more powerful NSA, after all, If the President can be bought by Russia, why should our intelligence services answer to him?

By no means do I consider this a good thing, and in any other administration this would be a scandal (democrat or republican), but consisting how unpopular and scandalous the first administration is, and so quickly, and so constantly, I think it's very likely this'll just lend credence to those strategies and the former administration, especially when you keep in mind many are questioning if Nunes is even capable of being unbiased here. Tbh considering how they're allowing companies to buy our information, I imagine this won't even be making big splashes, anyone who is outraged was probably already a Trump fan to begin with.
Yes, Nunes' impartiality is being questioned because he is going against the narrative. His integrity was never questioned before, only after he announced he had seen evidence of Trump being monitored that his integrity is now questioned. If Trump had connections with Russia it would have been unmasked and leaked to the press already. Just like it was with Mike Flynn and Sessions. Even though Sessions did nothing wrong, and Mike Flynn didn't violate anything either, but that's another discussion. As for your comment that we may need a more powerful NSA after all, I will refer you to Ben Franklin.

Quote:
 
Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.


Daemon,

Leaking classified information is a felony. If the ex-President or his staff was involved that would indicate a integrated conspiracy that threatens the founding principles of the Republic. So, although I know people only want to know about Trump and Russia, we can't ignore the fact that we may have enemies within that could damage the country, and who have already demonstrated there attitudes by leaking information to damage Trump's staff. Again, I will mention that if there was evidence of Trump colluding with Putin, it most likely would have been leaked long ago. I know you're not from here so it probably doesn't matter to you, but I contend that there is an investigation into Russia and Trump already, we would be wise to institute another one into the Felony leaks and potential collusion of the Obama administration to violate our indirect-democracy.

If there is an investigation into Trump and his staff with regard to Russia, there should also be one with Obama and his staff and there possible acts of trying to manipulate our election through illegal activities.
Edited by Political Piper, Apr 3 2017, 07:17 PM.


My Youtube Channel With More Political and Breaking News Videos

FOOD FOR THOUGHT:
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daemon Keido
Member Avatar
Warmaster of Chaos

Political Piper
Apr 3 2017, 07:15 PM
If there is an investigation into Trump and his staff with regard to Russia, there should also be one with Obama and his staff and there possible acts of trying to manipulate our election through illegal activities.
There has already been a concentrated effort for the better of ten years to discredit Obama. If after all that time and the fact that the Republicans had no small amount of power the last 6 years that such info has not come up, I doubt it will onntje basis it does not exist.

Face it, Republicans would LOVE to have as much dirt as there appears to be with Trump. They had plenty of time to dig for it, when they weren't using that time to stonewall Obama.

I won't say Obama was a perfect president because that is foolish. But if ANYTHING resembling treason or wrongdoing was evident, Nunes would have led with that outright instead of wishy-washy comments like "Trump seems to be right correct".

Tracking potential breaches in the American government is not illegal. Certainly not if Obama had ordered it. Nor any other President, Democrat or Republican.

But if you want to call into question everything Obama has done, please do. But do not be surprised if the system you value finds he did nothing illegal.
A Shadow is merely Darkness in the presence of Light


Posted Image

Thanks Kid Buu for this awesome sig!

The Emperor Protects
Member Online View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Political Piper
Member Avatar


Quote:
 
There has already been a concentrated effort for the better of ten years to discredit Obama. If after all that time and the fact that the Republicans had no small amount of power the last 6 years that such info has not come up, I doubt it will onntje basis it does not exist


Not necessarily. We have to remember that Obama's administration was involved in numerous, serious scandals. Eric Holder in Fast and Furious and lying under oath, Eric Snowden leaks and James Clapper lying under oath to congress, Hillary's private email server, IRS targeting Tea party members, Loretta Lynch meeting Bill Clinton (not reported as much as it should have been.) Just because Obama wasn't impeached by a Republican congress, doesn't exonerate him for all illicit activity. The President has access to intelligence services that congress doesn't. And as we found out from Clapper, congress didn't know that the NSA was spying on millions of Americans. So the claim that congress would have found something doesn't hold muster.

