Did the Obama Administration spy on Trump?

[Tom 1]

That is not going to work but nice try

I had a look over the articles - they have their perspective, fair enough - I’m not sure what you mean by facts though, you seem to be saying the articles are ‘proof’ of something, which I don’t see. It’s one way of looking at the situation. What do you mean ‘nice try’? There are some issues that should be of concern regarding your current President, given his rather salacious history. I don’t see how insisting it shouldn’t be looked into is of any benefit to the US.

 

[disciple Clint]

That isn't unusual. It is quite common for judges to grant warrants without a hearing.

Should never happen on a FISA warrant. There are special laws that apply to FISA.

 

[Bible2+]

Tom Farebrother said in post #10:

Steele is and always has been a credible operator, his business relies on his credibility, and on his wide network of intelligence contacts within Russia.

Then did he collude with his Russian contacts?

That is, if he could get dirt on Trump from supposed Russian contacts, then how is that any different than Trump supposedly getting dirt on Clinton from Russian contacts?

 

[Bible2+]

The Barbarian said in post #12:

. . . the scandal was discovered when a Trump campaign worker bragged about it while drinking with an Australian diplomat, who passed it on to U.S. authorities.

Why was the Australian diplomat drinking with Papadopoulos?

Was the latter purposely sought out and "set up" as he claims?

For five eyes' intel was unanimously opposed to Trump, and still is, in its deep state.

The Barbarian said in post #12:

Steele later cites one source as stating Russia that was behind the leak of hacked Democratic National Committee (DNC) emails to WikiLeaks.

Why was the supposedly Russian-sourced dossier against Trump leaked? Who didn't want Trump elected? And who did Steele work for, really?

 

[Tom 1]

Then did he collude with his Russian contacts?

That is, if he could get dirt on Trump from supposed Russian contacts, then how is that any different than Trump supposedly getting dirt on Clinton from Russian contacts?

That's Steele's job, he is a former MI5 agent who now runs his own security firm. He was hired by a group of Republican political commentators concerned about Trump's candidacy to do some background checks on Trump. Consider the differences between a person contracted to perform services that are part of his professional portfolio, and a presidential candidate's son and various close advisers having involvement in a clandestine meeting set up with foreign agents to 'get dirt' on an opponent, and then repeatedly lying about it, and you should have your answer.

 

[disciple Clint]

Then did he collude with his Russian contacts?

That is, if he could get dirt on Trump from supposed Russian contacts, then how is that any different than Trump supposedly getting dirt on Clinton from Russian contacts?

That is the $64,000 question isn't it? Why is there such a blatantly obvious double standard?

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
Nope. As you just learned, the Steele dossier is not what started the investigations. However, as you just learned, so far each claim that has been checked out, has been confirmed to be true.

No point in denying it.

Please provide any, and again I say any, evidence for what you are saying

Trump Falsely Claims Russia Investigation Started Because of Steele Dossier
President Trump has repeatedly pointed to the findings of a House Intelligence Committee report to insist his campaign did not collude with Russia. But that same report concludes that the inquiry began with a diplomat’s tip about a Trump campaign adviser — not the salacious findings of a former British spy.
Trump Falsely Claims Russia Investigation Started Because of Steele Dossier

December 31 2017
Washington (CNN)George Papadopoulos told an Australian diplomat that Russia had "political dirt" on Hillary Clinton in May of last year, a conversation that might have played a role in the FBI's decision to open an investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, according to a report published Saturday.

The New York Times reported that Papadopoulos, then a foreign policy adviser to Donald Trump's campaign, was drinking at an upscale London bar when he told Australia's top diplomat in Britain, Alexander Downer, that Russia had political information on Clinton.
A few weeks before their meeting, Papadopoulos was told Moscow had thousands of emails relating to Clinton, CNN has reported.
About two months after the meeting with Downer, after WikiLeaks posted hacked Democratic National Committee emails online, Australian officials passed Papadopoulos' information along to their US counterparts, the Times reported, citing four current and former American and foreign officials with direct knowledge of the Australians' role.
NYT: Papadopoulos told Australian diplomat Russia had Clinton dirt - CNNPolitics

Trump Falsely Claims Russia Investigation Started Because of Steele Dossier
President Trump has repeatedly pointed to the findings of a House Intelligence Committee report to insist his campaign did not collude with Russia. But that same report concludes that the inquiry began with a diplomat’s tip about a Trump campaign adviser — not the salacious findings of a former British spy.
Trump Falsely Claims Russia Investigation Started Because of Steele Dossier

You think the House republicans lied about it? How so?

