Quote:
Originally Posted by kane
To me, there are three likely scenarios here.
1. Trump was wiretapped and it was done in secret under order from Obama or someone high up in his administration. They ignored the law and carried this out in secret. I give this about 5000:1 odds of being true. The reason being, if they found something useful their only real option would be to leak it and it is unclear how much that may or may not help Hilary. I think Obama wanted Hillary to win. I think he badly wanted her to win. I don't think he wanted her to win badly enough that he would risk going to jail and destroying his legacy for it.
2. Trump was wiretapped, but it was done legally. This would mean a FISA court judge signed off on a warrant. This is no small matter. It would mean a judge would have had enough evidence presented to them that they were willing to approve wiretapping a candidate for POTUS. If this is true, it is terrible news for Trump because it means they have something on him that is bad enough to convince a judge to approve the tap. The odds of this being true? I give it about 500:1.
3. There was no wiretapping and this is all something someone within Trump's administration told him or suggested to him or in some way presented to him. There are stories coming out about how Trump exploded in a fit of rage after Sessions recused himself from the Russian investigation. I won't be shocked to hear someone suggested this to Trump in order to calm him down and take his focus off of Sessions and that whole mess. I also won't be shocked if Trump just made it up as a way to deflect the attention Sessions and the Russians are getting. The odds of this being true? I give it even money.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by beerptrol
That would mean a court thought there was enough evidence to wire tap chump tower, just reenforcing that chump is dirty, shady, liar or someone working for him is too
|
It's already discussed all over how the FISA was obtained. It's the B.S. report from the wannabe James Bond.
"Last April, the CIA director was shown intelligence that worried him. It was - allegedly - a tape recording of a conversation about money from the Kremlin going into the US presidential campaign.
It was passed to the US by an intelligence agency of one of the Baltic States. The CIA cannot act domestically against American citizens so a joint counter-intelligence taskforce was created.
The taskforce included six agencies or departments of government. Dealing with the domestic, US, side of the inquiry, were the FBI, the Department of the Treasury, and the Department of Justice. For the foreign and intelligence aspects of the investigation, there were another three agencies: the CIA, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the National Security Agency, responsible for electronic spying.
Lawyers from the National Security Division in the Department of Justice then drew up an application. They took it to the secret US court that deals with intelligence, the Fisa court, named after the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. They wanted permission to intercept the electronic records from two Russian banks.
Their first application, in June, was rejected outright by the judge. They returned with a more narrowly drawn order in July and were rejected again. Finally, before a new judge, the order was granted, on 15 October, three weeks before election day."
Trump 'compromising' claims: How and why did we get here? - BBC News
Which leads us back to the investigation that has been referred to many times here on GFY by me which right before the election Comey came out and said there was nothing to be found.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/u...ald-trump.html
The same stupid shit just keeps getting rehashed. I'm sure Trump is tired of it so he's striking back.