Quote:
 
Face it, Republicans would LOVE to have as much dirt as there appears to be with Trump. They had plenty of time to dig for it,


Again, poor argument. Democrats would LOVE to have as much dirt on George Bush as they the GOP had Bill Clinton. Using political partisanship to argue the validity of an investigation does not negate possible illegal activities.

Quote:
 
when they weren't using that time to stonewall Obama.


"I don't need congress. I have a phone and a pen."
"Elections have consequences."

Quote:
 
I won't say Obama was a perfect president because that is foolish. But if ANYTHING resembling treason or wrongdoing was evident, Nunes would have led with that outright instead of wishy-washy comments like "Trump seems to be right correct".


Good comment. Obama was very far from perfect and very far from transparent. He has the record for most FOIA requests denied, yet he promised to be the most transparent administration. Nothing big in this statement but still interesting. As for Nunes leading out with that, I don't know his motives. But I think accusing the past President of these transgressions would create a firestorm that could have very damaging consequences? Maybe he wanted to complete the investigation first and not make wild claims that he can't back up? Saying Trump's communications were monitored is one thing, saying it was done nefariously by the Obama admin is a completely different thing. Perhaps we should get an investigation into what caused the unmasking and monitoring of Trump?

Quote:
 
Tracking potential breaches in the American government is not illegal. Certainly not if Obama had ordered it. Nor any other President, Democrat or Republican.


Tracking potential breaches isn't illegal, but willfully colluding with a Presidential candidate to hurt another candidate is. The President ordering something does not make it lawful, remember Nixon. I believe he said that the President can't do anything illegal, or to that effect.

Quote:
 
But if you want to call into question everything Obama has done, please do. But do not be surprised if the system you value finds he did nothing illegal.


I don't. You did, by bringing the last decade up of how the GOP tried to get at him. Obama may not be involved with any of this, but that doesn't mean every one else in his administration is innocent. As we discovered with Farkas and Rice.


My Youtube Channel With More Political and Breaking News Videos

FOOD FOR THOUGHT:
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daemon Keido
Member Avatar
Warmaster of Chaos

There is no proof Obama did what he did to aid the election. Indeed, if he had an inkling that Trump might actually win but seems rather buddy-buddy to Russia despite Republican Protocol basically being "give Russia the finger and walk on", it seems unusual. Maybe it is as innocent as Trump says. But on the chance it is not, best to get it sorted before a potential security breach at the highest level can occur.
A Shadow is merely Darkness in the presence of Light


Posted Image

Thanks Kid Buu for this awesome sig!

The Emperor Protects
Member Online View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tinny
Member Avatar


Quote:
 
Yes, Nunes' impartiality is being questioned because he is going against the narrative. His integrity was never questioned before, only after he announced he had seen evidence of Trump being monitored that his integrity is now questioned. If Trump had connections with Russia it would have been unmasked and leaked to the press already. Just like it was with Mike Flynn and Sessions. Even though Sessions did nothing wrong, and Mike Flynn didn't violate anything either, but that's another discussion. As for your comment that we may need a more powerful NSA after all, I will refer you to Ben Franklin.

I'd prefer in the future if you read my posts instead of responding to them assuming you know what's in them, secondly we did that a long time ago and we freely don't seem to stop heading there any time soon, it's kind of disgusting how it feels that Americans cares so little about what supposedly makes the USA a great country to be honest.

Quote:
 
By no means do I consider this a good thing and in any other administration this would be a scandal (democrat or republican), but consisting how unpopular and scandalous the current administration is, and so quickly, and so constantly, I think it's very likely this'll just lend credence to those strategies and the former administration, especially when you keep in mind many are questioning if Nunes is even capable of being unbiased here.


And as for what's going on so far, it's clear there are various connections to Russia going on, especially since I've seen the story from them change tone and time again which certainly isn't helping to clear their name and legitimize themselves, though this administration in general seems to constantly be putting it's foot in its mouth.

But of course if we're gonna simply be not reading what someone said in the same conversation and assuming such, I'm probably wasting my time writing this out.
Posted Image
Above signature created by Graffiti

Posted Image
Member Online View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Political Piper
Member Avatar


Tinny
Apr 3 2017, 09:12 PM
Quote:
 
Yes, Nunes' impartiality is being questioned because he is going against the narrative. His integrity was never questioned before, only after he announced he had seen evidence of Trump being monitored that his integrity is now questioned. If Trump had connections with Russia it would have been unmasked and leaked to the press already. Just like it was with Mike Flynn and Sessions. Even though Sessions did nothing wrong, and Mike Flynn didn't violate anything either, but that's another discussion. As for your comment that we may need a more powerful NSA after all, I will refer you to Ben Franklin.

