Law prof. Lawrence Tribe: Falsely accusing Obama of wiretapping ‘qualifies as an impeachable offense’

[AURaptor 1,125]

 So you don't even consider the idea that this guy might have some validity when he explains the disparity between how Trump supporters and his opponents view him? 

 

 And this is not the same as simply stating that Trump can say stuff and then getting away with it. It's also having to do with how people view him.  Sort of like how Obama lied like hell, but because of the mainstream media coverage of him, most people saw him as a genuinely nice guy, and someone whom they liked. Despite his overt deceitfulness &  passive aggressive attitude toward anyone who doesn't adore him. 

[TitanTiger 20,499]

 

Quote

Ryan, Senate Intel committee see no evidence of Trump wiretap

The speaker of the House, the Senate Intelligence Committee chairman and the ranking Democrat on the committee said Thursday that they've seen no evidence of President Donald Trump's accusation that he was wiretapped last year by his predecessor.

Senate Intelligence Committee chair Richard Burr and ranking member Mark Warner issued a statement Thursday, saying "based on the information available to us, we see no indications that Trump Tower was the subject of surveillance by any element of the United States government either before or after Election Day 2016."

 

The statement from the leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee marks the clearest and strongest refutation of Trump's allegations since the President first made them two weeks ago. The senators statement also addresses Trump's more recent statement that he was not merely speaking about wiretapping specifically.

The leaders of the House Intelligence Committee have said they have yet to see any evidence of wiretapping, but have yet to flatly rule out all surveillance. House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes said Wednesday that it was possible that Trump aides were surveilled via "incidental" collection.

 

Their statement came hours after House Speaker Paul Ryan said that "no such wiretap existed," citing intelligence reports to House leaders.

 

"The intelligence committees, in their continuing, widening, ongoing investigations of all things Russia, got to the bottom -- at least so far with respect to our intelligence community -- that no such wiretap existed," Ryan said in response to a question from CNN at a news conference.

 

Ryan's comment follows Trump and the White House retreating from the President's stunning accusation in a tweet two weeks ago.

 

"When I say wiretapping, those words were in quotes. That really covers -- because wiretapping is pretty old-fashioned stuff -- but that really covers surveillance and many other things. And nobody ever talks about the fact that it was in quotes, but that's a very important thing," Trump told Fox News Wednesday.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/16/politics/paul-ryan-wiretap-response/index.html

 

[AURaptor 1,125]

Trust, but verify. 

On the one hand, we have a former administration which lied about damn near everything. From day 1, the O-Care claims, to the IRS targeting of TEA party groups, Fast and Furious... all the way up through Loretta Lynch meeting Bill on the tarmac, in a ' closed ' meeting, away from prying ears, eyes, and " official " office business. 

Only the most naive would ever accept the establishments word at face value, on damn near anything. 

On the other hand... Trump has yet to prove his case. I've heard claims of this or that, but nothing yet concrete. " How " did he " find out " about this wiretap ? ( And I'm going to ignore the nonsense of his use of technical language , for now. Spied on, eaves dropped, monitored... what ever, doesn't matter ) 

IF it turns out his claim is bogus, then we'll see him answer for it, one way or another. 

[TitanTiger 20,499]

9 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

Trust, but verify. 

On the one hand, we have a former administration which lied about damn near everything. From day 1, the O-Care claims, to the IRS targeting of TEA party groups, Fast and Furious... all the way up through Loretta Lynch meeting Bill on the tarmac, in a ' closed ' meeting, away from prying ears, eyes, and " official " office business. 

Only the most naive would ever accept the establishments word at face value, on damn near anything. 

On the other hand... Trump has yet to prove his case. I've heard claims of this or that, but nothing yet concrete. " How " did he " find out " about this wiretap ? ( And I'm going to ignore the nonsense of his use of technical language , for now. Spied on, eaves dropped, monitored... what ever, doesn't matter ) 

IF it turns out his claim is bogus, then we'll see him answer for it, one way or another. 

I think the Senate Intelligence Committee has been verifying though.  They aren't taking anything at face value.

[AURaptor 1,125]

12 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I think the Senate Intelligence Committee has been verifying though.  They aren't taking anything at face value.

Maybe. Maybe not. 

[AUUSN 823]

Sorry Trump. You're on your own.

 

[AURaptor 1,125]

 

[AUUSN 823]

1 hour ago, AURaptor said:

 

Translation....

Man that stings. Got to weasel it up.

[AURaptor 1,125]

 

There there...

