• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Did the Obama Administration spy on Trump?

Discussion in 'General Politics' started by Mountainmanbob, Nov 27, 2018.

  1. Of course they did and thought they would get away with it

    14 vote(s)
    51.9%
  2. No

    13 vote(s)
    48.1%
  1. Bible2+

    Bible2+ Matthew 4:4

    +374
    Christian
    Private
    Note that the British "investigator" worked for British intel.

    Also, if Trump had hired Assange to find the Russian intel against Clinton, would that be legal?

    If so, why is Assange being charged with a crime for receiving Russian dirt, but not Steele?

    But the "wanting" to get dirt wasn't?

    Why not?

    Was he really charged with lying about conspiracy?

    If so, then why was he not charged with conspiracy itself?

    And why was he given such a light jail sentence for such a serious crime?

    Because what he did didn't matter that much to the d.s.

    All it cares about is nailing Trump.

    What was the organized crime, and why have there been no charges regarding it?

    Also, why was there no going after the organized crime of Clinton Foundation pay-to-play, or the Uranium One deal with its $500,000 speech-bribe?

    Because the d.s. likes Clinton, while it hates Trump.

    Also, why was there no going after the organized crime of Brennan, Obama and his people colluding with British intel against candidate Trump and President-elect Trump, and against every Republican member of Congress by compiling dirt dossiers against them?

    Because the d.s. likes Brennan, Obama and his people, while it hates Trump.

    And the d.s. is under the control of British intel.

    Why do you believe that? Why can't he still be a British agent but with the totally-flimsy cover that he is only a "former" agent?

    Also, if Assange is not a Russian agent, then can he give Russian dirt on Clinton to Trump, just as Steele gave "Russian" dirt on Trump to Clinton?

    So what? How does that make what they or Steele did legal?

    And if it was legal, then why is not what Assange does legal?

    They had years to do it, and British intel had more than enough resources to do it. Also, it had already done it to some extent, and still does it continually, for its own interests.

    It is not a "friendly" intel agency, but the enemy of U.S. democracy and independence. It wants to enslave the U.S. and make it a mere pawn in its empire.

    God forbid.

    Regarding "Especially so", do you mean especially okay or especially a crime?

    If the former, then would it have been okay for Trump to receive Russian dirt on Clinton from Assange so long as Assange didn't charge for it?

    Or, if that would have still been a crime, then how much more was it a crime for Clinton to pay foreign agent Steele to receive "Russian" dirt on Trump?

    Then why haven't British intel, Clinton, Brennan, Obama and his people all been charged with conspiracy for interfering in the 2016 U.S. election?

    What crime is he expected to be indicted on?

    Also, if Trump had paid Assange for Russian data on Clinton, and Assange is not a Russian agent, then that would have been okay?

    So Clinton hasn't lied about Clinton Foundation pay-to-play?

    Also, if Mueller is interested in foreign interference in the 2016 election, then why is Mueller only investigating Trump and his people, and not Clinton, Steele, British intel, Brennan, Obama and his people?

    Because Mueller and his people hate Trump and his people, while they love the rest.

    So much for "blind" justice. How sad to see the country come to this.

    (This is not to say that the rest should be investigated, but that Trump should be given a break just as they are being given a break.)

    On what evidence did the judge base his claims?

    And why did the prosecutor not agree with him?

    Then any conspiracy by Flynn doesn't matter? All that matters is the investigation the whole purpose of which is to nail Trump?

    Then why wasn't Flynn even more urgently charged with conspiracy?

    And again, why haven't any of Trump's people been charged with conspiracy?

    How do you know? Have you seen the d.s.'s documents regarding its investigation into Clinton Foundation pay-to-play?

    No, because the d.s. would not even give the documents to Congress.

    Because the d.s. is protecting Clinton, while it is going after Trump with everything it's got.

    How sad to see such bias.

    Why not just say what the data shows?

    Because it doesn't actually support your position?

    Then is the Constitutional electoral system "a glitch" when it doesn't match the popular vote?

    If so, then what is the point of the Constitutional electoral system?

    The point is that it forces Presidential candidates to focus on the United States, instead of only on a few Dem states along the coasts.

