House gives Trump 7 days to prove Trump Tower was wiretapped

[theHawk]

Oh so they will say The NY Times was lying and that Flynn's conversations were fabricated.

They will say the NYT's article said Trumps server, which wasn't in Trump Tower, was monitored under a FISA warrant. And Flynns conversation was caught as the result of his communicating with a foreign agent under FISA surveillance.

It doesn't matter how the wiretaps were obtained, it proves Trump's staff was being wiretapped, and that information was leaked for political purposes.

 

[radical right]

the FBI could have called a judge with this information and quickly gotten a surveillance warrant to unmask them, but if what they said was not particularly compelling, then the warrant would have been denied and their identities would have remained masked.

There were two brothers, one was a citizen, the other a foreign national. As you said, they could reveal the identity of the foreign national. But how do they mask the identity of his us citizen brother again?

 

[radical right]

And Flynns conversation was caught as the result of his communicating with a foreign agent under FISA surveillance.

It doesn't matter how the wiretaps were obtained, it proves Trump's staff was being wiretapped, and that information was leaked for political purposes.

You seem unable to comprehend. Someone isn't wiretaped if they get caught on somebody elses wiretap.

 

[theHawk]

And Flynns conversation was caught as the result of his communicating with a foreign agent under FISA surveillance.

It doesn't matter how the wiretaps were obtained, it proves Trump's staff was being wiretapped, and that information was leaked for political purposes.

You seem unable to comprehend. Someone isn't wiretaped if they get caught on somebody elses wiretap.

I do comprehend it. If there is a FISA authorized "wiretap" on a foreigner, and an US citizen is identified, then that recording must be quarantined and purged, unless a separate court order approves keeping the recording. That means a "wiretap" must be explicitly authorized for that US citizen. The fact that the Flynn was ever identified on one of those recordings means that there was an court order to wiretap him, or that FISA rules were ignored and the law was violated by the intel agency that initially gathered it. Either way, it means he was being wiretapped. The leak about his conversations was a felony. To this day, that is the only crime that has happened in this whole "Russia gate" scandal.

 

[charwin95]

They reported the Russians were wiretapped

Under the law, if the wire tap includes a conversation with an American for whom no surveillance warrant has been issued, the identity of the American must be masked, but we know for a fact that in the case of Mike Flynn, the mask was removed and the information about his conversation with the Russian ambassador was used by Obama holdovers on the Justice Department to get Flynn fired. How many more Trump associates were illegally spied on by this method?

Ambassador Kislyak phone was wiretapped ........ That is how they got Flynn and that was presented to your Fuhrer.
If Flynn phone was wiretapped.......... Trump could have used that as an excuse. Don't you think?

Also it is common knowledge that we wiretapped Russian diplomats and track foreign spies. And they do the same to us in Russia. Flynn is a stupid general........ he should know better.

The law is different when an American is on the phone... they have to have a FISA warrant on the American. That there was a warrant to tap Flynn is revealing.

Link?

DNI: NSA can't spy on Americans without a warrant

Okay... so where did it say .... Obama spied on Trump?

 

[radical right]

I do comprehend it. If there is a FISA authorized "wiretap" on a foreigner, and an US citizen is identified, then that recording must be quarantined and purged, unless a separate court order approves keeping the recording. .

The top secret rules that allow NSA to use US data without a warrant

The NSA is empowered to retain data for up to five years and the policy states "communications which may be retained include electronic communications acquired because of limitations on the NSA's ability to filter communications".

Even if upon examination a communication is found to be domestic – entirely within the US – the NSA can appeal to its director to keep what it has found if it contains "significant foreign intelligence information", "evidence of a crime", "technical data base information" (such as encrypted communications), or "information pertaining to a threat of serious harm to life or property".

Domestic communications containing none of the above must be destroyed. Communications in which one party was outside the US, but the other is a US-person, are permitted for retention under FAA rules.

