Obama Officials Deny Spying On Trump Campaign As They Simultaneously Admit It

[Darth Omar]

The guy Halper used had a femme fatale drinking with him at the bar who told Papa da Russians had “dirt” on HRClinton in the form of “thousands of emails,”

If they pulled that stunt Halper was no informant.

[Darth Omar]

You mean nothing has been corroborated

The irony is the Dossier was made up lol.

They think the fact none of it has been proven untrue means it’s worth something. They actually think that.

[Darth Omar]

4th option you are a TRumplestilskin and will fight the truth and the obvious facts to the end. Nothing in the Dossier has been refuted at this time, nothing. You are making it up.

Scientology has yet to be refuted lol.

[canceled.2021.1]

As long as you guys do not know Trump admitted he used the term spy because he knew it was emotionally charged and his followers would leap on it., you will show your ignorance and blind belief again. He knows it is an informant and knows the difference. You guys are such suckers.

You keep splitting those hairs about whether it is a "spy" or an "informant". I have asked two questions that you haven't adequately answered. Why? Because you can't because your Democrat Media Industrial Complex hasn't told you what to say yet. But, the questions bear repeating

If as you are repeating from Clapper et al that the FBI was ONLY concerned about Russian involvement in our elections and were ONLY trying to find out what the Russians were doing and predicated it ONLY on the basis of individuals in a campaign having contact with Russians then:

1) Why didn't the FBI just pull individuals from the Trump campaign aside and warn them? Wouldn't that have been the least intrusive method?
2) Why didn't the FBI have an "informant" inside the Clinton campaign? At that point did the FBI really know for sure that the Russians were supposedly working on behalf of Trump? They couldn't have concluded that. And Hillary's people had Russian connections as well

This is really simple; if the Russians were the real target, then it would have made perfect sense to reach out and inform and protect the campaign member in question be letting them know what is going on. Only if a campaign member was the target, would the FBI have kept him in the dark and try to get him to unwittingly implicate himself which is exactly what Halper and Downer did to Papadopolous. That is it in a nutshell. The whole "we were trying to protect Trump" narrative is a big fat whopping lie. They were the target from the get go and their actions prove it.

The whole "spy" vs "informant" is a side show meant to distract from what really is going on and you either know that, or you are an unwitting dupe of the Democrat Media Industrial Complex.


Now, you might ask, why would the FBI lie about Papadopolous being the target when it would have been perfectly legal to make him a target? That is a great question. And if the FBI did have to admit that Papadopolous was the actual target well then the next logical question would be WHY. Why was he a target. Because that would mean that the investigation started BEFORE Halper and Downer engaged Papadopolous which would tear at the thread of the story they have told which was that Downer and Halper's communications with Papadopolous were the precipitating factors leading up to the start of the investigation? Are you following?

The FBI has no choice but to try to play this semantic game because to do anything else would cause all of their lies to collapse. But, it's OK. I don't expect you to see it. You can't because ou are too blinded by TDS. But, trust me. There are people who do see the connections and the clock is ticking and many peoples days are numbered. I predict in this order

McCabe
Brennan
Clapper
Comey

and then eventually it will all lead back to Obama and how ironic would it be if after all of this, it were Obama who were impeached?

[Darth Omar]

You keep splitting those hairs about whether it is a "spy" or an "informant". I have asked two questions that you haven't adequately answered. Why? Because you can't because your Democrat Media Industrial Complex hasn't told you what to say yet. But, the questions bear repeating

If as you are repeating from Clapper et al that the FBI was ONLY concerned about Russian involvement in our elections and were ONLY trying to find out what the Russians were doing and predicated it ONLY on the basis of individuals in a campaign having contact with Russians then:

1) Why didn't the FBI just pull individuals from the Trump campaign aside and warn them? Wouldn't that have been the least intrusive method?
2) Why didn't the FBI have an "informant" inside the Clinton campaign? At that point did the FBI really know for sure that the Russians were supposedly working on behalf of Trump? They couldn't have concluded that. And Hillary's people had Russian connections as well

This is really simple; if the Russians were the real target, then it would have made perfect sense to reach out and inform and protect the campaign member in question be letting them know what is going on. Only if a campaign member was the target, would the FBI have kept him in the dark and try to get him to unwittingly implicate himself which is exactly what Halper and Downer did to Papadopolous. That is it in a nutshell. The whole "we were trying to protect Trump" narrative is a big fat whopping lie. They were the target from the get go and their actions prove it.

The whole "spy" vs "informant" is a side show meant to distract from what really is going on and you either know that, or you are an unwitting dupe of the Democrat Media Industrial Complex.


Now, you might ask, why would the FBI lie about Papadopolous being the target when it would have been perfectly legal to make him a target? That is a great question. And if the FBI did have to admit that Papadopolous was the actual target well then the next logical question would be WHY. Why was he a target. Because that would mean that the investigation started BEFORE Halper and Downer engaged Papadopolous which would tear at the thread of the story they have told which was that Downer and Halper's communications with Papadopolous were the precipitating factors leading up to the start of the investigation? Are you following?

