TRUMP FUMING! Trump accuses Obama of wire-tapping his phone

[MyLadiesDaddy]

1 hour ago, divemaster5734 said:

It's not the first time they used the government to break the law.

Besides the IRS scandal targeting conservatives, or the CIA "fast and furious" giving guns to cartels, who then killed Americans, or clinton and obama creating ISL, those were illegal, but not "spying".

Aside from the lawless actions, remember when obama wiretapped the Fox News reporters?

They "got away" with it then, whatever makes you think they didn't continue to spy on their enemies?

They ARE socialists, it's WHAT they do.

I agree with your thoughts, my friend but those weren't actions taken directly against President Trump. They were most likely a motivating factor for his deciding to run for President. 

This wire tapping of his phones is a direct attack on Donald Trump. And we know how he reacts to being attacked. Unlike everyone else he is not going to let them get away with it. By the way has anyone here asked themselves why is it that President Trump has surrounded himself with strong military Generals? 

Ya'll might wanna be thinking about that 

[divemaster5734]

11 minutes ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

 those weren't actions taken directly against President Trump.

No, but they were intentional, malicious, illegal, and immoral actions, almost mindboggling abuse of power acts by obama.

It establishes a pattern of wanton rule breaking and corruption.

After all the other violations, can there be any doubt they would attack Trump.

Besides, remember, Trump is only the personification of the voice of the American People.

Every other transgression, including those against Trump, were also, by default, attacks against America.

Trump is just the latest targeted individual, but everything has been done to overthrow America.

I hope the Trump haters can get past their own noses to realize what it all means.

After obviously ignoring the Rule of Law, or at least the laws that he didn't like at any particular moment, obama and his willing administration spit in the face of EVERY American.

Nixon had to resign, and clinton was impeached, after getting caught doing JUST ONE illegal act.

How much longer are the dems going to ignore all obama's criminal acts.

They are only hurting themselves by their determined loyalty to someone who destroys allies at the drop of a hat.

We have to look at the bigger picture, this isn't just about Trump.

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

Here ya go my friends

 

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

And this just in

 

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

38 minutes ago, divemaster5734 said:

We have to look at the bigger picture, this isn't just about Trump.

Again you're correct this seems to be about far more than most wish to know. 

As to the reaction of Trump to the events of late, I would ask you one question. Do you think that President Trump understands the precarious powder keg that he's sitting on? Do you think he realizes how close to all out civil war we all are. And if you do think he is aware, then what do you think he will do to stop this from progressing?  

[RV ME]

1 hour ago, divemaster5734 said:

No, but they were intentional, malicious, illegal, and immoral actions, almost mindboggling abuse of power acts by obama.

It establishes a pattern of wanton rule breaking and corruption.

After all the other violations, can there be any doubt they would attack Trump.

Besides, remember, Trump is only the personification of the voice of the American People.

Every other transgression, including those against Trump, were also, by default, attacks against America.

Trump is just the latest targeted individual, but everything has been done to overthrow America.

I hope the Trump haters can get past their own noses to realize what it all means.

After obviously ignoring the Rule of Law, or at least the laws that he didn't like at any particular moment, obama and his willing administration spit in the face of EVERY American.

Nixon had to resign, and clinton was impeached, after getting caught doing JUST ONE illegal act.

How much longer are the dems going to ignore all obama's criminal acts.

They are only hurting themselves by their determined loyalty to someone who destroys allies at the drop of a hat.

We have to look at the bigger picture, this isn't just about Trump.

 

Agree on many points my friend, but you need to remember that for liberals, the end justifies the means.  Rule breaking and corruption are acceptable as long as it is liberals doing the deed.  They do not care about nor will they admit Obummers criminality.  They do not care about Obummers blatant law breaking because all of Obummers actions were directed at what they consider “the enemy”.  They are too invested in their ideology, Constitution be damned (it is an outdated racist document anyway) to care about what is written on an old piece of parchment.  Can you imagine the uproar if W had done the things O did?  Nixon resigned because conservatives in the Senate told him they would hold him accountable in the impeachment.  Conversely, the libs attempted to cover up, then justify O actually using the IRS against the TEA Party groups (something Nixon only considered but never actually did).  As Harry Reid said when questioned about flat out lying on the Senate floor regarding Romney’s taxes, “Well, he didn’t win did he?”.  Justified ends by totally corrupt people and totally acceptable to the ideologically likeminded.

On the other hand Trump haters will never give him credit for anything.  They only turn up their noses at anything he does.  Evidenced by several here who have claimed to be willing to give him a chance, but never had any intention of actually doing so.  I can think of no better example than Shabs blaming Trump for the stock market going down the day after the election but failing to mention the many stock market records since then.  When you have BA claiming O saved the world because W ruined it (without actually ever explaining exactly how O saved us or how W destroyed us), while blaming everything from the housing bubble to the bank deregulation, and even Obamacare on Republicans, are two examples of mild libs, just look at the deranged mask wearing rabid liberal fascists that are taking to the streets.  I have no hope that liberals will ever do anything but look at Trump as public enemy #1.  Unfortunately as long as Trump, or any other non-lib, are looked at as the enemy, there will be no end to the libs justifying their means.

 

[Karsten]

1 hour ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

Again you're correct this seems to be about far more than most wish to know. 

As to the reaction of Trump to the events of late, I would ask you one question. Do you think that President Trump understands the precarious powder keg that he's sitting on? Do you think he realizes how close to all out civil war we all are. And if you do think he is aware, then what do you think he will do to stop this from progressing?  

LGD,

I think President Trump indeed understands the powder keg he is sitting on and I believe he full well knows who is funding it. I do believe he knows the situation fully and just how close we are to a civil War but the issues at hand fueling protests is not coming from the Right Wing Conservative, it is not coming from the Tea Party, it is not coming from Good Olde Southern Gun Totin, Bible trumpin types either....These groups did burn Boston, These groups did riot in Ferguson, these groups burn the campus at UC-Berkley.

The violence is being fueled by the Left, by obama, soros, Hillarious and the rest of the DC elites that stand to loose everything, that stand to be exposed for what they have done for themselves at the cost of the American Tax Payer.

