PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
Manafort's been under surveillance for years. He was tapped in 2014, long before trump was in the picture. Nobody wants to admit that.
three years of surveillance and still nothing to show for it.....
Manafort's been under surveillance for years. He was tapped in 2014, long before trump was in the picture. Nobody wants to admit that.
"oh how Awan go home".....

I know who Teflon Don and Alice in Liberaland are because I have seen their posts. They are pikers compared to Evince in the foulness sweepstakes. I probably assumed that "IHA" was one of your pet names for someone you hate, or a misspelling, I guess. Didn't give it much thought.
You fail again.
Why do you suck so badly?
Is that what you advised your baby Zappacrite to do when your mutual hypocrisy was exposed?
Looks like he took your advice.
Your self-deception is noted.

Another Christiecriteopinionfantasy.![]()
Just scanning your contradictory comments, scaled cat.

given that he is the campaign manager im sure he was.
So they were listening to the conversations between the republican candidate and his campaign manager?
Let's see these supposedly contradictory comments, Christiecrite.
Who is "Scaled cat", BTW? Another fictional poster I should be denouncing - according to you, a blatant hypocrite?![]()
Law enforcement, especially at that level would have a hard time convincing a judge to issue a warrant based on information gathered in another warrant. That's called investigative phishing, a judge would know the evidence gathered in the second warrant would never pass the taste test. It's border line entrapment if 'not' entrapment itself.
In the case at hand, I hope you are not planning on anything against Trump that will lead to legal troubles.
If you never believe anything else you hear here believe me when I say it would have come out already. In this leaking sieve of all things political we live in today, it would be out there.
it's a nothing burger as some have called it. Hate to dissapoint
What makes you believe that you know the extent of who was tapped or who the conversations were with. The FACT is that Trump spoke to his campaign manager multiple times per day, thus Trump was tapped. Got that kid
I wonder who will take the fall for that skinny-assed Kenyan?so the government may very well have been wiretapping Trump!
I do in this case. As I suspect you already know, I meant to say "scalded cat".
That's one Christiecritery mystery solved.
BTW, I don't see any proof of the "contradictory comments" you mentioned. I think I know why.
Well you're quick to point out everyone else's spelling or grammar mistakes, so... think of it as a teaching moment. I already pointed out your contradictory comments re: Zap, yurtsie and IHA, and am compiling the rest. It's a big file so be patient.

Who might that be, silly Billy?
Bill . If you want to do that, then get a warrant for probable cause to tap Trump.
Especially since Clapper said there was no FISA warrant against "Trump or his campaign"
I mean "incidental collection " is a hard one to swallow, but lying about it on top of it is Deep State arrogance
"...even if those conversations between Trump and Manafort were picked up in the surveillance, they would be eliminated unless the conversation had to do with Manafort's ties to Russian officials. This is a process called "minimization" which is described in the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 this way:
"Information acquired from an electronic surveillance conducted pursuant to this subchapter concerning any United States person may be used and disclosed by Federal officers and employees without the consent of the United States person only in accordance with the minimization procedures required by this subchapter. No otherwise privileged communication obtained in accordance with, or in violation of, the provisions of this subchapter shall lose its privileged character. No information acquired from an electronic surveillance pursuant to this subchapter may be used or disclosed by Federal officers or employees except for lawful purposes."
"...even if those conversations between Trump and Manafort were picked up in the surveillance, they would be eliminated unless the conversation had to do with Manafort's ties to Russian officials. This is a process called "minimization" which is described in the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 this way:
"Information acquired from an electronic surveillance conducted pursuant to this subchapter concerning any United States person may be used and disclosed by Federal officers and employees without the consent of the United States person only in accordance with the minimization procedures required by this subchapter. No otherwise privileged communication obtained in accordance with, or in violation of, the provisions of this subchapter shall lose its privileged character. No information acquired from an electronic surveillance pursuant to this subchapter may be used or disclosed by Federal officers or employees except for lawful purposes."