patrick.net

He claims that he put wire tapping in quotes, so he didn't mean literally. But there are two other tweets where they do not appear in quotes. If you meant it in some more general surveillance, then why not use it consistently? Better yet, why not just tweet that he had you surveilled?

He claimed that Obama did it. This would mean at least that Obama ordered or approved surveillance of Trump Tower. It also does not mean that people were listening to a conversation only while a Russian national was in Trump Tower. It means that they were listening to Trump and his associates.

He also claimed that it was during the election. The reference to Nixon/Watergate is definitely a claim that he was trying to gather information to help with the election.

There's no way to spin these tweets based on the additional information we now have to say that Trump was 'right.' The best corroborating evidence is that Nunes saw Trump's or his associates names in some reports, and that the names should have been redacted if the data were gathered while investigating someone else. Schiff (Nunes' counterpart) saw the same reports and states that the evidence of collusion is 'more than circumstantial.' This is not an endorsement for Trump.

The dude just says whats on his mind at the moment.
It can be right or wrong, good or bad, pornographic or angelic.
His tweets are nothing more than passing thoughts not representative of whatever positions he might hold.
He has learned through the power of television that vocalizing the salmon run of mindless neuronic pulses is appealing and entertaining to the common man.
So, at this point, to try and apply an analytical process to the stream of clicks emanating from his fingers is pointless.
Everyone should know this by now, so no need for microscopic investigations of past tweets.

YesYNot says

He claims that he put wire tapping in quotes, so he didn't mean literally. But there are two other tweets where they do not appear in quotes. If you meant it in some more general surveillance, then why not use it consistently?

Because words matter. When the President of the United States, the most powerful man in the world, speaks, people listen.

That's why.

joeyjojojunior says

Because words matter.

Correct, he's not a polished politician. You are finding lies where there are none, while conveniently never holding your team to any level of scrutiny. See Obama's list of actual lies above. If you've been paying attention to the Wikileaks CIA files you should see the tyrannical overreach of the CIA under Obama. You should see the danger of judging a politician by his ability to use happy words in a speech.

At least Trump is fighting back against the tyranny.
At least Trump is making the enormous issue of CIA surveillance a public issue.
At least Trump is willing to do what is right, w/o fear of being called a politically correct dissident.

Trump is a real leader, wherein Obama and Bush before him were merely puppets for their masters. That is why Trump is attacked day-in and day-out. This is easy to see w critical thinking skills. Just look at the consistent misleading wording, assumptions, and outright fake news being spewed about him nonstop. The MSM media going hysterical regarding Trump means he is doing his job properly.

joeyjojojunior says

people listen.

You certainly aren't listening or you wouldn't accuse him of lying nonstop.

I don't know where to begin after your last post. I can't tell if it's sarcastic or not.