world

Trump says his campaign was spied upon illegally

125 Comments

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Sunday that documents released by the FBI relating to a former adviser's ties to Russia showed that his campaign for the 2016 presidential election had been illegally spied upon by U.S. law enforcement, but offered no evidence to support his assertion.

In a series of Twitter posts, Trump also accused the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice of misleading the courts during a probe of Russian interference in the election, but did not elaborate.

The FBI documents released on Saturday showed how in 2016 the bureau requested surveillance of the former Trump campaign adviser, Carter Page, as part of that investigation, saying the bureau believed he had been collaborating with the Russian government.

"Looking more & more like the Trump Campaign for President was illegally being spied upon (surveillance) for the political gain of Crooked Hillary Clinton and the DNC," Trump wrote on Twitter, referring to the Democratic National Committee."Republicans must get tough now. An illegal Scam!"

A White House spokeswoman referred questions on why Trump believed the documents proved the FBI and DOJ demonstrated illegal conduct or were misleading courts to Trump's personal counsel. His lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, did not respond to a request for comment.

The DOJ did not immediately respond to requests to comment on Trump's allegation. The FBI declined to comment.

Page told CNN on Sunday he was never an agent of a foreign power, and that the documents overstated his ties to Russia. Page could not immediately be reached for comment by Reuters.

A spokesman for Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who is now leading the probe into Russia's interference in the 2016 election, declined to comment on the president's tweets.

Trump has repeatedly criticized U.S. law enforcement agencies that are investigating allegations of Russian meddling in the vote, and he has insisted there was no collusion with members of his campaign. Russia denies any interference.

Trump's statements on Twitter followed sharp criticism, including from some Republicans, of his meeting in Finland last week with Russian President Vladimir Putin. At a joint news conference, Trump failed to confront the Russian leader over Moscow's alleged election interference and appeared to side with the Kremlin over U.S. intelligence agencies.

The 412 pages of heavily redacted documents released on Saturday by the FBI included surveillance applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and warrants surrounding the investigation into Page. They included an initial application and requests for renewals that were filed in 2017, after Trump took office.

"The FBI believes that Page has been collaborating and conspiring with the Russian Government," the surveillance application filed in October 2016 said.

In addition, the documents said "the FBI believes that the Russian Government's efforts are being coordinated with Page and perhaps other individuals associated with" Trump's campaign, and that Page "has established relationships with Russian Government officials, including Russian intelligence officers."

Page has denied being an agent of the Russian government and has not been charged with any crime.

Referring to the Page documents, Trump tweeted on Sunday:"As usual they are ridiculously heavily redacted but confirm with little doubt that the Department of "Justice" and FBI misled the courts. Witch Hunt Rigged, a Scam!"

Some Republican lawmakers have contended that the FBI made serious missteps when it sought a warrant to monitor Page in October 2016 shortly after he left the Trump campaign.

On CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday, Page called the documents a "complete joke" and insisted they overstated his relationships with the Russian government.

"I've never been an agent of a foreign power by any stretch of the imagination," Page told CNN. "I've never been anywhere near what's being described here."

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2018.

©2018 GPlusMedia Inc.

125 Comments
Login to comment

Be nice to wake up one morning and hear that Trump said something intelligent!

14 ( +14 / -0 )

Poor little Russian agents on trump’s campaign being spied upon.

Implosion is nigh. And long overdue .

20 ( +21 / -1 )

Dear Cadet Coward-In-Bonespurs,

You can scream "witch hunt" and 'rigged' and all your other gaslighting buzz words all you want. You can keep your followers drinking the Kool-Aid all you want. You can try to shift blame (without evidence) onto the DNC, to HRC, to Obama, to Santa Claus, to whoever. It doesn't matter.

It doesn't change the simple facts that you have proven through your own conduct and words. The facts that you are an abhorrent coward of a man unfit to be President of the United States. That your very presence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is a slap in the face of the great men who have sat in that office before you.

It doesn't change the fact that you do not care about your country before you care about your 'brand.' You do not care about destroying the very foundations that our nation was founded upon in your own mad quest for power, President Commodus.

It doesn't change the fact that you wouldn't know truth if it barked in your face, or that your behavior has weakened the United States.

It doesn't change the fact that you are an abject liar who relies upon gaslighting and dogwhistling, upon fear mongering and the lowest common denominator in order to maintain a facade of power.

It doesn't change the fact that while you have maintained the facade thus far, you cannot maintain an honorable core, because you have no honor.

I went to an institution that has a simple motto: Duty, Honor, Country. For you, Donald Trump you coward, those three words mean nothing to you. Your motto is Me, Me, Me.

27 ( +27 / -0 )

I'm thinking this whole Cohen thing has him freaked out. Cohen knew more of his dirt than anyone. This is why he's back to trying to discredit the intelligence agencies again, because he's realizing how strong the info is that they have on him. Since he can't really discredit his personal lawyer, he needs to move one step higher and discredit the people interviewing his personal lawyer.

Rearranging chairs on the deck of the titanic is all it is.

23 ( +23 / -0 )

When Page was warned by the FBI that a Russian spy ring was trying to recruit him his response wasn't "Oh My God" or "how can I help protect America", it was to run to the Russians and warn them the FBI was onto them. Another Republican patriot.

21 ( +21 / -0 )

A White House spokeswoman referred questions on why Trump believed the documents proved the FBI and DOJ demonstrated illegal conduct or were misleading courts to Trump's personal counsel. His lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, did not respond to a request for comment.

Nobody ever wants to take responsibility for what Trump says - they just keep passing the buck until you get to someone like Sanders who simply flat-out lies. That says a lot.

19 ( +19 / -0 )

but offered no evidence to support his assertion.

The article could honestly have stopped here. If Trump can't even be bothered to make his own case, then he has no case. For as much as he whines about the media being out to get him, it's amazing how much credit they give his own paper-thin excuses.

17 ( +17 / -0 )

Wwll, the IG cleared the FBI, and now the release of the warrant exposes yet more lies by Team Trump with their "the investigation is based on the dossier" BS.

