Difference between revisions of "Talk:Obamagate timeline"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 21: Line 21:
Anybody have any information? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 2]]</sup> 18:29, 25 March 2017 (EDT)
Anybody have any information? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 2]]</sup> 18:29, 25 March 2017 (EDT)
=="Supreme Court Justice Anton Scalia found dead in Texas"
Are people actually claiming that Obama had Scalia '''assassinated'''? [[User:Whiterose|Whiterose]] ([[User talk:Whiterose|talk]]) 20:26, 22 April 2017 (EDT)
Are people actually claiming that Obama had Scalia '''assassinated'''? [[User:Whiterose|Whiterose]] ([[User talk:Whiterose|talk]]) 20:26, 22 April 2017 (EDT)

Revision as of 18:27, 22 April 2017

On March 7, I have already started CP's presentation of Trump's allegations of wiretapping in the Barack Obama Controversies and Barack Hussein Obama articles. I do not object to a separate timeline, provided that we also have good prose coverage there. I believe that timelines fail to provide full context, and sometime editors can quibble in attaching dates to various events. Thanks, JDano (talk) 06:16, 9 March 2017 (EST)

I'm anticipating this will be drawn out for months - with future revelations to come and gaps to be filled in. As more is uncovered, this timeline is intended to be a guidepost for giving context to other articles where a prose narrative will explore in depth.
My biggest fear and concern at this point is to keep the fake news story "Russiagate" off this page entirely (hopefully) as it can be assumed a merging or confusing of the two by msm is their best strategy to neutralize the devastating impact this story will have once its full dimensions are known. RobSCIA vs Trump. Who's gonna win? 10:19, 9 March 2017 (EST)
I agree that formulations like "Russiagate" (or even the -gate suffix to invite comparisons to Nixon) are not helpful. However, I suspect that antecedent events were cited to justify the warrant, and those should probably belong in the timeline. Also, there are two possibilities here: either the federal bureaucracy is doing this without Obama, or Obama personally directed it. I have not seen any evidence of his personal involvement (which is what Trump tweeted.)JDano (talk) 10:58, 9 March 2017 (EST)
It's only in the rudimentary stages, what, four, five days? We're just laying out the broad context. This is much bigger, deeper, and far reaching than any allegations against Trump so far. And likely to have an impact on future legislation. This is an abuse of power scandal. It is already having an economic impact on Microsoft, Google, Samsung, Apple and others. RobSCIA vs Trump. Who's gonna win? 11:09, 9 March 2017 (EST)
Let me add, in just the past 24 hours I've read 2 print and heard 1 radio broadcast of gross distortions of fact in reporting on this breaking story ("the taping of phones of President Obama..." made it sound like Trump ordered wiretaps on Obama; another claimed websevers in the White House connected to two Russian banks, rather than in Trump Tower to obtain the warrant) I can only presume to be deliberate to mislead people. I want to get a handle on facts quickly. RobSCIA vs Trump. Who's gonna win? 11:55, 9 March 2017 (EST)
You know that I am an admirer of your work. I just wanted you to know I had already started some coverage a few days ago in other articles, and I agree we need to be careful keeping our facts straight on who, what, when, where and why. JDano (talk) 13:52, 9 March 2017 (EST)
Yes, definitely. As a rule, I'll try to insert sourcing for every line item. I just found out when there are more than 200 internal & outgoing links, search engines may discriminate thinking its spam. RobSCIA vs Trump. Who's gonna win? 21:09, 9 March 2017 (EST)

IRS scandal

The IRS scandal is almost a textbook example of corruption in modern Washington, and how it is handled and covered up. How through various Congressional investigations which change hands by party; how deniability through four changes of Commissioner; how a designated fall guy is paid off; how either both party's are guilty of abuses, or one party needs to shield it ineptitude, impotence, and weakness from the public because of its lack of control or influence within the bureaucracy; the footdragging of investigators, prosecutors, and even the Independent Inspector Generals to buy time for cover up; most importantly, the timing of events within the unknown variable of a two year election cycle. That aspect can be easily seen from the start and end dates of various investigations.

Much of the IRS scandal was replicated in the Clinton email scandal. For example, the "lost" emails and how its sold to the public & media, whereas everyone knows the NSA has copies of the emails in its metadata collection. What's revealing here is the difficulty of Congressional investigators accessing it. Snowden and Ellsberg are evidently correct: the NSA has the ability to spy on and blackmail Senators, Supreme Court Justices, and candidates for President of the opposing party and their aides, and then sometimes share that information with a sitting president.

Where Obamagate goes from here is fairly obvious: the challenge to President Trump and Republican Congressional investigators is not necessarily to expose institutional corruption in the bureaucracy, but rather to gain control of it. It's unlikely it can be completed in a two-year cycle. What Obama did was indeed treasonous, using institutions and methods designed to fight foreign enemies like the KGB, al Qaeda, and drug cartels, to fight a domestic "enemy", Donald Trump and Republicans. This indeed needs to be exposed and eternally attached to his legacy, and his reputation ground to powder. RobSCIA vs Trump. Who's gonna win? 11:03, 10 March 2017 (EST)

Grassley/Feinstein meeting with Comey

It's almost comical to read libs reviews of the Grassley/Feinstein-Comey meeting. The truth is, this was a briefing in reverse. Comey needed advice how to handle questions on a FISA warrant for Flynn without perjuring himself in testimony before the House, which he doesn't ordinarily do. For this he turned to senior members of the Senate, respected in both parties, whom he'd worked well with over the years and there is a trusting bond. If any members of the House panel are dissatisfied with his testimony, they can turn to Grassley or Feinstein for a private briefing on the FISA law and need for secrecy. Hence, a bipartisan cover narrative is emerging, and secrecy around FISA preserved and intact. RobSCIA v Trump updated score:CIA 3, Trump 2 17:22, 21 March 2017 (EDT)

Ben Rhodes and David Ignatius

Anybody have any information? RobSCIA v Trump updated score:CIA 3, Trump 2 18:29, 25 March 2017 (EDT)

=="Supreme Court Justice Anton Scalia found dead in Texas" Are people actually claiming that Obama had Scalia assassinated? Whiterose (talk) 20:26, 22 April 2017 (EDT)