Obama's attempts at undermining American democracy

[Brian]

A FISA request does not equal a wire tap. That is the conspiracy jump.

Ummm...

 

That is the sole purpose of a FISA request. Wiretaps are no longer physical wiretaps as that is unnecessary but the term is still in common use for secret collection of communications.

 

That the first request was rejected is significant, BTW.

[blackstar212]

Ummm...

 

That is the sole purpose of a FISA request. Wiretaps are no longer physical wiretaps as that is unnecessary but the term is still in common use for secret collection of communications.

 

That the first request was rejected is significant, BTW.

Correct a request does not have to be filled

[Brian]

Correct a request does not have to be filled

0.03% have been rejected since 1979.

[liminal_luke]

Yes I believe the right individualists have a form of sociopathy. They want to exploit society for their own benefit. Just look at all our wars the slaughter continues

 

Blackstar,

 

I`m guessing you didn`t vote for Trump.  Neither did I.  Just listening to him speak, I`m astonished that pretty much anybody did.  I`ll bet there`s a bunch more stuff we agree on too.  How do you feel about military spending?  I`d  be happy to cut it down by about 50% and use all that money to plant trees instead. I`m pro-choice when it comes to abortion, and also believe in euthanasia, at least in certain instances. (And, in case your wondering, I hold life sacred -- and no, I don`t see the contradiction.)  I could care less who uses what bathroom, and am happy to let someone change their gender back and forth six ways to Sunday and not say a word about it.  In other words, I suspect that some of the more right-wing people in the forum can only conclude that I`ve been thoroughly brainwashed by a corrupt government and the "false news" liberal media machine.

 

But about this sociopathy business: I`d be careful with that.  Other people are often more complicated than they appear, and making statements about their inner working is a delicate and dangerous business.  We`re on safer ground confining our statements about inner psychological states to ourselves. (This doesn`t apply, of course, to Trump; I`m happy to diagnose his mental state.)  In general though, it`s hard to know what other people are thinking and feeling.  It`s especially difficult to diagnose whole huge groups of them.  Personally, I wouldn`t do it.    

Edited March 5, 2017 by liminal_luke

[blackstar212]

Blackstar,

 

I`m guessing you didn`t vote for Trump. Neither did I. Just listening to him speak, I`m astonished that pretty much anybody did. I`ll bet there`s a bunch more stuff we agree on too. How do you feel about military spending? I`d be happy to cut it down by about 50% and use all that money to plant trees instead. I`m pro-choice when it comes to abortion, and also believe in euthanasia, at least in certain instances. (And, in case your wondering, I hold life sacred -- and no, I don`t see the contradiction.) I could care less who uses what bathroom, and am happy to let someone change their gender back and forth six ways to Sunday and not say a word about it. In other words, I suspect that some of the more right-wing people in the forum can only conclude that I`ve been thoroughly brainwashed by a corrupt government and the "false news" liberal media machine.

 

But about this sociopathy business: I`d be careful with that. Other people are often more complicated than they appear, and making statements about their inner working is a delicate and dangerous business. We`re on safer ground confining our statements about inner psychological states to ourselves. (This doesn`t apply, of course, to Trump; I`m happy to diagnose his mental state.) In general though, it`s hard to know what other people are thinking and feeling. It`s especially difficult to diagnose whole huge groups of them. Personally, I wouldn`t do it.

Yes we agree on many things. I believe that humans are naturally social animals that look out for each others welfare above individual. If one deviates from that natural course then the only word I have is a form of sociopathy. They are not natural. Perhaps education can help them?

 

Someone first established themselves as a King or Emperor they were no better than anyone else but convinced people they were. It creates a caste system which is not very productive. We need to get back to our natural roots as social animals.

[Brian]

Yes we agree on many things. I believe that humans are naturally social animals that look out for each others welfare above individual. If one deviates from that natural course then the only word I have is a form of sociopathy. They are not natural. Perhaps education can help them?