I'd prefer in the future if you read my posts instead of responding to them assuming you know what's in them, secondly we did that a long time ago and we freely don't seem to stop heading there any time soon, it's kind of disgusting how it feels that Americans cares so little about what supposedly makes the USA a great country to be honest.

Quote:
 
By no means do I consider this a good thing and in any other administration this would be a scandal (democrat or republican), but consisting how unpopular and scandalous the current administration is, and so quickly, and so constantly, I think it's very likely this'll just lend credence to those strategies and the former administration, especially when you keep in mind many are questioning if Nunes is even capable of being unbiased here.


And as for what's going on so far, it's clear there are various connections to Russia going on, especially since I've seen the story from them change tone and time again which certainly isn't helping to clear their name and legitimize themselves, though this administration in general seems to constantly be putting it's foot in its mouth.

But of course if we're gonna simply be not reading what someone said in the same conversation and assuming such, I'm probably wasting my time writing this out.
Whoops. Sorry Tinny, I misread your post. It happens sometimes, not to you, apparently. But we're all not as perfect. =\ I'll try to be more careful so you don't feel "obligated" to respond. I don't want you to "waste your time."

Ok. Enough patronizing your sardonic, irrelevant denigration of a common human error, I think I made my point. Back to the subject at hand..

I reread your comment and I have some questions:

Quote:
 
consisting how unpopular and scandalous the first administration is,


Which is the first administration? You talking about Obama's?

Quote:
 
If the President can be bought by Russia, why should our intelligence services answer to him?

I think that's a big reason Hillary lost. Different countries buying her, of course. It's funny donations are way down and she had to shut down CGI. We should be grateful Trump is President. We only have an allegation he's paid for, we know Hillary was. It could be coincidence all her donors dropped off after the election for other reasons, I guess.

Quote:
 
I think it's very likely this'll just lend credence to those strategies and the former administration, especially when you keep in mind many are questioning if Nunes is even capable of being unbiased here.


Those questioning Nunes are doing so based on a false narrative orchestrated by the left because Nunes won't reveal a source that showed him evidence that Trump was incidentally wiretapped. The Vice-chair was also showed this information over the weekend but refused to comment. This is literally the same answer I gave earlier so if once again I am getting your post wrong. (Which I've read both times for both posts FYI) then either you are wasting your time because I must be an idiot, you are too smart for everyone and we're all idiots, or you need to do a better explanation. I would prefer the last one. But if you don't have the time I understand



My Youtube Channel With More Political and Breaking News Videos

FOOD FOR THOUGHT:
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daemon Keido
Member Avatar
Warmaster of Chaos

For the record, it was just reported a few minutes ago that any and all collection of information from Trump or Trump Associates was done legally and incidentally. This was confirmed by Republicans on the comittee as opposed to Democrats so there goes your "partisan line" arguement. So you no longer have that point. Also, even if Rice did unmask the names there is zero requirement for having anybody else see it.
A Shadow is merely Darkness in the presence of Light


Posted Image

Thanks Kid Buu for this awesome sig!

The Emperor Protects
Member Online View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Political Piper
Member Avatar


Okay, let's dissect this.

Quote:
 
For the record, it was just reported a few minutes ago that any and all collection of information from Trump or Trump Associates was done legally and incidentally.


It may be legally done, but it's not hard to get FISA court orders since they don't adhere to direct evidence. Either way, it is "illegal" to give a reporter confidential information (which FISA transcripts) would fall under. It is also illegal to collude with a political party to hurt another candidate. So even if the the wiretap was done legally and incidentally (which my first post said so this isn't breaking news) what happens next is the pith of it all. Also, once an American's voice is determined they are to stop recording. Unmasking the transcript then that transcript randomly gets sent to media outlets only solidifies that there is a problem here. Not just how the information was collected and unmasked, but that it was illegally dispersed.

