Random Political comments...

1. June 2016: FISA request. The Obama administration files a request with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) to monitor communications involving Donald Trump and several advisers. The request, uncharacteristically, is denied.

2. July: Russia joke. Wikileaks releases emails from the Democratic National Committee that show an effort to prevent Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) from winning the presidential nomination. In a press conference, Donald Trump refers to Hillary Clinton’s own missing emails, joking: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing.” That remark becomes the basis for accusations by Clinton and the media that Trump invited further hacking.

3. October: Podesta emails. In October, Wikileaks releases the emails of Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, rolling out batches every day until the election, creating new mini-scandals. The Clinton campaign blames Trump and the Russians.

4. October: FISA request. The Obama administration submits a new, narrow request to the FISA court, now focused on a computer server in Trump Tower suspected of links to Russian banks. No evidence is found — but the wiretaps continue, ostensibly for national security reasons, Andrew McCarthy at National Review later notes. The Obama administration is now monitoring an opposing presidential campaign using the high-tech surveillance powers of the federal intelligence services.

5. January 2017: Buzzfeed/CNN dossier. Buzzfeed releases, and CNN reports, a supposed intelligence “dossier” compiled by a foreign former spy. It purports to show continuous contact between Russia and the Trump campaign, and says that the Russians have compromising information about Trump. None of the allegations can be verified and some are proven false. Several media outlets claim that they had been aware of the dossier for months and that it had been circulating in Washington.

*6. January: Obama expands NSA sharing. As Michael Walsh later notes, and as the New York Times reports, the outgoing Obama administration “expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.” The new powers, and reduced protections, could make it easier for intelligence on private citizens to be circulated improperly or leaked.

7. January: Times report. The New York Times reports, on the eve of Inauguration Day, that several agencies — the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Treasury Department are monitoring several associates of the Trump campaign suspected of Russian ties. Other news outlets also report the exisentence of “a multiagency working group to coordinate investigations across the government,” though it is unclear how they found out, since the investigations would have been secret and involved classified information.

8. February: Mike Flynn scandal. Reports emerge that the FBI intercepted a conversation in 2016 between future National Security Adviser Michael Flynn — then a private citizen — and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The intercept supposedly was part of routine spying on the ambassador, not monitoring of the Trump campaign. The FBI transcripts reportedly show the two discussing Obama’s newly-imposed sanctions on Russia, though Flynn earlier denied discussing them. Sally Yates, whom Trump would later fire as acting Attorney General for insubordination, is involved in the investigation. In the end, Flynn resigns over having misled Vice President Mike Pence (perhaps inadvertently) about the content of the conversation.

9. February: Times claims extensive Russian contacts. The New York Times cites “four current and former American officials” in reporting that the Trump campaign had “repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials. The Trump campaign denies the claims — and the Times admits that there is “no evidence” of coordination between the campaign and the Russians. The White House and some congressional Republicans begin to raise questions about illegal intelligence leaks.

10. March: the Washington Post targets Jeff Sessions. The Washington Post reports that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had contact twice with the Russian ambassador during the campaign — once at a Heritage Foundation event and once at a meeting in Sessions’s Senate office. The Post suggests that the two meetings contradict Sessions’s testimony at his confirmation hearings that he had no contacts with the Russians, though in context (not presented by the Post) it was clear he meant in his capacity as a campaign surrogate, and that he was responding to claims in the “dossier” of ongoing contacts. The New York Times, in covering the story, adds that the Obama White House “rushed to preserve” intelligence related to alleged Russian links with the Trump campaign. By “preserve” it really means “disseminate”: officials spread evidence throughout other government agencies “to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators” and perhaps the media as well.

In summary: the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.

*N.S.A. Gets More Latitude to Share Intercepted Communications

By CHARLIE SAVAGE
JANUARY 12, 2017
The New York Times

WASHINGTON — In its final days, the Obama administration has expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections

The new rules significantly relax longstanding limits on what the N.S.A. may do with the information gathered by its most powerful surveillance operations, which are largely unregulated by American wiretapping laws. These include collecting satellite transmissions, phone calls and emails that cross network switches abroad, and messages between people abroad that cross domestic network switches.

The change means that far more officials will be searching through raw data. Essentially, the government is reducing the risk that the N.S.A. will fail to recognize that a piece of information would be valuable to another agency, but increasing the risk that officials will see private information about innocent people.

LINK:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/01/...tude-to-share-intercepted-communications.html

 

That's the thing Ryan isn't status quo. He didn't want that job and when he dared to act like a father... You had all of these old timers angry that he wanted time off for his kids. He is a young guy. Trump has been playing with politics longer. He hired all of these people who have been playing the game as long. 60 something and up ... basically the problem with this country . They want crap the old way and we aren't going back!

 

Unfortunately, Paul Ryan, Richard Burr, and Mark Warner all disagree with you about the existence of evidence:

The important part of this article:

Others, including Republicans, are also skeptical:

 

Hey been meaning to ask you how's medical school fam?

 

Have to agree. The gap is largely due to choices in jobs. Men more likely take dangerous jobs that pay more like logging, crab fishing, ice trucking, oil drilling.
Women usually take lower paying jobs like nursery school teaching or other caregiver position. It's rare to find the girl who goes for a job in ice trucking

 

Yep. He's a useful idiot who is becoming less useful, especially in light of the GOP's current healthcare debacle. His campaign promises painted the entire party into a corner and now they can't get out.

 

Ok Bliss, since you posted information from a VERY open right winger, Mark Levin, here is another view of the same information from a different source.

When President Donald Trump tweeted on March 4 that former President Barack Obama ordered a wiretap on his phones during the election, he didn’t turn to the federal intelligence agencies for proof.