So....why not make up some more stuff, right? It's not like there are any consequences.

14 ( +14 / -0 )

they overstated his relationships with the Russian government."I've never been an agent of a foreign power by any stretch of the imagination," Page told CNN. "I've never been anywhere near what's being described here."

The investigation has only released info about people around him, and has found quite a lot. Meanwhile, screaming "There was no colusion" before being accused of collusion is probably not the best sales pitch.

13 ( +13 / -0 )

I guess this gets people talking about his disasters of the past weekish. He was rude to the queen, called the EU an enemy, met with a dictator and acted like a dog with its tail between its legs, then spent days trying to explain his actions through obvious lies and BS.

But let’s not forget those things for this one.

13 ( +13 / -0 )

There will always be the 30% who will spread this lie, and they will be here shortly. The important thing is to starve the nutball arguments of oxygen with a methodical presentation of the evidence so they can’t infect people outside of their bubble.

At this point the entire “Deep State” and bias arguments come down to Strzok’s text messages saying he personally didn’t like Trump, and the IG specifically cleared him. There has been zero evidence of any improper anti-Trump actions by Rosenstein and Mueller or anyone else.

Zero.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Of course it was. Crooked Clinton was prepared to do anything to win. Trump 2020!

-21 ( +3 / -24 )

Another baseless claim from a pathological liar. There are only two ways left to respond to him at this point: "Prove it" and "Shut up".

17 ( +17 / -0 )

There are only two ways left to respond to him at this point: "Prove it" and "Shut up".

Neither of which work with him anyway. The best response in my opinion, would be for Twitter to shut down his account due to his being senile, and the rest of the press to stop reporting anything he has to say.

Next have congress find a way to have him quietly put into the hospital for observation, due to him being incapable of doing his duties as president, then be quietly removed from office.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Sunday that documents released by the FBI relating to a former adviser's ties to Russia showed that his campaign for the 2016 presidential election had been illegally spied upon by U.S. law enforcement, but offered no evidence to support his assertion.

This is a man who lied about his own father being born in Germany and claimed the Queen hadn't inspected her Guard for 70 years so I wouldn't take anything he says too seriously.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

From Today's NYT: "... the release was itself noteworthy, given that wiretapping under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, is normally one of the government’s closest-guarded secrets. No such application materials had apparently become public in the 40 years since Congress enacted that law to regulate the interception of phone calls and other communications on domestic soil in search of spies and terrorists, as opposed to wiretapping for ordinary criminal investigations.

The documents made public on Saturday were heavily redacted in places, and some of the substance of the applications had already become public in February, via the Republican and Democratic Intelligence Committee memos.

Visible portions showed that the F.B.I. in stark terms had told the intelligence court that Mr. Page “has established relationships with Russian government officials, including Russian intelligence officers”; that the bureau believed “the Russian government’s efforts are being coordinated with Page and perhaps other individuals associated with” Mr. Trump’s campaign; and that Mr. Page “has been collaborating and conspiring with the Russian government.”

The fight over the surveillance of Mr. Page centered on the fact that the F.B.I., in making the case to judges that he might be a Russian agent, had used some claims drawn from a dossier compiled by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence agent..."

Recall also that Fusion GPS & Steele had originally hired by a Republican to find intel on Trump in hopes of derailing his campaign. When it became he was the likely nominee, the Republican dropped Fusion GPS. DNC then hired Fusion GPS & Steele - who already had much of the intel that comprised the dossier in hand. It may well yet turn out that certain members of the GOP knew of the contents of the dossier before the DNC did...

4 ( +4 / -0 )

but offered no evidence to support his assertion.

That’s because he doesn’t need to.

His supporters do not care.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

The documents in question were declassified by Trump earlier this year because he wanted to enable the release of the biased and incomplete partisan Republican report. Well look where that cleverness got you, Swampy!

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Poor little Russian agents on trump’s campaign being spied upon.

Hmmmm...

Implosion is nigh. And long overdue.

And then what?

Now that it’s an irrefutable fact the Obama administration as well as the Hillary campaign bought and financed the dirty dossier that Comey elated to being salacious and unverified. The Dems try and try and try....

-18 ( +0 / -18 )

Now that it’s an irrefutable fact the Obama administration... bought and financed the dirty dossier

Thats not a fact, and entirely refutable.

Lets to keep the claims of fact to actual fact mmkay?

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Is making accusations with no evidence whatsoever now acceptable behaviour from the leader of a civilised, democratic country?

Has anyone checked the National Enquirer to see if they have anything concrete on this?

6 ( +6 / -0 )

tells me all I need to know. Plus these documents confirmed the “conspiracy theory” that both the DNC and the FBI paid for the information in the dossier.

“Page has denied being an agent of the Russian government and has not been charged with any crime.”

-14 ( +0 / -14 )

The unredacted 412 page document IS the evidence. (trump has seen it)

What does the media mean that Trump made allegations without any evidence?

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

What does the media mean that Trump made allegations without any evidence?

It means that without providing evidence, Trump made allegations.

Your argument that Trump has read it seems to be akin to using anonymous sources, which you guys haaaaaaate. And I know you're going to say they aren't the same, but they are in that they both provide information that cannot be verified by independent outside sources.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Thats not a fact, and entirely refutable. 

Ok, so the left says so, so the tangible evidence doesn’t matter because the left commands you to think so, gotcha.

Lets to keep the claims of fact to actual fact mmkay?

K! Liberal spin facts it is.

-18 ( +0 / -18 )

Ok, so the left says so

Well no, I was basing it on the fact that until you just claimed it was the Obama administration that paid for the dossier, no one else ever claimed that, the reason for no one saying so is that nothing has ever come up to indicate that the Obama administration even knew about it, much less paid for it.

But hey, you said they paid for it, so we just need to take your word at face value, right? AKA, just because 'you said so'?

You realize your 'argument' in fact kills all your other arguments, right? If you require something above just saying so, yet you never provide anything more than just saying so, you are very clearly stating that your own level of evidence provided is never enough to actually support any argument.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

The application stated Carter Page is a Russian agent. This was the reason given to spy on the Trump campaign.

