![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 |
Should the phrase "(conspiracy theory)" be removed from the title of this article?:
The important testimony of Trisha Anderson (FBI Deputy General Counsel over the Counter-Intelligence Operation of the Trump campaign) revealed that the FBI "relied upon its network of sources" that had "campaign contacts." I've have been unable to find any additional information or further inquiry into these Trump campaign "contacts" who were informing the FBI. I do not see any follow-up inquiry from the Senate or in the media that reported the testimony. The nature and identify of these FBI contacts in the Trump campaign are of direct relevance to this article. Tachypaidia ( talk) 11:54, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
The article adds extraneously that "Papadopoulos was paid $3,000 by Halper for a research paper on the oil fields of Turkey, Israel and Cyprus." This addition is out of context and unexplained. Unless this can be addressed, it should be deleted. The $3,000 offer and the expense paid trip to London appear to have been a ruse to set-up the interview, but I am unaware of any source that gives sufficient information regarding this. Tachypaidia ( talk) 12:30, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
MAY 2020
Trey Gowdy, the Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee and a former federal prosecutor, stated on a Tucker Carlson show that he had been wrong in his 2018 assessment of the FBI behaviour.
"Former congressman Trey Gowdy admitted during a Monday appearance on Tucker Carlson Tonight that he had been wrong in “relying on the word of the FBI and the DOJ” during hearings on the Trump-Russia probe, saying he realized his mistake after reviewing the documents related to the opening of the investigation.
Carlson played Gowdy a clip of the former South Carolina Republican saying in May 2018 that after being briefed, he was “more convinced the FBI did exactly what my fellow citizens would want them to do when they got the information they got, and that it has nothing to do with Donald Trump.”
When Carlson then asked “do you still feel that way?” Gowdy replied “oh gosh, no.”
“I made a lot of mistakes in life — relying on briefings, and not insisting on the documents,” Gowdy explained, saying he changed his mind “about three weeks” after his public comments.
“I went to the Department of Justice. I sat there for four hours. That’s when I saw that Peter Strzok actually initiated and approved Crossfire Hurricane. That’s when I saw the exculpatory information on George Papadopoulos. That’s when I saw for the very first time that it was the Trump campaign mentioned in that predicate document,” Gowdy elaborated, adding that the officials called to testify had been “telling us all along, ‘Trump’s not the target, the campaign’s not the target.”
“So yes, my mistake was relying on the word of the FBI and the DOJ and not insisting on the documents. Luckily it took me three weeks to correct that mistake,” Gowdy stated."
[1] Kimartus ( talk) 23:42, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
References
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The title that says Spygate (Conspiracy Theory) is no longer a conspiracy theory. It has been proven and there are NUMEROUS documents proving that the FBI, DNC, and media worked together to undermine a Presidency. The "Conspiracy Theory" part should be removed because it has been proven it is not a conspiracy theory. Leaving it the way it is would be considered false information and looks like it is part of the agenda of the Democrats and part of the cover up itself. This needs to be removed immediately. There has already been so much false information regarding the Trump campaign put out in the media and it is time for the truth to be shown. Trump did not collude with Russia and there has been years of investigations proving they have no evidence that he ever did. Now the information that just came out from the justice department in the Flynn case only proves furthermore that this was never a conspiracy theory and spygate actually happened. If this is not removed I will report it to authorities. Thank you 2600:1015:B040:DBE3:646:31D4:1B6E:E09F ( talk) 20:44, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Much of this article is ~2 years stagnant; so many of sources: FBI confidential source transcripts, Senate and House testimony, 302s, court documents, etc. have come to light. Much of what was only alleged or alluded earlier is not in documentary evidence or, more importantly, contradicted by it. As the currency of the article is of direct relevance to the present politic, it is unclear why so very little substantive progress has been made. A thorough review and update should proceed. Tachypaidia ( talk) 01:23, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
so many of sources: FBI confidential source transcripts, Senate and House testimony, 302s, court documents, etc.changes anything that's already in the article? – Muboshgu ( talk) 15:51, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
former FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith is expected to plead guilty in the Obamagate/Spygate scandal. Clinesmith was so intent on spying on Carter Page, an unpaid advisor to the Trump campaign, that he lied to the secret FISA court and doctored an official document to misrepresent that Page had not cooperated with the CIA in past investigations involving Russian espionage.as soon as this FISA surveillance warrant was granted, the FBI, under the control of President Barack Obama, had access to the entire Trump campaign. https://townhall.com/columnists/larryoconnor/2020/08/14/now-theres-no-denying-it-obamas-fbi-spied-on-trump-period-n2574380 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kevin-clinesmith-fbi-lawyer-plead-guilty-probe-origins-russia-investigation/— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1017:B111:D73A:2495:DC73:F9D8:7255 ( talk) 15:47, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.224.138.104 ( talk) 11:34, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change "an covert informant" to "a covert informant" on the first line of the 4th paragraph. Zingbust ( talk) 17:24, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Regarding the reversion of my including the initiative statement to the claim of a spy within the Trump campaign by Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS in testimony before U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on August 22, 2017 (and reiterated on January 2, 2018), it was reverted on the basis that (a) the statement was later "walked back" (though not by Mr. Simpson) and of yet it (b) has not been proven true. The Glenn Simpson's statement was not contradicted until after it became public information on January 9, 2018. For 4 1/2 months this claim was known among government personnel having appropriate clearance. For this reason, this seminal evidence on the very topic of this article and its potential subsequent effects cannot be omitted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tachypaidia ( talk • contribs) 13:26, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
That's because-the genesis of spygate which has been repeatedly blocked even on the talk pages- 1)November 2016, article in the NY Times informing the world that Trump is being spied upon by the government.
2)March 4th, 2017 for the first time Trump tweets referencing spying-Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!
3)The media deny these allegations, ridicule Trump for using the words "wires-tapped"
That is the first time government spying was publicly linked to the Trump campaign and the first time that Trump publicly claimed the government was spying on him.
Encyclopedic and topical facts. His having some reason to even mention being spied upon is not congruent with Trump the irrational madman WP leftist cabal mis and disinformation campaign. Therefore we end up with a nonsensical page where Trump out of nowhere just came up with some unfounded conspiracy theory.
