How come they wiretapped lots of Trump people and none of Hillary’s?
Because no one in Clinton’s campaign was as crooked as Trump’s campaign.
The DNC E-mails revealed they were much more corrupt. You have 0 campaign corruption on the Trump side.
What crimes did the emails uncover that needed investigating?
because what if the person they tell is in on the crime?
I’m not sure if rigging a primary is illegal, or passing on debate questions. But there are no campaign related crimes even talked about with Trump.
Passing debate questions isn’t illegal. “Rigging” the primary is fake news.
Trump wasn’t wiretapped. The people that were had warrants explaining why they were wiretapped which included potential crimes that they were investigating.
If he means the preference given to Clinton over Sanders that’s not illegal either.
He doesn’t know what he means. I’ve asked him.
1 Like
What potential crimes? Couldn’t Hillary people be colluding. I mean they got hacked, and Trump didn’t, so…
There was no reason to suspect anyone in Clinton’s campaign was colluding.
The same cannot be said about people in Trump’s campaign.
Not True. The DNC was hacked. The Russians could have had help from the inside. Getting Podesta password for example.
Not True. The DNC was hacked. The Russians could have had help from the inside. Getting Podesta password for example.
Was there any evidence to suggest they got help from the inside? If there was, then the persons suspected could have been investigated.
Provide the reason to suspect someone inside the Clinton campaign.
To find out about the Hacking
They did.
They also told them to be on the lookout for more trying to enter the camaign.
Good americans would heed that warning, and upon getting an email from the Russians promising dirt on Clinton, call the FBI. Trump did not, and sent his lackey son to host a meeting in Trump Tower with them. Again, after the FBI specifically warned them.
They were warned, and yet they continued to have these contacts. Explicity doing the opposite of the FBI’s warnings is a good way to rightly put yourself under suspicion.
You know all this though.
We know exactly how they got podesta password. Why don’t you know this?
Provide the reason to suspect someone in the Clinton campaign was participating in the hacking of the DNC server.
“To find out” is not a reason to suspect something and you know it so stop wasting our time.
"may have been caused by a typo, The New York Times reported Tuesday in an in-depth piece on Russian cyberattacks.
So, we don’t know, and so it’s obvious the Hillary camp would have need more “protection” (= spies) than Trumps camp as Trump was not a victim like Hillary was…lol!
Why would you assume hacking was the only way the Russians tried to attack Hillary. Why “protect” the Trump camp and not hillary’s, when nothing happened to the Trump camp?