Yet Carter Page has never even been indicted for this? So it means that reason for the spying was false, therefore it’s illegsl spying. The fact that spying happened is no longer even in question.

The dossier was the justification to spy until we found out Hillary paid for it. Now it’s that Russian agent Carter Page who is actually an FBI anti-Russian asset. Now back to a drunk Papadapolous excuse. But his name isn’t in the dossier at all....

-15 ( +0 / -15 )

So basically spying that cannot be justified IS illegsl spying. Pretty simple.

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

So basically spying that cannot be justified IS illegsl spying. Pretty simple.

Good thing it was justified the. :)

6 ( +6 / -0 )

So can’t use Papadapolous as spy justification because of Hillary donations from the diplomat and other Hillary advocates involved.

Cant use dossier cause it’s full of unverified info and Hillary and the Comey FBI both paid its creator.

So all is left is Carter Page. As FISA warrants have the highest level of proof required can’t use unverified or speculative evidence.

So Page MUST be a Russian agent as the application says or its a false warrant. Seems Mueller forgot to indict him though. Not even a “lying to the FBI” or a decades old tax case. Oops.

-14 ( +0 / -14 )

Wasn’t justified as the provided information to get the surveillance was false. Carter Page wasn’t found to be a Russian agent as he is a known FBI asset.

So the law says a search with an invalid warrant is an illegal search. Same for an invalid FISA warrant, that’s illegal spying.

Or will liberals make up a brand new reason to justify the FISA warrant that’s not even in the application?

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

A few salient points:

Page was on US intelligence radar even before he joined the Trump campaign;

Issuance of a FISA in no way implies guilt, just suspicion (which Page had provided in abundance);

Public pronouncements from intel agencies have been few center upon the idea that Carter was being "cultivated" by Russia, not that he was a spy or foreign agent;

This may be the case, which would be why he has not (yet) been charged;

Not having been charged, there is nothing for Carter to deny;

The whole point of releasing the FISA has nothing to do with Carter's guilt or innocency anyway - it is because the GOP and Trump are trying to scapegoat intel services;

The FISA documents show that it was issued properly and was not any attempt to "spy" on Trump's campaign;

If intel services had wanted to spy on Trump's campaign, they certainly had better choices (Jr., Kushner, Stone, Brannon) than Carter.

So the whole idea falls flat on its face. Whatever happens to Carter happens, but intal agencies did nothing improper. (Or would you prefer that those suspected of falling under the influence of foreign powers - say, Islamic ones - be ignored and left to their ways?)

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Carter Page has never even been indicted for this? So it means that reason for the spying was false

No.

therefore it’s illegsl spying.

No.

The fact that spying happened is no longer even in question.

No.

So all is left is Carter Page. As FISA warrants have the highest level of proof required can’t use unverified or speculative evidence.

Yes.

So Page MUST be a Russian agent as the application says or its a false warrant.

No.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

Wasn’t justified as the provided information to get the surveillance was false.

No.

So the law says a search with an invalid warrant is an illegal search. Same for an invalid FISA warrant, that’s illegal spying.

No.

will liberals make up a brand new reason to justify the FISA warrant that’s not even in the application?

No.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Blacklabel: So basically spying that cannot be justified IS illegsl spying. Pretty simple.

So the FBI illegally spied on Trump and you have evidence proving it. Sucks for you since there's nothing you can do about it. Score one for the Deep State.

The unredacted 412 page document IS the evidence.

Yes, but we made sure that you will never see it. We've consolidated all of the evidence of our conspiracy into the redacted pages of the FBI warrant. All of your theories can be proven there....if only it could be released. Everything about Page and Strzok, Mueller, Rosenstein, Comey, all the made up stuff justifying the witch hunt....everyone and everything. All right there in black and white confirming everything you ever suspected.

Just one more locked door....after a dozen Benghazi hearings, an email investigation, and investigation into the email investigation, an investigation into the investigation of the email investigation...all coming so close but yet so far. We continue to stay one step ahead of you. You break through, we put up another wall.

You will never find direct proof of our brothers and sisters in the Deep State. We cover our tracks too well.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Laguna: The FISA documents show that it was issued properly

Yep, signed off and renewed by Republican appointed judges and the Trump appointed Republican, Rosenstein. (I've been told that party affiliation is evidence of bias.)

10 ( +10 / -0 )

"Republicans must get tough now. An illegal Scam!"

I agree.

Tough on Trump. Tough on the causes of Trump.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

The truth will come out as most of the deep state has either resigned, been fired or is now paid to talk on CNN or MSNBC by now.

Trump has it all, knows it all and can declassify and unredact anything he wants at his leisure.

Thats why Brennan, Clapper, Comey are all over media and social media freaking out. The leftover deep state just trying to stall until the midterms praying Dems will retake the House to prevent the truth from coming out.

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

"Trump has repeatedly criticized U.S. law enforcement agencies that are investigating allegations of Russian meddling in the vote, and he has insisted there was no collusion with members of his campaign. Russia denies any interference."

Did Obama ever challenge the presidents of China and Iran for all their meddling and theft?

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

Didn’t say anything about the Chinese OPM hack in 2014-2015 of 21 million Americans. Maybe because those Americans weren’t Podesta and Hillary?

The person involved wasn’t arrested until Obama was out of office in 2017.

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/opm-data-breach-exposes-obama-false-promise-of-competence-in-government/

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

Well no, I was basing it on the fact that until you just claimed it was the Obama administration that paid for the dossier, no one else ever claimed that, the reason for no one saying so is that nothing has ever come up to indicate that the Obama administration even knew about it, much less paid for it.

Ok, so that’s the Spliff tried narrative, interesting. What other fantasy ideas are the left coming up with? Democrats now believe in Capitalism? Deregulation? Lol

But hey, you said they paid for it, so we just need to take your word at face value, right? AKA, just because 'you said so'?

I never said, I’m not apart of the intelligence committee, I just hear what evidence showed. But I wish I did had that kind of clearance.

You realize your 'argument' in fact kills all your other arguments, right?