As for how to stop the leftist violence.....Cut off their funding for one. Pass laws allowing drivers to drive through blocked freeway and roadways that block and delay ambulances and other emergency vehicles, pass laws protecting LEO and stiff penalties  for acts of violence toward police, pass laws where acts of Violence, Rioting, looting and destruction of property is an instant lose of any and all state of government benefits such as welfare, any student loans....

The 1st Amendment give you the right to gather, protest and voice your opinion...It does not give you the right to riot, loot, burn cars and buildings, damage property or Assault Other People who feel differently than they do.....Hence the left is asking for something they wont win.

As for what President Trump can do to put a stop to the leftist violence....One thing and One thing only will put a stop to this.....He would have to resign and make sure Hillarious was advanced to office of POTUS even thought 10 other Republican are in line before she would even be eligible and that would truly open Pandora's Box. 

Right now everyone needs to come to grips that there is a New POTUS (and he just like obama was  supposed to be) is the American Peoples President. Let him either do the job and do it well and MAGA or let him fail.....But no one has the right to subvert his efforts by illegal actions.

Just to set the record straight.

By the way LGD as for this from before.... Please sister, calm down and seek the will of the Father. I am nothing more than an angry old man and I even ride Harley's

Karsten

 

Edited March 5, 2017 by Karsten

[Theseus]

I have been thinking hard on this all day and reviewed Levin's interview with Fox News. I actually watched it live.

 I want to counter a narrative that is going on right now in the news and I am sure even you might have guessed this by now. What is the narrative? The narrative is that the sitting President covered up the wiretapping of then Presidential Candidate Donald J Trump. The counter to this narrative I am postulating  is this: there is no cover up by then President Obama. That is not to say what Obama did was wrong, because it is certainly an abuse of power. I believe everyone agrees this is highly suspicious in nature but there is no cover up. Why? Today Mark Levin exhibited, if you will, various articles from various “reputable” sources including the New York Times about the wiretap I believe in August of 2016. So let’s take a look at how this all happened. Some say this started in the Spring of 2015. However, I firmly believe it really gained traction when then Presidential Candidate Trump jokingly uttered those infamous words about how the Russians should find the missing 30K Clinton emails. Also a narrative was then being thrown out that Russia hacked into Hillarious Clinton’s private server she kept in the basement. Some of the media at the time were saying China, Iran and others hacked into it too. However, you notice by the time we get to the Conventions the only country mentioned was Russia. No China. No Iran. No others. In almost every article the hacking done was strictly done by Russia. This becomes important later.

Let’s fast forward to the Summer of 2016 but before the DNC Convention, Obama’s Administration went to the FISA court  to get a wiretap warrant signed by a judge. It was denied because it was too broad in scope (I am assuming they asked for this based on several nations, not just Russia). This was reported on per Mark Levin’s interview today with Fox News. Now, right before the Democrat National Convention. WikiLeaks releases a bombshell of emails which cost Debbie Wasserman Schulz her position at the DNC. Almost instantaneously, the Russians were blamed for this. Even Fox News reported on this and unknowingly were complicit in the plot. Notice the reports on Hillarious Clinton’s server being hacked, the reports are only about the Russians doing the hacking. The narrative becomes focused solely on the Russians, no more China, no more Iran, no more others. Yeah, they get a brief mention here and there but the focus is solely on Russia, at this point. If the original request was too broad, the narrative had to be narrowed to fit the next request. However the request wasn’t done immediately. Obama let this fester in the public eye for a while. This is the most important part of this. He let Hillarious Clinton and her followers, including the MSM and everyone who reported on this, beat the narrative, focusing solely on Russia, in the minds of the public opinion so that when investigating the hacking of her server and emails, the public would then only refer to the perpetrators as the Russians. Once this narrative had time to ferment in the court of public opinion, Obama’s administration then went back to the FISA Court and requested another wiretap, which was narrowed in scope to only the Russians this time. The emails from WikiLeaks also added to this case giving it further traction.

However, Sean Hannity did an interview with Julian Assange that adamantly denied the source of the emails were not the Russians.  Those covering the story, went on and on about how the Russians were the hackers in question and ignored Assange’s interview. In this time, various news outlets had reported that the first wiretap authorization was turned down. These reports, too, were largely ignored. A second wiretap warrant was then requested and granted in October 2016. However, by that time it was too late for the election. Notice Obama had assured the nation Trump was not going to be elected. He knew what was going on, I can only assume at this juncture. He also knew he was on his way out.  Up to this point there is no cover up. None. Zilch. People knew that a second wiretap had been requested and the investigation was ongoing because it was reported in the media. 

Also, the server, in Trump Tower,  in which the Russian Banks appeared on, were the catalyst to expand the narrowed wiretap warrant to then include other Senior members of Trump’s administration. Once they found this on the server the wiretap authority was expanded.  Which is how the Obama Administration were able to record Flynn and Sessions and others. 

In December, Obama, as well as others in his Administration, came out and said the matter had been investigated and there was no evidence of the hacking by Russians. Now we have the cover up. Why would Obama come out in December 2016 and say there is no evidence? The answer is rather simple, so once Donald Trump took the oath of office, he would do so under the guise that the matter into the Russian Hacking was settled and more than likely not investigate the matter. Then leaks started happening and cost Flynn his position. Something was not right. Everyone sensed it. Rumors about a shadow government was being formed etc. The cover up  was not until the Obama administration came out, around December 16, 2016, saying there was no evidence to impugn the Russians for the hacking. By then, it was too late for anyone to do anything as the transition was fully underway.

It all fits. There was no cover up of the wiretapping until December 2016. It was reported on by various news agencies when it occurred and it was right in front of our faces the entire time. The cover up did not happen until December 2016 and only then the cover up was about whom the wiretaps were on. All in all, both requests for wiretaps were requested fraudulently. They used first the narrative of the several foreign nations hacking and when this didn’t work they narrowed the scope and re-requested knowing full well what they asked of the FISA Court to approve was not the intended purpose of the wiretaps. 

It is my belief this is how the pieces fit in and how the analysis in the public arena has it almost right but is off by a smidgen. What Obama did, tapping a political opponent, was abuse his power, he might not have ordered the wiretaps but he could have requested the current AG to go to the FISA Court on his behalf as is the law of the land. It would be remiss to say Obama was unaware of this, due to the nature of the daily intelligence briefings and the subject of the wiretaps. I am postulating this at this juncture because I have not seen the FISA request. I doubt anyone outside of the those in the power to do so will be the only ones to see these. Give this some serious thought and I know you will see it after I have. I also know this is still raw as it only came to light today so things might shift here and there, but in generality, this is most likely how things transpired.  