The official WP leftist cabalist excuse given for excluding this is neither his claim nor the NY Times article explicitly mention spygate by name.
Oddly the material posted from the usual leftist cabalists merchants of misinformation called RS don't ex0lictly cite Spygate by name either yet are abundant on the page.
This leaves Spygate to be as narrowly defined as possible by the cabalists so as to be as unrealistic as possible.
The secondary official WP leftist cabalist excuse given for excluding the obviously encyclopedic topical material is that it is an opinion. Yet it is not an opinion, both points are undeniable facts.
Oddly again, the material posted from the usual leftist cabaiist merchants of mis and disinformation that are abundant on the page are all opinion and almost no fact.
Fourteen separate editors have posted that the colloquial definition of Spygate is all encompassing Trump's claim that the federal government was spying on him and his campaign. While the minority of five editors posts Spygate literally means one spy. The minority has repeatedly accused the majority of meat puppetry even though the minority sought like minded editors themselves. The minority has disregarded numerous votes of the majority. In other words it is little different than any other WP political topic, largely left wing hit pieces that devolve into nonsensical messes like here or serve as a coherent chronicle of epic left wing fail. Ofc none of any of this includes any of the current information that refutes almost the entire page. Plus, shows that the NYTimes article citing use of the FISA court to spy on Trump and the campaign was spot on in the first place.
Instead we have the talk pages of the same cabalists supporting the 142 WP pages born from the hoax that Trump and Russia colluded and not one single page showing that the DEmocrats lost 1041 elections, a record by 500 for any two termer during the Obama administration and lost to Trump in 1042. Besides this being nothing more than unsubstantiated hyperbole and libel both gross violations of BLP.
This article is in great need of revision. The Mueller Report, erased the idea that there had been any “collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia. The Horowitz report clearly identified the falsification of documents used to obtain FISA warrants to conduct surveillance of emails and phone calls of Carter Page going forward and retroactively to look at the campaign and a seated Presidential organization and Senate and Congressional members. This has been corroborated by the guilty plea of the senior attorney Clinesmith who changed an email message to insure the FISA warrant would be issued. The Steele dossier was completely discredited as bar talk and lies, and Steele’d legitimacy disavowed by the UK intelligence service. The discussion on the site regarding having editors claiming “no consensus” seems to say truth isn’t an issue but a consensus is. My recommendation would be that this item be updated by permitting use and reference to objective evidence OR be purged from the site, DoDad4Ever ( talk) 21:39, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Completely rewrite without the horrifically biased slant. This is disgusting. 75.167.113.167 ( talk) 01:18, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Replace with the following article and delete your biased garbage.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/spygate-the-true-story-of-collusion_2684629.html 75.167.113.167 ( talk) 01:53, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the section § Activities of Stefan Halper, fifth paragraph: "Ms.Turk" lacks a space (should be "Ms. Turk").
"...to add a trained and trusted investigator like Ms.Turk as a 'layer of oversight"
"...to add a trained and trusted investigator like Ms. Turk as a 'layer of oversight'"
Srey Sros talk 04:32, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This is NOT a Conspiracy Theory. See source: John Soloman "Just The News": https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/once-secret-fbi-informant-reports-reveal-wide-ranging
Possible copyright violation was removed by Lowercase sigmabot III ( talk) at 00:36, 24 July 2024 (UTC) The user included the full text of the linked article.
172.74.26.171 ( talk) 18:14, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Conspiracy theory? Only on Wikipedia https://www.newsweek.com/trump-was-right-about-fbi-scramble-assemble-russia-evidence-after-2016-win-texts-claim-1534191
The fact that anyone is calling this a conspiracy theory at this point should be embarrassing to them. Why not rely on reasonable, but still well left-of-center analysis from the likes of (as three examples) Alan Dershowitz, John Turley, or even Glenn Greenwald? You folks need to look up and study Crossfire Hurricane and the information that we have on the Steele Dossier. The fact that they spied on Trump during his campaign should not even be controversial at this point. How about this article? https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/509002-more-willful-blindness-by-the-media-on-spying-by-obama-administration I used to be very impressed by the analysis on Wikipedia relating to politics. What happened? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.103.223.118 ( talk) 06:54, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Why are we calling this a theory? It happened. We know it and there is extremely extensive documentation that it happened. It turned out not to be a person in the campaign but a modern wiretap. There really is not question unless there is some ulterior motive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.252.33 ( talk) 22:52, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
This is no theory except for fact-deniers and idiots. Read the newly-declassified FBI documents and fix this shame of an article: https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2021-02/Halper%20Source%20Documents_final.pdf https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2020-09/04518073623.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.241.38.148 ( talk) 19:05, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
2600:1008:B002:5A49:B8B0:FD37:2F8:947 ( talk) 08:53, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Everything has been proven true by the FBI it is no longer a conspiracy theory
Why doesn’t Wiki mention the origins of the Steele Dossier? Funded by Hillary & the DNC to hire Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on Trump. Fusion GPS then hired Steele who created the bogus Dossier and the handed it over to the FBI. The FBI knowing the information in the dossier was not factual had to alter and add more false information to the file in order to get the FISA court to give the FBI permission to wire tap Carter Page. It’s obvious to me that the editors of Wikipedia are overwhelmingly politically bias in the writing of their articles. The American people are NOT stupid and not easily fooled. Shame on Wiki for helping to destroy the USA by writing articles that are obviously misleading so they can push their political agenda!!!!! 2600:387:F:4510:0:0:0:A ( talk) 13:07, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Given the continued proof that this is Not a conspiracy and that Hillary Clinton funded and orchestrated spying on a candidate, creating and planting false evidence, and spying on a president, this page should be UPDATED 2600:1008:B158:F6E4:B495:DB8D:E258:A23 ( talk) 21:44, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Hillary Clinton's campaign paid tech firm to 'infiltrate' Trump Tower and White House servers, which is of course not true and why the WP:DAILYMAIL is deprecated. – Muboshgu ( talk) 22:07, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
This is confirmed to be "not a conspiracy theory". Do not spread mis-dis- information. You can't have it both ways. 2601:40D:401:43B0:BC23:1933:C4A5:6991 ( talk) 02:52, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
this is no longer a theory. 2605:8D80:461:3ADB:D422:A9B9:B1DB:40C7 ( talk) 05:54, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Could you please give us a few examples of media outlets you consider credible sources? I have read multiple times from editors that this (spygate) is not related to the current filing that Trump was spied on by Tech executive 1 with links to Clinton campaign. If this is the case then why is it the 5th result when you search " Was Trump spied on " ? Is there a keyword issue here? I have no affiliation with any political party. I simply searched the topic to read all info I could find to gather my own opinion. 2600:1007:B039:9F6:3C68:E29:5D3C:7BC8 ( talk) 15:57, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
When is this fake information page change to fully change the page to show President Trump was %100 correct. 174.251.137.110 ( talk) 16:51, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
This debunked story has been debunked 2600:1007:B115:E6C:C505:E5F2:21A8:2CD4 ( talk) 19:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Seems President Trump, like him or not, wasn’t lying after all, given that Durham has now found that democrats WERE spying on him both during his campaign and when he was our sitting President. Mainstream media (mostly left leaning) has again tried and convicted him over and over, and now we are starting to see the truth revealed—one that is seriously damning and actually indicting democrats for what they (and not Trump) did. You need to update this and be fair rather than regurgitating leftist media propaganda. (And I’m an independent sick of the propaganda, divisiveness, political lying and BS!) 162.226.140.42 ( talk) 16:31, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited this arrangement by mining the EOP’s DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump.The tech company provided DNS resolution services to the EOP (Executive Office of the President).
