Important Announcement regarding the Alternative Views Subforum

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Making this accusation without proof is a crime (slander, libel) that could lead to impeachment.

Are you serious?

Then every politician and journalist needs to be locked up!

Just for starters.

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I have been carefully following this new administration from day 1 and I have seen much more evidence presented indicative of collusion between the Russians and Trump's campaign than I have seen concerning Obama wire tapping Trump.

So have I, and I have arrived at the opposite conclusion.

It just all depends where you get your news.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Are you serious?

Then every politician and journalist needs to be locked up!

Just for starters.


So have I, and I have arrived at the opposite conclusion.

It just all depends where you get your news.

Yes.

Do you remember when the 60 minutes interview with the Tobacco executive aired? Big Tobacco tried to smear him with a 500 pages of lies, misinformation, distortion, etc. Real journalists tracked down every source, verified every accusation and concluded that it was a smear campaign. Big Tobacco was trying to discredit this key witness before his testimony could be heard, instead they got caught in their lies, and I assume you know the rest.

Liars must be held accountable for every word. I am completely disgusted with Trump, Conway, Spicer and the rest of them trying to walk back what they said. Trump's words were very clear, an illegal surveillance (a la Watergate) at the order of Obama on Trump tower. Trying to spin what was said into anything else is a lie. For a president to do this is not only disgraceful but irresponsible and unbefitting the post. To make this claim and then not support it with evidence is childish and despicable.

The Wall Street Journal called the attack on Wigand as the "lowest form of smear campaign". This is what I see from Trump and his minions. I am not listening to a 3rd party interpret the quotes for me, I can hear it from their own mouths.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Yes.

Do you remember when the 60 minutes interview with the Tobacco executive aired? Big Tobacco tried to smear him with a 500 pages of lies, misinformation, distortion, etc. Real journalists tracked down every source, verified every accusation and concluded that it was a smear campaign. Big Tobacco was trying to discredit this key witness before his testimony could be heard, instead they got caught in their lies, and I assume you know the rest.

Liars must be held accountable for every word. I am completely disgusted with Trump, Conway, Spicer and the rest of them trying to walk back what they said. Trump's words were very clear, an illegal surveillance (a la Watergate) at the order of Obama on Trump tower. Trying to spin what was said into anything else is a lie. For a president to do this is not only disgraceful but irresponsible and unbefitting the post. To make this claim and then not support it with evidence is childish and despicable.

The Wall Street Journal called the attack on Wygand as the "lowest form of smear campaign". This is what I see from Trump and his minions. I am not listening to a 3rd party interpret the quotes for me, I can hear it from their own mouths.

Your example does not fit here. Wygand was an individual. Obama has an administration with millions of employees and contractors.

Can you prove that no one in the Obama administration tapped Trump's phones? Of course not, because we now know, via Snowden, that not just Trump's lines were tapped but yours and mine too! Not just metadata, but the whole conversation, sitting in cyber space ready to be mined for evil.

We know it, but can never prove it. But I have already provided plenty of evidence to prove my point. Unfortunately, you don't agree, but that's OK.

To be honest, I did not like Trump initially, and did not vote for him in the primary. To me he was the rude and crude school yard bully. The same goes for many of my friends and family. But the more the media hates on him, spewing their daily bias, spinning everything, the more I like the guy, and the more I like his decisions and his selection of people around him.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

and the more I like his decisions and his selection of people around him.

Do you really like Bannon?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Do you really like Bannon?

I don't know him.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I don't know him.

You don't know any of those you claim to like that Trump has gathered around him ... yet said you like them. And of course you know Bannon ; the founder of Breitbart ... and notorious white nationalist, and prolly supremacist ; the KKK love him. He's Trump's brain. These are the types Trump has gathered, and you said you like them.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

You don't know any of those you claim to like that Trump has gathered around him ... yet said you like them. And of course you know Bannon ; the founder of Breitbart ... and notorious white nationalist, and prolly supremacist ; the KKK love him. He's Trump's brain. These are the types Trump has gathered, and you said you like them.

Your epithets are simply nasty baseless names. Is he not innocent until proven guilty?

I prefer Bannon to Valerie Jarrett, the brains of the last prez. Let's talk about her. For starters: the father, maternal grandfather, and father-in-law of President Barack Obama's closest adviser, Valerie Jarrett, "were hardcore Communists under investigation by the U.S. government."

She is also Iranian. Do you see the connections to Obama's treaty with Iran?

Go read about her.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Do you really like Bannon?