Edited March 6, 2017 by Theseus

[RV ME]

50 minutes ago, Theseus said:

I have been thinking hard on this all day and reviewed Levin's interview with Fox News. I actually watched it live.

 I want to counter a narrative that is going on right now in the news and I am sure even you might have guessed this by now. What is the narrative? The narrative is that the sitting President covered up the wiretapping of then Presidential Candidate Donald J Trump. The counter to this narrative I am postulating  is this: there is no cover up by then President Obama. That is not to say what Obama did was wrong, because it is certainly an abuse of power. I believe everyone agrees this is highly suspicious in nature but there is no cover up. Why? Today Mark Levin exhibited, if you will, various articles from various “reputable” sources including the New York Times about the wiretap I believe in August of 2016. So let’s take a look at how this all happened. Some say this started in the Spring of 2015. However, I firmly believe it really gained traction when then Presidential Candidate Trump jokingly uttered those infamous words about how the Russians should find the missing 30K Clinton emails. Also a narrative was then being thrown out that Russia hacked into Hillarious Clinton’s private server she kept in the basement. Some of the media at the time were saying China, Iran and others hacked into it too. However, you notice by the time we get to the Conventions the only country mentioned was Russia. No China. No Iran. No others. In almost every article the hacking done was strictly done by Russia. This becomes important later.

Let’s fast forward to the Summer of 2016 but before the DNC Convention, Obama’s Administration went to the FISA court  to get a wiretap warrant signed by a judge. It was denied because it was too broad in scope (I am assuming they asked for this based on several nations, not just Russia). This was reported on per Mark Levin’s interview today with Fox News. Now, right before the Democrat National Convention. WikiLeaks releases a bombshell of emails which cost Debbie Wasserman Schulz her position at the DNC. Almost instantaneously, the Russians were blamed for this. Even Fox News reported on this and unknowingly were complicit in the plot. Notice the reports on Hillarious Clinton’s server being hacked, the reports are only about the Russians doing the hacking. The narrative becomes focused solely on the Russians, no more China, no more Iran, no more others. Yeah, they get a brief mention here and there but the focus is solely on Russia, at this point. If the original request was too broad, the narrative had to be narrowed to fit the next request. However the request wasn’t done immediately. Obama let this fester in the public eye for a while. This is the most important part of this. He let Hillarious Clinton and her followers, including the MSM and everyone who reported on this, beat the narrative, focusing solely on Russia, in the minds of the public opinion so that when investigating the hacking of her server and emails, the public would then only refer to the perpetrators as the Russians. Once this narrative had time to ferment in the court of public opinion, Obama’s administration then went back to the FISA Court and requested another wiretap, which was narrowed in scope to only the Russians this time. The emails from WikiLeaks also added to this case giving it further traction.

However, Sean Hannity did an interview with Julian Assange that adamantly denied the source of the emails were not the Russians.  Those covering the story, went on and on about how the Russians were the hackers in question and ignored Assange’s interview. In this time, various news outlets had reported that the first wiretap authorization was turned down. These reports, too, were largely ignored. A second wiretap warrant was then requested and granted in October 2016. However, by that time it was too late for the election. Notice Obama had assured the nation Trump was not going to be elected. He knew what was going on, I can only assume at this juncture. He also knew he was on his way out.  Up to this point there is no cover up. None. Zilch. People knew that a second wiretap had been requested and the investigation was ongoing because it was reported in the media. 

Also, the server, in Trump Tower,  in which the Russian Banks appeared on, were the catalyst to expand the narrowed wiretap warrant to then include other Senior members of Trump’s administration. Once they found this on the server the wiretap authority was expanded.  Which is how the Obama Administration were able to record Flynn and Sessions and others. 

In December, Obama, as well as others in his Administration, came out and said the matter had been investigated and there was no evidence of the hacking by Russians. Now we have the cover up. Why would Obama come out in December 2016 and say there is no evidence? The answer is rather simple, so once Donald Trump took the oath of office, he would do so under the guise that the matter into the Russian Hacking was settled and more than likely not investigate the matter. Then leaks started happening and cost Flynn his position. Something was not right. Everyone sensed it. Rumors about a shadow government was being formed etc. The cover up  was not until the Obama administration came out, around December 16, 2016, saying there was no evidence to impugn the Russians for the hacking. By then, it was too late for anyone to do anything as the transition was fully underway.

It all fits. There was no cover up of the wiretapping until December 2016. It was reported on by various news agencies when it occurred and it was right in front of our faces the entire time. The cover up did not happen until December 2016 and only then the cover up was about whom the wiretaps were on. All in all, both requests for wiretaps were requested fraudulently. They used first the narrative of the several foreign nations hacking and when this didn’t work they narrowed the scope and re-requested knowing full well what they asked of the FISA Court to approve was not the intended purpose of the wiretaps. 

It is my belief this is how the pieces fit in and how the analysis in the public arena has it almost right but is off by a smidgen. What Obama did, tapping a political opponent, was abuse his power, he might not have ordered the wiretaps but he could have requested the current AG to go to the FISA Court on his behalf as is the law of the land. It would be remiss to say Obama was unaware of this, due to the nature of the daily intelligence briefings and the subject of the wiretaps. I am postulating this at this juncture because I have not seen the FISA request. I doubt anyone outside of the those in the power to do so will be the only ones to see these. Give this some serious thought and I know you will see it after I have. I also know this is still raw as it only came to light today so things might shift here and there, but in generality, this is most likely how things transpired.  

IF what you say is true, Obummer still has broken the law.  The problem then becomes that according to the law regarding the FISA court, if there was a “wiretap” and nothing was found the information must be destroyed.  Obummer went askew of the actual law and issued an edict that all material be retained, reclassified, and disseminated.  So either poison you choose, it is still outside the law.