Lol in response to the ignorant comment below. Here is the indictment from Durham. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638.35.0_2.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:17e0:9c30:dd62:88eb:1ed1:d430 ( talk) 09:34, February 14, 2022 (UTC)
Lawd have mercy on the blind. Read the “indictment portion”; I’ll even post it for you. But the interesting thing I’m seeing here is that one apparently shouldn’t listen to anything the right media might be saying because it’s all lies and conspiracies—but that listening to left media and conspiracy info is fine. Hypocrisy appears to be alive and well on Wikipedia. :( It’s a shame because I’ve often contributed to them and even allow/encourage my students to use Wiki.
“USA [Durham] vs Michael Sussmann
Criminal Case No. 21-582 (CRC), Document 35”
Below is the factual background information the investigation has found thus far in the “Spygate” investigation.
“FACTUAL BACKGROUND
2. The defendant is charged in a one-count indictment with making a materially false statement to the FBI, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001 (the “Indictment”). As set forth in the Indictment, on Sept. 19, 2016 – less than two months before the 2016 U.S. Presidential election – the defendant, a lawyer at a large international law firm (“Law Firm-1”) that was then serving as counsel to the Clinton Campaign, met with the FBI General Counsel at FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C. The defendant provided the FBI General Counsel with purported data and “white papers” that allegedly demonstrated a covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and a Russia-based bank (“Russian Bank-1”). The Indictment alleges that the defendant lied in that meeting, falsely stating to the General Counsel that he was not providing the allegations to the FBI on behalf of any client. In fact, the defendant had assembled and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including (i) a technology executive (“Tech Executive-1”) at a U.S.-based Internet company (“Internet Company- 1”), and (ii) the Clinton Campaign.
3. The defendant’s billing records reflect that the defendant repeatedly billed the Clinton Campaign for his work on the Russian Bank-1 allegations. In compiling and disseminating these allegations, the defendant and Tech Executive-1 also had met and communicated with another law partner at Law Firm-1 who was then serving as General Counsel to the Clinton Campaign (“Campaign Lawyer-1”).
2 Case 1:21-cr-00582-CRC Document 35 Filed 02/11/22
Page 3 of 13
4. The Indictment also alleges that, beginning in approximately July 2016, Tech Executive-1 had worked with the defendant, a U.S. investigative firm retained by Law Firm-1 on behalf of the Clinton Campaign, numerous cyber researchers, and employees at multiple Internet companies to assemble the purported data and white papers. In connection with these efforts, Tech Executive-1 exploited his access to non-public and/or proprietary Internet data. Tech Executive-1 also enlisted the assistance of researchers at a U.S.-based university who were receiving and analyzing large amounts of Internet data in connection with a pending federal government cybersecurity research contract. Tech Executive-1 tasked these researchers to mine Internet data to establish “an inference” and “narrative” tying then-candidate Trump to Russia. In doing so, Tech Executive-1 indicated that he was seeking to please certain “VIPs,” referring to individuals at Law Firm-1 and the Clinton Campaign.
5. The Government’s evidence at trial will also establish that among the Internet data Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited was domain name system (“DNS”) Internet traffic pertaining to (i) a particular healthcare provider, (ii) Trump Tower, (iii) Donald Trump’s Central Park West apartment building, and (iv) the Executive Office of the President of the United States (“EOP”). (Tech Executive-1’s employer, Internet Company-1, had come to access and maintain dedicated servers for the EOP as part of a sensitive arrangement whereby it provided DNS resolution services to the EOP. Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited this arrangement by mining the EOP’s DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump.)
6. The Indictment further details that on February 9, 2017, the defendant provided an updated set of allegations – including the Russian Bank-1 data and additional allegations relating
3 Case 1:21-cr-00582-CRC Document 35 Filed 02/11/22
Page 4 of 13
to Trump – to a second agency of the U.S. government (“Agency-2”). The Government’s evidence at trial will establish that these additional allegations relied, in part, on the purported DNS traffic that Tech Executive-1 and others had assembled pertaining to Trump Tower, Donald Trump’s New York City apartment building, the EOP, and the aforementioned healthcare provider. In his meeting with Agency-2, the defendant provided data which he claimed reflected purportedly suspicious DNS lookups by these entities of internet protocol (“IP”) addresses affiliated with a Russian mobile phone provider (“Russian Phone Provider-1”). The defendant further claimed that these lookups demonstrated that Trump and/or his associates were using supposedly rare, Russian-made wireless phones in the vicinity of the White House and other locations. The Special Counsel’s Office has identified no support for these allegations. Indeed, more complete DNS data that the Special Counsel’s Office obtained from a company that assisted Tech Executive-1 in assembling these allegations reflects that such DNS lookups were far from rare in the United States. For example, the more complete data that Tech Executive-1 and his associates gathered – but did not provide to Agency-2 – reflected that between approximately 2014 and 2017, there were a total of more than 3 million lookups of Russian Phone-Provider-1 IP addresses that originated with U.S.-based IP addresses. Fewer than 1,000 of these lookups originated with IP addresses affiliated with Trump Tower. In addition, the more complete data assembled by Tech Executive-1 and his associates reflected that DNS lookups involving the EOP and Russian Phone Provider-1 began at least as early 2014 (i.e., during the Obama administration and years before Trump took office) – another fact which the allegations omitted.
