Senator Ben Sasse Issues Strong Statement Regarding Wiretapping Claims

[SirLinksALot]

And that doesn't make you wonder at all that maybe you're hearing what you want to hear? Just a tad?


It's right there in the beginning too.

Well if I read it right, here's what we can gather:

1) Paul Ryan does not think that Obama ordered the surveillance (in response to the question: Are you concerned, on the flip side, that the Obama administration may have been surveilling members of the Trump campaign)

2) Paul Ryan believes that there STILL was a surveillance. (in response to the question: And then in October they renew it and they do start a wiretap with some computer and Russian banks and it doesn’t show up anything, by reporting. Have you heard that? So you believe this to be true? )

So, if there was no Obama order but a surveillance was still done, who the heck ordered it?

[LonestarDream]

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,252277.msg1250131.html#new

More corroborating facts over here.

And that doesn't make you wonder at all that maybe you're hearing what you want to hear? Just a tad?


It's right there in the beginning too.

[LonestarDream]

DOJ, which is really Obama

Well if I read it right, here's what we can gather:

1) Paul Ryan does not think that Obama ordered the surveillance (in response to the question: Are you concerned, on the flip side, that the Obama administration may have been surveilling members of the Trump campaign)

2) Paul Ryan believes that there STILL was a surveillance. (in response to the question: And then in October they renew it and they do start a wiretap with some computer and Russian banks and it doesn’t show up anything, by reporting. Have you heard that? So you believe this to be true? )

So, if there was no Obama order but a surveillance was still done, who the heck ordered it?

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Well if I read it right, here's what we can gather:

1) Paul Ryan does not think that Obama ordered the surveillance (in response to the question: Are you concerned, on the flip side, that the Obama administration may have been surveilling members of the Trump campaign)

2) Paul Ryan believes that there STILL was a surveillance. (in response to the question: And then in October they renew it and they do start a wiretap with some computer and Russian banks and it doesn’t show up anything, by reporting. Have you heard that? So you believe this to be true? )

So, if there was no Obama order but a surveillance was still done, who the heck ordered it?

I still have seen no proof that any surveillance was done at all.


We all know Trump is a lying sack of shit of course. So I won't take his word for it. Not without some solid proof.


We are basing this whole thing on some "unnamed sources" (which Trump said were bad at one point).


There's a guy I follow on Twitter that Trump has a lot of people living at Trump Tower and Trump may not even have been the target of the wiretap.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,252277.msg1250131.html#new

More corroborating facts over here.

 


What am I look at here LonestarDream?


You linked to an abortion of a thread.

[LonestarDream]

Trump wining is directly correlated to the velocity of trolling around here.

Well if I read it right, here's what we can gather:

1) Paul Ryan does not think that Obama ordered the surveillance (in response to the question: Are you concerned, on the flip side, that the Obama administration may have been surveilling members of the Trump campaign)

2) Paul Ryan believes that there STILL was a surveillance. (in response to the question: And then in October they renew it and they do start a wiretap with some computer and Russian banks and it doesn’t show up anything, by reporting. Have you heard that? So you believe this to be true? )

So, if there was no Obama order but a surveillance was still done, who the heck ordered it?

[LonestarDream]

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,252277.msg1250131.html#new

Looks good to me

[geronl]

And that doesn't make you wonder at all that maybe you're hearing what you want to hear? Just a tad?

We all know "Russian banks" is code for "Trump". Plus the blinking is proof beyond doubt. 

[SirLinksALot]

I still have seen no proof that any surveillance was done at all.


We all know Trump is a lying sack of shit of course. So I won't take his word for it. Not without some solid proof.


We are basing this whole thing on some "unnamed sources" (which Trump said were bad at one point).


There's a guy I follow on Twitter that Trump has a lot of people living at Trump Tower and Trump may not even have been the target of the wiretap.

Here's what we DO know:

1. Trump lies ( yes I agree ). But we also know that the Obama administration has done surveillance on journalists -- James Rosen and the Associated Press. So, it becomes a matter of who has more credibility, the one who exagerrates and lies, or the one who also lies (i.e., Obama, remember, "YOU can keep your doctor?") and who has a record of using the power of government to spy on people.

2. Somebody knows inside information about communications the Trump team has had with the Russians ( e.g. Mike Flynn ).

The evidence seems to show that some sort of surveillance was done.

We can go back and forth on this, but if a FISA order was indeed given last October, it would be a simple matter to produce that order.

If the President can order that it be shown, the ball is in his court.

[endicom]

Trump wining is directly correlated to the velocity of trolling around here.

Or the people of the United States winning.

Shouldn't trolling be at least rational? The bratscat stuff here needs some other term.

[LonestarDream]

Or the people of the United States winning.

Shouldn't trolling be at least rational? The bratscat stuff here needs some other term.

Apparently not.  Just high velocity to obfuscate findings.

[bigheadfred]

looky looky

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,252201.msg1250201.html#msg1250201

[SirLinksALot]

looky looky

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,252201.msg1250201.html#msg1250201

Well, it's looking like (if the above report in the link is true ):

1) There was REASONABLE evidence to do surveillance because of the possible connection to these Russian banks.

2) Nothing illegal was found.

3) If the above are correct, Trump's tweet is essentially correct. THERE WAS SURVEILLANCE, but it could be said it was for good, precautionary reasons.

4) The disturbing thing is this -- the results of the surveillance could have been selectively LEAKED to the press to imply that there was collusion between the Trump team and the Russians.

[Suppressed]

Yes!!!!

And the fact that Ryan started blinking means he felt threatened by this line of questioning.

Clearly, Ryan did not want to concede the existence of the FISA court orders.

Now, as a control, go look at other clips of him under those lights with neutral statements. I recall him being a "blinker" in the past while speaking.  I bet you'll see the same.

Besides, I'm sure he was concentrating on being careful with words. That will lead to blinking even if not hiding.

[Frank Cannon]

Well if I read it right, here's what we can gather:

1) Paul Ryan does not think that Obama ordered the surveillance (in response to the question: Are you concerned, on the flip side, that the Obama administration may have been surveilling members of the Trump campaign)

2) Paul Ryan believes that there STILL was a surveillance. (in response to the question: And then in October they renew it and they do start a wiretap with some computer and Russian banks and it doesn’t show up anything, by reporting. Have you heard that? So you believe this to be true? )

So, if there was no Obama order but a surveillance was still done, who the heck ordered it?

Isn't this Ben the Uber fag who hates Donny just for fun?