    Thank God.

    How far removed? And how is that relevant to the whole point of the Constitutional electoral system?
     
  2. Bible2+

    Bible2+ Matthew 4:4

    +374
    Christian
    Private
    Do you include the conspiracy theory of "Russian collusion"?

    Without one charge of collusion?

    Also, why is he ignoring Clinton's and Obama's collusion with British intel, the enemy of the U.S.?
     
  3. EpiscipalMe

    EpiscipalMe Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,288
    United States
    Episcopalian
    Married
    Patience. Mueller is still hard at work. In the meantime, please review the list of people who were indicted, pleaded guilty, or who were found guilty in court:
    Here's everyone who has been charged and convicted in Mueller's Russia probe so far

    Also, Mueller’s mandate is to look into any link between the Russian government and the Trump campaign or anyone associated with the Trump campaign. He is also directed to look into any other potential crimes that he finds along the way:
    Rosenstein letter appointing Mueller special counsel

    If you review the list above, you will see that quite a few people from the Trump campaign fit into those categories. This disproves the “witch hunt” meme.

    Also, please provide evidence of collusion between Obama, Clinton, and Britain (which is an ally, not an enemy).

    Finally, do you include the Republican led US Congress as part of the deep state? Are Nunes and Gowdy five eyes? Because they spent years and millions of dollars investing Clinton and came up empty.
     
  4. The Barbarian

    The Barbarian Crabby Old White Guy

    +5,075
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    As you learned, they designed it specifically to thwart would-be dictators like Trump. The deep state prevents any one person from assuming complete power. It is called the separation of powers.

    Clinton knew that "the Russians" had damaging information on Trump before the dossier became publicly known. So what?

    Because she didn't break any laws.

    Show us that.

    Your problem is pretty simple. Evidence. Or rather, lack of it. Frustrating, um?

    Ah, sorry. I was making fun of it, but I didn't know you believed it.

    (Poe alert! Poe alert!) police-cars-revolving-light_1f6a8.png


    Wow. That was close...
     
  5. Bible2+

    Bible2+ Matthew 4:4

    +374
    Christian
    Private
    So he has been so hard at work for so long, but he still can't come up with even a single charge of "collusion"?

    Why is that?

    Britain itself is an ally, such as with regard to its military being friendly with ours.

    But British intel (b.i.) is not really as "friendly" with the U.S. as it is made out to be. For example, it spied on Trump Tower on behalf on Brennan, Obama and his people. (This claim is based on Fox reporters with deep state (d.s.) whistleblower contacts.)

    Also, the awful Trump dossier was given to Clinton by a so-called "former" b.i. agent, and was used to further the "Russian collusion" attack on Trump, which was pursued wholeheartedly by the d.s. as a way to distract from the d.s.'s own collusion with b.i. against candidate Trump and President-elect Trump.

    Also, it is said that Obama and his henchpeople had b.i. develop and give them extensive dirt dossiers against every Republican member of Congress, and that this is why so many of them declined to run for re-election. I.e., they got wind of the existence of the dossiers and didn't want the dirt to come out while they were still in office. For it is a much less interesting news story to say that a merely "former" member of Congress secretly did such and such bad things than it is to say that a current member of Congress is dirty.

    Also, actual hard evidence of b.i.'s misdeeds against U.S. democracy has not come out yet because its coming out is not in anyone's interest.

    It's not in the Dems interest because it would mean that Obama and his henchpeople ran a sort of mafia blackmail operation in the White House.(This would have been just par for the course for people raised on Chicago politics.)

    And it is not in the Repubs interest because the exposure of the blackmail dossiers and what they contain could ruin many a fine (and powerful) Republican member of Congress who is still in office and wants to stay there for as long as possible.

    No, it is beyond the reach of the three Constitutional branches of government, as was proven, for example, by the failure of Republican House investigations to nail anyone. This was because the d.s. simply stonewalled the House's requests for documents, stating that they were "too secret" to reveal to anyone, because, for example, they involve the d.s.'s dealings with foreign i.c.'s (especially b.i.).

    This is what makes the d.s. so dangerous. It can get away with anything by simply invoking "secrecy" and "national security".

