IS THERE ANY DOUBT IN YOUR MIND THAT TYRANT WHO OVERSAW THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT RECORDING EVERY SINGLE ELECTRONIC ENCOUNTER THAT EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN HAS EACH DAY WAS SPYING ON THE MAN WHO THREATENED TO SEND HIM TO THE GALLOWS FOR HIS CRIMES? CLEARLY HE WAS. EVEN MORE CLEAR IS THE FACT THAT COMEY IS TRYING TO COVER IT UP.
HOW HE IS GOING ABOUT ‘EXPOSING’ THE FACTS AND TO WHOM SAYS IT ALL. COMEY NEEDS TO BE FIRED AND INDICTED FOR DERELICTION OF DUTY, THE MAN IS EITHER BOUGHT AND PAID FOR OR … BOUGHT AND PAID FOR, THERE IS NO QUESTION ABOUT IT, THE MAN IS A HACK. UNDER COMEY THE FBI HAS LOST AS CREDIBILITY AND AMERICA’S TRUST.
YC After President Donald Trump raised the concern about possible Obama administration surveillance on the Trump team, Sen. Lindsay Graham demanded answers from the FBI.
He demanded that they turn over any evidence of warrants or surveillance by Wednesday.
He said that if they did not turn over what they had by Wednesday, that he would subpoena the information from them.
The FBI failed to brief them on what they had on Wednesday, but did send a response only after Graham’s threats.
Graham said that FBI Director James Comey agreed to brief Graham and Rhode Island Democrat Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, but only in a “classified” setting, meaning that the public won’t be able to know what is said during the meeting.
Graham is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism; Whitehouse is its ranking Democrat.
But they didn’t give them a definitive date on when that would be.
“Apparently the FBI has contacted my staff (and said) that they will be at some date in the future providing us an answer to this in a classified manner,” Graham stated at a hearing on Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election, according to the Daily Mail.
So here’s the thing.
If there was no surveillance, why do they want to brief them in a ‘classified setting’ and not in open session?
What is there that they don’t want people to know?
Or are they just trying to give Graham an excuse to avoid his threat of a subpoena to hide surveillance they did?
Obviously, there is something, otherwise they just would have said there is nothing to say and no investigation.
As we have reported previously and will keep saying until more pick it up, there obviously was surveillance since the calls that Trump made to the Presidents of Australia and Mexico were transcribed and the transcripts leaked to the media.
Where did they come from if there was no surveillance?