Trump Still Has No Evidence He Was Wiretapped

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/19/politics/trump-wiretapping-manafort/index.html

That's because it never happened ...

All he has to say is it's fake news and his dumb followers will gobble it up...

Well you see, it's like Watergate, which took years to prove. You know, just like they're saying all the time about zero proof so far from the Mueller investigation.

It's only fair to afford Trump vs Obama as much time as Mueller vs Trump in producing any actual evidence.

...How about any proof for that claim by Trump of there being over 2,750,000 fake votes for Hillary that was 100 percent what her popular vote margin was made of?







]Well you see, it's like Watergate, which took years to prove. You know, just like they're saying all the time about zero proof so far from the Mueller investigation.

It's only fair to afford Trump vs Obama as much time as Mueller vs Trump in producing any actual evidence.[/quote]

The difference is, the Watergate scandal had been investigated by legitimate news sources (Woodward and Bernstein), which uncovered legitimate evidence. In this current Trump/Russia situation, legitimate law enforcement had found members of Trump's team having hidden associations with Putin's intelligence apparatus. Trump's claims that he was wire tapped by Obama arose solely from actual fake news, like Infowars, and Breitbart, sources completely lacking credibility.

Both have zero evidence. The idea with Trump/Russia is it's supposed to be given as many years as Watergate took to produce anything solid. The allotment of years to be given to produce factual evidence is the focal point. I'm not the one who set that marker. But what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Trump should be granted years to prove his wiretapping claims.

The problem with this argument is that Trump didn't follow up with an investigation (it's within his authority), he just made a claim and expected everyone to accept it as fact. If he had actually ordered an investigation, and actually investigated it, I'd wait for the investigation to get done before drawing a conclusion. None of that happened, he made an outrageous claim and then just walked away like he never said it. If it actually happened Trump is being negligent in his job by not ordering an investigation, since the claim he's making is a direct violation of due process and he's tasked with upholding the Constitution, it's either that or it never happened and he was flat out lying about a very serious issue. So he's either highly incompetent or a liar, which is it?

Then let him. But I wouldn't hold my breath for Trump finding anything, as he knows it isn't true.

I wouldn't hold my breath or have bated regarding Trump or Mueller finding anything of significance.

The OP's article is about wiretapping that did take place. Now of course there's a whole bunch of spin and dodging going on regarding this established fact. Nonetheless, the US government, under Obama, was conducting wiretaps. So Trump was at least to some degree correct.

Of course the left side of things are scrambling to obfuscate that as much as possible because, "Wiretaps may prove Trump right — and that’s absolutely terrifying" - New York Post. Now of course I'm not a NY Post reader. But I think the headline is accurate. Especially in using the hyperbolic wording of "absolutely terrifying". Just the very idea that Trump was in any way correct about this is upsetting the left greatly I'm sure.

Also just because an official investigation hasn't taken place yet, doesn't mean one won't. Or maybe there is an investigation taking place that's currently under wraps. How long did it take for the official Watergate investigation to start? And how much longer would it have taken if five arrests hadn't been made at the onset? These things have to be given lots of time, as has been said over and over regarding investigations involving a president.

Also that little adage that's been used a lot; "Where there's smoke there's fire".

And, all he would have to do is say there's an on-going investigation, but that hasn't happened. He just floated it out to see if it stuck and left it hanging like a nasty fart in an elevator. As for taps, yes there were taps on Paul Manafort, they were signed off by a FISA court, meaning not just the FBI but also a federal judge saw enough evidence to elevate it to probable cause, and thus it's 100% legal. Paul Manafort is not Trump, and Manafort has been under investigation twice where taps were issued, the first time being 2014, well before Trump even announced for president. The only evidence of Trump being wiretapped was a 4 a.m. tweet by Trump himself, not exactly the most credible evidence.

The official "Watergate investigation" started right after the Watergate burglary itself. I mean: literally minutes after it!

It didn't take "years" for Watergate to be proven. It was pretty well "proven" by about June of 1973. John Dean let the cat out of the bag LOL

Nixon had the 1972 election in the bag; it was stupid of him and his lieutenants to even conceive of doing something like Watergate.

Last edited by kraftiekortie on 22 Sep 2017, 8:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Trump made the specific claim that president Obama had wiretapped him. That didn't exactly happen, since all evidence points to the Obama administration being too careful not to offend congressional republicans. Trump implies falsely that Obama directed wiretaps against a political opponent, and he probably believes it. He'd do it.

However, the NSA wiretapped everyone, even as Clapper perjured himself before congress claiming that they didn't. He didn't perjure himself in the classified briefings, so the righteous indignation by elected officials rings hollow.

Why then are Trump and his people acting so scared? It's called consciousness of guilt.

Once again, just because an offcial investigation hasn't taken place yet, doesn't mean one won't. Nasty fart in an elevator could be applied to Russia accusations as well so far.