 

[The Barbarian]

Bible2+ said: ↑
Then did he collude with his Russian contacts?

That is, if he could get dirt on Trump from supposed Russian contacts, then how is that any different than Trump supposedly getting dirt on Clinton from Russian contacts?

If the circumstances were the same, it wouldn't be different at all. If Steele's sources were Russian officials, and Steele was an American politician running for election in the U.S., he'd have committed the same crime as the Trump people who colluded with Russian agents in Trump Tower.

Otherwise, not.

 

[The Barbarian]

Why was the Australian diplomat drinking with Papadopoulos?

To imbibe alcohol, one supposes.

Was the latter purposely sought out and "set up" as he claims?

Let's see... Two Evil Anti-Trump Conspiracy© employees are meeting.

"Hey, I have an idea. Let's get one of our guys to go drinking with a Trump staffer and see if we can get him to admit anything illegal in the Trump campaign."

"Only a idiot would let himself be tooled that way. Who would be stupid enough to hire someone like that for a sensitive campaign position?"

(Long pause)

"Oh...yeah, go for it."

Hmm... maybe you're right.

 

[Yarddog]

Should never happen on a FISA warrant. There are special laws that apply to FISA.

There are laws which to FISA but none of them state that a hearing needs to be held in order to obtain a warrant from the FISA judge.

 

[Seventeen76]

Why is this even a question? It has already been documented that Dems paid Steele/Fusion for the phony dossier from the Russian intelligence and then lied to the FBI stating it was vetted when they never vetted it...they simply submitted it to Yahoo News (laughable) telling YAHOO it was vetted....all of this to get FISA surveillance under false pretenses.

Its the epitome of stunning corruption and the fact that so many Americans are in denial proves that too many of us are intellectually dishonest or just plain ignorant.

 

[The Barbarian]

Why is this even a question?

Because some people are still falling for the story that the dossier was the reason for the investigation. As you see, it wasn't.

It has already been documented that Dems paid Steele/Fusion for the phony dossier

As you know, everything that has been definitely checked on the dossier turned out to be true.

What’s True in Trump-Russia Dossier? Key Parts Proved Over Last Year
Dossier Claim: Russia Meddled

Revelation: The U.S. intelligence apparatus concluded that Russia interfered in 2016’s election in a report released in January 2017. Though Steele’s name is not mentioned in that report, it does back up his reporting that Russia was actively interfering in the election process.

Dossier Claim: Russia Had Dirt on Clinton and DNC

Revelation: Much of the dossier is devoted not only to Trump but to Russia’s—specifically Putin’s—distaste for former Secretary of State Clinton. “Putin motivated by fear and hatred of Hillary Clinton,” one line of the dossier reads. Another line said: “The two sides had a mutual interest in defeating Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, whom President Putin apparently both hated and feared.”

Steele later cites one source as stating Russia that was behind the leak of hacked Democratic National Committee (DNC) emails to WikiLeaks.

The U.S. intelligence community confirmed not only that Russia had tried to meddle in the election but that it was the source of the hacked DNC emails released by WikiLeaks.

Dossier Claim: Putin Was in Charge

Revelation: On the very first page of the dossier, Steele explains that the election meddling was “endorsed by Putin” and that the effort was “both supported and directed” by him. The U.S. intelligence report reached the same conclusion, writing that Putin “ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the presidential election.” According to Steele’s sources, Putin and Russia had been cultivating Trump for “at least 5 years.”

Dossier Claim: Mr. Cohen Goes to Prague

Revelation: The president’s former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, was accused in the dossier of meeting with “Kremlin representatives” in Prague in August 2016. Cohen has repeatedly denied traveling to the Czech capital, but McClatchy last month reported that Mueller had evidence the trip happened.

The report stated that Mueller’s team discovered proof Cohen got to Prague through Germany. The two countries are part of a number of European nations with an open borders agreement that allows undocumented travel. However, no other media outlet has been able to confirm McClatchy’s reporting.

Dossier Claim: Russian Diplomat Was a Spy

Revelation: Steele also claimed that Russia was worried a diplomat named Mikhail Kalugin was heavily involved in the meddling operation. Afraid he would be exposed, Russia pulled Kalugin out of Washington on “short notice.” Steele actually misspelled Kalugin’s name, but the U.S. government had identified Kalugin as a Russian spy, the BBC reported in March.