Quote:
 
For the record, it was just reported a few minutes ago that any and all collection of information from Trump or Trump Associates was done legally and incidentally.Democrats so there goes your "partisan line" arguement.


Nunes reported this a while ago, actually. As for partisan argument... I refer you to my above post.

Quote:
 
So you no longer have that point.


Again, I refer you up above.

Quote:
 
Also, even if Rice did unmask the names there is zero requirement for having anybody else see it.


Yes. It is completely legal for an intelligence official to violate the rules and unmask and American voice then send that official transcript to a media outlet... Not saying Rice also leaked it, but to say anybody can see a FISA transcript is nonsensical.. =\

EDIT: The second quote got all messed up.. I can't remember what was all in it.. But we'll just leave it as is
Edited by Political Piper, Apr 3 2017, 11:33 PM.


My Youtube Channel With More Political and Breaking News Videos

FOOD FOR THOUGHT:
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daemon Keido
Member Avatar
Warmaster of Chaos

You keep saying wiretap. Let's make it clear right now:

TRUMP WAS NEVER UNDER WIRETAP. THE ONLY PARTY UNDER WIRETAP WERE THE RUSSIANS TRUMP AND ASSOCIATES WERE TALKING TO. THIS DOES NOT MEAN TRUMP WAS UNDER A WIRETAP.

Now that we got that out of they way, you have no evidence any of the leaks were caused by the Democrats and yet you seem intent on saying it was. It seems as likely as a Republican with an axe to grind against Trump and his ilk. So how about we cut off the veiled targeting of the left for now?
A Shadow is merely Darkness in the presence of Light


Posted Image

Thanks Kid Buu for this awesome sig!

The Emperor Protects
Member Online View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Political Piper
Member Avatar


If we're going to argue semantics, let's at least argue it rightly.

Quote:
 
TRUMP WAS NEVER UNDER WIRETAP. THE ONLY PARTY UNDER WIRETAP WERE THE RUSSIANS TRUMP AND ASSOCIATES WERE TALKING TO.


It is of my knowledge that there were no wiretaps. Communications were monitored, but wiretapping means they have to physically enter the premises and plant the bug. So no Trump wasn't wiretapped and no, Russians weren't wiretapped. Unless you know something I don't? So as I said in my original post. Arguing semantics is irrelevant. We all know wiretapping means monitoring communication. And you know I meant that as well since I literally said that in my first post. Which means your post is just argumentative which is just a waste of time (a true waste of time.) Or you didn't read my first post and so I will direct you to Tinny's second reply.

Quote:
 
Now that we got that out of they way, you have no evidence any of the leaks were caused by the Democrats and yet you seem intent on saying it was. It seems as likely as a Republican with an axe to grind against Trump and his ilk. So how about we cut off the veiled targeting of the left for now?


Where did I say it was a Democrat? The neocons in congress are just as bad as some on the left, as my channel constantly describes. But since Susan Rice worked for Obama and unmasked the tapes, and Loretta Lynch is on video saying keep protesting in the streets and there may be bloodshed, it's not a far jump to question if the Obama administration was involved, since Susan Rice was part of it. If we found out John McCain was involved unmasking the wiretap, excuse me, communications, I would be questioning the Republican establishment.

Make sense?


EDIT To Tinny (kind of off topic)

Quote:
 
Tbh considering how they're allowing companies to buy our information


Did you know that the search engine Bing and Firefox doesn't sell information? I just found that out the other day on one of my podcasts.. Which kind of sucks because I really don't like Bing, and Chrome is so much better than Firefox ... But I heard a rumor that Chrome incognito prevents that? Or if you get a VPN. I'm assuming Tor would as well but that's also a slower browser. Okay, got a little off topic but I honestly didn't know about that. I completely agree with you. Remember I did a post on here saying we have to stop Obama from giving the internet to the UN to control. I feel the same away about congress selling our information.. Hopefully Trump vetoes it

Edited by Political Piper, Apr 3 2017, 11:51 PM.


My Youtube Channel With More Political and Breaking News Videos

FOOD FOR THOUGHT:
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daemon Keido
Member Avatar
Warmaster of Chaos

The jump to targeting the Obama Administration is quite far since there is zero evidence to prove it beyond very weak circumstantial evidence. You base the leak probability based on who held tje highest office of influence when the adminiatrations were in transition. There are many who had access at the point that you are identifying smoking gun.