Instead, he says he got it straight from the "failing" New York Times.

In a March 15 interview, Fox News host Tucker Carlson asked Trump why he didn’t ask the agencies about any possible surveillance on him or his campaign before tweeting about it, given that the White House appears to have no evidence to backup his claims.

"Well, because the New York Times wrote about it," Trump replied. "Not that I respect the New York Times. I call it the ‘failing’ New York Times. But they did write on Jan. 20, using the word ‘wiretap.’ "

The New York Times report does use the word "wiretap;" the print headline was "Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides." It doesn’t appear that Trump read the article closely, however, because it does not say Obama personally ordered a tap on his phones during the election, as Trump claimed in his tweet.


The New York Times article is about intercepted communications used by the FBI amid its investigation into some of Trump’s current and former aides — including Roger Stone, Carter Page and Paul Manafort — and their ties to Russia. It does not say whether the surveillance targeted Russians or Americans.

Nor does it say Trump and his campaign were under investigation or surveillance. In fact, the author stipulates: "It is not clear whether the intercepted communications had anything to do with Mr. Trump’s campaign, or Mr. Trump himself."

The difference between the substance of the New York Times article and what Trump claimed in his tweet is significant, because Trump’s tweet alleges Obama possibly acted outside the law to harm a political opponent, whereas the New York Times described aspects of an FBI investigation.

A president cannot unilaterally order surveillance on an American citizen. The FBI would have to obtain a warrant from a judge first, and to do that, investigators would need to have a suspicion based in evidence that Trump might have committed a crime.

As president, Trump could find out whether a court ever issued such a warrant. Congress has asked FBI Director James Comey for any evidence that a warrant was requested, issued or denied.

In his interview with Carlson, Trump also mentioned a Fox News segment with host Bret Baier as a source. However, that segment — and a few more news articles the White House has provided as evidence — discusses unproven allegations that the FBI requested warrants to surveil Trump associates. It does not back up Trump’s accusation that Obama personally ordered a wiretap on Trump for political sabotage.

Our ruling

Trump said "the New York Times wrote about" Obama wiretapping him during the election.

The New York Times article Trump references says the FBI has used intercepted communications in its investigation of several Trump associates and their ties to Russia. It does not say Obama ordered this surveillance, nor does it say Trump’s own phones were tapped or that he was under surveillance in any way.

Trump took an article about legitimate intelligence investigations and completely distorted it. We rate his claim False.

'
Share The Facts
Donald Trump
President


Says "the New York Times wrote about" Barack Obama wiretapping Donald Trump during the election.
in an interview with Fox's Tucker Carlson – Wednesday, March 15, 2017

• Share
• Read More

 

Question to all of my Christians who voted for Trump; how can you square yourselves with cutting out the Meals On Wheels program?
Seriously. I'm not trying to debate anyone on this. I won't even answer back if you choose to post a reply. I just legitimately want to know how do you feel about Trump doing this? Is this a moral problem for you or a compromise for the greater good?

 

Because Samson, they're not "cutting out" the Meals on Wheels program. Its classic lazy reporting you're re-spouting..

Please I implore you, if you're going to be a die-hard liberal at least understand that they're going to lie to you so you never stray.

Understand, It was too tempting a headline for the vindictive MSM and their lazy following reporters to run with it without checking.
They don't want you to know the truth - which is, no Meals on Wheels recipient is going to go hungry.

In fact, Meals on Wheels America, the largest of the 5000 Meals on Wheels organizations, came out today and said (paraphrasing) that
they receive 1- 3% of funding from the Block program- and the majority of their funding , 34% - comes from a different Goverment program that has had NOTHING cut and it is not going to be cut. The rest of their funding comes from private/philanthropic donations.

So then, the Block program which HUD oversees us what was cut back.
Now ask, why was it?
Because it's rife with pork barrel spending and waste.

But why didn't you hear that?

Because in those fine lines of where the enormous funds are allocated, is the one that provides 1-3% towards Meals on Wheels.

Now , what do you think your NSM focused on? Was it on the major recipients who are not showing progress and riddled with fiscal abuses..oorrr that one M.O.W line...? The answer is the one you repeated here.. and as such, questioned the morality of Christians.

** Here is a balanced explanation of the cuts, as well as M.O.W's statement today.at the bottom of the page..

www.google.com/amp/reason.com/blog/2017/03/16/seniors-wont-starve-if-meals-on-wheels-l/amp

 

"Word" Semantics.. deems it false??Only on Planet Liberal.

I suppose it's boiled down to Right and Left interpretations and the truth has been buried under it. We shall see..

 

Is Loki a liberal on planet Bliss?

 

Well, since Loki said something bad about Trump...yes lol. Yes he is.

 

I think she was referring to Politifact as liberal, not me, Bliss is on record as believing Politifact is a left leaning, biased, fact checker.

 

As usual, both sides have their "spin", it is VERY interesting to see Paul Ryan come out and clearly state that there is no evidence of Obama administration tapping Trump...

Senate Intelligence Committee chair Richard Burr and ranking member Mark Warner issued a statement earlier 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."

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

 

This guy must be a card-carrying citizen of Planet Liberal, too:

The Latest: Republican says Trump should apologize to Obama

Do you know how full of shit you have to be when a Republican from Oklahoma says that you owe Barack Obama an apology?

 

LOL. Bliss you are so hardcore.
Free your mind woman, The truth is the truth and has no ideology.

Trump has a 'feeling' that he's been under government surveillance, but when you're the POTUS you have a a responsibility to NOT make unsubstantiated claims without PROOF.
Even DAs and cops know they need to make a case and present evidence in order to convict a potential criminal suspect.

Trump most of all needs message discipline and not to go on twitter and post the latest thought crime he was running through his head.