7. In his meeting with Agency-2 employees, the defendant also made a substantially similar false statement as he had made to the FBI General Counsel. In particular, the defendant
4 Case 1:21-cr-00582-CRC Document 35 Filed 02/11/22
Page 5 of 13
asserted that he was not representing a particular client in conveying the above allegations. In truth and in fact, the defendant was representing Tech Executive-1 – a fact the defendant subsequently acknowledged under oath in December 2017 testimony before Congress (without identifying the client by name).”
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638.35.0_2.pdf
But maybe Durham is lying with his “factual information.” Just curious, has MSNBC addressed any of this? If so, does it match what Durham said or what you are parroting? After all, you appear to be as leery of media claims as I am, which is why I did NOT post media outlets or people’s (biased) opinions—but instead posted the legal “factual information” from Durham himself. Do you doubt it, too?
I think, considering he is legally investigating this whole spygate thing, that Durham is probably more accurate than anyone/anything else on the topic. But that’s my opinion. And I support your right to an opinion. But facts are not opinions.
When wiki sees something that counters something they’ve written, they have a moral obligation to revisit what was said and update it for accuracy. Or they lose credibility. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:17E0:9C30:DD62:88EB:1ED1:D430 ( talk) 18:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
You wrote “Okay, so you copy/pasted all of that text here. So, what does it mean?”
Hmm what does it mean to post a very recent legal document that outlines some of factual background on what has been confirmed about this Spygate investigation, thus putting into context the validity of this investigation into Sussmann and spying on and/or colluding against Trump? Only one reason.
Wiki and many of you who are responding to the individuals who posted about the problem with the Spygate page appear to be tossing out anything contrary to your own beliefs. Including turning a blind eye to what Durham is saying.
From what I’ve read from you and others is claims/insinuations that all the objections you are getting to your Spygate page is from the radical right and right-leaning news shows. You’re even now arguing against what Durham found in his investigation because — it doesn’t seem to fit your narrative.
So what do I want? Honesty, integrity and a lack of bias. Wiki needs to review this legal document (in the context of the whole Spygate issue) and be accurate in what they’re saying rather than relying on newspapers and opinions that serve as confirmation bias for you.
Actually, that’s something both the left and the right should do. But I’m not holding my breath because both sides have proven to be false and self-serving, more than not. Your choice. Review the info and adjust for accuracy. Or don’t. Misinformation and disinformation is alive and well on both sides. You can contribute to it if you wish. Ciao. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:17E0:9C30:DD62:88EB:1ED1:D430 ( talk) 19:30, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
tossing out anything contrary to your own beliefswhen really you fail to understand that Trump was not "spied upon" as the conspiracy theory suggested. Sussman was indicted in September 2021. The filing from this past Friday does not suggest what you say it suggests. – Muboshgu ( talk) 20:57, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
This is no longer a conspiracy theory! Change the definition!!!! 73.113.44.103 ( talk) 18:11, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Better change the heading!! Not a conspiracy theory...truth!! 2600:8807:C185:C500:D907:D492:6F2C:DB90 ( talk) 19:15, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
The spygate was on 2/11/2022 confirmed as a fact by special counsel Dunham. So this entire definition has to be rewritten by a authorized person to reflect that the Clinton campaign with Obama’s Whitehouse did in fact spy on candidate and sitting President Trump. This is a federal crime and is by definition Treason. They conspired to go against United States of America and steal top secret information to harm America. So please make these facts now available since you got it all wrong. Again. 174.251.137.110 ( talk) 00:53, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Special counsel John Durham says he is building a case to show the technology executive with whom an indicted Democratic lawyer was working to build a Trump-Russia collusion narrative gained access to internet traffic at the White House to try and obtain dirt on former President Donald Trump."Building a case" does not mean "confirmed as fact". – Muboshgu ( talk) 01:01, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
steal top secret informationsince we just learned that Trump took 15 boxes of documents, including some marked TOP SECRET, with him to Mar-a-Lago. – Muboshgu ( talk) 01:03, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Coming from guy that spread the russian collusion nonsense is laughable. John Durham's report is a rs 2600:8805:C980:9400:71E5:D6DA:EBEB:A7FE ( talk) 18:06, 15 February 2022 (UTC). It's best Valjean recuse himself from this discussion.