The FBI has no choice but to try to play this semantic game because to do anything else would cause all of their lies to collapse. But, it's OK. I don't expect you to see it. You can't because ou are too blinded by TDS. But, trust me. There are people who do see the connections and the clock is ticking and many peoples days are numbered. I predict in this order

McCabe
Brennan
Clapper
Comey

and then eventually it will all lead back to Obama and how ironic would it be if after all of this, it were Obama who were impeached?

Boom.

I don’t think you can post hoc impeach a president and I actually wouldn’t care if it just stopped at Obama, et al., being implicated and paying the historical price for it. I would like to see Democrats pay a hefty political price it for it though. And I would like to see Democrats media complex brought down and the IC rid of partisan hacks.

All of that would be a great victory for the country.

[canceled.2021.1]

Boom.

I don’t think you can post hoc impeach a president and I actually wouldn’t care if it just stopped at Obama, et al., being implicated and paying the historical price for it. I would like to see Democrats pay a hefty political price it for it though. And I would like to see Democrats media complex brought down and the IC rid of partisan hacks.

All of that would be a great victory for the country.

Actually you can impeach them after they have left. Remember if one is impeached and found guilty, they are removed from office and barred from ever holding office again. It would be the most effective way of dealing with Obama. One could argue that he would also face criminal charges, but he would never see prison. The easiest way is to make sure he could never run for federal office again. That means Supreme Court and be on a cabinet.

So, yes it could happen. Would it? Huge long shot

[Darth Omar]

Actually you can impeach them after they have left. Remember if one is impeached and found guilty, they are removed from office and barred from ever holding office again. It would be the most effective way of dealing with Obama. One could argue that he would also face criminal charges, but he would never see prison. The easiest way is to make sure he could never run for federal office again. That means Supreme Court and be on a cabinet.

So, yes it could happen. Would it? Huge long shot

You’re probably right.

Thing of it is, Obama would be damaged goods, politically.

[canceled.2021.1]

You’re probably right.

Thing of it is, Obama would be damaged goods, politically.

Never underestimate the left

[canceled.2021.1]

Boom.

I don’t think you can post hoc impeach a president and I actually wouldn’t care if it just stopped at Obama, et al., being implicated and paying the historical price for it. I would like to see Democrats pay a hefty political price it for it though. And I would like to see Democrats media complex brought down and the IC rid of partisan hacks.

All of that would be a great victory for the country.

I notice not one liberal commented on my post. Must have confused them or they are waiting for Rachel Maddow to tell them what to think?

[ptif219]

You keep splitting those hairs about whether it is a "spy" or an "informant". I have asked two questions that you haven't adequately answered. Why? Because you can't because your Democrat Media Industrial Complex hasn't told you what to say yet. But, the questions bear repeating

If as you are repeating from Clapper et al that the FBI was ONLY concerned about Russian involvement in our elections and were ONLY trying to find out what the Russians were doing and predicated it ONLY on the basis of individuals in a campaign having contact with Russians then:

1) Why didn't the FBI just pull individuals from the Trump campaign aside and warn them? Wouldn't that have been the least intrusive method?
2) Why didn't the FBI have an "informant" inside the Clinton campaign? At that point did the FBI really know for sure that the Russians were supposedly working on behalf of Trump? They couldn't have concluded that. And Hillary's people had Russian connections as well

This is really simple; if the Russians were the real target, then it would have made perfect sense to reach out and inform and protect the campaign member in question be letting them know what is going on. Only if a campaign member was the target, would the FBI have kept him in the dark and try to get him to unwittingly implicate himself which is exactly what Halper and Downer did to Papadopolous. That is it in a nutshell. The whole "we were trying to protect Trump" narrative is a big fat whopping lie. They were the target from the get go and their actions prove it.

The whole "spy" vs "informant" is a side show meant to distract from what really is going on and you either know that, or you are an unwitting dupe of the Democrat Media Industrial Complex.


Now, you might ask, why would the FBI lie about Papadopolous being the target when it would have been perfectly legal to make him a target? That is a great question. And if the FBI did have to admit that Papadopolous was the actual target well then the next logical question would be WHY. Why was he a target. Because that would mean that the investigation started BEFORE Halper and Downer engaged Papadopolous which would tear at the thread of the story they have told which was that Downer and Halper's communications with Papadopolous were the precipitating factors leading up to the start of the investigation? Are you following?

The FBI has no choice but to try to play this semantic game because to do anything else would cause all of their lies to collapse. But, it's OK. I don't expect you to see it. You can't because ou are too blinded by TDS. But, trust me. There are people who do see the connections and the clock is ticking and many peoples days are numbered. I predict in this order

McCabe
Brennan
Clapper
Comey

and then eventually it will all lead back to Obama and how ironic would it be if after all of this, it were Obama who were impeached?

Also why didn't the FBI confiscate the DNC computers to find out who hacked and what information was stolen

[ptif219]

According to Rune, they had no right to do so.

It was a matter of national security if it was Russia. It shows me this is just a witch hunt to get rid of Trump and destroy our election system

[ptif219]

The angriest poster on JPP claims otherwise.

They had every right problem is Comey was working for the democrats

[Legion]

They had every right problem is Comey was working for the democrats

Rune disagrees.

[ptif219]

Rune disagrees.

I could care less who disagrees. I know no Rune.

[ptif219]

Reply to his post and you'll meet him.

If you would spell his name correctly I might know him