 

Someone first established themselves as a King or Emperor they were no better than anyone else but convinced people they were. It creates a caste system which is not very productive. We need to get back to our natural roots as social animals.

^^^ So what's stopping you? Rather than demand an all-powerful central government use force to "look out for each other's welfare" why don't you just start doing it yourself in your own surroundings? I've asked you these questions in several forms and you seem to think the suggestion is ridiculously absurd, rhetorical even -- and when pressed you give flippant and idiotic answers. Nothing rhetorical or absurd about it! Start living and demonstrating the life you claim to value and desire rather than demanding the same Big Brother you claim to oppose must force everyone else to surrender his or her liberty in order to fulfill your pipedream.

[dust]

What ties?

 

One or two of the links I posted at the end of my comment might throw some light on that for you. e.g. Paul Manafort.

 

Aside from that.. we know that Michael Flynn and Jeff Sessions have lied about communication with Russian officials and that Rex Tillerson and Wilbur Ross have close ties to men in the Kremlin. The FBI is still investigating Roger Stone, Carter Page, Paul Manafort, and Michael Flynn regarding their contact with Russian officials during the campaign.

 

If half a dozen of the men he chose to form his inner circle aren't enough...

 

Something interesting is that all of this Russia talk seemed to start at the second to last debate between Clinton and Trump. She was gung ho for defaming Russia, and it appeared like the left wanted WW3 out of the blue. Prior to that, was there any talk of Russia?

 

I'm assuming you don't mean in general... because yes, there has been discussion of Russia for a long time!

 

As far as Trump himself is concerned:

 

“And in terms of high-end product influx into the US, Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets; say in Dubai, and certainly with our project in SoHo and anywhere in New York. We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”

 

Spoken by his son, Don junior, some years ago (I lost the article, sure you can find it if you want)

 

In 2007, Trump praised Putin for “rebuilding Russia.”

In 2008, he said, “He does his work well. Much better than our Bush.”

Trump denies that Putin has assassinated his opponents, “In all fairness to Putin, you’re saying he killed people. I haven’t seen that.”

But if he did see it: “At least he’s a leader.” “I will tell you that, in terms of leadership, he’s getting an A.”

 

 

 

They pushed this Russia nonsense, and made up stories about it. Just because someone is accused of something by someone does not mean they're suspected by law enforcement of it...but it does make sense that in an era of induced paranoia, a FISA request would be granted. The outcome of the surveillance: NOTHING. The Trump campaign was not colluding with or controlled by Russia.

 

FBI investigation still ongoing. There is lots to look into, it would appear.

[dawei]

Jeff Sessions have lied about communication with Russian officials

 

I would not characterize Sessions as having lied but answering too narrowly to an exact idea of whether he as a surrogate of the campaign meet with the R. Ambassador about the campaign, elections or future direction.

 

Compare that to the McCaskill and Pelosi who both said they "never" meet the Ambassador.

 

And compare the response to Trump's tweet of O wiretapping.   They only answer that O did not order the wiretap...  it is narrowly answering exactly like Sessions.   They are not answering if O knew of the FISA investigation into Trump and Co.

 

The 'wiretap' comment is essentially not the correct way of saying what the FISA is doing.  Even Paul Ryan admitted nothing came of the investigation he was aware of.

[Miffymog]

They only answer that O did not order the wiretap...  

 

When this thread was created as a split from the previous Obama thread, I felt the title was a bit too strong. I still do, but if things keep going in this direction, maybe it's not so far off after all ...

[Brian]

When this thread was created as a split from the previous Obama thread, I felt the title was a bit too strong. I still do, but if things keep going in this direction, maybe it's not so far off after all ...

Oh, Obama was sometimes subtle but was never unclear about his objectives from the very beginning.