 

Yes, There Could Be Serious Legal Problems if Obama Admin Involved in Illegal Surveillance

by Robert Barnes

 

President Trump recently tweeted claiming that former President Obama wiretapped him during his campaign. One can only imagine how nuts the media would have gone if the roles had been reversed: President Trump wiretapping either Obama or the Clintons, though his DOJ could have authority to do just that given the expansive leaks of intelligence information by Obama and Clinton supporters the last few months. Heck, he could wiretap the media at this point, legally and legitimately, as the sources of these unlawful leaks, for which Obama himself set precedent. Do liberals understand what Pandora’s Box Obama opened up by Obama using the powers of the NSA, CIA and FBI to spy on his political opponents? Even Nixon never did that.

If the stories are correct, Obama or his officials might even face prosecution. But, we are still early in all of this and there are a lot of rumors flying around so the key is if the reports are accurate. We just don’t know at this time. The stories currently are three-fold: first, that Obama’s team tried to get a warrant from a regular, Article III federal court on Trump, and was told no by someone along the way (maybe the FBI), as the evidence was that weak or non-existent; second, Obama’s team then tried to circumvent the federal judiciary’s independent role by trying to mislabel the issue one of “foreign agents,” and tried to obtain a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act “courts”, and were again turned down, when the court saw Trump named (an extremely rare act of FISA court refusal of the government, suggesting the evidence was truly non-existent against Trump); and so, third, Obama circumvented both the regular command of the FBI and the regularly appointed federal courts, by placing the entire case as a FISA case (and apparently under Sally Yates at DOJ) as a “foreign” case, and then omitted Trump’s name from a surveillance warrant submitted to the FISA court, which the FISA court unwittingly granted, which Obama then misused to spy on Trump and many connected to Trump. Are these allegations true? We don’t know yet, but if any part of them are than Obama and/or his officials could face serious trouble.

Can a President be charged with a crime? Only once out of office. While in office, impeachment remains the exclusive remedy in order to avoid a single judicial branch trying to overturn an election, such as a grand jury in any part of the country could. Once out of office, a President remains immune from civil liability for his duties while President, under a 1982 decision of the United States Supreme Court. However, as the Nixon pardon attests, nothing forecloses a criminal prosecution of the President after his presidency is complete for crimes against the country. Obama, the Constitutional lawyer, should know that.

What crimes could have been committed? Ironically, for Democrats falsely accusing Attorney General Sessions, perjury and conspiracy to commit perjury, as well as intentional violations of FISA. Rather shockingly, no law currently forbids misusing the power of the presidency to spy on one’s adversaries. What the law does forbid is lying to any judicial officer to obtain any means of surveillance. What the law does forbid, under criminal penalty, is the misuse of FISA. Both derive from the protections of the Fourth Amendment itself. Under section 1809, FISA makes it a crime for anyone to either “engage in” electronic surveillance under “color of law” under FISA without following the law’s restrictions, or “disclose” or “use” information gathered from it in contravention of the statute’s sharp constrictions.

FISA, 50 USC 1801, et seq., is a very limited method of obtaining surveillance authority. The reason for its strict limits is that FISA evades the regular federal court process, by not allowing regularly, Constitutionally appointed federal judges and their magistrates to authorize surveillance the Fourth Amendment would otherwise forbid. Instead, the Chief Justice handpicks the FISA court members, who have shown an exceptional deference to the executive branch. This is because FISA court members trust the government is only bringing them surveillance about pending terror attacks or “grave hostile” war-like attacks, as the FISA statute limits itself to. Thus, a FISA application can only be used in very limited circumstances.

One important reminder about electronic surveillance. Occasionally, a law enforcement officer will hear or see or record information not allowed by the warrant, but incidental or accidental to otherwise lawful surveillance. Their job is to immediately stop listening, stop recording, and to delete such information. This is what you occasionally see in films where the agent in the van hears the conversation turn away from something criminal to a personal discussion, and the agent then turns off the listening device and stops the recording. Such films simply recognize long-standing legal practice.

FISA can only be used for “foreign intelligence information.” Now that sounds broad, but is in fact very limited under the law. The only “foreign intelligence information” allowed as a basis for surveillance is information necessary to protect the United States against actual or potential “grave” “hostile” attack, war-like sabotage or international terror. Second, it can only be used to eavesdrop on conversations where the parties to the conversation are a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power. An agent of a foreign power cannot be a United States person unless they are knowingly involved in criminal espionage. No warrant is allowed on that person unless a FISA court finds probable cause the United States person is knowingly engaged in criminal espionage. Even then, if it involves a United States person, special steps must be taken to “minimize the acquisition and retention, and prohibit the dissemination, of non publicly available information concerning un-consenting United States persons.”

This includes procedures that require they never identify the person, or the conversation, being surveilled, to the public where that information is not evidence of a particular crime. Third, the kind of information sought concerns solely information about a pending or actual attack on the country. That is why the law limits itself to sabotage incidents involving war, not any form or kind of “sabotage,” explicitly limiting itself to those acts identified in section 105 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

This bring us to Watergate-on-Steroids, or #ObamaGate. Here are the problematic aspects of the Obama surveillance on Trump’s team, and on Trump himself. First, it is not apparent FISA could ever be invoked. Second, it is possible Obama’s team may have perjured themselves before the FISA court by withholding material information essential to the FISA court’s willingness to permit the government surveillance. Third, it could be that Obama’s team illegally disseminated and disclosed FISA information in direct violation of the statute precisely prohibiting such dissemination and disclosure. FISA prohibits, under criminal penalty, Obama’s team from doing any of the three.

At the outset, the NSA should have never been involved in a domestic US election. Investigating the election, or any hacking of the DNC or the phishing of Podesta’s emails, would not be a FISA matter. It does not fit the definition of war sabotage or a “grave” “hostile” war-like attack on the United States, as constrictively covered by FISA. It is your run-of-the-mill hacking case covered by existing United States laws that require use of the regular departments of the FBI, Department of Justice, and Constitutionally Senate-appointed federal district court judges, and their appointed magistrates, not secretive, deferential FISA courts.

Out of 35,000+ requests for surveillance, the FISA court has only ever rejected a whopping 12. Apparently, according to published reports, you can add one more to that — even the FISA court first rejected Obama’s request to spy on Trump’s team under the guise of an investigation into foreign agents of a pending war attack, intelligence agents apparently returned to the court, where, it is my assumption, that they did not disclose or divulge all material facts to the court when seeking the surveillance the second time around, some of which they would later wrongfully disseminate and distribute to the public. By itself, misuse of FISA procedures to obtain surveillance is itself, a crime.