No, but I do see how it kills yours. But if you think you’re right and recently, almost always...ok, almost every time, the left has been wrong on virtually everything that involves speculation. The left thinks everyone is wrong as if they didn’t have their grimy mitts in the fake salacious dossier, but they know concretely that the President colluded with the Russians, so if Carter Page is some secret agent, if that were near close to the truth, he wouldn’t be walking around. Adam Spliff would sound the siren, scale the mountain tops and sounded the alarm, that wouldn’t be something he would sit on...EVER!

If you require something above just saying so, yet you never provide anything more than just saying so, you are very clearly stating that your own level of evidence provided is never enough to actually support any argument.*

As I have said, don’t know how many times I provided evidence,but I keep forgetting, the left only take the words of left leaning....so called facts, nothing else, so why bother, I mean, really?

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

Ok, so that’s the Spliff tried narrative, interesting. What other fantasy ideas are the left coming up with?

What a weird 'defense' to me pointing out how you claimed the Obama administration paid for 'the dossier', which had never been claimed by anyone, on any team, until you said it. I'm not coming up with any idea, fantasy or otherwise. I'm pointing out something that, in absence of the existence of any evidence or even a suggestion, appears to have been fantasized by you. Not even your own team has ever made the claim.

I never said, I’m not apart of the intelligence committee, I just hear what evidence showed.

Neither is 'the left' a member of any intelligence committee, we just hear 'what evidenced showed'. So your argument makes no sense. You question why you should believe something just because 'the left' said it, yet you expect 'the left' to believe what you say, just because you said it.

I do see how it kills yours.

Heh, I'm sure you do. After all, in your mind, the Obama administration paid for 'the dossier'. There are apparently a lot of things that you see that no one else sees. Like, not even the conspiracy theorists.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Ah, yes, Black - the "deep state" (paranoiac for "civil servant"): This is what Republican Senator Trew Gowdy had to say to Trump "deep state" appointees such as (but not limited to) Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley:

The president either needs to rely on the people that he has chosen to advise him, or those advisers need to re-evaluate whether or not they can serve in this administration. But the disconnect cannot continue. The evidence is overwhelming and the president needs to say that and act like it.

It is a question for these pros: On one hand, if they leave, they lose their ability to restrain Trump; on the other, if they stay, they're further tarred for all of history.

One thing is true: Not one Trump appointee has come out to defend him in recent weeks. He's increasingly isolated not only in Congress but within his own White House. Blame the "deep state" that he appointed if you'd like a scapegoat; Trump certainly will be doing so soon.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

You know good and well the “deep state” isn’t the Trump appointees. It’s the leftover Obama appointees and the intelligence community heads in 2016 and their underlings.

Oh and Mattis defended Trump, as did Pompeo.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Black, ya gotta keep up with your definitions.

deep state (n): any bureaucracy which attempts to inhibit, stall, or otherwise interfere with orders with which they disagree from a US president of either party.

The followinf would be logical according to your point of view (which would match McConnell's),

supreme court nominee (n): that only made by a Republican president.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Trump is spitting out crazy tweets. We must have gotten to him. :)

6 ( +6 / -0 )

"Trump is spitting out crazy tweets. We must have gotten to him. :)"

Keep your eyes and ears closed tight, Super! Wouldn't want any truth to get in the way here :) Oh my...

Bongino: Russia probe is biggest scam in modern US history

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoWB1C5WyKs

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

It's times like these that remind me of the late, great George Carlin.

"Never argue with an idiot. They will simply drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"

4 ( +4 / -0 )

The indicted leaker from the Intelligence Committee who was sleeping with the NY Times reporter sent her 82 texts per the indictment.

Guess how many pages were in the initial FISA application? 83, with one page blank.

So a NY times reporter has the unredacted IC copy of the FISA warrants and used it to do TV interviews on CNN/MSNBC and write anti-Trump articles, but the American public cant see it?

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Trump said 6 months ago in Twitter that the DNC and FBI had involvement in paying for the dossier.

liberal media laughed about the "conspiracy theory".

What have we learned since then even in the redacted FISA application? That the FBI and Hillary/DNC paid Steele (a foreign national spy) for the information in the dossier.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Everyone already knew that. It was started by Republicans and picked up by Democrats. Your "bombshell" distraction is just a rehash.

I believe the GOP position was that the document relied exclusively on the dossier (lie). They also said it was not disclosed that it was partially funded but Democrats (lie).

Blame Nunes if you want someone to be angry with. He duped you into spreading false information.

Will you fall for it again? I'm thinking...yes.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Yeah it relied on the dossier and a Yahoo news article. Which was sourced from the dossier, despite the FISA warrant saying all 4 times that they felt Steele was not the source of the Yahoo news article (but he was, that is not in dispute anymore)

Actually the Nunes memo has been proven exactly correct. You just choose to spread a different story. Nunes and others have seen it unredacted so they know.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/fisa-warrant-application-supports-nunes-memo

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Trump/Putin in 2020

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Trump is colluding with the American people to MAGA.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

What is there to spy on?? Witch hunt!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

but offered no evidence to support his assertion.

of course he didn’t. He never does. 3000 plus lies and piling them up.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Trump says his campaign was spied upon illegally

he says lots of things...and most of them, like this, are false

4 ( +4 / -0 )

I'm not coming up with any idea, fantasy or otherwise.

Glad to hear it.

I'm pointing out something that, in absence of the existence of any evidence or even a suggestion, appears to have been fantasized by you. Not even your own team has ever made the claim.

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/obama-behind-trump-investigation/

Neither is 'the left' a member of any intelligence committee, we just hear 'what evidenced showed'. So your argument makes no sense. You question why you should believe something just because 'the left' said it, yet you expect 'the left' to believe what you say, just because you said it.

Yeah, uh....well....I respect you guys for trying, I really do, especially my non-American friends.

According to former MI6 British spy Christopher Steele's now infamous dossier on Trump, Page's trip was when the alleged Trump-Russia plan to hack the Democratic National Committee was born.

