leibowde84
Veteran Member
Why do you think an investigation is even necessary when Trump can simply ask his own intelligence agencies/officials whether the wiretap was ordered by Obama? Obviously, they would have been aware of any wiretap order.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
"Trump falsely accuses Obama of wiretapping his phone"
- Thread starter Jeremiahcp
- Start date
It would be up to Trump to decide how best to proceed.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
He published a false statement that is damaging to a former President's reputation. If it turns out that all officials confirm it is false (many have already), then Obama can sue him for Libel. I would hope that he does, as it would be a way to hold Trump accountable for what he publishes on Twitter.
A claim like this is "ridiculous" if it is not based on anything more than a tabloid article (Breitbart) and a conservative talk show host's rant (Levin), as it is a serious accusation of criminal activity by a sitting President. Doesn't get much more ridiculous than that.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
No, it's up to Congress. They should ask for Trump's evidence that has convinced him completely that Obama ordered an illegal wiretap of his campaign.
They can investigate too, if they so choose.
But I was answering your question about Trump's course.
esmith
Veteran Member
We were still using them in the Navy in 1981(my last year)
Is this article saying what I think it's saying.....That the CIA could have hacked the DNC and Podesta and left "fingerprints" behind that pointed to the Russians? In addition it sounds like one had better go back to the analog method of correspondence (pen and paper), and do not purchase anything that has a receiving microphone hooked up to the interweb if one doesn't want anything or everything recorded. I could really care less what they learn from me; however, I have made certain remarks at the TV that wouldn't bode well.
I'm glad my wrenches aren't internet enabled.
The things a snooper would hear!
esmith
Veteran Member
One does not have to evidence of wrongdoing in order to commence an investigation, only the suspicion of illegal activity. In other words what evidence exist that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians. Under the idea that one needs concrete evidence of wrongdoing to start an investigation, how can the Dem's call for an investigation into the Trump campaign.
Sure anything is possible and apparently tweets can now be a source for investigation.
Well there is the fact that Russians admitted it after the election and people in Russia getting fired for the hacks, just for starters, that is if you don't want to believe our own intelligence agencies.
People don't seem to understand that being tweeted is irrelevant.
It's about whether the charge is made formally.
esmith
Veteran Member
But did the Russians admit they colluded with the Trump campaign? I don't think so, there is only "speculation" that the did. Correct?
leibowde84
Veteran Member
I'm saying that they should require Trump to disclose the evidence he has that convinced him this is a fact, not merely a suspicion. Until that evidence is received, they really have nothing to go off of. Again, the accusation was very specific. It would be a "witch hunt" if they merely were investigating any possible surveillance efforts, legal or not.
With the Russia/Trump issue, there is evidence that Russian officials attempted to illegally influence the US election in favor of Trump. And, no one claimed that it was a "fact" that Trump's administration colluded with the Russians in any specific way. And, we all know that Trump's own surrogates/appointees cast suspicion on themselves by providing false statements regarding meetings with Russian officials.
With Trump's allegations of Obama, Trump stated that it was a "fact", that the wiretaps were ordered by Obama himself, and that they were illegal (not via judicial approval). And, there has been no evidence that his allegation stands muster. Evidence would have to show that Obama ordered illegal wiretaps on the Trump Campaign at Trump Tower in NYC.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
I mean, Wikileaks is not a reliable source at all. They can literally claim whatever they want without providing corroborating evidence or checking with sources (kind of like the Donald).
When they release emails, there is no reason to believe that they don't alter said emails, as they don't wait for confirmation.
As far as I remember they admitted to being in contact with the campaign, yes.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
I don't think this is true. I haven't seen any admission that Russian Officials colluded with the Trump campaign in their election manipulation efforts. If you have seen anything of this sort, can you provide a link?
What I'm most interested in is if trump actually found some tapped phones yelling "damn you Obama".
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Trump did make the charge formally.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
This is not an admission of collusion with the Trump campaign. Russian officials are permitted to contact members of a future administration to begin building relationships. But, that being said, Trump and his surrogates have expressly stated that they did not have meetings with Russian officials during the campaign, which seems to be patently false.