 

His goal has been to "fundamentally transform" America and he believes the US Constitution is "tragically flawed" because it doesn't require the central government to give people things ("a charter of negative liberties" I believe was the phrase he used -- that is to say, it places restrictions on the Federal government). He said he let the church ladies in Chicago think he shared their beliefs because doing so served his agenda. He holds in contempt the bitter people who cling to their guns and Bibles and harbor antipathy towards those who aren't like them. He plainly stated Obamacare was a necessary covert step on the path to his desired complete nationalization of the American healthcare system. He told the gathered physicians at an AMA convention that they better understand their jobs were soon to be entirely focused & judged on following the government's "standards of care" requirements and that they would be immune from malpractice liability if they toed the Party line. When asked point-blank how his political ideology differed from Marxism, he replied that he thought it a good thing when wealth is spread around. He born to Marxist parents, raised by Marxist grandparents (interesting that he later described his grandmother as a typical racist white woman) surrounded himself in college with Marxists and launched his political career literally in the living room of two bomb-throwing Marxist terrorists. He was trained in Alinksky's radical & revolutionary "community organizer" methods, which he said was more influential on him than university, and he taught Alinskyism in Chicago. He took advantage of every opportunity to foment racial division and fan animosity towards law enforcement and he used branches of the Federal government as political weapons at every turn (IRS, FBI, NSA, NASA, EPA, DoJ, DoE, ED, DHS, you name it). He literally asked his supporters in the public to report their friends, co-workers, relatives and neighbors for saying things contrary to his own statements to assist him in building an enemy's list -- not of foreign threats, mind you, but of American citizens. He wiretapped reporters at the AP, both in their offices and their personal phones, to try to find out who was spreading bad stories about him and then he authorized & directed the NSA to provide unredacted intercepts of signals communications to his operatives embedded throughout the government to be leaked to members of the collaborative legacy media when it turned out not to be prosecutorially actionable.

 

I can continue if you'd like...

[Aetherous]

I'm assuming you don't mean in general... because yes, there has been discussion of Russia for a long time!

 

I'm specifically referring to the anti-Russian rhetoric of the left.

[Kar3n]

 

I can continue if you'd like...

Please do!

[blackstar212]

^^^ So what's stopping you? Rather than demand an all-powerful central government use force to "look out for each other's welfare" why don't you just start doing it yourself in your own surroundings? I've asked you these questions in several forms and you seem to think the suggestion is ridiculously absurd, rhetorical even -- and when pressed you give flippant and idiotic answers. Nothing rhetorical or absurd about it! Start living and demonstrating the life you claim to value and desire rather than demanding the same Big Brother you claim to oppose must force everyone else to surrender his or her liberty in order to fulfill your pipedream.

I am. One day it will come true.probably after my lifetime.

[Miffymog]

^^^ So what's stopping you? Rather than demand an all-powerful central government use force to "look out for each other's welfare" why don't you just start doing it yourself in your own surroundings? 

 

Aaarrrgggghh - (a little realisation, not mild discomfort).

 

So some of the reasons in the differences of opinion between people is how to best govern a population of 320 million and how devolved it should be. This debate is continually going on over here with the EU.

 

If I'm honest, I might be a little Marxist myself

Edited March 5, 2017 by Miffymog

[blackstar212]

Brian, on 05 Mar 2017 - 5:21 PM, said:

 

Aaarrrgggghh - (a little realisation, not mild discomfort).

 

So some of the reasons in the differences of opinion between people is how to best govern a population of 320 million and how devolved it should be. This debate is continually going on over here with the EU.

 

If I'm honest, I might be a little Marxist myself

It will much to the dismay of those who want to take advantage of society eventually come. There is true happiness coming.

[Miffymog]

It will much to the dismay of those who want to take advantage of society eventually come. There is true happiness coming.

 

 

I really like the positive attitude !!!

[dust]

I would not characterize Sessions as having lied but answering too narrowly to an exact idea of whether he as a surrogate of the campaign meet with the R. Ambassador about the campaign, elections or future direction.

 

Compare that to the McCaskill and Pelosi who both said they "never" meet the Ambassador.

 

And compare the response to Trump's tweet of O wiretapping.   They only answer that O did not order the wiretap...