The only problem is, the Steele dossier has been exposed as a fanciful product of the Clinton campaign and the opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which hired Steele. And the main assertions were based on hearsay from Russian officials, and never validated.

Even so, the FBI and Justice Department used the dossier to apply to the FISA court to tap Page's communications and, as a result, much of the rest of the Trump campaign.

In doing so, the FBI broke its own rules and, worse, the Obama Justice Department withheld the fact from the FISA court that the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee were responsible for the dossier.

Heh, I'm sure you do. After all, in your mind, the Obama administration paid for 'the dossier'. There are apparently a lot of things that you see that no one else sees. Like, not even the conspiracy theorists.

Nothing is in my mind except the illusion that liberals keep trying and like an exploding cigar, they get foiled again and again.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

The FBI said it was including information from a source who, the FBI believed, was looking to discredit Trump. That would be Steele. Their response was that they had gotten credible information in the past from the source and wanted to research the information despite Steele’s position.

They didn’t mention Clinton or any names. They don’t do that in warrant applications. That’s why Trump is referred to as Candidate 1. It’s in line with what the FBI has always done, but right wing propagandists are treating the exclusion of the names as some kind of intentional coverup. Which is a lie.

Page was already on the FBI’s radar long before Steele arrived, going back to an investigation in 2013.

The application was signed off on by 4 Republican judges as well as other Republicans in charge at the DOJ. All Republicans.

They had other evidence on Page, not just the dossier. Focusing exclusively on the dossier is disingenious as it’s one part of the puzzle.

Theres no coverup here. There’s no crime here. There will be no arrests or indictments. That alone should prove that you have no legal case whatsoever.

Just more propaganda by omission and misleading statements from Trump fans. They fall for it every time. Remember the bombshell IG report? The bombshell final email report? The bombshell Benghazi investigation? The bombshell Comey/Strzok testimony? All complete and utter duds which produced enough spin to convince Trump fans that there’s just one more locked door to open where all of their made up speculation is confirmed.

Still waiting.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Yet Page has not been indicted, so what happened to all this evidence? The other evidence was newspaper articles that were based on the dossier.

They had other evidence on Page, not just the dossier. Focusing exclusively on the dossier is disingenious as it’s one part of the puzzle.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Yep sure Donny all your loon base supporters believe you...

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Yet Page has not been indicted

That’s correct. And Trump parted with him anyway.

so what happened to all this evidence?

What do you mean what happened? They had evidence, they got a warrant, they investigated, the didn’t find reason to bring charges. It happens. Just ask Clinton.

The other evidence was newspaper articles that were based on the dossier.

Nope. You are reading sources that are intentionally omitting information and misleading you, That’s why you are 100% convinced there is a coverup yet you have no arrests, no indictments, and Rosenstein, the supposed ringleader, still has a job? Makes no sense whatsoever.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Just more propaganda by omission and misleading statements from Trump fans. They fall for it every time. Remember the bombshell IG report? The bombshell final email report? The bombshell Benghazi investigation? The bombshell Comey/Strzok testimony? All complete and utter duds which produced enough spin to convince Trump fans that there’s just one more locked door to open where all of their made up speculation is confirmed.

The problem is that they've worked themselves up into such a frenzy, that when it turns out that the frenzy was over something that didn't turn out to be true, they need to come up with a different excuse: "The deep state"

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The document states Source #1, which is Steele (and his dossier). Strangely I don’t see any Source #2 or Source #3?

Yeah they spied on Page for a year, yet can’t indict him? Means the initial allegation that he was a foreign agent was obviously false.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Coney said the dossier was not a “critical part” of the FISA application. So what was the critical part?

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Yeah they spied on Page for a year, yet can’t indict him? Means the initial allegation that he was a foreign agent was obviously false.

When are you going to realize that coming to a conclusion with a minimal number of facts is an easy way to look silly for not knowing what you're talking about.

A) How do you know they can't indict him, and he hasn't been indicted for other reasons?

B) How do you know that of the infinite number of possible reasons other than the one you gave, yours is the correct answer?

You guys need to stop manufacturing outrage simply because you don't know something, and are too lazy to go find out about it. 99% of your arguments are 'What about A? Therefore B', where B is not supported by A, and half the time A isn't even what you say it is.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Coney said the dossier was not a “critical part” of the FISA application. So what was the critical part?

Why don't you try to find out the answers to your questions, instead of creating mock outrage since you don't know the answer.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Yep, obviously false. Just like all of your information about Clinton. No charges = false evidence.

So why hasn’t Trump exposed and fired the ringleader, Rosenstein? Still sticking with, “no need to” right after you’ve convinced the world you figured it all out?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

I know the answer.

The dossier (and media articles about it) WAS the critical part. and Comey and others lied and used that to falsely accuse Page of being a foreign agent to spy on Trump campaign long after Page was gone.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Uh no, the evidence against Clinton was real. There were classified emails found in her private emails. An illegal email address and server existed. The evidence was not false.

Comey changed the wording on the document from a criminal offense to a non criminal one. Focused on lack of intent when intent is not part of the law. All of this information is readily available in the public.

But Hillary is irrelevant, right?

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

COMEY: You know, that's not my recollection, Brett, and I don't know that the FISA application's been released. My recollection was, it was part of a broader mosaic of facts that were laid before the FISA judge to obtain a FISA warrant.

BAIER: There was a lot more than the dossier and the FISA application?

COMEY: My recollection was, there was a significant amount of additional material about Page and why there was probable cause to believe he was an agent of a foreign power, and the dossier was part of that but was not all of it or a critical part of it, to my recollection.

So where is this “broader mosaic of facts” in the FISA application? They never thought it would be released so felt safe to lie about the contents. Oops! Anyway the media has deflected and moved on so we should too, right?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

"I've never been an agent of a foreign power by any stretch of the imagination," Page told CNN. "I've never been anywhere near what's being described here."

An agent or a spy is highly unlikely to admit it.

The assets are doing a fine job, great people.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

They didn’t mention Clinton or any names. They don’t do that in warrant applications. That’s why Trump is referred to as Candidate

Well, it’s not Kermit the frog.