This raises the second problem: Obama’s team submission of an affidavit to to the FISA court. An application for a warrant of any kind requires an affidavit, and that affidavit may not omit material factors. A fact is “material” if it could have the possible impact of impacting the judicial officer deciding whether to authorize the warrant. Such affidavits are the most carefully drawn up, reviewed, and approved affidavits of law enforcement in our system precisely because they must be fully-disclosing, forthcoming, and include any information a judge must know to decide whether to allow our government to spy on its own. My assumption would be that intelligence officials were trying to investigate hacking of DNC which is not even a FISA covered crime, so therefore serious questions arise about what Obama administration attorneys said to the FISA court to even consider the application. If the claim was “financial ties” to Russia, then Obama knew he had no basis to use FISA at all.

Since Trump was the obvious target, the alleged failure to disclose his name in the second application could be a serious and severe violation of the obligation to disclose all material facts. Lastly, given the later behavior, it is evident any promise in the affidavit to protect the surveilled information from ever being sourced or disseminated was a false promise, intended to induce the illicit surveillance. This is criminalized both by federal perjury statutes, conspiracy statutes, and the FISA criminal laws themselves.

That raises the third problem: it seems the FISA-compelled protocols for precluding the dissemination of the information were violated, and that Obama’s team issued orders to achieve precisely what the law forbids, if published reports are true about the administration sharing the surveilled information far-and-wide to promote unlawful leaks to the press. This, too, would be its own crime, as it brings back the ghost of Hildabeast’s emails — by definition, FISA information is strictly confidential or it’s information that never should have been gathered. FISA strictly segregates its surveilled information into two categories: highly confidential information of the most serious of crimes involving foreign acts of war; or, if not that, then information that should never have been gathered, should be immediately deleted, and never sourced nor disseminated. It cannot be both.

Recognizing this information did not fit FISA meant having to delete it and destroy it. According to published reports, Obama’s team did the opposite: order it preserved, ordered the NSA to search it, keep it, and share it; and then Obama’s Attorney General issued an order to allow broader sharing of information and, according to the New York Times, Obama aides acted to label the Trump information at a lower level of classification for massive-level sharing of the information. The problem for Obama is simple — if it could fit a lower level of classification, then it had to be deleted and destroyed, not disseminated and distributed, under crystal clear FISA law. Obama’s team’s admission it could be classified lower, yet taking actions to insure its broadest distribution, could even put Obama smack-middle of the biggest unlawful surveillance and political-opponent-smear campaign since Nixon. Except even Nixon didn’t use the FBI and NSA for his dirty tricks.

 

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/yes-obama-could-be-prosecuted-if-involved-with-illegal-surveillance/

[divemaster5734]

4 hours ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

Again you're correct this seems to be about far more than most wish to know. 

As to the reaction of Trump to the events of late, I would ask you one question. Do you think that President Trump understands the precarious powder keg that he's sitting on? Do you think he realizes how close to all out civil war we all are. And if you do think he is aware, then what do you think he will do to stop this from progressing?  

Of course he does, that is exactly what inspired his speech last week.

I understand the frustration he is feeling, those who oppose him care nothing for AMerica if it doesn't fit into their warped and twisted narrative.

Trump has been offering the "olive branch of peace", and every time it has been violently slapped from his hand.

Trump is being inclusive, so when the hysterical mobs scream for inclusion, what they are really saying is THEY  want to be the ONLY special benefits.

Most of the opposition force is in reality just paid protesters who are too self-consumed to bother to realize what they are doing to themselves.

Yes, America is at a major crossroads, and until the insanity of "political correctness" is finally abandoned for the tool of the dividers it really is, America will remain one small step from internal meltdown.

Even so, it will take years to unravel the twisted "logic" forced on our children in public education institutions.

With luck, his education secretary will help user in the end of the teachers union, and along with it, the incompetent, predators, and molesters.

[Whatshername]

Incompetent AND Criminal: Obama’s Wiretapping of President Trump Icing on the Cake of Worst President Ever

Jim Hoft Mar 5th, 2017 

With President Obama’s actions disclosed over the weekend by President Donald Trump, there is no longer any argument that Obama was the Worst President Ever.

President Donald Trump shared in a series of tweets yesterday that President Barack Obama had him wire tapped during the election.

President Trump tweeted:

Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my “wires tapped” in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017

 

He next tweeted:

Is it legal for a sitting President to be “wire tapping” a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017

 

Next the President tweeted:

I’d bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017

 

The final for four tweets concerning the wire tapping:

How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017

 

Not surprising after the shock of what was presented by the current President to the public, the left wing media, their Democrat allies and the few #NeverTrump Republicans who align in their opposition to President Trump went all in for former President Obama.  Their responses no longer surprise America.  Americans would be shocked if they criticized former President Obama.  As a result of the recent Presidential campaign, Americans are used to seeing the corrupt media and Democrats (including #NeverTrumpers) react as they do.  Their extreme bias is why President Trump is trusted more than the media.

The truth will come out and former President Obama will go down in history as the Worst President Ever.  This is the nail in the Obama coffin.  What a mess and what a mistake he was.

Former President Obama lied to the American people more times than anyone could possibly count.  He lied about Obamacare resulting in lower premiums.  He lied and said the US did not pay a $400 million ransom in cash to Iran for hostages.  He lied and said illegal aliens wouldn’t receive Obamacare subsidies. He lied about Benghazi.  He lied repeatedly about global warming.  He lied about Obamacare allowing you to keep your doctor.  He lied about the IRS targeting conservatives.  He lied and blamed Bush for his historical debt and deficits. He lied and told Jewish donors that his Administration had done more to support Israel security than any administration in 25 years.  He even lied at the National Prayer Breakfast about his father’s Muslim faith.

Now America is supposed to believe that the narcissist President Obama was looking out for America when he tapped President Trump at Trump Tower during the election?  This former President who chose not to investigate his former Secretary of State, Hillarious Clinton, for known abuses with foreign entities in her Clinton Foundation, felt the need to wire tap her competitor during the election for no known reason?

Based on his deceiving track record, it is clear that President Obama wanted to gain information against future President Trump that he could use against him.  This is Obamagate.  Hopefully, the final chapter in Obama’s failed Presidency.