They screw up notifications and are unnecessary. I get email notifications and invariably get sent to the Spygate disambiguation page. Can't we just get rid of them? They don't serve any purpose as the disambiguation page works just fine. One other improvement would be to make the title reflect the contents, which is a normal requirement: Spygate: Trump conspiracy theory. -- Valjean ( talk) 17:12, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Stop lying to the American people. This is not or ever was an conspiracy theory! Read the Durham findings and change these lies! 2600:1000:B128:FB5:A8C2:57AE:FC49:EA9C ( talk) 19:42, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
A wikipedia admin does not know more then the investigator. https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-really-was-spied-on-2016-clinton-campaign-john-durham-court-filing-11644878973 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8805:C980:9400:71E5:D6DA:EBEB:A7FE ( talk) 18:02, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
No im not. You are a sports writer buddy. You are trying so HARD to debunk. Sorry to burst your reality. You believe that Donald Trump colluded with russia lol. You say WSJ is most right wing. But then push the most left wing editorial boards in media NYT is not a reliable source. No credibility as a admin lol 2600:8805:C980:9400:71E5:D6DA:EBEB:A7FE ( talk) 18:08, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
It literally says opinion lol 2600:8805:C980:9400:71E5:D6DA:EBEB:A7FE ( talk) 20:12, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
'They spied on a sitting president' https://www.foxnews.com/media/jim-jordan-durham-probe-clinton-spied-trump 2601:46:C801:B1F0:6996:F51A:8EB2:FC78 ( talk) 20:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
in fact we have the oppositeRhetorical question only: we do? Let's not go down that road here. soibangla ( talk) 21:38, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Muboshgu does not know more then the Durham Investigator and it's all coming out now. Edit the article 2600:8805:C980:9400:71E5:D6DA:EBEB:A7FE ( talk) 18:03, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Trump was spied on per the Durham report and investigation. This is not a conspiracy nor was it ever a conspiracy. Fact is Obama and Hillary Clinton took illegal steps to spy on them candidate Trump and now we find tech was also accessing WH server information to spy on them President Trump. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.213.161.206 ( talk) 20:48, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Right-wing media outlets and Republican politicians, including Trump, are citing Durham's court filing to accuse Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign of spying on Trump because of the use of the data. But Durham's court filing doesn't allege that the pro-Clinton researchers use of internet data meant that there was any eavesdropping on content of communications.– Muboshgu ( talk) 00:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Soibangla's additions (to the John Durham article) of content on this subject are excellent. Durham did not allege that any eavesdropping of Trump communications content occurred. This is an allegation that DNS lookups may have occurred. That activity could not provide any content information. -- Valjean ( talk) 05:58, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
[Durham] slipped in a few extra sentences that set off a furor among right-wing outlets about purported spying on former President Donald J. Trump. But the entire narrative appeared to be mostly wrong or old news — the latest example of the challenge created by a barrage of similar conspiracy theories from Mr. Trump and his allies...The conservative media also skewed what the filing said. For example, Mr. Durham’s filing never used the word “infiltrate.” And it never claimed that Mr. Joffe’s company was being paid by the Clinton campaign.
The Times isn't quoting. That is the Times' statement of fact. WP doesn't operate on a 'Reliable source 1 and 2 disagree so we only add the one we think is true basis'. In this case, The Times - a perennial reliable source is itself saying that Trump was spied upon as a statement of fact.
WP:UNDUE requires that statement of fact to be covered in the article even if you or other editors think it is rubbish based on some other reliable source.
Raise whatever objection you like, raise whatever complaints about Fox you like, The Times is a perennially reliable source and its main statements of fact in a major article are required to be covered. SeanusAurelius ( talk) 19:06, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign paid an internet company to access servers at Trump Tower and the White House in a search for links between Donald Trump and Russia, a US special prosecutor has suggestedis not a statement of fact. I emphasized that clause that is doing a lot to hedge there.
The Clinton campaign was effectively accused of spying by John Durhamis also not a statement of fact. The rest of that article is behind a paywall so I don't know what else it says. – Muboshgu ( talk) 19:13, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
requires that statement of fact to be covered in the articleBut not this article, which is specifically about an alleged embedded person. It's in John Durham#Indictment of attorney where it belongs, unless we decide to split it off into a new article. It's also in Michael Sussmann and Rodney Joffe. soibangla ( talk) 21:31, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
@Valjean: Your totally uncorroborated thesis that The Times just copies Fox without doing independent reporting is your personal fantasy only. There's no evidence for it. The Times is a perennial reliable source. If it has a different view to e.g. CNN or the other left wing media sources you prefer, then they are both required to be covered. SeanusAurelius ( talk) 10:00, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Has nobody on here wanted to take the needed time to update this? This has all been proven wrong.. it's a little unprofessional at the least to just ignore the evidence that nunes came out with in the last weeks. Do better. 2601:989:4582:13F0:FCD8:69:9A94:52B9 ( talk) 22:02, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
|
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
no further commentary needed
|
---|
Although the Durham investigation is not complete, at the very least, “Conspiracy Theory” should be removed. There is a Federal Investigation that has charged people, and will most likely hand out more charges. Conspiracy theory suggests something is completely fabricated and is 100% false, which this is not. This also defines Spygate as the Obama Admin doing the spying. From the start it was believed to be the Clinton’s, with the White House possibly turning a blind eye. ANGRYTOOCH ( talk) 02:03, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
|
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 |
Should the phrase "(conspiracy theory)" be removed from the title of this article?:
The important testimony of Trisha Anderson (FBI Deputy General Counsel over the Counter-Intelligence Operation of the Trump campaign) revealed that the FBI "relied upon its network of sources" that had "campaign contacts." I've have been unable to find any additional information or further inquiry into these Trump campaign "contacts" who were informing the FBI. I do not see any follow-up inquiry from the Senate or in the media that reported the testimony. The nature and identify of these FBI contacts in the Trump campaign are of direct relevance to this article. Tachypaidia ( talk) 11:54, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
The article adds extraneously that "Papadopoulos was paid $3,000 by Halper for a research paper on the oil fields of Turkey, Israel and Cyprus." This addition is out of context and unexplained. Unless this can be addressed, it should be deleted. The $3,000 offer and the expense paid trip to London appear to have been a ruse to set-up the interview, but I am unaware of any source that gives sufficient information regarding this. Tachypaidia ( talk) 12:30, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
MAY 2020
Trey Gowdy, the Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee and a former federal prosecutor, stated on a Tucker Carlson show that he had been wrong in his 2018 assessment of the FBI behaviour.
"Former congressman Trey Gowdy admitted during a Monday appearance on Tucker Carlson Tonight that he had been wrong in “relying on the word of the FBI and the DOJ” during hearings on the Trump-Russia probe, saying he realized his mistake after reviewing the documents related to the opening of the investigation.
Carlson played Gowdy a clip of the former South Carolina Republican saying in May 2018 that after being briefed, he was “more convinced the FBI did exactly what my fellow citizens would want them to do when they got the information they got, and that it has nothing to do with Donald Trump.”
When Carlson then asked “do you still feel that way?” Gowdy replied “oh gosh, no.”