 

 

[AUUSN 823]

1 hour ago, AURaptor said:

 

There there...

 

 

Translation. Shoot they are  on to me. Better post an emoji and double down the weasel.

[AURaptor 1,125]

 On to me? That doesn't even make any sense. I am just reveling  at your whining and grasping at straws. 

[AUUSN 823]

 

[TitanTiger 20,499]

15 hours ago, AUUSN said:

Translation. Shoot they are on to me. Better post an emoji and double down the weasel.

Yeah.  Love how that Fox News reference was shot down and zero comments except to post other clips of unrelated nonsense.

[AURaptor 1,125]

1 hour ago, AUUSN said:

 

Only it isn't a lie

[TitanTiger 20,499]

37 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

Only it isn't a lie

Just unsubstantiated poppycock.

[AURaptor 1,125]

2 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

Just unsubstantiated poppycock.

Maybe.  But if the NYT reports that Trump was wiretapped, and then Trump takes that report at face value... 

DID the NYT clarify  or retract that claim ? If so, I've not heard of it. And if Trump wants to infer that TRUMP TOWERS , not just some aspect of his campaign, got wiretapped from what the NYT posted, then fine.  

But don't come and try spin it as if he came up w/ the claim he was wiretapped out of thin air, because he didn't. 

That's what so many are missing, or pretending doesn't exist. 

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Just now, AURaptor said:

Maybe.  But if the NYT reports that Trump was wiretapped, and then Trump takes that report at face value... 

DID the NYT clarify  or retract that claim ? If so, I've not heard of it. And if Trump want to infer that TRUMP TOWERS got wiretapped from what the NYT posted, then fine. But don't come and try spin it as if he came up w/ the claim he was wiretapped out of thin air, because he didn't. 

We've already discussed this ad nauseam.  The NYT didn't claim that.

[AURaptor 1,125]

4 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

We've already discussed this ad nauseam.  The NYT didn't claim that.

they absolutely did. 

 

[TitanTiger 20,499]

6 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

they absolutely did. 

No, they did not.  You repeating bull**** over and over doesn't magically transform it into gold.

I'll quote myself:

Quote

I figured this was probably the quote you were going to reference, but I wasn't going to do your work for you.  So let's take a closer look:

"The F.B.I. is leading the investigations, aided by the National Security Agency, the C.I.A. and the Treasury Department’s financial crimes unit. The investigators have accelerated their efforts in recent weeks but have found no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, the officials said. One official said intelligence reports based on some of the wiretapped communications had been provided to the White House."

As is typical of your arguments, the supporting evidence you provide (when you provide any) almost never says what you claim it does.  It simply says that the White House was provided intel reports based on some of the wiretapped communications.  It does not say that Obama knew of any wiretap on Trump or that Trump was the one being wiretapped.  There is still zero proof that Trump was ever wiretapped.  The article does say that several Russian contacts were under surveillance though:

"The counterintelligence investigation centers at least in part on the business dealings that some of the president-elect’s past and present advisers have had with Russia. Mr. Manafort has done business in Ukraine and Russia. Some of his contacts there were under surveillance by the National Security Agency for suspected links to Russia’s Federal Security Service, one of the officials said."

So, you (and Trump) still have not put forth any proof.  Try again.

The NYT story does not say what you claim it says.  Period.  Any further lies about this will be deleted on sight.

For future reference, the next time you get all wrapped around the axle because someone calls you a weasel or a liar, this thread can be Exhibit A for why.  You've earned it.

[AURaptor 1,125]

22 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

No, they did not.  You repeating bull**** over and over doesn't magically transform it into gold.

I'll quote myself:

The NYT story does not say what you claim it says.  Period.  Any further lies about this will be deleted on sight.

For future reference, the next time you get all wrapped around the axle because someone calls you a weasel or a liar, this thread can be Exhibit A for why.  You've earned it.

* I never SAID the NYT story stated that Obama wiretapped Trump. All I am showing is that it's reasonable to infer that Trump, SEEING a story in the NYT which says info about him came from wiretaps , that Obama was in some way complicit.

I AM NOT LYING - You are taking my words out of context and inventing meaning to things I NEVER SAID 

 

Others in the business disagree. Like Ari Fleischer and John Crudele ( NY Post )  , the writer of this linked story, 

Did the New York Times Already Tell Us Trump Was 'Wiretapped'?

http://nation.foxnews.com/2017/03/09/did-new-york-times-already-tell-us-trump-was-wiretapped  ( not sure how the link got mixed up w/ another one ... oh well ) 

 

And btw... 