Dossier Claim: Page Met With Russians

Revelation: Carter Page previously denied having met with Russian government officials during his trip to Russia in July 2016, but he admitted to the meeting while speaking to the House Intelligence Committee last November. Page was a foreign policy adviser to Trump’s campaign and in June 2016 delivered a speech in Washington praising Putin. And as early as September 2016, U.S. officials were looking into Page’s contacts in Russia, Yahoo News reported.

Dossier Claim: Manafort Received Payment for Work in Ukraine

Revelation: Paul Manafort, who is facing serious charges from Mueller’s team, worked extensively in Ukraine for years before Trump hired him as campaign chairman in 2016. The longtime Washington lobbyist received $12.7 million from the political party of former pro-Russia Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych between 2007 and 2012, The New York Times reported on August 14, 2016. Manafort resigned from the campaign after that report.

Steele’s dossier states that Yanukovych and Putin met the day after the story broke, and the former made assurances to the latter that no trail could be found.

“This had been held in secret on 15 August near Volgograd, Russia, and the Western media revelations about Manafort and Ukraine had featured prominently on the agenda,” the dossier says about the meeting. “Yanukovych had confided in Putin that he did authorize and order substantial kick-back payments to Manafort as alleged but sought to reassure him that there was no document trail left behind which could provide clear evidence of this.”

In April 2017, financial records unearthed by the Associated Press confirmed that at least $1.2 million went to Manafort’s company from Ukraine.
Here's what's true in the infamous Trump-Russia dossier

The real reason was that a Trump staffer, during a drinking bout, told an Austalian diplomat about the collusion, and the diplomat informed U.S. intelligence.

That's just a fact, even though Trump's followers remain in denial. Its the epitome of stunning corruption and the fact that so many of Trump's followers are in denial proves that too many of them are intellectually dishonest or just plain ignorant.

 

[Seventeen76]

Because some people are still falling for the story that the dossier was the reason for the investigation. As you see, it wasn't.

As you know, everything that has been definitely checked on the dossier turned out to be true.

That's just a fact, even though Trump's followers remain in denial. Its the epitome of stunning corruption and the fact that so many of Trump's followers are in denial proves that too many of them are intellectually dishonest or just plain ignorant.

Oh. You are very slick indeed.
Quite a way twisting words you have. ;-)
I hope you've been duped, not dishonest!

First of all, the post question didnt ask anything about the 'investigation'. It asked about 'spying'.
While the investigation may have been implemented, the SURVEILLANCE via FISA did not come about until the dossier.

And everything CHECKED on the dossier turned out to be true?
You mean as in 'the false stuff couldnt be checked because well...it was false...so the other stuff, yeah we checked it."?

All the other things you say "turned out to be true" arent damning or in any way prove a Trump conspiracy. It simply acknowledged already known facts...that many of these political operatives routinely travel and engage foreign diplomats and other politicians...and that some business and/or diplomatic negotiations were ongoing. Shocker. American and Russian operatives and spies and politicians have been glad handing each other for decades.
You could have done the same with Hillary...you know...when she negotiated the sale of 20% of our uranium to Russia and soon received donations to the Clinton Foundation and speaking engagements in Russia!

Is that proof Hillary conspired to swing the election? No.
But paying Fusion GPS for the dossier and then presenting it to FISA court LYING that it had been vetted and FAILING to tell them that they PAID for it....well, that sounds like conspiracy.

So, being as complex as this investigation is, and knowing that most American citizens are too busy watching inappropriate content or playing video games to follow this closely, the goal of democrats is to constantly pound these circumstantial events to give the impression that they are evidence of some greater crime.

THAT has not been demonstrated one bit.

Is it possible that like most political operatives, one or more of these guys could have been trying to get their hands dirty over there?
Sure.
But there is nothing to show that Trump coordinated or conspired in any way to sway the election.

And THAT is why Mueller now has shifted the goal post from conspiracy to "this 72 year old kook lied about forwarding one of the 10 thousand emails we quizzed him about for 40 hours and so I cant prove collusion anymore because people are lying."

 

[The Barbarian]

First of all, the post question didnt ask anything about the 'investigation'. It asked about 'spying'.
While the investigation may have been implemented, the SURVEILLANCE via FISA did not come about until the dossier.