“I made a lot of mistakes in life — relying on briefings, and not insisting on the documents,” Gowdy explained, saying he changed his mind “about three weeks” after his public comments.
“I went to the Department of Justice. I sat there for four hours. That’s when I saw that Peter Strzok actually initiated and approved Crossfire Hurricane. That’s when I saw the exculpatory information on George Papadopoulos. That’s when I saw for the very first time that it was the Trump campaign mentioned in that predicate document,” Gowdy elaborated, adding that the officials called to testify had been “telling us all along, ‘Trump’s not the target, the campaign’s not the target.”
“So yes, my mistake was relying on the word of the FBI and the DOJ and not insisting on the documents. Luckily it took me three weeks to correct that mistake,” Gowdy stated."
[1] Kimartus ( talk) 23:42, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
References
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The title that says Spygate (Conspiracy Theory) is no longer a conspiracy theory. It has been proven and there are NUMEROUS documents proving that the FBI, DNC, and media worked together to undermine a Presidency. The "Conspiracy Theory" part should be removed because it has been proven it is not a conspiracy theory. Leaving it the way it is would be considered false information and looks like it is part of the agenda of the Democrats and part of the cover up itself. This needs to be removed immediately. There has already been so much false information regarding the Trump campaign put out in the media and it is time for the truth to be shown. Trump did not collude with Russia and there has been years of investigations proving they have no evidence that he ever did. Now the information that just came out from the justice department in the Flynn case only proves furthermore that this was never a conspiracy theory and spygate actually happened. If this is not removed I will report it to authorities. Thank you 2600:1015:B040:DBE3:646:31D4:1B6E:E09F ( talk) 20:44, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Much of this article is ~2 years stagnant; so many of sources: FBI confidential source transcripts, Senate and House testimony, 302s, court documents, etc. have come to light. Much of what was only alleged or alluded earlier is not in documentary evidence or, more importantly, contradicted by it. As the currency of the article is of direct relevance to the present politic, it is unclear why so very little substantive progress has been made. A thorough review and update should proceed. Tachypaidia ( talk) 01:23, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
so many of sources: FBI confidential source transcripts, Senate and House testimony, 302s, court documents, etc.changes anything that's already in the article? – Muboshgu ( talk) 15:51, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
former FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith is expected to plead guilty in the Obamagate/Spygate scandal. Clinesmith was so intent on spying on Carter Page, an unpaid advisor to the Trump campaign, that he lied to the secret FISA court and doctored an official document to misrepresent that Page had not cooperated with the CIA in past investigations involving Russian espionage.as soon as this FISA surveillance warrant was granted, the FBI, under the control of President Barack Obama, had access to the entire Trump campaign. https://townhall.com/columnists/larryoconnor/2020/08/14/now-theres-no-denying-it-obamas-fbi-spied-on-trump-period-n2574380 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kevin-clinesmith-fbi-lawyer-plead-guilty-probe-origins-russia-investigation/— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1017:B111:D73A:2495:DC73:F9D8:7255 ( talk) 15:47, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.224.138.104 ( talk) 11:34, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change "an covert informant" to "a covert informant" on the first line of the 4th paragraph. Zingbust ( talk) 17:24, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Regarding the reversion of my including the initiative statement to the claim of a spy within the Trump campaign by Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS in testimony before U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on August 22, 2017 (and reiterated on January 2, 2018), it was reverted on the basis that (a) the statement was later "walked back" (though not by Mr. Simpson) and of yet it (b) has not been proven true. The Glenn Simpson's statement was not contradicted until after it became public information on January 9, 2018. For 4 1/2 months this claim was known among government personnel having appropriate clearance. For this reason, this seminal evidence on the very topic of this article and its potential subsequent effects cannot be omitted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tachypaidia ( talk • contribs) 13:26, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
That's because-the genesis of spygate which has been repeatedly blocked even on the talk pages- 1)November 2016, article in the NY Times informing the world that Trump is being spied upon by the government.
2)March 4th, 2017 for the first time Trump tweets referencing spying-Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!
3)The media deny these allegations, ridicule Trump for using the words "wires-tapped"
That is the first time government spying was publicly linked to the Trump campaign and the first time that Trump publicly claimed the government was spying on him.
Encyclopedic and topical facts. His having some reason to even mention being spied upon is not congruent with Trump the irrational madman WP leftist cabal mis and disinformation campaign. Therefore we end up with a nonsensical page where Trump out of nowhere just came up with some unfounded conspiracy theory.
The official WP leftist cabalist excuse given for excluding this is neither his claim nor the NY Times article explicitly mention spygate by name.
Oddly the material posted from the usual leftist cabalists merchants of misinformation called RS don't ex0lictly cite Spygate by name either yet are abundant on the page.
This leaves Spygate to be as narrowly defined as possible by the cabalists so as to be as unrealistic as possible.
The secondary official WP leftist cabalist excuse given for excluding the obviously encyclopedic topical material is that it is an opinion. Yet it is not an opinion, both points are undeniable facts.
Oddly again, the material posted from the usual leftist cabaiist merchants of mis and disinformation that are abundant on the page are all opinion and almost no fact.
Fourteen separate editors have posted that the colloquial definition of Spygate is all encompassing Trump's claim that the federal government was spying on him and his campaign. While the minority of five editors posts Spygate literally means one spy. The minority has repeatedly accused the majority of meat puppetry even though the minority sought like minded editors themselves. The minority has disregarded numerous votes of the majority. In other words it is little different than any other WP political topic, largely left wing hit pieces that devolve into nonsensical messes like here or serve as a coherent chronicle of epic left wing fail. Ofc none of any of this includes any of the current information that refutes almost the entire page. Plus, shows that the NYTimes article citing use of the FISA court to spy on Trump and the campaign was spot on in the first place.
Instead we have the talk pages of the same cabalists supporting the 142 WP pages born from the hoax that Trump and Russia colluded and not one single page showing that the DEmocrats lost 1041 elections, a record by 500 for any two termer during the Obama administration and lost to Trump in 1042. Besides this being nothing more than unsubstantiated hyperbole and libel both gross violations of BLP.