The minimization procedure adds that these can be disseminated to other agencies or friendly governments if the US person is anonymised, or including the US person's identity under certain criteria.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Breaking Update:

www.washingtonexaminer.com/doj-sends-wiretap-materials-to-congressional-investigators/article/2617748

 

[charwin95]

The New York times reported that it was wiretapped.....why don't they just reveal their sources....?

So why is your buddy Trump can't produce a single evidence?
So you are saying ...... They spied on Trump because NY times told Trump? Is the president is so stupid that he just relied news media for these kind of serious accusations?

Obama spied on me bc NYT told me. Do you even realize how smart you are Guy?

 

[charwin95]

The New York times reported that it was wiretapped.....why don't they just reveal their sources....?

No they didn't.

They reported that Flynn was wiretapped, we're assuming that Obama's 1984 Intel Operation wiretapped All of Trumps people including Trump himself. And having the Iranians wiretap Trump Tower and relay it to Obama, still counts as wiretapping Trump Tower

Where did it say that Flynn (idiot general ) phone was wiretapped?

 

[charwin95]

Prove Obama got one. The FBI gets them all the time to spy on foreign entities.

Latest is Judge Napolitano on Fox News says that the NSA, CIA, FBI, none of the US intelligence agencies were involved. It was British Intelligence that tapped Trump Tower.

That rightwing nonsense has already been debunked.

White House apologizes to British government over spying claims - CNNPolitics.com

They are getting frustrated using all sorts of defense protecting all these lies from Trump.

 

[charwin95]

The New York times reported that it was wiretapped.....why don't they just reveal their sources....?

Liar!

Trump has 17 intelligence agencies that provide information for his Presidentiial Daily Brief. So why is Trump getting his intelligence information from a newspaper?

Actually from Breitbart ........... That shows how STUPID is Trump.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Wait a minute................Didn't Trump say that the NYT was "fake news" just a little while ago? And now he's using them as a source for his claims that he was wiretapped? Which is it, are the NYT reliable or not?

 

[Faun]

LOL

You don't possess enough evidence to factually state laws were clearly broken.

Clearly we do have enough evidence since there is no way anyone would have known about Flynn's identity on that intercept without breaking the law, but to Obama supporters, as with Obama himself, it's politics that counts, not policy and not even national security.

LOLOL

You don't even know who may have leaked the information. The law does allow for exceptions. Without knowing who divulged it, you don't know that the law was violated.

(2)(a)(i) It shall not be unlawful under this chapter for an operator of a switchboard, or an officer, employee, or agent of a provider of wire or electronic communication service, whose facilities are used in the transmission of a wire or electronic communication, to intercept, disclose, or use that communication in the normal course of his employment while engaged in any activity which is a necessary incident to the rendition of his service or to the protection of the rights or property of the provider of that service, except that a provider of wire communication service to the public shall not utilize service observing or random monitoring except for mechanical or service quality control checks.​

We are talking about breaching an NSA database, you moron, not eavesdropping on conversations. Sally Yates was acting AG when she received the information on Flynn, so she knew without a warrant it couldn't have been obtained legally, yet she used it anyway to get Flynn fired instead of seeking to indict the person who illegally unmasked Flynn's identity.

No, you don't know that. You don't know who told her nor do you know how that person obtained the information. Not that your ignorance on those matters will prevent you from leaping head first into assumptions. Carry on.

We both know that without a surveillance warrant on Flynn, no one could have legally known Flynn was the person on that intercept, and Sally Yates knew there was no surveillance warrant on Flynn, so she knew that anyone who brought that information to her was committing a crime and as the acting AG, the highest law enforcement official in the US, she knew it was her duty to arrest him or her, but instead she chose to become complicit in his crime by divulging the information she should never have had. This is just one more example of the "Obama effect" of introducing corruption in many areas of government, the IRS, the intelligence services, the Justice Department and the federal courts.

We both know this is true, but the difference between us is, you don't care if the law was broken or if national security was compromised as long as it generates some negative propaganda about the President. This attitude of yours is also part of the effect Obama has had on some Americans.