    The Founders are turning in their graves.

    No, for they are not intel agents working for one of the five i.c.'s, but elected representatives of the People of the U.S.

    And the d.s. (like the rest of the five) despises the People, wanting to be able to pick and choose who gets to run for President and how long a duly-elected President gets to stay in office.

    They were stonewalled by the d.s. with regard to their document requests about the d.s.'s investigation into Clinton Foundation pay-to-play, for example.

    This was because the d.s. likes Clinton, and is protecting her, while it hates Trump and is going after him with everything it's got.

    How sad to see such bias.

    (This is not to say that Clinton, or Obama and his henchpeople, for that matter, should be gone after, but that Trump should be given a break just as they are being given a break.)
     
  6. Bible2+

    Bible2+ Matthew 4:4

    +374
    Christian
    Private
    Note that the Founders did not design the d.s., for it is nowhere in the Constitution, but is even anti-constitutional. For example, it refuses to declare its "secret" activities even to the highest members of Congress.

    Also, the illegal surveillance systems which the d.s. has set up will come under the control of the future Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of Revelation's "beast") and facilitate his universal and continual surveillance and subjugation of everyone (Revelation 13:4-18).

    So the d.s. was designed by Satan to set everything up to empower the ultimate dictator, the future Antichrist, who will be a Satanist, and who will bring the whole world into the conscious and open worship of Satan/Lucifer, the dragon (Revelation 13:4-18, Revelation 12:9).

    What law did he break that she didn't?

    And how is Clinton getting "Russian" dirt on Trump from a foreign agent not much worse than Papadopoulos merely "wanting" to get Russian dirt on Clinton?

    Show us not that.

    You mean like the lack of evidence of "Russian collusion"?

    You weren't making fun of Revelation 13:4-18.

    What do you believe that it and Revelation 12:9 mean?
     
  7. tulc

    tulc loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!

    +13,578
    Christian
    Married
    So...it's not based on any actual evidence that can be seen or touched or anything? You know what they call that where I live? "no evidence".
    something I might point out? When people ask "do you have any evidence to support "X"?" if you reply with "No I don't have anything I can show you, but someone said it and I believe him!"? That isn't evidence. :sorry:
    tulc(just thought that should be pointed out) :wave:
     
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2019
  8. EpiscipalMe

    EpiscipalMe Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,288
    United States
    Episcopalian
    Married
    Mueller has found “collusion” yet? Did you read the letter appointing Mueller? It isn’t just about “collusion.” And, Flynn did lie to the FBI about his communications with Russian diplomats.

    Also, Mueller is still working and has not released everything yet. His investigation has been leak-free - unusual for sure. So, you can’t claim he has found no collusion any more than I can claim that he has a smoking gun.

    As for the rest of your post, a simple “no, I don’t have evidence” would suffice. Conspiracy theories noted.
     
  9. Bible2+

    Bible2+ Matthew 4:4

    +374
    Christian
    Private
    The evidence would be the contacts' testimony.

    But it is impossible for them to come forward publicly without being locked up in jail for the rest of their lives.

    For the d.s. claims that its dealings with foreign i.c.'s are "too secret" to reveal to anyone, even the top members of Congress.

    This is what makes the d.s. so dangerous. It can get away with anything in the name of "secrecy" and "national security".

    Note that testimony is evidence, and many court cases are decided by whether or not the jury believes the testimony of witnesses.

    Also, with regard to the d.s. collusion with b.i. against candidate Trump and President-elect Trump, any records of that could have been destroyed by the d.s., or never kept in the first place.

    If such documentary evidence did exist at one point but was destroyed, it would have to take a d.s. whistleblower who kept copies of the documents, and who decides to release them to the media, like how Snowden released the documents showing the d.s.'s illegal spying on everyone.
     
  10. Bible2+

    Bible2+ Matthew 4:4

    +374
    Christian
    Private
    But note that the reason that he was appointed was to investigate "collusion".

    And he has not found any evidence of that.

    But those communications were not "collusion".

    That's why he was not charged with that.

    Do you include the conspiracy theory of "Russian collusion"?
     