It’s in line with what the FBI has always done, but right wing propagandists are treating the exclusion of the names as some kind of intentional coverup. Which is a lie.

Yeah, as if how the FBI has been conducting themselves is anything but honest and buy the book, don’t even go there.

Page was already on the FBI’s radar long before Steele arrived, going back to an investigation in 2013.

Yes and so far nothing. If Page were some kind of agent, Spliff would have leaked it and ran with it to the mountain top. So much for that claim.

The application was signed off on by 4 Republican judges as well as other Republicans in charge at the DOJ. All Republicans.

As if party affiliation resolves anything. Like the band the Clash, two members were Jewish, the other two Christian, but they all had something in common, they were all musicians.

They had other evidence on Page, not just the dossier. Focusing exclusively on the dossier is disingenious as it’s one part of the puzzle. 

Unverified and salacious, dirty and unreliable and?

Theres no coverup here. There’s no crime here. There will be no arrests or indictments. That alone should prove that you have no legal case whatsoever.

There was coverup there was a crime and still the corrupt players have a job and funny how Tony Podesta who was charged with the EXACT same crime as Manafort, failing to file the FRA. Podesta Group told the Justice Department that it failed to file legally required disclosures of White House advocacy on behalf of India.

The Podesta Group did not file under FARA during any of the years when it lobbied both Congress and the executive branch, according to the Justice Department website. And yet Manafort gets charged and Podesta gets immunity for the same crime, interesting.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/11/05/tony-podesta-lobbied-for-russias-uranium-one-and-did-not-file-as-a-foreign-agent/

Just more propaganda by omission and misleading statements from Trump fans. They fall for it every time. Remember the bombshell IG report? The bombshell final email report? The bombshell Benghazi investigation? The bombshell Comey/Strzok testimony?

Oh, stop! The Dems have been shady, dishonest and have been trying their best to oust this President unsuccessfully might I add, even with the help by blundering misfits by opportunist rogue dirty cops like Brennan, Klapper, Comey, McCabe, Rosenstein and that smug Strzok still with all the tools at their disposal they still keep failing.

All complete and utter duds which produced enough spin to convince Trump fans that there’s just one more locked door to open where all of their made up speculation is confirmed.

Yeah, the left wishes that, another exploding cigar. Lol

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

The dossier (and media articles about it) WAS the critical part. and Comey and others lied and used that to falsely accuse Page of being a foreign agent to spy on Trump campaign long after Page was gone.

Ok, so do you have anything that is actually based in reality and can be proven with facts? Because I'm suspecting the above is a rant that isn't actually based in reality, and has no proof to back it up.

Remember kids, a question is not an argument.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Ok, so do you have anything that is actually based in reality and can be proven with facts?

The release of the FISA Warren, thr IG report, John Podesta wikileaks mails, the heavy redaction the Democrats vehemently and consistently oppose, (especially for a party that claims innocence) Strzok’s mails, Lisa Page’s mails, Comey’s lies and testimony, McCabe’s lies and testimony.

Denying that would be like denying that Trump loves gold.

Remember kids, a question is not an argument.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

You havent forgotten the IG is doing a report about FISA abuse right now have you?

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

The IG gets the unredacted copy. Some in Congress have also read the unredacted version and are asking for declassification of 21 specific pages. So I wouldn’t be so sure that nothing illegal happened.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

You havent forgotten the IG is doing a report about FISA abuse right now have you?

The left know they’re in a box, it’s a Porky pig moment for them. Lol

Bad News. Oh, my....

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/midterm-election-poll-shows-democrats-republicans-close-generic-ballot/

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

So I wouldn’t be so sure that nothing illegal happened.

Bingo!

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

The dossier (and media articles about it) WAS the critical part. and Comey and others lied and used that to falsely accuse Page of being a foreign agent to spy on Trump campaign long after Page was gone.

And Rosenstein, too. Don’t forget about him.

no, the evidence against Clinton was real

No charges = false evidence. Just like Page.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@bass you sound like your losing it there dude..need to chill out maybe get over the left thing...for someone who doesn't care what msm has to say about Trump you sure do spend alot of time defending the man..

2 ( +2 / -0 )

No charges = false evidence. Just like Page.

He may get stuck in a logic loop on that one. Trying to argue that no charges means absolute innocence with Page, while no charges means absolute guilt with Hillary... How does one rectify the fact that these two conclusions are polar opposite conclusions, when outrage needs to be manufactured?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Stranger, we are talking to a guy who believes the DNC email hack was an inside job by Seth Rich, who was then murdered by Democrats with the support of the Baltimore Police Dept and the FBI.

He can convince himself of anything.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Bass: the left and their dirty cop brigade have left a pile of crumbs

Im not seeing any charges brought against anyone on the left, while those in Trump's circle are preparing for prison time.

Why is that?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

you sound like your losing it there dude..

No, I’m not a liberal, so I’m good.

need to chill out maybe get over the left thing...

I think it’s more like, you guys need to get over the right seriously.

for someone who doesn't care what msm has to say about Trump you sure do spend alot of time defending the man..

I comment just like you and your personal comments are more in attacking the men, therefore, I’m allowed to support the man. I’m not a lemming and I don’t have to follow the liberal narrative in dog piling, I will be harsh on the president when I think there is good enough reason to be harsh on him, which I have done.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Im not seeing any charges brought against anyone on the left, while those in Trump's circle are preparing for prison time.

Why is that?

Corruption runs high on the left, what can I say? When you have John podesta and Paul Manafort being convicted on exactly the same charges, but because Manafort worked for Trump Podesta gets an immunity free out of jail card? Again, liberals can sit there and petal that crap all day, the evidence says otherwise. Either way, Trump will be able to pardon all of them anyway, so it doesn’t really matter.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

"Im not seeing any charges brought against anyone on the left, while those in Trump's circle are preparing for prison time. Why is that?"

Never heard of the Deep State, Super? When you see a felon like Hillary Clinton who has jeopardized national security still free, you know the Deep State exists.

Oh my!