Great, more ignorance.... again.... you don't know who told her, what they told her, or more to the point, if they broke the law. And since you don't know any of that, you're merely blowing smoke out of your ass because you're making baseless claims from a position of ignorance. On top of that, you idiotically claim I don't care about the law when you can't even prove a law was broken.

For that you earn the following awards...

 

[charwin95]

They reported the Russians were wiretapped

Under the law, if the wire tap includes a conversation with an American for whom no surveillance warrant has been issued, the identity of the American must be masked, but we know for a fact that in the case of Mike Flynn, the mask was removed and the information about his conversation with the Russian ambassador was used by Obama holdovers on the Justice Department to get Flynn fired. How many more Trump associates were illegally spied on by this method?

Ambassador Kislyak phone was wiretapped ........ That is how they got Flynn and that was presented to your Fuhrer.
If Flynn phone was wiretapped.......... Trump could have used that as an excuse. Don't you think?

Also it is common knowledge that we wiretapped Russian diplomats and track foreign spies. And they do the same to us in Russia. Flynn is a stupid general........ he should know better.

The Russian ambassador's phone was tapped under a FISA warrant which specifies that if an American is on the interecept his identity must be masked, so how did the Obama holdovers in the Justice Department gain access to Flynn's identity unless they violated the law? Clearly, people from the Obama administration violated the law and misused intelligence data for political purposes. This means that even if they did not tap his phones, the Obama administration did illegally surveil at least some of the people associated with the Trump campaign and the Trump transitional government.

So your saying republican senator Nunes committee chairman of senate intelligence is lying?

I'm saying you are too stupid to understand what he said. Nunes said there was no evidence of a wiretap on Trump Tower, he did not say there was no evidence of illegal surveillance of Trump and his associates. In fact we know there was as we have seen in the case of Mike Flynn.

Really? I fully understand what Nunes told to the world........ Trump is lying........ Dude your buddy Trump accused Obama of wiretapping the Trump Tower..... That is the main issue. Let me repeat *Wiretapping of Trump Tower*.
Wiretapping and surveillance is totally different story. It has nothing to do with the surveillance.

And even If there is or was a surveillance of Trump and his associates....... Trump could have come out blasting pointing fingers........... Don't you think?
Did Spicer or even Trump mentioned any surveillance?

 

[toomuchtime_]

No, if they said something before there was a warrant and before their identities were revealed that concerned the FBI, the FBI could ask a court for a surveillance warrant, and only after obtaining the warrant could the FBI unmask the Americans. .

You know that the FBI investigates security clearances. So if the NSA tells the FBI they have an intercept involving an american with a security secretly talking to a foreign government, does the FBI need a warrant to to listen, or read a transcript of that conversation?

Not as long as the identity of any Americans remains masked, but it must have a surveillance warrant to unmask any Americans on the intercept.

 

[theHawk]

I do comprehend it. If there is a FISA authorized "wiretap" on a foreigner, and an US citizen is identified, then that recording must be quarantined and purged, unless a separate court order approves keeping the recording. .

The top secret rules that allow NSA to use US data without a warrant

The NSA is empowered to retain data for up to five years and the policy states "communications which may be retained include electronic communications acquired because of limitations on the NSA's ability to filter communications".

Even if upon examination a communication is found to be domestic – entirely within the US – the NSA can appeal to its director to keep what it has found if it contains "significant foreign intelligence information", "evidence of a crime", "technical data base information" (such as encrypted communications), or "information pertaining to a threat of serious harm to life or property".

Domestic communications containing none of the above must be destroyed. Communications in which one party was outside the US, but the other is a US-person, are permitted for retention under FAA rules.

The minimization procedure adds that these can be disseminated to other agencies or friendly governments if the US person is anonymised, or including the US person's identity under certain criteria.

"the NSA can appeal to its director"

Thanks for confirming what I already said. Retention on such information needs to be approved, which means they had Flynn under surveillance specifically. However you are not providing proof that that course of action was taken in Flynn's case, you're just quoting rules that should had been followed. There is also no justification for such an authorization as there was no threat of "harm to life or property" in such conversations. Unless of course you want to argue that the Russian ambassador and General Flynn were conspiring a terrorist attack.

