hand grenade into Obama camp, right now before the head of the DOJ is Sessions. The acting head is still an Obama guy. 3
20170307 Tapping Scandal Math
Mathematical Logic to explain the Tapping scandal Could not this tapping scandal be explained a bit more simply? Could it be that, ● there was a surveillance sweep of Russians and this simply picked up conversations that Trump and co had over the last year? ●
this surveillance may have been increased because of the Russian hacking claims. Or it could be normal surveillance of the Russians.
●
that those conversations were revealed to possess information that Obama gang could use for their nefarious purposes - and did? Let us call this the "casting of a wide net, and coming up with gold". The wide net theory is what happened; not a direct tapping.
●
that the leaking of the information for political gain (in my opinion) is the a ctual illegality?
●
that those who adamantly disagree that Obama ordered Trump tapping (including computer communications) such as Clapper, are correct simply because Obama did not SPECIFICALLY say, "Surveil Trump". All the talking heads focus on that.
Let us now apply the math analogy: take what you know for certain and apply it to the theory. 1. Clapper says that Obama didn't ask for a tap on Trump. He didn't according to my theory; i.e., Clapper did not lie. Indeed, the talking heads, by the use of circuitous language, are hoping that the public infers that nothing unseemly happened, aside from Trump's mistake of claiming Obama tapped him. 2. And then there is Comey. It might be that he probably sees it the way I do, but he wants the DOJ to come out and say, without circuitous language, that there was no specific surveillance on Trump. Because there was none. But, Comey probably does know that there was a widely cast net that collected the conversations, and Comey probably knows only too well the the info in the leaks had to come from that source. And Comey knows that someone abused that information. But Comey doesn't want to be involved in that battleground, and only wants to remove the taint from Trump's accusation that the FBI was involved in causing the leaks. Toss that
hand grenade into Obama camp, right now before the head of the DOJ is Sessions. The acting head is still an Obama guy. 3. The FISA applications, as portrayed by the NYTimes says that they, the people making the request, were targeting Russians associating with Trump. I think the NYTimes might have written that in a way that was not accurate. The FISA application probably targeted Russians. Not Russians associating with Trump, per se. My guess, only; this may be the only weak but nonessential part of my theory. 4., 5., etc? I believe all can be explained this way. I do not think (but it is possible) that Trump tweeted his rant on Saturday to force an inquiry, rather than leak the top-secret information himself, to which he may now have access. He has mangled the truth, but the truth lies therein. Comments? From Daniel Robert Butler Prague, Czech Republic
[email protected] +420 606 213 523 Please credit me as the source. That is all.
