Support us on
(now with Euros € and £ Pounds)
Odds and Ends
Olive oil is good for the skin
24 3, 12:27am
You're the one grasping at straws. You talked about Chuck Todd as the "director" without specifying it was him you referred to, so I wrote:
"And I don't even know what "director" you're talking about here, but if it's someone from MSNBC I'm sure they said the same thing journalist always do in these situations; that their discussions with others are confidential and that they can't betray that trust by discussing in any detail what other have said to them."
Now this wasn't a big thing in any way and my answer still stands - I'm sure Chuck Todd said just what I said above.
But desperate to detract from the lack of proof for your pet theory you make a big deal out of it:
"Chuck Todd is a director of MSNBC. You really aren't reading into what you're talking about."
"if you aren't going to do research on what you say, there's no point in talking with you."
To which I simply stated the obvious fact that it isn't my job to guess what you mean when you don't write clearly.
"you're getting way to into the arguing and not enough about understanding"
There is nothing to understand here. You made a claim about "cooperation" between the DNC and media and you haven't been able to provide a shred of evidence of this.
Instead you add new falsehoods.
"Ah, and if you check the news now, you'll see that there was surveillance on Trump during the election. Next time you hear some crazy claim that you insist isn't true, you might want to wait a bit."
Trump claim was that OBAMA had him wiretapped in Trump office - there is NO proof of that. Nor is there any proof of any "surveillance on Trump during the election" now.
What there is evidence of so far is that Trump associates have spoken to Russians who where under surveillance. But that's not surveillance of either Trump or his associates, but of the Russians. But if they call Russians known to the US intelligence agencies as spies, their conversations will of course be recorded as well.
There is still no proof what so ever that any surveillance has been targeted directly at Trump or his associates - and certainly no evidence that any of this has anything to do with Obama, as Trump claimed, at all.
The US intelligence community regularly monitors a lot of foreign agents in the US and any American that comes into contact with them will be recorded as well of course. This is completely routine and has been going on for decades - Obama has nothing to do with this.
Now if there where any - as of yet unknown - surveillance actually directed directly at Trump or his associates - that would be very, very serious indeed.
Because that would show that those individuals activities where enough of a concern for the US intelligence community for them to look closer, directly at them.
Now there is still no proof of this, but according to the Guardian the FBI actually sought a warrant to conduct such directly targeted surveillance against four Trump associates during last summer. That request was denied but there is unverified reports that a later request was granted.
This is still not evidence that any actually surveillance directed at Trump associates or himself has ever happened and certainly no evidence that Obama was involved in any way.
The FBI conducts it's own operations, so if they actually did this and even more so if they obtained a warrant that's really bad news for Trump as that shows that the FBI apparently believes there are issues of national importance in Trump associates contacts with the Russians.
Which in other words means treason.
So - no proof of anything you or the right-wing media claim, but the smoke coming from this whole pile rather seems to indicate that Trump's team are the ones in trouble here.
Which is of course why he and they are desperately trying to direct attention away from that with ridiculously fake claims about irregularities or even illegalities on the Democratic side.