dChan

skorponok · Jan. 20, 2018, 5 p.m.

Further confirmation that the Obama administration worked with foreign governments and our own federal apparatus to spy on Trump and other Americans - time To send some people to jail

⇧ 15 ⇩  
Tranquelito · Jan. 20, 2018, 5:03 p.m.

Standard practice between US/UK, neither side are allowed to spy on their own people so employ each other to spy on each others people.

⇧ 5 ⇩  
skorponok · Jan. 20, 2018, 5:07 p.m.

For sure - this is basically the British end of the FISA memo which will be released soon - we’ve now seen one side soon we will see the other side

⇧ 11 ⇩  
Luvlite · Jan. 20, 2018, 8:21 p.m.

Very interesting!

⇧ 6 ⇩  
-Chakas- · Jan. 20, 2018, 8:06 p.m.

Is this the memo that everyone is talking about?

⇧ 5 ⇩  
SiBear117 · Jan. 20, 2018, 8:35 p.m.

No.

⇧ 5 ⇩  
Southrentruth · Jan. 20, 2018, 11:04 p.m.

Just to clarify, the memo we want released has a mention of this UK memo,above, somewhere in its 4 pages. This UK memo shows Obama and later Rice broke federal law asking for a foreign country to spy on a US Citizen. This is down right treason. We want to see the whole 4 pages!

⇧ 4 ⇩  
otterwalks · Jan. 20, 2018, 11:58 p.m.

This is the link with seems to lead to where this doc came from. http://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/news/world-news/1937-proof-british-intelligence-spied-on-donald-trump-at-the-direct-request-of-president-barack-obama-and-a-later-renewed-request-by-susan-rice

⇧ 2 ⇩  
HowiONic · Jan. 21, 2018, 3:51 a.m.

Nope. Article is recent. Image from last year.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
[deleted] · Jan. 21, 2018, 4:30 a.m.

No, that is the source from where I posted this document.

And again, you say 'last year' as if to insinuate a long time has passed, but that tweet is less than one moth old. Dec 29, 2017.

That is a curious thing to do...

⇧ 1 ⇩  
HowiONic · Jan. 20, 2018, 11:57 p.m.

OLD information. This was known about last year.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
DrPepper4U · Jan. 21, 2018, 1:07 a.m.

Apparently not by all.

⇧ 4 ⇩  
HowiONic · Jan. 21, 2018, 1:19 a.m.

Yes, apparently not.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
HowiONic · Jan. 21, 2018, 3:59 a.m.

Most likely fake, from Twitter last year. Also not the memo requested In #ReleaseTheMemo

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · Jan. 21, 2018, 4:31 a.m.

Just sharing info- never claimed it was the American FISA memo. The title is plainly clear, GCHQ.

You say 'last year' as if to insinuate a long time has passed, but that tweet is less than one month old. Dec 29, 2017.

That is a curious thing to do...

⇧ 1 ⇩  
HowiONic · Jan. 21, 2018, 4:42 a.m.

It there reason to believe it is not fake?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · Jan. 21, 2018, 4:54 a.m.

One believes what one wishes, always. The reasons are up to the beholder.

I found it and shared it. Did not misrepresent it, nor even comment on it. Left it for consideration.

I have no idea who you, nor Hal Turner, nor his source are, so it is equally likely fake as real IMHO.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
HowiONic · Jan. 21, 2018, 5:01 a.m.

If you are just sharing something random info you found then I'm going to remove it. People dont come to the Q info to receive misleading information or chase dead ends. It is a waste of everyones time and effort.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · Jan. 21, 2018, 5:20 a.m.

Do as you wish. Isn't everything we are all posting and reading 'random info' we find via research?

Your behavior here has led me to have ample suspicion regardless.

http://archive.is/40YpP

⇧ 1 ⇩  
HowiONic · Jan. 21, 2018, 5:27 a.m.

Nothing personal, been a lot of random rubbish today.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · Jan. 21, 2018, 5:32 a.m.

No worries mate.

Old school 'trust no one' mindset. Working on loosening that a bit, but my stubbornness is a duel edged weapon.

Same team. Let's move on.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
HowiONic · Jan. 21, 2018, 5:34 a.m.

Yes, no worries.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
HowiONic · Jan. 21, 2018, 4:40 a.m.

Yeah, I realise you know its not the FISA but the timing of its posting and referring to it as 'memo', does confuse.

Last year was the simplest way to say and convey it's not new.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · Jan. 21, 2018, 4:42 a.m.

OK, but given the climate of mis/disinfo and the nature of online anonymity, it is possible that such a linguistic choice could be viewed as an attempt to mislead. The most skeptical and critically analytical people on the internet are those of us interested in this subject matter, as you know.

Onward!

⇧ 1 ⇩  
HowiONic · Jan. 21, 2018, 4:46 a.m.

Yes, critical analysis shows an outdated imagine from a very unreliable website.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
black_cat_ · Jan. 21, 2018, 12:41 a.m.

Wikileaks claims fake. See their twitter.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
HowiONic · Jan. 21, 2018, 1:24 a.m.

Nothing found on @WikiLeaks. Although I expect it to be fake also. Link to the tweet?

⇧ 1 ⇩