Trump accuses 'fake news' media of making up sources

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

3 minutes ago, IAMX said:

It's already well established, thanks to the media inadvertently reporting on it, and the follow-up investigations, that the Obama administration was already spying on the Trump campaign.

 

As usual though, as shown with Obama and Bush administrations, nobody ever goes to jail.. or if they do (i.e. Libby) they just get pardoned anyways. #Justice

The way I remember it is that Chaffetz was promoting that story, walked it back after an embarrassing wag the dog uber ride and then announced his retirement...so no proof.

[IAMX 3,055]

1 minute ago, ccneat said:

The way I remember it is that Chaffetz was promoting that story, walked it back after an embarrassing wag the dog uber ride and then announced his retirement...so no proof.

Nah, the narrative has changed, to "Obama was spying on everyone, so may have spied on Trumps campaign too". Already known this happened, it's now a matter of proof "beyond reasonable doubt". At very least the courts recently unsealing classified documents provided enough ammo for civil cases against the government's spying to proceed.

[Dashinka 24,493]

8 minutes ago, IAMX said:

It's already well established, thanks to the media inadvertently reporting on it, and the follow-up investigations, that the Obama administration was already spying on the Trump campaign.

 

As usual though, as shown with Obama and Bush administrations, nobody ever goes to jail.. or if they do (i.e. Libby) they just get pardoned anyways. #Justice

But Trump was wrong, Obama never wire tapped his phones!  It is amazing how much real bad acting by an administration can be ignored.

 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

6 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Wow, you took the meme right from my own thoughts as applied to the MDL and their ever evolving narrative of no crime, but the need to impeach President Trump anyway!

 

 

 

You are jumping way ahead on impeachment...lets just address the "not one shred of evidence to continue investigation" theory that you and others keep pushing.  That is a falsehood.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

2 minutes ago, IAMX said:

Nah, the narrative has changed, to "Obama was spying on everyone, so may have spied on Trumps campaign too". Already known this happened, it's now a matter of proof "beyond reasonable doubt". At very least the courts recently unsealing classified documents provided enough ammo for civil cases against the government's spying to proceed.

that's your narrative, but you seem to have a new one every week 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

2 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

But Trump was wrong, Obama never wire tapped his phones!  It is amazing how much real bad acting by an administration can be ignored.

 

If you are trying to trigger folks with your tiresome bonk emoji, you are coming damn close.  I am sure President Obama never tapped his phones.  Thats not how phone taps work and we have no evidence that Trump was involved.  You do know that there is a Russian bank and some dodgy Russian tenants in Trump tower, why not  those as the target?

[IAMX 3,055]

5 minutes ago, ccneat said:

that's your narrative, but you seem to have a new one every week 

My narrative hasn't changed.. where's the proof of Russian hacking and meddling? I go with the proof, not with the narrative.

 

The narrative of changing targets and relying on anonymous sources is all the left. Projection isn't uncommon for those who are religiously devoted to their narrative.

[Dashinka 24,493]

Just now, ccneat said:

If you are trying to trigger folks with your tiresome bonk emoji, you are coming damn close.  I am sure President Obama never tapped his phones.  Thats not how phone taps work and we have no evidence that Trump was involved.  You do know that there is a Russian bank and some dodgy Russian tenants in Trump tower, why not  those as the target?

It would still be spying on one administration (transition team) by another for what looks like political reasons.  Everyone knew that Trump had international banking/financial ties which were much the same as Hillary's and her family foundation.  To my knowledge, neither is a crime.

 

The only thing tiresome here is the constant hammering of a new president with absolutely no evidence, and the constant barrage from the left wing biased media.  Hence the hammer on the head emoji.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

2 minutes ago, IAMX said:

My narrative hasn't changed.. where's the proof of Russian hacking and meddling? I go with the proof, not with the narrative.

 

The narrative of changing targets and relying on anonymous sources is all the left. Projection isn't uncommon for those who are religiously devoted to their narrative.

You do not accept the findings of the US intelligence community, you do accept the denials of Putin.  No sense in arguing. 

[IAMX 3,055]

Just now, ccneat said:

You do not accept the findings of the US intelligence community, you do accept the denials of Putin.  No sense in arguing. 

I don't accept the "findings" of the US intelligence community because 1) they clearly screwed up on Iraq, and deliberately due to the Bush administration's narrative [see Joe Wilson/Plame case], so their track record of intelligence is garbage and 2) they haven't shown any proof.. 

 

So, make the same dumb mistake and just believe them again, or go with proof? Boy this is a tough one.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

Just now, IAMX said:

I don't accept the "findings" of the US intelligence community because 1) they clearly screwed up on Iraq, and deliberately due to the Bush administration's narrative [see Joe Wilson/Plame case], so their track record of intelligence is garbage and 2) they haven't shown any proof.. 

 

So, make the same dumb mistake and just believe them again, or go with proof? Boy this is a tough one.

But you do accept the denials of Putin. 

[IAMX 3,055]

Just now, ccneat said:

But you do accept the denials of Putin. 

I don't know what Putin's beliefs are, nor do I care, I'm more than capable of holding my own without anyone's help.

 

The McCarthyistic attempt of trying to associate people you disagree with for being Putin slappies is pretty humorous, says a lot more about how terrible your arguments are though.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

1 minute ago, IAMX said:

I don't know what Putin's beliefs are, nor do I care, I'm more than capable of holding my own without anyone's help.

 

The McCarthyistic attempt of trying to associate people you disagree with for being Putin slappies is pretty humorous, says a lot more about how terrible your arguments are though.

Too rich for your blood? Okay, so you do accept the denials of Trump. 

[IAMX 3,055]

Just now, ccneat said:

Too rich for your blood? Okay, so you do accept the denials of Trump. 

I never quoted Trump nor Putin so let me know when you want to actually address my views rather than talk about other people. 

[eieio 1,594]

1 hour ago, ccneat said:

You do not accept the findings of the US intelligence community, you do accept the denials of Putin.  No sense in arguing. 

RUSSIA,RUSSIA,RUSSIA!! lol

 

MARSHA,MARSHA,MARSHA