Reply With Quote
The article is trying to spin the spying as being about inside campaign information, that was never the spying accusation. The spying accusation was that informants and undercover agents were sent at the Trump campaign.
So then you agree using informants and undercover agents to elicit such information would be “spying”.
The article is trying to spin the spying as being about inside campaign information, that was never the spying accusation. The spying accusation was that informants and undercover agents were sent at the Trump campaign.
Wanna know what was legal? The FISA warrant
Are you so dense you don’t understand the difference between inside campaign information and eliciting information from Mr. Page and Mr. Papadopoulos about their ties to Russia?
nobody doubts they were looking into ties to russia. that was the whole point of the investigation
spygate was about it being more than that, and done for political purposes to get info on his campaign.
This is the only Trump claim mentioned I quoted. You ready to eat for having poor reading comprehension?
—————-
“Mr. Trump and his allies have pointed to some of the investigative steps the F.B.I. took as evidence of spying, though they were typical law enforcement activities. For one, agents had an informant, an academic named Stefan A. Halper, meet with Mr. Page and Mr. Papadopoulos while they were affiliated with the campaign. The president decried the revelation as an “all time biggest political scandal” when it emerged last year.
The F.B.I. did have an undercover agent who posed as Mr. Halper’s assistant during a London meeting with Mr. Papadopoulos in August 2016.”
—————-
Trump didn’t claim the bolded dip , the NYT revealed it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/02/u...tor-trump.html
I can see why you were confused though, that was the whole point of the NYT article. So in the end I didn’t lie and you can’t read.
To get info on his campaign?nobody doubts they were looking into ties to russia. that was the whole point of the investigation
spygate was about it being more than that, and done for political purposes to get info on his campaign.
And you can’t even get yourself to type the words spied on his campaign.
djohn2oo8, RandomGuy, and Spurminator all stroll into the thread with their chests puffed out and immediately get slapped.
ok. instead of "looking into" ties to russia, rephrase that to "investigating" ties to russia.To get info on his campaign?
And you can’t even get yourself to type the words spied on his campaign.
and if the wording is that important to you, then by all means, rephrase line 2 to: "spygate was about it being more than that, and done for political purposes to spy on his campaign"
which is something you tried to walk back in this thread.
of course, the word "spy" doesnt have much legal meaning in this context, much like "collusion" (legal term was conspiracy)... its about whether their was inappropriate surveillance
That’s what Horowitz did to your theoriesdjohn2oo8, RandomGuy, and Spurminator all stroll into the thread with their chests puffed out and immediately get slapped.
To get info on his campaign?
And you can’t even get yourself to type the words spied on his campaign.
Yes, genius...
because every agent that asked trump team a question -
got...
lies...
lies...
lies...
more lies...
deflections....
lies x1000
and...
lies!
So the FBI was supposed to stay at home and allow an enemy foreign government to attack our elections, allow trump team traitors to have meetings, receive stolen emails, run an internet disinformation propaganda scheme, coordinate and collude against the USA, and NEVER send anyone inside to INVESTIGATE.
BECAUSE?
because ORANGE MAN HONEST PATRIOT!!!!
Go yourself comrade.
can will be kicked to huber/durham
Once again, you’re falling for the false narrative being presented by the NYT.ok. instead of "looking into" ties to russia, rephrase that to "investigating" ties to russia.
and if the wording is that important to you, then by all means, rephrase line 2 to: "spygate was about it being more than that, and done for political purposes to spy on his campaign"
which is something you tried to walk back in this thread.
of course, the word "spy" doesnt have much legal meaning in this context, much like "collusion" (legal term was conspiracy)... its about whether their was inappropriate surveillance
“Mr. Horowitz found no evidence that Mr. Halper tried to infiltrate the Trump campaign itself, the people familiar with the draft report said, such as by seeking inside campaign information or a role in the organization.”
I’ll simplify it for you, were informants and undercover agents sent at Trump’s campaign? Yes or no.
Horowitz report isn’t even out yet you stupid
You know’s who’s report did come out? Mueller’s and he the all over your theories
Horowitz can’t prosecute anyone and Durham is the one with an open criminal investigation(s) so not sure how that would be kicking the can to him.
gaslighting tbh
I’ll ask you again, were informants and undercover agents sent at Trump’s campaign? Yes or no.
Who do you think you're fooling, liar?djohn2oo8, RandomGuy, and Spurminator all stroll into the thread with their chests puffed out and immediately get slapped.
The article is linked for everyone to read.
TSA thought he could blatantly mistepresent the findings and the article but didn't count on people reading the article.
Or he's just repressing facts he doesn't want to believe, because his self validation hinges on this stuff.
I don't know which is sadder.
changing the allegation tbh
lets just wait for horowitz report to see how they lay it out
Do you not think people can read where you got your pushed in and are now ignoring it like it never happened?
Nothing was changed. You guys are such pussies about admitting when you were wrong
3-4 Major publications have all stated his report will find no wrongdoing by the FBI. None. No bias. Everything legal. Oh and No FISA abuseHorowitz report isn’t even out yet you stupid
You know’s who’s report did come out? Mueller’s and he the all over your theories
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
