Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit
14,282
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: + + + +
Talk:Barack Obama Controversies (view source)
Revision as of 04:01, March 20, 2017
, 04:01, March 20, 2017→British surveillance: new section
As we discuused at Main Page talk, the wiretapping is legal. Heck, Obama could've droned Trump legally. I would suggest for the subheading, "domestic spying controvercy". [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 1]]</sup> 09:12, 13 March 2017 (EDT)
As we discuused at Main Page talk, the wiretapping is legal. Heck, Obama could've droned Trump legally. I would suggest for the subheading, "domestic spying controvercy". [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 1]]</sup> 09:12, 13 March 2017 (EDT)
:I changed it to "Wiretapping the 2016 election." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 15:10, 13 March 2017 (EDT)
:I changed it to "Wiretapping the 2016 election." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 15:10, 13 March 2017 (EDT)
== British surveillance ==
Despite all the heated denials, it's a safe bet that the British were in fact eavesdropping on Trump. He didn't have the level of security a government official does, so it would have been easy enough for them to do it. Judging from all the leaks that appeared in the British press, the Brits were obviously interested in this issue. If they are not surveilling the obvious targets, what's an electronic surveillance agency for? That surveillance agencies do surveillance is hardly remarkable. The story here is, why did the FBI want a FISA warrant and why did this information leak to so many media outlets? [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:01, 20 March 2017 (EDT)