Unlike the media that is still cheerleading for serial liar Obama, most Americans stand by the side of their current President Trump, and rightly so. 

See the Following for More Reasons Why Obama is the ‘Worst. President. Ever’:

Worst. President. Ever: Obama First President Ever Not to Reach 3% GDP Growth
Worst. President. Ever: Obama’s the Most Racist President in 50 Years – Since Democrat LBJ
Worst. President. Ever: Obama’s Failed Stimulus
Worst. President. Ever: Barack Hussein Obama’s Disdain for Christians and Jews
Worst. President. Ever: Obama’s Involvement in Hillarious’s Criminal Email Activities
Worst. President. Ever: Obama’s Open Borders and Anti-US Immigration Actions
Worst. President. Ever: Obama’s Contempt of US Military Might
Worst. President. Ever. Will Obama Ever Be Charged in Court for His Many Lies to American People?
WORST. PRESIDENT. EVER: Obama’s Many Lies about the Benghazi Terror Attack
WORST PRESIDENT EVER: Obama’s Historically Low Home Ownership Rates
WORST PRESIDENT EVER: Obama Created ISIS – And Now the Killer Group Is Active in 17 Countries
WORST PRESIDENT EVER: Obama’s Libyan Catastrophe Unleashed Hell on Middle East and Europe
WORST PRESIDENT EVER: Obama’s $20 Trillion Debt an Unprecedented Disaster
WORST PRESIDENT EVER: Obama’s Actions and Inaction Created the Current Nightmare in Syria
WORST PRESIDENT EVER: Obama’s Signature Bill – Obamacare – Is a Complete Disaster
WORST PRESIDENT EVER: Obama Gave Billions to the World’s Leading Terrorist State Iran
WORST PRESIDENT EVER: Obama’s Food Stamp Nation
WORST PRESIDENT EVER: Obama Ignited Riots in Ferguson Over ‘Hands Up, Don’t Shoot’ Lie
WORST PRESIDENT EVER: Obama Released Taliban 5 for Deserter Bergdahl- Current Whereabouts Unknown
WORST JOBS PRESIDENT EVER: Obama’s 94 Million Jobless Americans
Worst President Ever…GDP Growth Shrinks by 0.7% in First Quarter
Alan Dershowitz GOES OFF on Obama: Worst Foreign Policy President Ever
Worst President Ever… Obama’s Legacy – Destruction of US Middle Class
TRUMP HITS OBAMA: His Ignorance Is Why He’s “Worst President in US History”
Voters Rate Obama Worst President in 70 Years
Donald Trump Slams “Make-Believe” Obama “Most Certainly the Worst President in US History” at FL Tea Party Rally
**** Cheney Slams Obama: Carter no Longer Worst President of Our Lifetime (Video)
MUST SEE VIDEO>>> Chicago Inner City Blacks GO OFF on Obama Over Illegal Immigration “Worst President Ever”
It’s Official – Obama Is Worst President in History on Job Creation; Worse Than Hoover on Job Losses
Rep. Michele Bachmann: Obama Is Worst President Ever… “No Question” (Video)

[Whatshername]

Former Secret Service Agent Dan Bongino: #Obamagate Is Going to Blow Wide-Open This Week

Jim Hoft Mar 5th, 2017 

Former Secret Service agent and best-selling author Dan Bonginoclaims the Obama wiretapping scandal is going to blow wide open this week.

Bongino was assigned to the U.S. Presidential Protection Division during George W. Bush’s term. He remained on protective duty after Barack Obama became President, leaving in May 2011.

On Saturday Bongino said the #Obamagate scandal is going to blow wide-open this week.

#ObamaGate is going to blow wide-open this week

— Dan Bongino (@dbongino) March 5, 2017

 

I'll be sharing more about the Obama administration this week, it's time. #ObamaGate

— Dan Bongino (@dbongino) March 5, 2017

[new york kevin]

On 3/4/2017 at 8:00 AM, Shabibilicious said:

From yet another tax payer funded retreat to Mar-a-Lago, Capt Twitter goes on another social media tirade, provides zero evidence of wire tapping....then tweets negatively about Arnold's separation from the Apprentice.... and the sheep can't get enough.  

 

Shabby: The first and second FISA applications are all over the internet. The first one was denied for a lack of appropriate evidence, the second one was approved to monitor and evaluate the server that the Trump Inc and his Campaign maintained as a matter of everyday business. 

 Share

 

Home

Breaking News

FBI Was Granted FISA Warrant in October to “Investigate Trump Campaign” 

FBI Was Granted FISA Warrant in October to “Investigate Trump Campaign” 

BREAKING NEWS BY AMY MORENO MARCH 4, 2017

 Share

 

 Tweet

In October the FBI was granted a “FISA warrant” in regards to the Trump Campaign and so-called ties to Russia.

The United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (also called the FISA Court) is a federal court established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) to oversee requests for surveillance warrants against foreign spies inside the United States by federal law.

A FISA warrant is an authorization to collect evidence, not to arrest.

As we all know by now, the FBI cleared Trump and his campaign of any “Russia ties,” but the liberals and dishonest media still can’t let it go.

However, in light of Trump’s latest allegations of Obama “wiretapping,” the bigger question is who requested this warrant and how closely is this linked to the wiretapping story Trump is referencing?

As Mark Levin put it, this is just some of what we know about the Obama administration and its intel/law enforcement tactics from the public record — aka, media reports.

This story is a November “exclusive” from Heatstreet, outlining the FISA warrant and what the Feds were interested in.

From Heatstreet

Two separate sources with links to the counter-intelligence community have confirmed to Heat Street that the FBI sought, and was granted, a FISA court warrant in October, giving counter-intelligence permission to examine the activities of ‘U.S. persons’ in Donald Trump’s campaign with ties to Russia.

Contrary to earlier reporting in the New York Times, which cited FBI sources as saying that the agency did not believe that the private server in Donald Trump’s Trump Tower which was connected to a Russian bank had any nefarious purpose, the FBI’s counter-intelligence arm, sources say, re-drew an earlier FISA court request around possible financial and banking offenses related to the server. The first request, which, sources say, named Trump, was denied back in June, but the second was drawn more narrowly and was granted in October after evidence was presented of a server, possibly related to the Trump campaign, and its alleged links to two banks; SVB Bank and Russia’s Alfa Bank. While the Times story speaks of metadata, sources suggest that a FISA warrant was granted to look at the full content of emails and other related documents that may concern US persons.