 

Well, without arguing over the definitions of "lie", we can forget about Sessions. Others lied. Others certainly had more than a conversation with Russian officials and/or businessmen. I was only proving to Aetherous that Trump and a number of his friends most certainly have had contact with various Russians -- to, it seems to me, a greater extent than Clinton.

 

And I don't think McCaskill or Pelosi are relevant. That would be another topic -- "Democrats who lie about things including their contact with Russian politicians", or something..

 

But anyway... if Obama did not order the wiretap, this whole thread is meaningless, no?

 

 

 

I'm specifically referring to the anti-Russian rhetoric of the left.

 

Not rhetoric. Actual anti-Russian sentiment. Certainly it's not new. The Cold War didn't see the end of mistrust between Russia and the West. And Putin has very much secured that mistrust.

 

As far as I know Trump is the first American figurehead in a long time to heap such praises on Russia or one of its leaders.

[Aetherous]

Not rhetoric. Actual anti-Russian sentiment. Certainly it's not new. The Cold War didn't see the end of mistrust between Russia and the West. And Putin has very much secured that mistrust.

 

Yes, there was a new narrative about it toward the end of this election...I'm not at all referring to the remnants of Cold War sentiment, although this new narrative took advantage of that lingering distrust.

 

I believe it was this debate in which we first heard how much the left wanted to start a WW3 with Russia narrative:

 

In contrast to less than a decade prior...

 

Edited March 5, 2017 by Aetherous

[dawei]

Well, without arguing over the definitions of "lie", we can forget about Sessions. Others lied. Others certainly had more than a conversation with Russian officials and/or businessmen. I was only proving to Aetherous that Trump and a number of his friends most certainly have had contact with various Russians -- to, it seems to me, a greater extent than Clinton.

 

I think we need to forget about simply bumping into someone at a conference too... and then we're down to a moot meeting of Flynn who was wrong to deny the talk.   But it raises, how would someone know the contents of that call ?  Or Trumps with Australia and Mexico ?   So, somehow, phone talk contents are known.

 

And I don't think McCaskill or Pelosi are relevant. That would be another topic -- "Democrats who lie about things including their contact with Russian politicians", or something..

 

Yes and No.  We have to keep some contact in contexts... you do that in the previuos point (ie: greater extent than Clinton).  It is well known that Russia was very upset over Clinton and/or WH attempts to affect Russian elections.  If she had not done that, it may be possible they never attempt to hack her.   Regardless of what republic won, the Russian ambassador would of been reaching out, asking for meetings, etc...  That is keeping it in context in a way most are choosing to ignore.

 

 Bottom line is:    They meet with many ambassadors as part of their normal and expected duty as senators of committees.    

 

But anyway... if Obama did not order the wiretap, this whole thread is meaningless, no?

 

This thread was not about the wiretap but the larger issue of whether there are things going on that are intentionally meant to subvert this WH.  Some of the leaks are likely against the law, for example.

 

 

 

As far as I know Trump is the first American figurehead in a long time to heap such praises on Russia or one of its leaders.

 

I don't know that this has any real significance other than a willingness to strike a better relationship.   A businessman knows in order to sell something, you have to get the buyer to 'buy into it' in a manner of speaking.    It's smart business.  The challenge is the political context he is now applying that idea.

[blackstar212]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/comey-asks-justice-dept-to-reject-trump%e2%80%99s-wiretapping-claim/ar-AAnOQko

 

WASHINGTON — The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, asked the Justice Department this weekend to publicly reject President Trump’s assertion that President Barack Obama ordered the tapping of Mr. Trump’s phones, senior American officials said on Sunday. Mr. Comey has argued that the highly charged claim is false and must be corrected, they said, but the department has not released any such statement.

 

 

Oh now Comey must be in on this conspiracy to get President Trump ROFLMAO

[Brian]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/comey-asks-justice-dept-to-reject-trump%e2%80%99s-wiretapping-claim/ar-AAnOQko

 

WASHINGTON — The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, asked the Justice Department this weekend to publicly reject President Trump’s assertion that President Barack Obama ordered the tapping of Mr. Trump’s phones, senior American officials said on Sunday. Mr. Comey has argued that the highly charged claim is false and must be corrected, they said, but the department has not released any such statement.