You've been duped on that. It started with Papadopoulos drunken admission to an Australian diplomat:

How the Russia Inquiry Began: A Campaign Aide, Drinks and Talk of Political Dirt
How the Russia Inquiry Began: A Campaign Aide, Drinks and Talk of Political Dirt

[

And everything CHECKED on the dossier turned out to be true?

So far, everything that has been checked out, has been true.

You mean as in 'the false stuff couldnt be checked

Nope. Just that not all of it has yet been confirmed. Everything checked so far, has been confirmed to be true. See above.

You could have done the same with Hillary...you know...when she negotiated the sale of 20% of our uranium to Russia

You were had on that one, too. The deal wasn't for 20% of our uranium. (There's a glut on the world market for uranium, BTW; we have more than can be used. And she didn't make the final decision. Would you like to learn about what really happened? That's why Trey Gowdy's inquistion failed; there was nothing illegal about any of it. On the other hand, Mueller has taken down a good number of perps in the collusion scandal already, and more are coming.

But there is nothing to show that Trump coordinated or conspired in any way to sway the election.

One former Trump official wrote that the meeting with Russian agents in Trump Tower was "treasonous."

It's why Donnie Jr. is saying that he expects to be indicted. And why the House republicans want to see what security training Ivanka got before she used a private server to do government business.

 

[Seventeen76]

You've been duped on that. It started with Papadopoulos drunken admission to an Australian diplomat:

You keep conflating the INVESTIGATION with SPYING. The FISA surveillance was a separate event, prompted by a different set of information.

So far, everything that has been checked out, has been true.

Right. Because they couldn't "check out the stuff that never happened"...like peeing on hookers. The stuff that "checked out" was simply time and place of correspondence between russian and american operatives. Something that has gone on for decades. Intent and consequence has NOT been determined.

You were had on that one, too. The deal wasn't for 20% of our uranium. (There's a glut on the world market for uranium, BTW; we have more than can be used. And she didn't make the final decision. Would you like to learn about what really happened? That's why Trey Gowdy's inquistion failed; there was nothing illegal about any of it. On the other hand, Mueller has taken down a good number of perps in the collusion scandal already, and more are coming.

“I am pleased to inform you that today we control 20 percent of uranium in the United States. If we need that uranium, we shall be able to use it any time,” Russian state corporation Rosatom’s head Sergey Kiriyenko said in his address speech to the Russian Parliament after Rosatom consolidated 100% of Uranium One Inc. (U1) in January 2013 and takes it private.
The US government's fast-track approval of Rosatom’s acquisition of U1, which controls 20% of domestic strategic uranium reserves.

Was it a quid pro quo? No. But there is no questioning Hillary's influence.
Numerous Uranium One investors made donations to the Clinton Foundation and the Foundation later admitted it made "mistakes" in accounting for foreign donations and promised greater future transparency. There's a fine line between being innocent and not having enough evidence to prove guilt.

It's at least highly questionable that they would accept such donations and that we would authorize the acquisition of uranium by a hostile foreign power with clear military threats on its neighbors.

One former Trump official wrote that the meeting with Russian agents in Trump Tower was "treasonous."

Hearsay.

And why the House republicans want to see what security training Ivanka got before she used a private server to do government business.

Fair enough. Could have been ignorance and inexperience. Could have been dastardly.

So after they're done with Ivanka, we should ask why Comey blatantly said that his investigation found that Hillary indeed committed a felony and willfully destroyed evidence but he decided not to indict her because 'it had never been done before'.

You've illustrated a willingness to tolerate a number of double standards here.

 

[The Barbarian]

You keep conflating the INVESTIGATION with SPYING. The FISA surveillance was a separate event, prompted by a different set of information.

The FBI's counterintelligence investigation into whether Trump campaign officials had improper contacts with Russia was triggered by information the bureau obtained about George Papadopoulos, a former adviser to the campaign, according to the memo released Friday by House Intelligence Committee Republicans.
...
Allies of President Trump have claimed the Russia probe began with the so-called Steele dossier that was paid for in part by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee (DNC). That would mean the Russia investigation itself — and by extension, special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe — was launched from political opposition research.

But the memo states that FBI agent Pete Strzok opened the investigation in July 2016 based on "information" about Papadapoulos, rather than the dossier.

The New York Times has previously reported that Papadapoulos bragged to an Australian diplomat that the Russians had damaging information on Clinton before the hack of the DNC became publicly known. The Australian government tipped off the FBI to what Papadapoulos had said, according to the Times.