The FBI agents who talked to the New York Times, and rubbished the ground-breaking stories of Slate ( Franklin Foer) and Mother Jones (David Corn) may not have known about the FISA warrant, sources say, because the counter-intelligence and criminal sides of the FBI often work independently of each other employing the principle of ‘compartmentalization’.

The FISA warrant was granted in connection with the investigation of suspected activity between the server and two banks, SVB Bank and Alfa Bank. However, it is thought in the intelligence community that the warrant covers any ‘US person’ connected to this investigation, and thus covers Donald Trump and at least three further men who have either formed part of his campaign or acted as his media surrogates. The warrant was sought, they say, because actionable intelligence on the matter provided by friendly foreign agencies could not properly be examined without a warrant by US intelligence as it involves ‘US Persons’ who come under the remit of the FBI and not the CIA. Should a counter-intelligence investigation lead to criminal prosecutions, sources say, the Justice Department is concerned that the chain of evidence have a basis in a clear  warrant.

In June, when the first FISA warrant was denied, the FBI was reportedly alarmed at Carter Page’s trip to Moscow and meetings with Russian officials, one week before the DNC was hacked. Counter intelligence agencies later reported to both Presidential candidates that Russia had carried out this hack; Donald Trump said publicly in the third debate that ‘our country has no idea’ if Russia did the hacking. The discovery of the Trump Tower private Russian server, however, communicating with Alfa Bank, changed matters, sources report.

To further complicate the story, the FISA warrant was allegedly granted in part because of the involvement of Vladimir Putin’s own daughters. One is married to a senior official at Gazprom, where Carter Page and Paul Manafort reportedly have holdings; another to Kirill Shamalov, a banking official.

The fact that the alleged warrant was a FISA warrant is itself significant. The court exists to grant warrants to examine cases concerned with Foreign Intelligence.

Did Obama and the Hillarious camp set all of this in motion to try and destroy Trump’s campaign, and in the process wiretap Trump Tower just weeks before the election?

Is the FISA warrant the actual “wiretap?”

There are still so many questions.

However, this scandal has the potential to bring D.C. to her knees and will end the clandestine reign of the dangerous “Deep State” who are out to destroy President Trump.

Amy Moreno is a Published Author, Pug Lover & Game of Thrones Nerd. You can reach her on Facebook here.

Share

[MyLadiesDaddy]

7 hours ago, Karsten said:

By the way LGD as for this from before.... Please sister, calm down and seek the will of the Father. I am nothing more than an angry old man and I even ride Harley's

 

 Snap, I never get that one right, sorry  And by the way that is one nice ride. 

8 hours ago, RV ME said:

Agree on many points my friend, but you need to remember that for liberals, the end justifies the means.  Rule breaking and corruption are acceptable as long as it is liberals doing the deed.  They do not care about nor will they admit Obummers criminality.  They do not care about Obummers blatant law breaking because all of Obummers actions were directed at what they consider “the enemy”.  They are too invested in their ideology, Constitution be damned (it is an outdated racist document anyway) to care about what is written on an old piece of parchment.  Can you imagine the uproar if W had done the things O did?  Nixon resigned because conservatives in the Senate told him they would hold him accountable in the impeachment.  Conversely, the libs attempted to cover up, then justify O actually using the IRS against the TEA Party groups (something Nixon only considered but never actually did).  As Harry Reid said when questioned about flat out lying on the Senate floor regarding Romney’s taxes, “Well, he didn’t win did he?”.  Justified ends by totally corrupt people and totally acceptable to the ideologically likeminded.

 

On the other hand Trump haters will never give him credit for anything.  They only turn up their noses at anything he does.  Evidenced by several here who have claimed to be willing to give him a chance, but never had any intention of actually doing so.  I can think of no better example than Shabs blaming Trump for the stock market going down the day after the election but failing to mention the many stock market records since then.  When you have BA claiming O saved the world because W ruined it (without actually ever explaining exactly how O saved us or how W destroyed us), while blaming everything from the housing bubble to the bank deregulation, and even Obamacare on Republicans, are two examples of mild libs, just look at the deranged mask wearing rabid liberal fascists that are taking to the streets.  I have no hope that liberals will ever do anything but look at Trump as public enemy #1.  Unfortunately as long as Trump, or any other non-lib, are looked at as the enemy, there will be no end to the libs justifying their means.

 

 

 I so love your clarity because I can regurgitate it and everyone thinks I'm so smart. 

[pattyangel]

I applaud each of you for a excellent job in bringing over truth, we the people will get justice.  Keep it up, stay ahead of our game.   

[RV ME]

5 hours ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

 I so love your clarity because I can regurgitate it and everyone thinks I'm so smart. 

Thanks, I appreciate that.  You know what they say, regurgitation is the sincerest form of flattery……or something like that. 

[Shabibilicious]

1 hour ago, RV ME said:

Thanks, I appreciate that.  You know what they say, regurgitation is the sincerest form of flattery……or something like that. 

 

I second LGD's assessment.  You are the best......You make me want to puke almost daily.    JK.  

GO RV, then BV

[RV ME]

53 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

I second LGD's assessment.  You are the best......You make me want to puke almost daily.    JK.  

GO RV, then BV

Feeling is mutual my friend. 

Derubytized you, good humor shouldn't be neged   

[Shabibilicious]

Just now, RV ME said:

Feeling is mutual my friend. 

Derubytized you, good humor shouldn't be neged   

Thanks.....I knew you had a good sense of humor.  +1    See....even getting along makes me nauseous.  

GO RV, then BV

[presence]

I started reading this post, (thread)  word by word, about an hour ago...then when I got to this page I decided to scroll to the bottom for the sake of 'efficiency'. I know one of the mods here often stated 'play nice' - Bumper I think. 

As emotions run strong, and as facts unfold, let's all take a breath and be glad that we are all part of the best dinar site on the net which makes us all the same in at least one way that we all agree on. Politics aside, let's not forget the respect that each of us has learned by reading, commenting on and learning from each others' posts -respectfully- for many years- and that at any moment, I.e.,  'soon',  or 'SUDDENLY', our attention may quickly change. So while still have this efficient means to communicate and comment directly to each other (before it all brakes loose), might I suggest we keep the positive inertia of respect that's been built over the years so that we don't have to spend years tracking each other down for the sole purpose of apologizing and buying each other drinks 'when cooler heads prevail.'