 

 

Oh now Comey must be in on this conspiracy to get President Trump ROFLMAO

Yes, this is the official Obama line at the moment -- Obama didn't personally give the order to collect communications from the Trump campaign so it is all a conspiracy theory non-story.

 

Ummm... The FISA request would come from either the Director of the FBI or directly from the Attorney General. The suspension of disbelief required here, of course, is that the DoJ would make three separate and unprecedented FISA requests (yes, three -- turns out they were rejected twice) of such extreme significance, over a period of about six months, without the awareness of the President.

 

That's really the tactic they are gonna try to fly?!?

 

Simply astounding. Gotta admire the chutzpah, at least.

 

Let's wait a couple weeks and we can discuss this in greater detail...

[blackstar212]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/03/05/trumps-evidence-for-obama-wiretap-claims-relies-on-sketchy-anonymously-sourced-reports/?utm_term=.47d2e91201e8

 

 

The Pinocchio Test

 

While the Trump White House cited five news reports to justify its request for a congressional investigation, only two actually are relevant.

 

It’s certainly ironic that the Trump White House — which has heavily criticized articles relying on anonymous sources — now relies on articles based on anonymous sources that cite information that has not been confirmed by any U.S. news organization. It would be amusing if it were not so sad.

 

After all, Clapper, who presumably would be aware of a FISA court order, has issued an on-the-record denial.

 

Even if these media reports are accepted as accurate, neither back up Trump’s claims that Obama ordered the tapping of his phone calls. Moreover, they also do not back up the administration’s revised claim of politically motivated investigations.

 

We’re still waiting for the evidence. In the meantime, Trump earns Four Pinocchios.

[Brian]

Curious that the mainstream media are now declaring that the mainstream media can't be trusted for important news stories -- especially when they use (gasp!) anonymous sources.

[dust]

I believe it was this debate in which we first heard how much the left wanted to start a WW3 with Russia narrative:

 

 

 

In contrast to less than a decade prior...

 

[picture]

 

Well if you read about that button, you'll see that it was an attempt to reset relations...but that it was a grand failure.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_reset

 

Not sure why this is any different than Trump's press for better relations with Russia -- except that Trump actually seems to believe Putin is a good guy, whereas Obama et al have long been aware that he is not.

 

Anyway, as long as we're looking at photos...

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/03/17/the-failure-of-the-u-s-russia-reset-in-9-photos/?utm_term=.75cee6e795dc

(article from 2014)

 

"It's been over five years since the United States and Russia vowed to "reset" their relationship. In that time, the two countries have had to grapple with disagreements over Syria, Iran and Libya, as well as Russia's welcome to U.S. whistleblower Edward Snowden and the U.S. condemnation of a Russian-supported referendum in Crimea.

On Monday, the United States imposed sanctions on some of the highest ranking officials in the Russian government. Let's just say it: The reset is dead."

 

And the subsequent photoshow begins with the one of Clinton and Lavrov that you showed in your own post.

 

I do believe this should permanently quell any suggestions that "the left" has suddenly and out of the blue decided that it doesn't like Russia.

 

I also think it's bizarre to claim that none of this has anything to do with the Cold War. Of course there is sentiment left over from those decades. Relations with Russia and the West have been strained for... over a century? More?

 

I won't even set foot near the idea that people (left or right) are gunning for WW3. Imagine how you'd take it if I suggested Trump wanted WW3. I don't like Clinton or Trump and I find the notion that either of them actually want WW3 quite insulting.

Edited March 6, 2017 by dust

[Brian]

I find it passing strange, as the expression goes, that not only the legacy media and the Obama surrogates but a significant number of citizens are essentially insisting -- demanding -- we not investigate what on face value may be the biggest and most disturbing scandal in US history.