One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
James Comey: "I've never thought of" electronic surveillance as "spying".
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: 1 2 3 next>>
Apr 13, 2019 10:38:45   #
Larry the Legend (a regular here)
 
Merriam-Webster defines 'spying' as: to watch secretly usually for hostile purposes.

Was the Trump campaign 'watched secretly'? You betcha! Was it for hostile purposes? Just look at the past two-plus years! is that 'hostile' enough for you?

James Comey is trying the classic ploy of a Washington miscreant caught with his pants down - redefine the language to suit the occasion.

Because he never 'thought' of it as spying, it clearly isn't spying, right? Right?'

http://thehollywoodconservative.us/articles/comey-floats-insane-theory-why-spying-on-trump-doesn-t-count

Barr saw the way the wind was blowing after his 'spying' reference and seemed to walk back his comments somewhat, saying his intention is to "make sure there was no unauthorized surveillance."

Mmm-hmm. He tipped his hand and tried to hide it.

| Reply
Apr 13, 2019 10:43:19   #
Sew_What
 
Larry the Legend wrote:
Merriam-Webster defines 'spying' as: to watch secretly usually for hostile purposes.

Was the Trump campaign 'watched secretly'? You betcha! Was it for hostile purposes? Just look at the past two-plus years! is that 'hostile' enough for you?

James Comey is trying the classic ploy of a Washington miscreant caught with his pants down - redefine the language to suit the occasion.

Because he never 'thought' of it as spying, it clearly isn't spying, right? Right?'

http://thehollywoodconservative.us/articles/comey-floats-insane-theory-why-spying-on-trump-doesn-t-count

Barr saw the way the wind was blowing after his 'spying' reference and seemed to walk back his comments somewhat, saying his intention is to "make sure there was no unauthorized surveillance."

Mmm-hmm. He tipped his hand and tried to hide it.
Merriam-Webster defines 'spying' as: to watch secr... (show quote)


Do you consider having a door bell with a camera spying or protection?

| Reply
Apr 13, 2019 10:47:08   #
Liberty Tree (a regular here)
 
Sew_What wrote:
Do you consider having a door bell with a camera spying or protection?


If you set it up on your own property it is protection. If you do it on someone else's property it is spying?

| Reply
Apr 13, 2019 10:56:52   #
Sew_What
 
Liberty Tree wrote:
If you set it up on your own property it is protection. If you do it on someone else's property it is spying?


...so did they set up electronic spying on his property. Trump said so...where's the proof.

Maybe the Russians were wearing a wire? ...so where's the proof?

Watched is not "electronic surveillance"....so he didn't change the language.

| Reply
Apr 13, 2019 11:15:27   #
Sew_What
 
Here you go, must have been cut from the same thread as Comey:



| Reply
Apr 13, 2019 11:28:50   #
Pennylynn (a regular here)
 
Sew_What wrote:
Do you consider having a door bell with a camera spying or protection?


People who own doorbells with camera are using them for protection, as they commissioned it to be installed and it "watches" the individual's property, specifically their front door. However, if someone else installed it without permission and knowledge of the occupant/property owner then it is spying. Likewise, I can install surveillance cameras on my home or property and that is not spying, however if I installed a camera that points directly toward my neighbor's yard or window, that is spying. Law enforcement agencies can spy on people... but, they have to have a warrant to install those devices. In order to obtain that warrant, real evidence of an actual crime must be presented to a judge. There are very specific guidelines of what "tools" can be used and where.. for example, they (law enforcement) can not install a camera in a bathroom or a shower, can not be installed over or directly pointing at a bed... same goes for "listening" devices or drones. Get the point?

| Reply
Apr 13, 2019 11:39:28   #
Pennylynn (a regular here)
 
Sew_What wrote:
Here you go, must have been cut from the same thread as Comey:


Barr is correct and supported by public documents. Barr said: "I think spying did occur," but the question is whether it was adequately predicated. And I'm not suggesting it was not adequately predicated. But I need to explore that."

It is a fact that in October 2016 the FBI wiretapped Carter Page, who had earlier been a short-term foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign. The bureau's application to a secret court for that wiretapping is public. It is heavily redacted but is clearly focused on Page and "the Russian government's attempt to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election." Page was wiretapped because of his connection with the Trump campaign.

Some critics have noted that the wiretap authorization came after Page left the campaign. But the surveillance order allowed authorities to intercept Page's electronic communications both going forward from the day of the order and backward, as well. Investigators could see Page's emails and texts going back to his time in the campaign.