Papadopoulos has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI and is cooperating with special counsel Mueller’s investigation.
Memo: Papadopoulos info triggered FBI's Russia investigation

And that was what triggered the FISA warrant.

The heavily redacted documents released Saturday comprise an application to, and subsequent renewals by, judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court allowing the FBI to investigate Page, a foreign policy aide to the Trump campaign. But it's already been established by the House Intelligence Committee that the Russia investigation began after the FBI learned that another campaign aide, George Papadopoulos, had been approached by a Russian agent. The agent told Papadopoulos the Russians had incriminating information about Hillary Clinton, including emails, according to court documents.. Papadopoulos then mentioned to an Australian diplomat that the Russians had "dirt" on Clinton, the Australians contacted the U.S. government, and the FBI began to take a look.
Why Trump is wrong about Carter Page, the dossier and the FISA warrant

Right. Because they couldn't "check out the stuff that never happened"...like peeing on hookers.

I think it was about hookers peeing on... well, you know. But that's not collusion. At least not the kind the FBI was concerned about.

“I am pleased to inform you that today we control 20 percent of uranium in the United States. If we need that uranium, we shall be able to use it any time,” Russian state corporation Rosatom’s head Sergey Kiriyenko said in his address speech to the Russian Parliament after Rosatom consolidated 100% of Uranium One Inc. (U1) in January 2013 and takes it private.

It's not even 20% of known deposits in the U.S. It's 20% of the uranium being mined currently.

The repeated, incorrect claim that Russia obtained ‘20 percent of our uranium’
https://www.washingtonpost.com/.../the-repeated-incorrect-claim-that-russia-obtained-20...

So after they're done with Ivanka, we should ask why Comey blatantly said that his investigation found that Hillary indeed committed a felony and willfully destroyed evidence but he decided not to indict her because 'it had never been done before'.

Well, let's take a look...
FBI has found no criminal wrongdoing in new Clinton emails, says Comey
FBI director says batch of emails ‘have not changed conclusion’
The FBI has determined that a new batch of emails linked to Hillary Clinton’s private email server “have not changed our conclusion” that she committed no criminal wrongdoing, FBI director James Comey told congressional leaders in a letter on Sunday.
FBI has found no criminal wrongdoing in new Clinton emails, says Comey

So there it is. Comey said the FBI found no criminal wrongdoing. You've illustrated a willingness to tolerate a number of double standards here.

 

[Seventeen76]

Memo: Papadopoulos info triggered FBI's Russia investigation
And that was what triggered the FISA warrant.

Uh. You just spent all that time AGAIN conflating the two issues then COPYING THE HEADLINE and then followed that by summing up in the same words with one small change.
Pops info triggered the INVESTIGATION.
...NOT the FISA WARRANT.
The WARRANT is a separate legal proceeding that authorizes the SPYING on Page/Trumps campaign...not the investigation itself.

Seriously, do you not understand the difference?...or even READ the actual article you posted?

"The memo released by Republicans on Friday, which was authored by staffers for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), also criticizes the FBI’s use of the Steele dossier in a warrant application. After the counterintelligence investigation began, the memo states, the FBI used the Steele dossier, in part, to obtain surveillance warrants for Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, who is not related to Lisa Page."

Why Trump is wrong about Carter Page, the dossier and the FISA warrant

No. That article simply reiterates the fact that the dossier didnt prompt the INVESTIGATION. It did prompt the WARRANT.

It's not even 20% of known deposits in the U.S. It's 20% of the uranium being mined currently.
The repeated, incorrect claim that Russia obtained ‘20 percent of our uranium’

https://www.washingtonpost.com/.../the-repeated-incorrect-claim-that-russia-obtained-20...

Did you notice that this article itself had 'updated' itself and clarified what IT meant by 20%? The figure was imprecise, not incorrect. I never said RESERVES. If uranium 'extraction capacity' is more precise, its still 20% of that capacity AS NOTED by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission which approved the deal.

FBI has found no criminal wrongdoing in new Clinton emails, says Comey
FBI director says batch of emails ‘have not changed conclusion’
The FBI has determined that a new batch of emails linked to Hillary Clinton’s private email server “have not changed our conclusion” that she committed no criminal wrongdoing, FBI director James Comey told congressional leaders in a letter on Sunday.
FBI has found no criminal wrongdoing in new Clinton emails, says Comey
So there it is. Comey said the FBI found no criminal wrongdoing. You've illustrated a willingness to tolerate a number of double standards here.