I was willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt upon his election and I said so to you way back when Trump won. And I have kept to that, as much as I have been able to. But there is simply more evidence of a sword of damocles over Trump's head than Obama but a smokescreen is neccessary for Trump to act as he wishes with the authority he was given.

You simply have no produced evidence that changes my mind.
A Shadow is merely Darkness in the presence of Light


Posted Image

Thanks Kid Buu for this awesome sig!

The Emperor Protects
Member Online View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Political Piper
Member Avatar


Daemon Keido
Apr 3 2017, 11:49 PM
The jump to targeting the Obama Administration is quite far since there is zero evidence to prove it beyond very weak circumstantial evidence. You base the leak probability based on who held tje highest office of influence when the adminiatrations were in transition. There are many who had access at the point that you are identifying smoking gun.

I was willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt upon his election and I said so to you way back when Trump won. And I have kept to that, as much as I have been able to. But there is simply more evidence of a sword of damocles over Trump's head than Obama but a smokescreen is neccessary for Trump to act as he wishes with the authority he was given.

You simply have no produced evidence that changes my mind.
True. Just like there has been zero evidence that Russia hacked the DNC/ working with Trump yet people are leaping to that accusation. We have 17 different intelligence agencies that agree, but what they don't tell you is that only three of them worked on the report, and the other 14 based their answers on that paper.

Yet people are still claiming Trump is Putins puppet and all that stuff. Not saying you did, but that is the populous contention. Wikileaks Vault 7 has proved that the US can leave evidence behind for hacking of any country they want. We know that there was a FISA request on Trump in July that was denied.

This was reported by NYT, Heatstreet, and Breitbart, among others. We know that the Government has lied to us many of times in the past: James Clapper about spying on Americans, Obama on spying on German Chancellor and French President, Obama admin about Assad using chemical weapons, Obama admin (and now Trump) funding yemen rebels who are a sect of Al-Qaeda, Colin Powell to the UN and the world about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction. They have also done horrible things to citizens like Operation Northwoods, Operation Dropkick, Operation Big Itch, Operation MK Ultra.

Why am I saying all of this? Because people willingly believe that Russia is responsible for hacking DNC and working with Trump. And the only thing they base it off of (besides the intelligence report) is the conversation of Michael Flynn with the ambassadors when he said he would reduce sanctions. But since Trump has said during the whole campaign that he wants better relations with Russia, it doesn't take a big leap to realize Flynn would be wise to talk with Russia and tell him Trump is still adamant about having a closer relationship. Just like Flynn talked to over a dozen other countries. As well as Hillary's staff. We remember when Obama told the Russian ambassador on a hot mic that he would be more helpful to Putin after his election.

The point is that there is a decent amount of circumstantial evidence on Trump/Russia connection. There's little circumstantial evidence on Russia hacking the DNC and Hillary. And there is circumstantial evidence that people in the Obama admin may have acted nefariously against Trump. The circumstantial evidence being the FISA denial in July; the leaks happening after Trump gets into office which was preceded by a democratic administration, Evelyn Farkas who worked in the Obama admin who said some very interesting things on MSNBC. And now Susan Rice.

It's entirely possible that it's somebody unaffiliated with Obama; it could be a republican, independent, whatever. But since we are basing things on circumstantial evidence, there is circumstantial evidence that makes it entirely possible these leaks could happen from a member of the Obama admin..

It's important to note that the only reason people think Trump's Putin puppet is from an intelligence report saying Russia used propaganda for Trump (which the US has done tons of times, most recently in France), unsubstantiated claims that Russia hacked the DNC (which is hard to believe since Governments do lie and Wikileaks has showed how easily they lie and what they can do with hacking. Until proof is given to the public I don't trust it. Too many lies from Government) and finally the leaked transcript of Flynn and the ambassador. Which wasn't illegal despite what the media says.

There's an investigation into Trump/Russia. There should be an investigation into who's leaking the material, the unmasking, and motives.


My Youtube Channel With More Political and Breaking News Videos

FOOD FOR THOUGHT:
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1

Theme Designed by McKee91