So there is simply no doubt that the FBI wiretapped a Trump campaign figure. Is a wiretap "spying"? It is hard to imagine a practice, whether approved by a court or not, more associated with spying.

That alone is enough to back up Barr's remark. But it is also known that the FBI engaged at least one informant, a professor named Stefan Halper, to penetrate the Trump campaign. The New York Times recently reported, "Agents involved in the Russia investigation asked Mr. Halper, an American academic who teaches in Britain, to gather information on Mr. Page and George Papadopoulos, another Trump campaign foreign policy adviser."

Halper went beyond Page and Papadopoulos, also contacting and seeking information from Trump campaign aide Sam Clovis. "It was not clear whether Mr. Halper had the FBI's blessing to contact Mr. Clovis," according to the Times.

The Halper case is more evidence that "spying did occur" on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election. At least in the cases of Page and Papadopoulos, the information gathering was done by an informant engaged by the FBI.

As to the second part of Barr's statement, "The question is whether it was adequately predicated," meaning whether the FBI presented evidence sufficient to justify surveillance, that is something that has been the subject of intense public debate. When the heavily blacked-out Page surveillance application was released — over the strong objections of the FBI — there followed a passionate argument over whether the wiretapping was "adequately predicated."

Republicans argued that it was not, because the application was based in part on the Steele dossier, the collection of unverified opposition research allegations compiled by British spy Christopher Steele on behalf of the Hillary Clinton's campaign. Democrats argued that the application was done properly and that the Page surveillance was justified. So, just as Barr said, the question was whether the spying was "adequately predicated."

There has been less public debate over whether the Halper operation was "adequately predicated."

In any event, despite the cries from outraged Democrats and the media analysts who simply can't imagine what Barr might have been referring to, the attorney general's words were demonstrably true.

| Reply
Apr 13, 2019 11:56:18   #
Larry the Legend (a regular here)
 
Sew_What wrote:
Do you consider having a door bell with a camera spying or protection?

If it's over my door, it's surveillance. If I'm putting it over your door, it's spying. There is a difference that obviously escaped you. I hope this clears it up.

| Reply
Apr 13, 2019 12:43:30   #
teabag09 (a regular here)
 
Sew_What wrote:
...so did they set up electronic spying on his property. Trump said so...where's the proof.

Maybe the Russians were wearing a wire? ...so where's the proof?

Watched is not "electronic surveillance"....so he didn't change the language.


And another village idiot chimes in! Mike

| Reply
Apr 14, 2019 06:42:36   #
Sew_What
 
Pennylynn wrote:
People who own doorbells with camera are using them for protection, as they commissioned it to be installed and it "watches" the individual's property, specifically their front door. However, if someone else installed it without permission and knowledge of the occupant/property owner then it is spying. Likewise, I can install surveillance cameras on my home or property and that is not spying, however if I installed a camera that points directly toward my neighbor's yard or window, that is spying. Law enforcement agencies can spy on people... but, they have to have a warrant to install those devices. In order to obtain that warrant, real evidence of an actual crime must be presented to a judge. There are very specific guidelines of what "tools" can be used and where.. for example, they (law enforcement) can not install a camera in a bathroom or a shower, can not be installed over or directly pointing at a bed... same goes for "listening" devices or drones. Get the point?
People who own doorbells with camera are using the... (show quote)


Do you.....get the point?

| Reply
Apr 14, 2019 06:43:39   #
Sew_What
 
Larry the Legend wrote:
If it's over my door, it's surveillance. If I'm putting it over your door, it's spying. There is a difference that obviously escaped you. I hope this clears it up.


...and at what point are we going to understand how trump was spied on...did the FBI hack in to his microwave as he claimed?

Accusations are not proof of anything.

| Reply
Apr 14, 2019 07:46:20   #
crazylibertarian (a regular here)
 
Larry the Legend wrote:
Merriam-Webster defines 'spying' as: to watch secretly usually for hostile purposes.

Was the Trump campaign 'watched secretly'? You betcha! Was it for hostile purposes? Just look at the past two-plus years! is that 'hostile' enough for you?

James Comey is trying the classic ploy of a Washington miscreant caught with his pants down - redefine the language to suit the occasion.

Because he never 'thought' of it as spying, it clearly isn't spying, right? Right?'

http://thehollywoodconservative.us/articles/comey-floats-insane-theory-why-spying-on-trump-doesn-t-count

Barr saw the way the wind was blowing after his 'spying' reference and seemed to walk back his comments somewhat, saying his intention is to "make sure there was no unauthorized surveillance."