No. Careful...see how dishonest your media sources are?
The only part Comey said is "have not changed our conclusion”...
The full quote: “Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July with respect to Secretary Clinton."
The Guardian added the words 'no criminal wrongdoing'. Dishonest propaganda.

What about that original conclusion in July?
"Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case."

It wasnt that she wasnt guilty! No...his conclusion was that although there was evidence that she WAS GUILTY, they decided not to recommend prosecution because they couldnt demonstrate intent. (Which itself is ridiculous...how the hell did a server get in her catbox in the bathroom and all the cellphones get smashed with hammers...by accident?

And if you read the actual statute in question, INTENT is no part of the law...not a bit. Comey went out of his way to spare her and sugarcoat it while openly saying she was guilty.

 

[The Barbarian]

Uh. You just spent all that time AGAIN conflating the two issues then COPYING THE HEADLINE and then followed that by summing up in the same words with one small change.
Pops info triggered the INVESTIGATION.
...NOT the FISA WARRANT.

Nope.

The so-called dossier formed only a smart part of the evidence used to meet the legal burden of establishing "probable cause" that Page was an agent of Russia.

The released documents contain dozens of pages that are entirely blacked out. People who have read them, including Rep. Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, say they contain secret evidence establishing ties between Page and Russians — evidence that goes beyond what was included in the dossier compiled by Christopher Steele. Frank Figliuzzi, the former FBI counterintelligence chief who is now an NBC News contributor, says that likely includes reporting from human sources and intercepted communications. Page, it should be said, denies that he was an agent of Russia and has not been charged with a crime.
Why Trump is wrong about Carter Page, the dossier and the FISA warrant

The WARRANT is a separate legal proceeding that authorizes the SPYING on Page/Trumps campaign

When it's done by law enforcement with a warrant, it's not called "SPYING." It's just a criminal investigation.

It wasnt that she wasnt guilty!

Let's take a look...
FBI has found no criminal wrongdoing in new Clinton emails, says Comey
FBI director says batch of emails ‘have not changed conclusion’
The FBI has determined that a new batch of emails linked to Hillary Clinton’s private email server “have not changed our conclusion” that she committed no criminal wrongdoing, FBI director James Comey told congressional leaders in a letter on Sunday.
FBI has found no criminal wrongdoing in new Clinton emails, says Comey

So there it is. Comey said the FBI found no criminal wrongdoing. You've illustrated a willingness to tolerate a number of double standards here.

No...his conclusion was that although there was evidence that she WAS GUILTY, they decided not to recommend prosecution because they couldnt demonstrate intent.

See above. You've been hornswoggled again.

 

[Seventeen76]

I dont think you're dishonest, but you're clearly over your head here. You are trying to argue about complex legal/political issues in a forum and when I illustrate your errors of conflation and point out the Guardian's blatant misrepresentation of Comey's quote, you shake your head and repeat yourself. Try a bit of humility and read it all again.

When it's done by law enforcement with a warrant, it's not called "SPYING." It's just a criminal investigation.

Right. Just like the CIA NSA recording our calls and emails. Its not 'spying'...its 'surveillance'. And no, thats NOT the same as an investigation. Its PART of an investigation...a part which requires further judicial approval. The article itself distinctly addresses the investigation which started earlier...and the warranty, which was a PIECE of the investigation, but a separate piece put in motion primarily by the dossier.

Let's take a look...
FBI has found no criminal wrongdoing in new Clinton emails, says Comey
FBI director says batch of emails ‘have not changed conclusion’
The FBI has determined that a new batch of emails linked to Hillary Clinton’s private email server “have not changed our conclusion” that she committed no criminal wrongdoing, FBI director James Comey told congressional leaders in a letter on Sunday.
FBI has found no criminal wrongdoing in new Clinton emails, says Comey

You LITERALLY just cut and paste the same misleading piece of the article after I provided the FULL QUOTE which did not include the words 'she committed no criminal wrongdoing' AND I provided his quote from the official statement concluding the investigation where Comey flat out said they had evidence that statutes were violated.

SMH.
You're having a pride issue I think.

 

[Tom 1]

You're having a pride issue I think.

Brother, what you are having is a ‘what you want to feel is true overrides your ability to take on information’ issue.