[RV ME]

1 hour ago, presence said:

I started reading this post, (thread)  word by word, about an hour ago...then when I got to this page I decided to scroll to the bottom for the sake of 'efficiency'. I know one of the mods here often stated 'play nice' - Bumper I think. 

As emotions run strong, and as facts unfold, let's all take a breath and be glad that we are all part of the best dinar site on the net which makes us all the same in at least one way that we all agree on. Politics aside, let's not forget the respect that each of us has learned by reading, commenting on and learning from each others' posts -respectfully- for many years- and that at any moment, I.e.,  'soon',  or 'SUDDENLY', our attention may quickly change. So while still have this efficient means to communicate and comment directly to each other (before it all brakes loose), might I suggest we keep the positive inertia of respect that's been built over the years so that we don't have to spend years tracking each other down for the sole purpose of apologizing and buying each other drinks 'when cooler heads prevail.'

There are arguments and disagreements in any family, and the DV family is no exception.  I have had many heated disagreements with family members and said and been called much worse things than are allowed to be posted here, but if push came to shove those disagreement s would be forgotten and we know we would have each other’s back.

Several of us can get passionate discussing the issues and/or our principles, but I do not believe this constitutes lack of respect.  While Shabs and I agree only occasionally, I do not hold a grudge against him when he is wrong, and I do not believe he holds a grudge against me when he incorrectly thinks I’m wrong .  We may go back and forth in heated tones, but as the end of the thread shows, we’re are only a joke away from showing all is well.

As for searching out people in order to buy them a drink, if I ever travel to the Buckeye state I will make the offer to buy him a BV, regardless of the RV status.  It’s one thing to back and forth on the site, but there is something to be said for a good old fashion handshake.  I would say the same thing for those fellow DVer’s in New Jersey, Bakersfield, Seattle, Houston, and many other towns across the country, and if I ever make it to Italy you can be sure I will be buying Umbertino the beverage of his choice.  I will go so far as to make a standing offer that if anyone is ever in the KC area, let me know and the first round is on me.  Matter of fact, I may be in Memphis this May and if so I will make the same offer to BA if I end up making the trip.  I only hope BA likes something better than BV, my brother calls me a bourbon snob so buying BV just won’t feel right.

[Jaxinjersey]

17 minutes ago, RV ME said:

 

 

There are arguments and disagreements in any family, and the DV family is no exception.  I have had many heated disagreements with family members and said and been called much worse things than are allowed to be posted here, but if push came to shove those disagreement s would be forgotten and we know we would have each other’s back.

Several of us can get passionate discussing the issues and/or our principles, but I do not believe this constitutes lack of respect.  While Shabs and I agree only occasionally, I do not hold a grudge against him when he is wrong, and I do not believe he holds a grudge against me when he incorrectly thinks I’m wrong .  We may go back and forth in heated tones, but as the end of the thread shows, we’re are only a joke away from showing all is well.

As for searching out people in order to buy them a drink, if I ever travel to the Buckeye state I will make the offer to buy him a BV, regardless of the RV status.  It’s one thing to back and forth on the site, but there is something to be said for a good old fashion handshake.  I would say the same thing for those fellow DVer’s in New Jersey, Bakersfield, Seattle, Houston, and many other towns across the country, and if I ever make it to Italy you can be sure I will be buying Umbertino the beverage of his choice.  I will go so far as to make a standing offer that if anyone is ever in the KC area, let me know and the first round is on me.  Matter of fact, I may be in Memphis this May and if so I will make the same offer to BA if I end up making the trip.  I only hope BA likes something better than BV, my brother calls me a bourbon snob so buying BV just won’t feel right.

 

 

 

Well said RV ME! ... and sincere apologies, and genuine accountability goes a long way with healing, in my book.  Here's to hoping we all get more travel experiences!  

[pattyangel]

4 hours ago, RV ME said:

 

As for searching out people in order to buy them a drink, if I ever travel to the Buckeye state I will make the offer to buy him a BV, regardless of the RV status.  It’s one thing to back and forth on the site, but there is something to be said for a good old fashion handshake.  I would say the same thing for those fellow DVer’s in New Jersey, Bakersfield, Seattle, Houston, and many other towns across the country, and if I ever make it to Italy you can be sure I will be buying Umbertino the beverage of his choice.  I will go so far as to make a standing offer that if anyone is ever in the KC area, let me know and the first round is on me.  Matter of fact, I may be in Memphis this May and if so I will make the same offer to BA if I end up making the trip.  I only hope BA likes something better than BV, my brother calls me a bourbon snob so buying BV just won’t feel right.

 

 

 

Looking forward to sharing a glass (wine for me ) with you and Mrs. RV ME!!!!

[divemaster5734]

On 3/5/2017 at 1:36 PM, RV ME said:

Agree on many points my friend, but you need to remember that for liberals, the end justifies the means.  Rule breaking and corruption are acceptable as long as it is liberals doing the deed. 

 

Your entire post was very a poignant reality we are faced with today.

The truth is, they have not changed since 1892 when the 2nd "modern" international socialist party was formed.

What has changed is there were just enough placaters, ignorant "peacemakers", and corrupted RINO's, who helped advance the left's platform, stood aside as they took over education, then filled it with propaganda and special interest.

What we are faced with is what happened in EVERY country where socialism and communism have been adapted.

What America has to realize is this really is a fight to the finish.

If we don't beat them back, we really are done.

The Bolsheviks took over Russia this exact same way. They were funded by J.P. Morgan and "associates", the very same ones that bought out the 25 biggest newspaper publishers in America, and controlled every "news" story from 1885 until the alternative media on the internet.

We conservatives have over a century of "the final push" by the globalists, whom have been planning this for over 1000 years.

Satan rules the earth, so we will never "win", but we can for darn sure do our very best to obey the Rule of God.

While some sit back and say "it is written", I prefer to stand and say, "what if this is a test?".

[RV ME]

1 hour ago, pattyangel said:

Looking forward to sharing a glass (wine for me ) with you and Mrs. RV ME!!!!

Looking forward to that glass of wine and a big  from both of us,  I guess that would mean two glasses of wine