 

[toomuchtime_]

the FBI could have called a judge with this information and quickly gotten a surveillance warrant to unmask them, but if what they said was not particularly compelling, then the warrant would have been denied and their identities would have remained masked.

There were two brothers, one was a citizen, the other a foreign national. As you said, they could reveal the identity of the foreign national. But how do they mask the identity of his us citizen brother again?

If the other brother had a green card, I think his identity would also be protected, but in the event he didn't, his identity would be revealed but his brother's identity would continue to be masked unless there was a surveillance warrant.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Clearly we do have enough evidence since there is no way anyone would have known about Flynn's identity on that intercept without breaking the law, but to Obama supporters, as with Obama himself, it's politics that counts, not policy and not even national security.

LOLOL

You don't even know who may have leaked the information. The law does allow for exceptions. Without knowing who divulged it, you don't know that the law was violated.

(2)(a)(i) It shall not be unlawful under this chapter for an operator of a switchboard, or an officer, employee, or agent of a provider of wire or electronic communication service, whose facilities are used in the transmission of a wire or electronic communication, to intercept, disclose, or use that communication in the normal course of his employment while engaged in any activity which is a necessary incident to the rendition of his service or to the protection of the rights or property of the provider of that service, except that a provider of wire communication service to the public shall not utilize service observing or random monitoring except for mechanical or service quality control checks.​

We are talking about breaching an NSA database, you moron, not eavesdropping on conversations. Sally Yates was acting AG when she received the information on Flynn, so she knew without a warrant it couldn't have been obtained legally, yet she used it anyway to get Flynn fired instead of seeking to indict the person who illegally unmasked Flynn's identity.

No, you don't know that. You don't know who told her nor do you know how that person obtained the information. Not that your ignorance on those matters will prevent you from leaping head first into assumptions. Carry on.

We both know that without a surveillance warrant on Flynn, no one could have legally known Flynn was the person on that intercept, and Sally Yates knew there was no surveillance warrant on Flynn, so she knew that anyone who brought that information to her was committing a crime and as the acting AG, the highest law enforcement official in the US, she knew it was her duty to arrest him or her, but instead she chose to become complicit in his crime by divulging the information she should never have had. This is just one more example of the "Obama effect" of introducing corruption in many areas of government, the IRS, the intelligence services, the Justice Department and the federal courts.

We both know this is true, but the difference between us is, you don't care if the law was broken or if national security was compromised as long as it generates some negative propaganda about the President. This attitude of yours is also part of the effect Obama has had on some Americans.

Great, more ignorance.... again.... you don't know who told her, what they told her, or more to the point, if they broke the law. And since you don't know any of that, you're merely blowing smoke out of your ass because you're making baseless claims from a position of ignorance. On top of that, you idiotically claim I don't care about the law when you can't even prove a law was broken.

For that you earn the following awards...

I don't believe you are really as stupid as you seem, so I'll just assume you are trying to be annoying and have no real interest in the topic.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Under the law, if the wire tap includes a conversation with an American for whom no surveillance warrant has been issued, the identity of the American must be masked, but we know for a fact that in the case of Mike Flynn, the mask was removed and the information about his conversation with the Russian ambassador was used by Obama holdovers on the Justice Department to get Flynn fired. How many more Trump associates were illegally spied on by this method?

Ambassador Kislyak phone was wiretapped ........ That is how they got Flynn and that was presented to your Fuhrer.
If Flynn phone was wiretapped.......... Trump could have used that as an excuse. Don't you think?

Also it is common knowledge that we wiretapped Russian diplomats and track foreign spies. And they do the same to us in Russia. Flynn is a stupid general........ he should know better.

The Russian ambassador's phone was tapped under a FISA warrant which specifies that if an American is on the interecept his identity must be masked, so how did the Obama holdovers in the Justice Department gain access to Flynn's identity unless they violated the law? Clearly, people from the Obama administration violated the law and misused intelligence data for political purposes. This means that even if they did not tap his phones, the Obama administration did illegally surveil at least some of the people associated with the Trump campaign and the Trump transitional government.