This article is in great need of revision. The Mueller Report, erased the idea that there had been any “collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia. The Horowitz report clearly identified the falsification of documents used to obtain FISA warrants to conduct surveillance of emails and phone calls of Carter Page going forward and retroactively to look at the campaign and a seated Presidential organization and Senate and Congressional members. This has been corroborated by the guilty plea of the senior attorney Clinesmith who changed an email message to insure the FISA warrant would be issued. The Steele dossier was completely discredited as bar talk and lies, and Steele’d legitimacy disavowed by the UK intelligence service. The discussion on the site regarding having editors claiming “no consensus” seems to say truth isn’t an issue but a consensus is. My recommendation would be that this item be updated by permitting use and reference to objective evidence OR be purged from the site, DoDad4Ever ( talk) 21:39, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Completely rewrite without the horrifically biased slant. This is disgusting. 75.167.113.167 ( talk) 01:18, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Replace with the following article and delete your biased garbage.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/spygate-the-true-story-of-collusion_2684629.html 75.167.113.167 ( talk) 01:53, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the section § Activities of Stefan Halper, fifth paragraph: "Ms.Turk" lacks a space (should be "Ms. Turk").
"...to add a trained and trusted investigator like Ms.Turk as a 'layer of oversight"
"...to add a trained and trusted investigator like Ms. Turk as a 'layer of oversight'"
Srey Sros talk 04:32, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This is NOT a Conspiracy Theory. See source: John Soloman "Just The News": https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/once-secret-fbi-informant-reports-reveal-wide-ranging
Possible copyright violation was removed by Lowercase sigmabot III ( talk) at 00:36, 24 July 2024 (UTC) The user included the full text of the linked article.
172.74.26.171 ( talk) 18:14, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Conspiracy theory? Only on Wikipedia https://www.newsweek.com/trump-was-right-about-fbi-scramble-assemble-russia-evidence-after-2016-win-texts-claim-1534191
The fact that anyone is calling this a conspiracy theory at this point should be embarrassing to them. Why not rely on reasonable, but still well left-of-center analysis from the likes of (as three examples) Alan Dershowitz, John Turley, or even Glenn Greenwald? You folks need to look up and study Crossfire Hurricane and the information that we have on the Steele Dossier. The fact that they spied on Trump during his campaign should not even be controversial at this point. How about this article? https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/509002-more-willful-blindness-by-the-media-on-spying-by-obama-administration I used to be very impressed by the analysis on Wikipedia relating to politics. What happened? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.103.223.118 ( talk) 06:54, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Why are we calling this a theory? It happened. We know it and there is extremely extensive documentation that it happened. It turned out not to be a person in the campaign but a modern wiretap. There really is not question unless there is some ulterior motive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.252.33 ( talk) 22:52, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
This is no theory except for fact-deniers and idiots. Read the newly-declassified FBI documents and fix this shame of an article: https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2021-02/Halper%20Source%20Documents_final.pdf https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2020-09/04518073623.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.241.38.148 ( talk) 19:05, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
2600:1008:B002:5A49:B8B0:FD37:2F8:947 ( talk) 08:53, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Everything has been proven true by the FBI it is no longer a conspiracy theory
Why doesn’t Wiki mention the origins of the Steele Dossier? Funded by Hillary & the DNC to hire Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on Trump. Fusion GPS then hired Steele who created the bogus Dossier and the handed it over to the FBI. The FBI knowing the information in the dossier was not factual had to alter and add more false information to the file in order to get the FISA court to give the FBI permission to wire tap Carter Page. It’s obvious to me that the editors of Wikipedia are overwhelmingly politically bias in the writing of their articles. The American people are NOT stupid and not easily fooled. Shame on Wiki for helping to destroy the USA by writing articles that are obviously misleading so they can push their political agenda!!!!! 2600:387:F:4510:0:0:0:A ( talk) 13:07, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Given the continued proof that this is Not a conspiracy and that Hillary Clinton funded and orchestrated spying on a candidate, creating and planting false evidence, and spying on a president, this page should be UPDATED 2600:1008:B158:F6E4:B495:DB8D:E258:A23 ( talk) 21:44, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Hillary Clinton's campaign paid tech firm to 'infiltrate' Trump Tower and White House servers, which is of course not true and why the WP:DAILYMAIL is deprecated. – Muboshgu ( talk) 22:07, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
This is confirmed to be "not a conspiracy theory". Do not spread mis-dis- information. You can't have it both ways. 2601:40D:401:43B0:BC23:1933:C4A5:6991 ( talk) 02:52, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
this is no longer a theory. 2605:8D80:461:3ADB:D422:A9B9:B1DB:40C7 ( talk) 05:54, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Could you please give us a few examples of media outlets you consider credible sources? I have read multiple times from editors that this (spygate) is not related to the current filing that Trump was spied on by Tech executive 1 with links to Clinton campaign. If this is the case then why is it the 5th result when you search " Was Trump spied on " ? Is there a keyword issue here? I have no affiliation with any political party. I simply searched the topic to read all info I could find to gather my own opinion. 2600:1007:B039:9F6:3C68:E29:5D3C:7BC8 ( talk) 15:57, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
When is this fake information page change to fully change the page to show President Trump was %100 correct. 174.251.137.110 ( talk) 16:51, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
This debunked story has been debunked 2600:1007:B115:E6C:C505:E5F2:21A8:2CD4 ( talk) 19:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Seems President Trump, like him or not, wasn’t lying after all, given that Durham has now found that democrats WERE spying on him both during his campaign and when he was our sitting President. Mainstream media (mostly left leaning) has again tried and convicted him over and over, and now we are starting to see the truth revealed—one that is seriously damning and actually indicting democrats for what they (and not Trump) did. You need to update this and be fair rather than regurgitating leftist media propaganda. (And I’m an independent sick of the propaganda, divisiveness, political lying and BS!) 162.226.140.42 ( talk) 16:31, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited this arrangement by mining the EOP’s DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump.The tech company provided DNS resolution services to the EOP (Executive Office of the President).