Mmm-hmm. He tipped his hand and tried to hide it.
Merriam-Webster defines 'spying' as: to watch secr... (show quote)



Comey isn't just a political hack; he proved he's an idiot.

| Reply
Apr 14, 2019 09:50:00   #
Larry the Legend (a regular here)
 
Sew_What wrote:
...and at what point are we going to understand how trump was spied on...did the FBI hack in to his microwave as he claimed?

Accusations are not proof of anything.

A lot of people don't know this, but...

"[A]ll forms of communication, including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls, and Internet searches, as well as all types of personal data trails — parking receipts, travel itineraries, bookstore purchases, and other digital 'pocket litter'" are collected at the NSAs $1.5 Billion Utah Data Center on every single American, every single second of every day. Right now, as I type this, it is being logged in some quiet corner of the largest and most invasive surveillance system in the history of the world. Find out more here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center

From the NSA website:

"Every day, people leave a digital trail of electronic breadcrumbs as they go about their daily routine. They go to work using electronic fare cards; drive through intersections with traffic cameras; walk down the street past security cameras; surf the internet; pay for purchases with credit/debit cards; text or call their friends; and on and on." And on and on and on... Into infinity! And Beyond!

https://nsa.gov1.info/data/

He was 'spied on' with a few simple clicks of the mouse, just like you, me and the little old lady down the street. Every single one of us is spied on 24/7/365, and our data are retained for future reference should someone in government take a dislike to us, just like they did to (then) candidate Trump.

And it's a completely legal, according to them:

"Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) provides us with a bonanza of "incidental" data collected from ordinary Americans communicating with foreigners targeted by this sweeping law. This convenient loophole allows us to peruse this database in our never-ending search for the elusive "needle in a haystack"."

They keep it all here, in this $1.5 Billion facility, in Utah:



| Reply
Apr 14, 2019 10:47:59   #
Radiance3 (a regular here)
 
Larry the Legend wrote:
Merriam-Webster defines 'spying' as: to watch secretly usually for hostile purposes.

Was the Trump campaign 'watched secretly'? You betcha! Was it for hostile purposes? Just look at the past two-plus years! is that 'hostile' enough for you?

James Comey is trying the classic ploy of a Washington miscreant caught with his pants down - redefine the language to suit the occasion.

Because he never 'thought' of it as spying, it clearly isn't spying, right? Right?'

http://thehollywoodconservative.us/articles/comey-floats-insane-theory-why-spying-on-trump-doesn-t-count

Barr saw the way the wind was blowing after his 'spying' reference and seemed to walk back his comments somewhat, saying his intention is to "make sure there was no unauthorized surveillance."

Mmm-hmm. He tipped his hand and tried to hide it.
Merriam-Webster defines 'spying' as: to watch secr... (show quote)


=======================
Spying when they used the fabricated DOSSIER paid for by Hillary Clinton for the purpose of illegally obtaining FISA information from the opponent candidate Trump.

Spying when the objective is for personal and group tank destructions of the opposite party to destroy and create fake or false information for malicious weapons of destructions.

And that was what the DOJ, FBI under Comey did, aided by various federal weapons of Obama the CIA, the DOJ, and the National Intelligence, with the officials involved Brennan, Clapper, Lynch, ComeY. This was under the leadership of Mr. Obama. FBI tentacles are Bruce Ohr, McCable, Strzok, Page, and many others. The evidences must be presented and must be proven the objectives of this very dangerous Deep State of Obama.

Then they fabricated and charged the opponent innocent party Trump of what they were doing.
The purpose was to prevent Trump from winning. But he won, to remove him from office by creating false accusation against him gathered by the ILLEGALLY SPYING and fabrications.

They carried the bunch of illegalities not examined but ignored and forgotten? The crimes of Hillary Clinton and Comey for a lifetime quid-pro-quo amassing tens or hundreds of millions of dollars.

DOJ BARR will solve all these. He is most independent, brilliant, and reliable DOJ working for us and the constitution to preserve the integrity of our justice system. The lawless, radical DEMS are all afraid of him. Clean them up DOJ Barr.

| Reply
Apr 14, 2019 10:51:27   #
nwtk2007 (a regular here)
 
Sew_What wrote:
Do you consider having a door bell with a camera spying or protection?


If someone is at YOUR door and you are looking to see who it is, it is NOT spying, but then, I can "spy" on anyone I want if they are on my front porch!

| Reply
Page: 1 2 3 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2019 IDF International Technologies, Inc.