So your saying republican senator Nunes committee chairman of senate intelligence is lying?

I'm saying you are too stupid to understand what he said. Nunes said there was no evidence of a wiretap on Trump Tower, he did not say there was no evidence of illegal surveillance of Trump and his associates. In fact we know there was as we have seen in the case of Mike Flynn.

Really? I fully understand what Nunes told to the world........ Trump is lying........ Dude your buddy Trump accused Obama of wiretapping the Trump Tower..... That is the main issue. Let me repeat *Wiretapping of Trump Tower*.
Wiretapping and surveillance is totally different story. It has nothing to do with the surveillance.

And even If there is or was a surveillance of Trump and his associates....... Trump could have come out blasting pointing fingers........... Don't you think?
Did Spicer or even Trump mentioned any surveillance?

Clearly you don't understand what Nunes said.

"Nunes said Wednesday that Trump's wiretapping claim, if taken literally, is wrong. But he added that he still wants to figure out if other surveillance took place, saying he wants more information on intercepted communications related to people associated with the Trump campaign, including ousted National Security Advisor Michael Flynn."

Key congressmen say they have no evidence that Obama wiretapped Trump Tower

In other words, Nunes intends to investigate if Obama illegally surveilled the Trump campaign and transitional government by other means than wiretaps.

 

[Faun]

LOLOL

You don't even know who may have leaked the information. The law does allow for exceptions. Without knowing who divulged it, you don't know that the law was violated.

(2)(a)(i) It shall not be unlawful under this chapter for an operator of a switchboard, or an officer, employee, or agent of a provider of wire or electronic communication service, whose facilities are used in the transmission of a wire or electronic communication, to intercept, disclose, or use that communication in the normal course of his employment while engaged in any activity which is a necessary incident to the rendition of his service or to the protection of the rights or property of the provider of that service, except that a provider of wire communication service to the public shall not utilize service observing or random monitoring except for mechanical or service quality control checks.​

We are talking about breaching an NSA database, you moron, not eavesdropping on conversations. Sally Yates was acting AG when she received the information on Flynn, so she knew without a warrant it couldn't have been obtained legally, yet she used it anyway to get Flynn fired instead of seeking to indict the person who illegally unmasked Flynn's identity.

No, you don't know that. You don't know who told her nor do you know how that person obtained the information. Not that your ignorance on those matters will prevent you from leaping head first into assumptions. Carry on.

We both know that without a surveillance warrant on Flynn, no one could have legally known Flynn was the person on that intercept, and Sally Yates knew there was no surveillance warrant on Flynn, so she knew that anyone who brought that information to her was committing a crime and as the acting AG, the highest law enforcement official in the US, she knew it was her duty to arrest him or her, but instead she chose to become complicit in his crime by divulging the information she should never have had. This is just one more example of the "Obama effect" of introducing corruption in many areas of government, the IRS, the intelligence services, the Justice Department and the federal courts.

We both know this is true, but the difference between us is, you don't care if the law was broken or if national security was compromised as long as it generates some negative propaganda about the President. This attitude of yours is also part of the effect Obama has had on some Americans.

Great, more ignorance.... again.... you don't know who told her, what they told her, or more to the point, if they broke the law. And since you don't know any of that, you're merely blowing smoke out of your ass because you're making baseless claims from a position of ignorance. On top of that, you idiotically claim I don't care about the law when you can't even prove a law was broken.

For that you earn the following awards...

I don't believe you are really as stupid as you seem, so I'll just assume you are trying to be annoying and have no real interest in the topic.

First and foremost, this thread topic is deceased.

House gives Trump 7 days to prove Trump Tower was wiretapped​

During that 7 day period, the White House confessed Trump Tower wasn't wiretapped.

That aside, you continue to claim the revelation of Flynn communicating with a Russian official is, in itself, proof a law was violated; when truth be told, you lack sufficient evidence to render such a claim unequivocally.

But embrace those awards I gave you, you earned each and every one.