 

I'll continue to point out derogatory and baseless ad hominems for as long as they occur.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

8 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

* I never SAID the NYT story stated that Obama wiretapped Trump.

You're lying again.  You said it right here:

 

Quote

Guess I'll have to keep repeating this until it sinks in. 

Jan 19th, the NYT already reported that Trump had been wiretapped, and that Obama had been briefed

https://www.aufamily.com/forums/topic/156004-law-prof-lawrence-tribe-falsely-accusing-obama-of-wiretapping-‘qualifies-as-an-impeachable-offense’/?do=findComment&comment=2646778

 

 

Quote

All I am showing is that it's reasonable to infer that Trump, SEEING a story in the NYT which says info about him came from wiretaps , that Obama was in some way complicit.

No, that is how you have moved the goalposts now to cover for the fact that you made a claim that wasn't true.

 

Quote

I AM NOT LYING - You are taking my words out of context and inventing meaning to things I NEVER SAID 

You are lying.  Again.  Nothing out of context - your words, verbatim.

 

Quote

I'll continue to point out derogatory and baseless ad hominems for as long as they occur.

Knock yourself out.  But bookmark this thread.  It will be my main answer to you henceforth.  Because the charge is not baseless.

[AURaptor 1,125]

4 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

You're lying again.  You said it right here:

 

 

 

No, that is how you have moved the goalposts now to cover for the fact that you made a claim that wasn't true.

 

You are lying.  Again.  Nothing out of context - your words, verbatim.

 

Knock yourself out.  But bookmark this thread.  It will be my main answer to you henceforth.  Because the charge is not baseless.

Not lying. That's EXACTLY what the story said. 

 

See, the problem is, you're so damn partisan, that anything anyone else says, regardless of who says it, what is said, if it in ANY way, remotely puts Trump in a favorable or less than negative light, you accuse them of LYING. Even if the info is passed on verbatim, and haven't changed 1 damn word.  

[TitanTiger 20,499]

1 minute ago, AURaptor said:

Not lying. That's EXACTLY what the story said. 

Yes, lying.  I pointed out to you that the story DID NOT say that Trump was wiretapped.  Again, quoting my post:

 

Quote

 

It simply says that the White House was provided intel reports based on some of the wiretapped communications.  It does not say that Obama knew of any wiretap on Trump or that Trump was the one being wiretapped.  There is still zero proof that Trump was ever wiretapped.  The article does say that several Russian contacts were under surveillance though:

"The counterintelligence investigation centers at least in part on the business dealings that some of the president-elect’s past and present advisers have had with Russia. Mr. Manafort has done business in Ukraine and Russia. Some of his contacts there were under surveillance by the National Security Agency for suspected links to Russia’s Federal Security Service, one of the officials said."

 

 

You can't even keep track of the lies anymore.  One minute you're saying they NYT claimed Trump was wiretapped.  Then when someone calls you on it, you backpedal and say that's not what you claimed and give some BS about how Trump could have perceived it.  Then when you're quoted saying that very thing, you go back to saying that's what the article says.

The article simply states that Obama was given reports from some wiretaps involving Russian officials and some included Trump people.  There is no claim Trump was wiretapped, never was.  Stop tap dancing and changing your stripes.  Trump is being an idiot and you're joining him.

 

[AURaptor 1,125]

3 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Yes, lying.  I pointed out to you that the story DID NOT say that Trump was wiretapped.  Again, quoting my post:

 

 

You can't even keep track of the lies anymore.  One minute you're saying they NYT claimed Trump was wiretapped.  Then when someone calls you on it, you backpedal and say that's not what you claimed and give some BS about how Trump could have perceived it.  Then when you're quoted saying that very thing, you go back to saying that's what the article says.

* The article simply states that Obama was given reports from some wiretaps involving Russian officials and some included Trump people.  There is no claim Trump was wiretapped, never was.  Stop tap dancing and changing your stripes.  Trump is being an idiot and you're joining him.

 

That's because I'm not lying, and you know I'm not lying. 

* Thanks for admitting I didn't lie. 

[TitanTiger 20,499]

5 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

That's because I'm not lying, and you know I'm not lying. 

* Thanks for admitting I didn't lie. 

You lied.  It has been explained to you that having Russian officials wiretapped, and Trump's people only getting snared because they called them, is not the same thing as having Trump or his people wiretapped.  So stop acting like they are the same thing.

And it's not up for continuing discussion.