  11. EpiscipalMe

    EpiscipalMe Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,288
    United States
    Episcopalian
    Married
    We keep going round and round. I show you evidence (the Mueller appointment letter and the list of indictments and confessions). You respond with conspiracy theories.

    Mueller has a job to do and he is doing it effectively. And this spooks Trump and his supporters.
     
  12. tulc

    tulc loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!

    +13,578
    Christian
    Married
    ...how is that different from what I said? "I don't have any evidence, but this guy said it and I believe him."? :scratch:


    They must not be very good at hiding evidence if you know the truth. Because if they were any good at it wouldn't that mean you'd be unaware of what they hid? :sorry:

    In movies that may be true, but in real life? I don't think so. :wave:

    so...even with no evidence to prove it, someone told you something and you believe them. with no evidence. Doesn't that sound more like "They told me something I really want to believe so I believe what they told me."? :scratch:


    I don't see why you believe that, I was under the impression you were perfectly happy to believe anything someone told you as long as it was something you wanted to believe. Here's an experiment: suppose someone suddenly came forward with all sorts of evidence, but what if instead of it showing what you want to believe it showed everything the people you don't agree with turned out to be right. Would you believe the evidence then, or would you continue to believe all the things you want to believe now. If it wouldn't change your mind then isn't it really sort of moot whether there's any evidence out there or not? You're going to believe what you want to believe no matter what the truth is. :sigh:
    tulc(is just curious) :wave:
     
  13. Bible2+

    Bible2+ Matthew 4:4

    +374
    Christian
    Private
    Note that the Mueller appointment letter said that the reason he was being appointed was to investigate collusion.

    But the only indictments and confessions he has come up with are not about collusion.

    So he has found no evidence supporting the "Russian collusion" conspiracy theory on which his appointment was based.

    So why is he still going?

    Because the whole purpose of the appointment was to target Trump and his people, as a way to distract from the fact that they had been targeted earlier by illegal collusion between the d.s. and b.i. while Trump was a candidate and President-elect.
     
  14. Bible2+

    Bible2+ Matthew 4:4

    +374
    Christian
    Private
    Because what people say is evidence. Otherwise, testimony in a court of law would not be evidence.

    They are very good at hiding evidence. For the truth is only known by those who believe the testimony of rare, d.s. whistleblowers, based on past revelations of d.s. illegality, such as revealed by Snowden.

    That is the case with the "Russian collusion" idea. People believe it just because the anti-Trump media has told them to.

    Note that people continue to believe in the "Russian collusion" idea no matter what the truth is: that there no evidence of it.

    That is why Mueller and his anti-Trump investigators still have not come up with even a single charge of "collusion".

    How sad to see the U.S. justice system so politicized.

    This is a case of selective prosecution. And it stinks to high heaven.
     
  15. EpiscipalMe

    EpiscipalMe Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,288
    United States
    Episcopalian
    Married
    Read the appointment letter again - it very clearly lays out Mueller’s mandate. I suspect he is still going because there is still more to investigate to fulfill his mandate. And, it is worth noting, he person who appointed Mueller is a Trump political appointee, not some “deep state” bogeyman.

    And, we only know what Mueller has allowed us to know. We do not know if he has found evidence of conspiracy or if he will. Time will tell.

    Why are Trump and his supporters so anxious to end the Mueller investigation? I suspect it is because they are afraid of what he will find.
     
  16. The Barbarian

    The Barbarian Crabby Old White Guy

    +5,075
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    Well, let's take a look...



    The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017
    ...

    (i) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and

    (ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and

    (iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).
    ...
    (c) If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters.
    ...
    600.6 Powers and authority.
    Subject to the limitations in the following paragraphs, the Special Counsel shall exercise, within the scope of his or her jurisdiction, the full power and independent authority to exercise all investigative and prosecutorial functions of any United States Attorney. Except as provided in this part, the Special Counsel shall determine whether and to what extent to inform or consult with the Attorney General or others within the Department about the conduct of his or her duties and responsibilities.
    https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download


    As you now realize, that wouldn't matter even if it was true. But of course, it's not true. Cohen has confessed to colluding with Trump to protect his campaign by paying off women he was sleeping with. His friend, David Pecker, publisher of the National Enquirer has now admitted paying hush money to a woman who alleged an affair with Donald Trump to “suppress the woman’s story” and “prevent it from influencing the election.”
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/

    Because he's following the directive to investigate, and he's bringing down a lot of criminals in the process. Apparently, there are more criminals for him to nail. So he's still going.