'She Has Gone INSANE' - Tucker Carlson Mocks Hillary Clinton After Her Speech

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=getD3AwYcVA

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

bass: Again, liberals can sit there and petal that crap all day, the evidence says otherwise.

The evidence is pointing to a lot of Trump's people going to jail. That's what the evidence is as far as the rule of law is concerned. Why no Democrats being sent to jail?

Serrano: Never heard of the Deep State, Super?

Yes, it's the made up thing Trump fans use to explain things they have no evidence for. But Deep State isn't a judge or a lawyer so "Deep State" isn't preventing people from being arrested or convicted.

Maybe you're being duped? Nah, it's probably not that. Just....maybe they just haven't gotten around to arresting anyone on the left. They'll do it after lunch.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Don't the American people recognize an unhinged, self-serving PSYCHO when they see one?! Oh wait -- come to think of it, maybe they don't.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Serrano: Clinton, Comey, Rosenstein, and all the rest should be rounded up to face charges.

Nah. Only your guys are going to jail. Those three will be fine.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Are there folks on the right that have done some shady things? Oh, I'm sure. But anyone who thinks the entire left are a bunch of saints guilty of nothing is delusional.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Republicans put Democrats on trial in the media, then wonder why the police aren't hauling them into court.

Democrats put Republicans behind bars based on the rule in law via our legal system.

The only real option for you would be to have the Fox News Opinion section count as real evidence in court. But as long as it's just hot air, no one will be going to jail.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Um, OK. Republicans are going to jail but they are all innocent. Democrats are guilty but aren't going to jail because of corruption on our justice system.

I'm willing to go along with that.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Ok, so he’ll pardon them later and?

I don't get this comment. Are you suggesting they shouldn't be charged because they'll end up being let off? Or do you mean that anything wrong they've done is ok, because they can be pardoned by it. What exactly is the point you're trying to make with this statement that has a question mark appended to it?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Um, OK. Republicans are going to jail but they are all innocent. Democrats are guilty but aren't going to jail because of corruption on our justice system.

The reason you have having troubles understanding what they are saying is a problem of dialect. You are speaking in the 'logical' dialect', and they are speaking in the 'partisan' dialect. This is resulting in a difficulty of communication, as they essentially are speaking another language, and do not have the capacity to understand the 'logic' dialect.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Um, OK. Republicans are going to jail but they are all innocent.

As if Mueller and his henchmen are the epitome of truth, integrity and honesty. But yeah, Trump can pardon them if he wants and I hope he does.

Democrats are guilty but aren't going to jail because of corruption on our justice system.

I'm willing to go along with that.

Bingo!

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

When your people are going to jail and nothing is happening to the other side and all you have is media accounts and the words of a known liar and proven scammer, maybe, just maybe, you are being duped.

As if Mueller and his henchmen

Dont forget about Rosenstein. You guys always seem to forget him. He’s the mysterious final piece to your conspiracy puzzle that just doesn’t seem to fit in place.

Unless you just make stuff up.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I don't get this comment. Are you suggesting they shouldn't be charged because they'll end up being let off?

No, I’m just saying this dog and pony show and overreach the Dems try to ultilize to their political advantage, it’s just great to know the President has the power in the end to equal stick it Mueller.

Or do you mean that anything wrong they've done is ok, because they can be pardoned by it.

Tony Podesta gets charged with the exact same crime as Manafort and yet, he gets immunity? So Yes, I’m happy that Trump will be able to pardon these people, Mueller wants to send a message and Trump will as well and the best part is, the left can’t do Jack about it.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Yep Comey testified he wasn’t aware that Hillary paid the dossier. Yet he signed the FISA application that liberals tell me clearly told the judge that Hillary paid for it.

so either Comey lied (again) or it wasn’t as clear as you claim. It should have directly said “candidate 2” paid for it, but they tried to hide it in vagueness.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Bass/Black,

Trump now saying the sun rising in the West. Let us know when you have adjusted your 'thinking' to this reality!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Yep Comey testified he wasn’t aware that Hillary paid the dossier. Yet he signed the FISA application that liberals tell me clearly told the judge that Hillary paid for it. 

No

so either Comey lied 

No.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

yes, Comey signed the FISA warrant.

Yes, Comey said he doesn’t know that Hillary paid:

https://thefederalist.com/2018/07/24/james-comeys-words-suggest-fbi-doj-hid-dossiers-funding-fisa-judge/

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/385112-comey-asserts-republicans-first-paid-for-steele-dossier

so how can the application he signed clearly state who paid if he still doesn’t know?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

And again you’re asking questions without bothering to find out the answers, and trying to manufacture outrage based on your lack of knowledge.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I’m not asking questions I’m stating facts backed up with evidence. Nothing I said was a question.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Nothing I said was a question.

Um...

so how can the application he signed clearly state who paid if he still doesn’t know?

You realize that was just one post back.

I’m stating facts

No. You don't think we've seen through you guys after years of going on about how Hillary was guilty and that the facts proved so, even though none of your committees ever found fault with her, through out like 67 investigations?

Sorry, we know you guys like to call stuff you've made up 'facts', but facts do not change based on partisanship.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Black label wrote:

so how can the application he signed clearly state who paid if he still doesn’t know?

Strangerland wrote:

And again you’re asking questions without bothering to find out the answers, and trying to manufacture outrage based on your lack of knowledge.

Blacklabel wrote:

I’m not asking questions I’m stating facts backed up with evidence. Nothing I said was a question.

Lol! Is Dump the only person who can't keep their lies straight? Or is his supporters also in the early stages of dementia?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Let me use short statements of fact.

James Comey signed the FISA warrant.

Liberals claim the FISA warrant clearly states that Hillary paid for the dossier.

James Comey claims he doesn’t know for sure who paid for the dossier.

All of these statements are affirmative, so from that I can deduct that either (a) the dossier doesn’t say clearly Hillary paid for it or (b) Comey is lying. Take your pick as both a and b cannot be true.