You got me thinking, so I read this article about Bannon by Bloomberg News couple years ago.

What it really explained to me was why crooked Hillary lost.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

You got me thinking, so I read this article about Bannon by Bloomberg News couple years ago.

What it really explained to me was why crooked Hillary lost.

Hillary lost because a lot of people hated her, including me.

But you didn't answer my question. Do you really like Bannon?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Hillary lost because a lot of people hated her, including me.

But you didn't answer my question. Do you really like Bannon?

What a weird question. And then you ask me it twice on a forum. What's up with that? So what ... I read an article about him ... I read one about Valerie Jarrett too, and I like her like a colonoscopy.

I mean you seem to have issues with me even liking the Bible.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Your example does not fit here. Wygand was an individual. Obama has an administration with millions of employees and contractors.

This is the weak link in the theory. The CIA knows that they cannot keep a secret unless they "tie up loose ends", a euphemism for killing everyone who might know something. The deaths of so many key witnesses in the JFK assassination is the strongest piece of evidence that it was a conspiracy carried out by the CIA. The Mafia also has tried and failed to keep secrets. How is it that some low level tech guy who would know the truth and could sell it for $1 million keeps quiet? I can understand Obama and Clinton keeping quiet, but since they didn't tap the phones themselves there are others who know the truth. In the tobacco case the man who blew the whistle did so at great personal risk and financial loss. He risked going to prison, his kids ending up on welfare without health care when they were asthmatic and could die. In contrast a government employee who knows that Obama broke the law risks absolutely nothing, no way Trump allows them to be fired if they come forward, and they will score a very big payday. Doesn't get better than that, you get paid a million dollars for being a hero who protects democracy.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Can you prove that no one in the Obama administration tapped Trump's phones? Of course not, because we now know, via Snowden, that not just Trump's lines were tapped but yours and mine too! Not just metadata, but the whole conversation, sitting in cyber space ready to be mined for evil.

Again, you ignore my point about the DNC hacked emails. Who cares that the phones have been tapped, recorded and stored at NSA if no one has listened in? If they did listen in and yet did not forward any information gleaned to the Clinton campaign, again so what? Trump likened this to Watergate. Therefore all you need to prove that something did take place is the DNC emails during the Clinton campaign. These will prove they knew something from inside the Trump campaign. That would be the smoking gun. So yes, since those emails have all been hacked and leaked, Trump could easily prove his claim if it were true. Not only so but he has had 4 months. I imagine that those emails have already been poured over and dissected under a microscope by the RNC and the Trump campaign. Since he still has not given any evidence I have to assume there was not any evidence in those emails.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

This is the weak link in the theory. The CIA knows that they cannot keep a secret unless they "tie up loose ends", a euphemism for killing everyone who might know something. The deaths of so many key witnesses in the JFK assassination is the strongest piece of evidence that it was a conspiracy carried out by the CIA. The Mafia also has tried and failed to keep secrets. How is it that some low level tech guy who would know the truth and could sell it for $1 million keeps quiet? I can understand Obama and Clinton keeping quiet, but since they didn't tap the phones themselves there are others who know the truth. In the tobacco case the man who blew the whistle did so at great personal risk and financial loss. He risked going to prison, his kids ending up on welfare without health care when they were asthmatic and could die. In contrast a government employee who knows that Obama broke the law risks absolutely nothing, no way Trump allows them to be fired if they come forward, and they will score a very big payday. Doesn't get better than that, you get paid a million dollars for being a hero who protects democracy.

Snowden and Assange have blown the whistle and they are at great risk. No one is calling them heroes, except the common man. Both are now on the run, knowing each day will be their last. Million dollars means nothing to them.

No one in the intelligentcia simply "comes forward" to talk.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Snowden and Assange have blown the whistle and they are at great risk. No one is calling them heroes, except the common man. Both are now on the run, knowing each day will be their last. Million dollars means nothing to them.

No one in the intelligentcia simply "comes forward" to talk.

This doesn't make sense. The FBI director clearly undermined Clinton's campaign. Surely there are some in the Intelligence community that do not support Obama. Also, Obama is no longer in power.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

This doesn't make sense. The FBI director clearly undermined Clinton's campaign. Surely there are some in the Intelligence community that do not support Obama. Also, Obama is no longer in power.

Undermined her campaign? By acquitting Hillary before the DNC, he paved the road to victory for her. She should have been indicted, but today she walks the streets free with all the money she stole.

Meet your new mayor!

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

It just all depends where you get your news.

You mean from anywhere but Fox, right? Well maybe Breitbart too.