    Nope. Read the authorizing letter. You've been misled about that.

    Nice try. You've been very useful helping us clarify these things, but you're starting recycle your old false claims now. And that's boring. Find some new material.
     
  17. Bible2+

    Bible2+ Matthew 4:4

    +374
    Christian
    Private
    Which was to investigate Russian collusion.

    But note that he has not found any evidence of Russian collusion.

    So why is he still going?

    Because the real purpose of his appointment was to target Trump and his people in any way possible, to lay a huge and continuing smokescreen before the media (and so the People) so that it would never look into how Trump and his people (not to mention many members of Congress) were illegally spied on by Obama and his henchpeople in collusion with b.i.

    Was he really appointed by Trump, or just a DOJ holdover from Obama who got the collusion-investigation job by seniority only after Trump's appointed a.g. recused himself against Trump's wishes? Also, the person who appointed Mueller is a reed who twists with the winds. He'll write a memo saying why Comey should be fired, if that will please Trump. But then he'll start the horrible Mueller investigation against Trump and his people if that will please the d.s., the real, underlying power in all of Washington, not to mention the rest of the U.S.

    The reason why he wasn't fired by Trump after starting the horrible Mueller investigation was for fear of charges of "obstruction of justice". That is also why Mueller hasn't been fired.
     
  18. Bible2+

    Bible2+ Matthew 4:4

    +374
    Christian
    Private
    Note that is not Russian collusion, the whole purpose for the starting of the Mueller investigation.

    Also, lawyers differ if that was a campaign contribution at all, for it was a private matter paid with private funds.

    There are always endless criminals to nail, if you focus hard enough and for long enough on just any one politician and his or her people.

    For example, if Mueller focused on Clinton and her people, there would be endless criminals to nail, such as with regard to Clinton Foundation pay-to-play, or the Uranium One deal, with its $500,000 speech-bribe.

    But Mueller's investigators, like the rest of the d.s., are all pro-Clinton, so they would never even go near her or her people.

    Similarly, if Mueller focused on Obama and his henchpeople, there would be endless criminals to nail, such as with regard to their collusion with b.i. in illegally spying on U.S. citizens.

    But Mueller's investigators, like the rest of the d.s., are all pro-Obama, so they would never go near him or his people.

    This is what is so wrong with the investigation against Trump: it is pure, selective prosecution, by anti-Trump people.

    This is not to say that Clinton, Obama, and their people should be investigated, but that Trump and his people should be given a break just as Clinton, Obama, and their people are being give a break.

    Anything less shows the utter politicization of the U.S. justice system.

    It makes the U.S. no different than a banana republic.

    How sad.

    The Founders are turning in their graves.
     
  19. EpiscipalMe

    EpiscipalMe Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,288
    United States
    Episcopalian
    Married
    I guess you didn’t read then letter then because that is not what it says.

    How do you know? Do you have a mole on Mueller’s team.

    Because he isn’t done yet.

    No evidence = conspiracy theory

    He was a US Attorney prior to being Deputy Attorney General. Sessions order him to resign upon taking over as AG. Trump declined his resignation and appointed him Deputy AG. He was initially appointed as a US Attorney by Bush. So, no, not an Obama holdover.
    Rod Rosenstein - Wikipedia

    Sessions did the ethical thing. “Trump’s wishes” have no bearing on ethics.

    Trump is right to fear obstruction of justice if he fires Mueller, because that is what it would be.
     
  20. tulc

    tulc loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!

    +13,578
    Christian
    Married
    Are you saying Mueller is simply a lot better at his job then any other Republican is at investigating? Remember millions of tax dollars and several years were spent investigating Sec Clinton they were never actually able to find anything to charge her or any of her people with. :scratch:
    tulc(is just curious) :wave:
     
Loading...