It’s ok, I know all our liberals want to move on from this inconvenient topic and are just waiting for “trump tapes” hitjob article to be posted soon.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

so from that I can deduct that either (a) the dossier doesn’t say clearly Hillary paid for it or (b) Comey is lying.

Not logically you can't. I can't believe after all this time, that you people haven't figured out that it's usually (c), something you haven't thought of, or don't want to, since it means you were wrong about their only being options (a) and (b).

Take your pick as both a and b cannot be true.

And yet both (a) and (b) can be false.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

So please provide a (c) and a (d) then to show what I haven’t thought about and don’t want to think about.

Your articulate “no” responses to allproven facts such as Comey signing the FISA warrant don’t help much in moving forward.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

James Comey signed the FISA warrant.

Bingo!

Liberals claim the FISA warrant clearly states that Hillary paid for the dossier.

James Comey claims he doesn’t know for sure who paid for the dossier.

Comey Lied under oath and taking his word on anything would be as pathetically appalling to even conteme

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

So please provide a (c) and a (d) then to show what I haven’t thought about and don’t want to think about.

Sorry, I've played that game with you too many times. You just come back and whine about how I've used words to prove you wrong.

Let's examine this though. You're claiming that there are only option (a) and (b). No other options. Then you expect me to justify your inflexibility and inability to consider what options (c), (d), (e), (f)... (infinity) may be. Why would I want to play into that game. I'd rather point out how illogical it is to only think there are options (a) or (b), and no other possibilities. You're trying to adjust the frame of logic for me to prove you're incorrect by only providing options (a) and (b), but by only providing options (a) or (b), it invalidates the argument itself, as by definition it is an illogical stance.

So no, I'm not going to provide options (c) and (d), because even someone who knows everything there is to know, may find out afterwards that they didn't have the piece of information that would allow them to have known what (c) an (d) were when making the argument.

To sum this all up, I'm going to repeat myself:

it's usually (c), something you haven't thought of, or don't want to, since it means you were wrong about their only being options (a) and (b).

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Comey Lied under oath

No.

taking his word on anything would be as pathetically appalling to even conteme

No.

Although maybe your sentence was cut off because you actually did contemplate it, and realized how silly your 'logic' was.

But I doubt it.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Hillary paid for the dossier.

was this a crime?

When you see a felon like Hillary Clinton

What's Trump waiting for? If Trump doesn't arrest President Hillary that means Trump is a joke of a president and shows his failures like his Muslim ban. No President Hillary arrest = Trump's (another) big failure (out of many many).

1 ( +1 / -0 )

No.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/03/18/turley_comey_may_have_lied_to_congress_under_oath_leaking_mccabe_firing_hurts_case.html

I'll trust one of the most prominent law professor in the country over any network or pundit.

No.

And yet, he had to lawyer up. Opps, wonder when Brennan will get his lawyer, maybe already has one/

Although maybe your sentence was cut off because you actually did contemplate it, and realized how silly your 'logic' was.

But I doubt it.

That the liberals keep trying to indoctrinate to the masses and passing it as somewhat facts? Good luck with that, Lol

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Comey Lied under oath

Then he should be in jail. What is Trump waiting for. He is weak and he is a failure for not jailing his political enemies who have lied under oath. Trump is the true failure.

I'll trust one of the most prominent law professor in the country over any network or pundit.

Fine, he said Comey lied under oath. Why isn't he in jail now? If that is so then this professor is a real quack. No Comey arrest = this professor is a quack and Trump is a complete failure.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/03/18/turley_comey_may_have_lied_to_congress_under_oath_leaking_mccabe_firing_hurts_case.html

Jonathan Turley is a quack. If he says that Comey perjured himself under Federal law that would be a prison sentence up to five years in Federal prison. Yet, Comey runs free. Either Professor Turley is a quack, Trump is weak, or both. Comey remains free.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I don’t know. But I know if Trump had paid for it, it definitely would be.

was this a crime?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I don’t know. But I know if Trump had paid for it, it definitely would be.

And if Hillary hadn't done it, you guys would claim she did until the end of all time.

Let's leave out the partisan 'pretending what the person may have done' argument, since you cannot logically prove what would or wouldn't have happened, and therefore it suits no purpose other than to give yourself a bit of a rush at having made a cut against what you are pretending the other side would have done evilly.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I don’t know.

I hear about all these felonies and murder, as well as child porn Pizza Gate by President Hillary. But she is not under arrest. What's going on? Then we have a quack of a legal professor Jonathan Turley who says Comey perjured himself under Federal authority. But no arrest. It's OK, Trump followers hate these people. But why keep saying they are criminals if there is no arrest. We are dealing with quacks and weak people on the right.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

because both of the professor said so

They are quacks. They both said that Comey and President Hillary have committed crimes and I don't see either of them in jail. Also Trump accused Obama of tapping his phones and Obama is free. Proof:

Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower

(Trump Tweet)

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Its sad how many people here believe that there are politicians on either side who aren't criminals.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

How many minutes has it been since Trump's last lie???

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I never spied him even I Had a chance and I don't care about his Twitting BS comments!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

David VarnesJuly 23 07:07 am JST

I agree with you all the way. I too a military vet - US Navy, and this little Caligula is just WAH WAH WAH (in Navy jargon). If he was legit in any way or in anything he does he wouldn't be so egotistical and paranoid all the time. It's a lot like 'Macbeth', we read it in HS English class and I can see that Shakespeare was right on the money in his plays (take away the witches, fairies, hocus-pocus pow jive, that is). Also coming to mind is 'Titus Andronicus'. I saw a production of that featuring actors dressed as modern skinhead bikers dressed in leather. The ideas behind these plays are so true to life - like now.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Alexandre T. IshiiJuly 27 08:15 pm JSTI never spied him even I Had a chance and I don't care about his Twitting BS comments!

And you don't need to spy on him to know about his boasting about groping and abusing women. His sick remarks and actions and such concerning him and his daughter also paints the picture too. No 'spying' needed here, he's blubbering all this stuff openly himself. And his surrender summit last week, and his constant kissy-up to Putin - no spying needed here. He's making everything very open, clear and explicit and obvious to all - in living color.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites