James Clapper Recalls ‘Staggering’ Proof of Putin Swaying Election to Trump

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

My whole argument centers around Clap's claim and the fact Trump should be he "happy". Clap's denial of spying on the Trump campaign doesn't make any logical sense. And I have repeatedly made my argument as to why it doesn't make any sense.

But that is not the main point you have been making. I said

Originally Posted by hcap

I quoted you 3 x's claiming "Spygate" was according to Clapper about "spies" spying on the Trump administration. The problem with this is Trump's and his cronies's spin that this was for political reasons. To gain an advantage in the 2016 election.

Originally Posted by boxcar

All the same. Clapper has admitted to spies in the Trump campaign. Google it. Then listen to how The Clap spins it, i.e. justifies it.

He did not spin it or justify anything. Clapper's answer to Behars first question shows no political bias against Trump by Clapper.....

BEHAR: So I ask you, was the FBI spying on Trump’s campaign?

CLAPPER: No, they were not. They were spying on — a term I don’t particularly like — but on what the Russians were doing. Trying to understand were the Russians infiltrating, trying to gain access, trying to gain leverage or influence, which is what they do.

Your "analysis" about Trump being happy or not happy is ridiculous.

Originally Posted by boxcar

... My whole argument centers around Clap's claim and the fact Trump should be he "happy". Clap's denial of spying on the Trump campaign doesn't make any logical sense. And I have repeatedly made my argument as to why it doesn't make any sense.

...and absurd, and not a "contradiction" in any sense of what Clapper said. It is your after the fact framing. To wit:

Originally Posted by you

If Clap and Co. were spying on Ruskies as Clap claims, then why should Trump be happy about that? Why should Trump be happy that the U.S. government was spying on his Russian buddies -- his cohorts in crime? Why should Trump be happy that the Obama Admin. was spying on the very people with whom Trump was allegedly colluding to bring Hillary down? Answer me. Tell me why.

1)You are assuming Trump is guilty of collusion (conspiring) and is only pretending innocence. And the Russians were really his "buddies"

2) Clapper on the other hand is assuming Trump is actually innocent. An innocent president would rather be proven innocent than have a dark cloud surround his presidency

3)Clapper has not claimed collusion--yet. Mueller I think will change that.

So your argument lacks any evidence of contradiction.

[hcap]

Then you go on......

Additionally, why should Trump be "happy" over U.S. spies inside his campaign when they failed miserably to protect the integrity of the election process? What is there to be happy over? Explain this.

No one should be happy about failure. But the job of counterintelligence agencies is to do the best that can be done.
There are committees in congress investigating exactly what happened in order to prevent future manipulations in upcoming elections. Trump and his Trumpeteers are obstructing justice in muddying this issue.

Mueller should be allowed to continue to shed light on what indeed happened..

[hcap]

More nonsense from you....

Originally Posted by you

Secondly, note that the Clap, in his admission of using spies in the Trump campaign to supposedly spy on Russians, used the term "infiltrating" and the phrase "trying to gain access". But again, an inquiring mind is pressed hard to ask: Why would Clap and Co. be concerned about Trump's Russian cohorts and allies infiltrating his/their own campaign?

Again, you are asserting James Clapper believes Trump colluded. He has not said anything about conspiracy yet.

First of all, since Trump was supposedly in bed with the Russians, any Russians that were mulling around in his campaign would have been there at Trump's behest to do his personal bidding. How can someone infiltrate a campaign when they're there with full knowledge of the nominee? The central idea behind "infiltrating" is for someone to enter or become established in an enemy's camp or behind enemy lines for subversive purposes

Oy gevalt!. What makes you think Trump and campaign was aware of how exactly and thoroughly the Russian intelligence agencies manipulated the election? The Mueller investigation has shown so far Pappadoupolis, Flyn and Manafiort were played without full knowledge of how they were being played.

But the entire Democrat Trump-Russia Collusion narrative prohibits this kind of reasoning. Trump was not the enemy of the Russians or vice versa. The Russians were not trying to subvert his campaign. The Russians would not have been collecting intel on Trump. Trump's Russian allies, cohorts, partners-in-crime would not have been "trying to gain access" or trying to infiltrate their own camp This makes absolutely no sense; yet, this is the reason Clap gave for government spies being inside Trump's campaign!

Incoherent and incomprehensible run on sentences AGAIN!

Still wanna bet?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

But that is not the main point you have been making. I said

He did not spin it or justify anything. Clapper's answer to Behars first question shows no political bias against Trump by Clapper.....

BEHAR: So I ask you, was the FBI spying on Trump’s campaign?

CLAPPER: No, they were not. They were spying on — a term I don’t particularly like — but on what the Russians were doing. Trying to understand were the Russians infiltrating, trying to gain access, trying to gain leverage or influence, which is what they do.

Your "analysis" about Trump being happy or not happy is ridiculous.

...and absurd, and not a "contradiction" in any sense of what Clapper said. It is your after the fact framing. To wit:

1)You are assuming Trump is guilty of collusion (conspiring) and is only pretending innocence. And the Russians were really his "buddies"

2) Clapper on the other hand is assuming Trump is actually innocent. An innocent president would rather be proven innocent than have a dark cloud surround his presidency

3)Clapper has not claimed collusion--yet. Mueller I think will change that.

So your argument lacks any evidence of contradiction.

My main point has not been about what Trump called "Spygate"?

I'm not assuming anything. The entire Dem narrative is that Trump COLLUDED with Russia to bring Hillary down. Therefore, the Ruskies were Trump's allies, according to all the Dem narratives. So...if the DEM narrative is true, why would Trump be happy that U.S. spies were in his campaign to gather intel on him and his Russian allies?

And Clapper never assumed the president is innocent. Provide the quote where any Dem thought that. Clap is as partisan as you can get.

Moreover, we're supposed to believe that the Obama Admin. and the Obama DOJ and the Obama FBI all had Trump's best interests at heart? And this is why they planted U.S. spies into Trump's campaign?! You have truly lost what little mind you have left, if you really believe your own drivel.

So...you haven't given me any reason as to why Trump should be happy over the embedding of U.S. spies in his campaign. The contradiction is Clap's claim v. Dem narrative.

The second contradiction is that the U.S. spies were in the wrong campaign, according to the Dem narrative of Trump-Russia Collusion. Why would Trump's Russian allies have to "try to gain access" to his/their campaign?

And now I add a third reason. If Clap and Co. were really out to "protect" Trump, as Clap also claimed at another time, why is the Clap so upset with Trump, calling for a DOJ investigation? If Clap is truthful, what does he have to fear from such an investigation? Why is he so angry with Trump for wanting to verify from an "independent" source that The Clap is being truthful? Truthful people never have to fear being investigated; for they are always confident in their strong position of the truth. In fact, they would encourage such an investigation that would finally and irrevocably vindicate them and exonerate them from all suspicion of wrongdoing. But instead...Clap had a cow when Trump called for an investigation.

Also, one more thing: If Clap actually assumed Trump's innocence. as you claim, you truly are in the minority; for no Dem I have read thinks that way. All the Dems blame Trump and his Russian allies for Hillary's loss. Yet, if what you say is true, Trump and the Russians ultimately didn't cause Hillary's downfall; it was the gross incompetence of the Obama Admin. for having U.S. spies planted into the wrong campaign, thereby failing to make arrests to protect Hillary!. I pointed this little "factoid" out a couple of days ago. Hillary's loss falls squarely on the shoulder's of the Obama Admin. and the Obama-controlled FBI, CIA, DOJ and whatever other alphabet agency you want to toss in. Talk about a GROSS MISCALCULATION! Hillary lost because Obama never protected her like he protected Trump. : This is the only logical inference that can be made to your idiotic theory that the Clap was really looking out for Trump (instead of Hillary).

So...tell us: Do you lay the blame, ultimately, for Hillary's loss at the feet of the Obama Admin.? Isn't Hillary's loss a big part of Obama's sacred legacy?

[hcap]

You would have lost the bet.

Originally Posted by boxcar

All the same. Clapper has admitted to spies in the Trump campaign. Google it. Then listen to how The Clap spins it, i.e. justifies it.

All the after the fact arguments you compose in your feverish absurd conspiratorial mind, about what you think Clapper's "real" motivations are, is just that. After the fact.

He never admitted any such nonsense. You loose big time!

This another down the rabbit hole argument in your collection of endless moving the goalpost further into the the dark rabbit hole, boring as hell rants.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

You would have lost the bet.
All the after the fact arguments you compose in your feverish absurd conspiratorial mind, about what you think Clapper's "real" motivations are, is just that. After the fact.

He never admitted any such nonsense. You loose big time!

This another down the rabbit hole argument in your collection of endless moving the goalpost further into the the dark rabbit hole, boring as hell rants.

Yes, he did. The spies were in Trump's campaign. What Clap didn't admit to was that they were in his campaign to spy on Trump. He said they were in his campaign to PROTECT Trump.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

You would have lost the bet.
All the after the fact arguments you compose in your feverish absurd conspiratorial mind, about what you think Clapper's "real" motivations are, is just that. After the fact.

He never admitted any such nonsense. You loose big time!

This another down the rabbit hole argument in your collection of endless moving the goalpost further into the the dark rabbit hole, boring as hell rants.

Just like Clap's statements are all "after the fact".

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

You would have lost the bet.
All the after the fact arguments you compose in your feverish absurd conspiratorial mind, about what you think Clapper's "real" motivations are, is just that. After the fact.

He never admitted any such nonsense. You loose big time!

This another down the rabbit hole argument in your collection of endless moving the goalpost further into the the dark rabbit hole, boring as hell rants.

Actually, I would not have lost big time. You would have. You forgot this little gem of a quote from the Clap:

"The objective here was actually to protect the campaign by determining whether the Russians were infiltrating it and attempting to exert influence," Clapper said.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-fbi-spied-tr/

Did you catch that? THE campaign? Which campaign, 'cappy? You see, the FBI spies were not interested in "protecting" Hillary's campaign. Clap didn't say the campaigns. The were only interested in "protecting" Trump's campaign. If we are to believe Clap, the Ruskies were only interested in infiltrating the enemy's campaign, i.e. Trump's campaign. Allies don't infiltrate themselves.

As stated numerous times, the Obama Team outsmarted itself big time, if we are to believe Clap. They were looking for the Russian spies in the wrong campaign, thereby leaving your beloved witch unprotected and vulnerable...to defeat. Obama unwittingly shafted Hillary.

Since we know that the Dems have had a great longstanding relationship with the Ruskies, 'cap, I can only surmise that Hillary colluded with the Russians to do Trump in. Clap certainly seemed to think so. This is why the FBI spies were in Trump's campaign and not hers. These U.S. spies did such a magnificent job in protecting Trump that he won the election.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by bollixed_up_car

Actually, I would not have lost big time. You would have. You forgot this little gem of a quote from the Clap:

"The objective here was actually to protect the campaign by determining whether the Russians were infiltrating it and attempting to exert influence," Clapper said.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-fbi-spied-tr/

Man are you dumb. You attempt to use this to prove your lie when it is slam dunk you are out of your mind.
As usual

From politi
Says James Clapper said "that the FBI was spying on (Trump's) campaign."
— Donald Trump on Wednesday, May 23rd, 2018 in a tweet

False!

Our ruling:

Trump said that Clapper had affirmed that the FBI had spied on the Trump campaign. That does not reflect Clapper’s words. In two separate interviews Clapper said that the FBI was looking for Russian interference in the election with the aim of protecting the campaign.

He specifically said that the FBI had not spied on the campaign.

Trump turned Clapper’s statements upside down and for that, we rate this claim False.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by hcap

He never admitted any such nonsense. You loose big time!

This another down the rabbit hole argument in your collection of endless moving the goalpost further into the the dark rabbit hole, boring as hell rants.

Originally Posted by bollied_up_car

Just like Clap's statements are all "after the fact".

Do I have to explain the simplest concepts to you?

Politifact and everyone else reading actual interviews and viewing Clappers video statements conclude he never admitted Trumps' idiotic "spygate" is. correctly...

Clapper "during the fact"!!!!

Whereas all your imagined Clappers' 'real" motivations and spoken words that Clapper never mentioned,

is Clapper interpreted incorrectly----wait for it bunky----

"after the fact"!!!

I am finished with your incoherent and incomprehensible idiocy. I really don't care if you believe Clapper. But you spinning nonsense for pages and pages is much too reminiscent of your insanity on the religious threads for me.

Bye-bye.

[Tom]

I am finished with your incoherent and incomprehensible idiocy.

I thought the same thing about you!
Go figure.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Man are you dumb. You attempt to use this to prove your lie when it is slam dunk you are out of your mind.
As usual

From politi
Says James Clapper said "that the FBI was spying on (Trump's) campaign."
— Donald Trump on Wednesday, May 23rd, 2018 in a tweet

False!

Our ruling:

Trump said that Clapper had affirmed that the FBI had spied on the Trump campaign. That does not reflect Clapper’s words. In two separate interviews Clapper said that the FBI was looking for Russian interference in the election with the aim of protecting the campaign.

He specifically said that the FBI had not spied on the campaign.

Trump turned Clapper’s statements upside down and for that, we rate this claim False.

We're not talking about what Trump said. We're talking about what the Clap said. Stay focused. Here it is again:

"The objective here was actually to protect the campaign by determining whether the Russians were infiltrating it and attempting to exert influence," Clapper said.

Which campaign was being protected, according to Clap?

And was THE campaign being protected from within or without by FBI spies?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Do I have to explain the simplest concepts to you?

Politifact and everyone else reading actual interviews and viewing Clappers video statements conclude he never admitted Trumps' idiotic "spygate" is. correctly...

Clapper "during the fact"!!!!

Whereas all your imagined Clappers' 'real" motivations and spoken words that Clapper never mentioned,

is Clapper interpreted incorrectly----wait for it bunky----

"after the fact"!!!

I am finished with your incoherent and incomprehensible idiocy. I really don't care if you believe Clapper. But you spinning nonsense for pages and pages is much too reminiscent of your insanity on the religious threads for me.

Bye-bye.

First of all, I don't give a flying rat's patut what Politifact or anyone thinks Clap said or what their interpretation is of his remarks. I look far beyond the raw comments to see what the ramifications or implications are. I analyze comments the way good law enforcement interrogators scrutinize someone's testimony. Like them, I never take anything raw comment at face value.

So...again...answer my question that I asked in my previous post a few minutes ago. Clap said the objective was to "protect" THE campaign. Which campaign is the Clap talking about? And was this protection by U.S. spies implemented from within or without the campaign?

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

We're not talking about what Trump said. We're talking about what the Clap said. Stay focused. Here it is again:

"The objective here was actually to protect the campaign by determining whether the Russians were infiltrating it and attempting to exert influence," Clapper said.

Which campaign was being protected, according to Clap?

And was THE campaign being protected from within or without by FBI spies?

POLITIDACT destroyed Trump"spygate" by comparing Trumps lie to Clappe's denial that the FBI had not spied on the campaign.

Originally Posted by POLITIFACT

In two separate interviews Clapper said that the FBI was looking for Russian interference in the election with the aim of protecting the campaign.

He specifically said that the FBI had not spied on the campaign.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by bolixed_up_car

First of all, I don't give a flying rat's patut what Politifact or anyone thinks Clap said or what their interpretation is of his remarks. I look far beyond the raw comments to see what the ramifications or implications are.

No,

What Clapper has said in several interviews this week is that there are strictures on the way the FBI can use confidential informants. Other former national security officials tell NPR that sending an intermediary like Halper is a less aggressive way for FBI to try to learn from subjects in an investigation. That way, the bureau doesn't have to send special agents themselves who might flash their badges and let the people involved know the FBI was interested.

https://www.npr.org/2018/05/24/61402...trump-campaign

Clapper:
"They were spying on — a term I don't particularly like ... what the Russians were doing," Clapper said on The View. "Trying to understand, 'Were the Russians infiltrating? Trying to gain access? Trying to gain leverage or influence?' Which is what they do."