Lol in response to the ignorant comment below. Here is the indictment from Durham. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638.35.0_2.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:17e0:9c30:dd62:88eb:1ed1:d430 ( talk) 09:34, February 14, 2022 (UTC)
Lawd have mercy on the blind. Read the “indictment portion”; I’ll even post it for you. But the interesting thing I’m seeing here is that one apparently shouldn’t listen to anything the right media might be saying because it’s all lies and conspiracies—but that listening to left media and conspiracy info is fine. Hypocrisy appears to be alive and well on Wikipedia. :( It’s a shame because I’ve often contributed to them and even allow/encourage my students to use Wiki.
“USA [Durham] vs Michael Sussmann
Criminal Case No. 21-582 (CRC), Document 35”
Below is the factual background information the investigation has found thus far in the “Spygate” investigation.
“FACTUAL BACKGROUND
2. The defendant is charged in a one-count indictment with making a materially false statement to the FBI, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001 (the “Indictment”). As set forth in the Indictment, on Sept. 19, 2016 – less than two months before the 2016 U.S. Presidential election – the defendant, a lawyer at a large international law firm (“Law Firm-1”) that was then serving as counsel to the Clinton Campaign, met with the FBI General Counsel at FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C. The defendant provided the FBI General Counsel with purported data and “white papers” that allegedly demonstrated a covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and a Russia-based bank (“Russian Bank-1”). The Indictment alleges that the defendant lied in that meeting, falsely stating to the General Counsel that he was not providing the allegations to the FBI on behalf of any client. In fact, the defendant had assembled and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including (i) a technology executive (“Tech Executive-1”) at a U.S.-based Internet company (“Internet Company- 1”), and (ii) the Clinton Campaign.
3. The defendant’s billing records reflect that the defendant repeatedly billed the Clinton Campaign for his work on the Russian Bank-1 allegations. In compiling and disseminating these allegations, the defendant and Tech Executive-1 also had met and communicated with another law partner at Law Firm-1 who was then serving as General Counsel to the Clinton Campaign (“Campaign Lawyer-1”).
2 Case 1:21-cr-00582-CRC Document 35 Filed 02/11/22
Page 3 of 13
4. The Indictment also alleges that, beginning in approximately July 2016, Tech Executive-1 had worked with the defendant, a U.S. investigative firm retained by Law Firm-1 on behalf of the Clinton Campaign, numerous cyber researchers, and employees at multiple Internet companies to assemble the purported data and white papers. In connection with these efforts, Tech Executive-1 exploited his access to non-public and/or proprietary Internet data. Tech Executive-1 also enlisted the assistance of researchers at a U.S.-based university who were receiving and analyzing large amounts of Internet data in connection with a pending federal government cybersecurity research contract. Tech Executive-1 tasked these researchers to mine Internet data to establish “an inference” and “narrative” tying then-candidate Trump to Russia. In doing so, Tech Executive-1 indicated that he was seeking to please certain “VIPs,” referring to individuals at Law Firm-1 and the Clinton Campaign.
5. The Government’s evidence at trial will also establish that among the Internet data Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited was domain name system (“DNS”) Internet traffic pertaining to (i) a particular healthcare provider, (ii) Trump Tower, (iii) Donald Trump’s Central Park West apartment building, and (iv) the Executive Office of the President of the United States (“EOP”). (Tech Executive-1’s employer, Internet Company-1, had come to access and maintain dedicated servers for the EOP as part of a sensitive arrangement whereby it provided DNS resolution services to the EOP. Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited this arrangement by mining the EOP’s DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump.)
6. The Indictment further details that on February 9, 2017, the defendant provided an updated set of allegations – including the Russian Bank-1 data and additional allegations relating
3 Case 1:21-cr-00582-CRC Document 35 Filed 02/11/22
Page 4 of 13
to Trump – to a second agency of the U.S. government (“Agency-2”). The Government’s evidence at trial will establish that these additional allegations relied, in part, on the purported DNS traffic that Tech Executive-1 and others had assembled pertaining to Trump Tower, Donald Trump’s New York City apartment building, the EOP, and the aforementioned healthcare provider. In his meeting with Agency-2, the defendant provided data which he claimed reflected purportedly suspicious DNS lookups by these entities of internet protocol (“IP”) addresses affiliated with a Russian mobile phone provider (“Russian Phone Provider-1”). The defendant further claimed that these lookups demonstrated that Trump and/or his associates were using supposedly rare, Russian-made wireless phones in the vicinity of the White House and other locations. The Special Counsel’s Office has identified no support for these allegations. Indeed, more complete DNS data that the Special Counsel’s Office obtained from a company that assisted Tech Executive-1 in assembling these allegations reflects that such DNS lookups were far from rare in the United States. For example, the more complete data that Tech Executive-1 and his associates gathered – but did not provide to Agency-2 – reflected that between approximately 2014 and 2017, there were a total of more than 3 million lookups of Russian Phone-Provider-1 IP addresses that originated with U.S.-based IP addresses. Fewer than 1,000 of these lookups originated with IP addresses affiliated with Trump Tower. In addition, the more complete data assembled by Tech Executive-1 and his associates reflected that DNS lookups involving the EOP and Russian Phone Provider-1 began at least as early 2014 (i.e., during the Obama administration and years before Trump took office) – another fact which the allegations omitted.
7. In his meeting with Agency-2 employees, the defendant also made a substantially similar false statement as he had made to the FBI General Counsel. In particular, the defendant
4 Case 1:21-cr-00582-CRC Document 35 Filed 02/11/22
Page 5 of 13
asserted that he was not representing a particular client in conveying the above allegations. In truth and in fact, the defendant was representing Tech Executive-1 – a fact the defendant subsequently acknowledged under oath in December 2017 testimony before Congress (without identifying the client by name).”
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638.35.0_2.pdf
But maybe Durham is lying with his “factual information.” Just curious, has MSNBC addressed any of this? If so, does it match what Durham said or what you are parroting? After all, you appear to be as leery of media claims as I am, which is why I did NOT post media outlets or people’s (biased) opinions—but instead posted the legal “factual information” from Durham himself. Do you doubt it, too?
I think, considering he is legally investigating this whole spygate thing, that Durham is probably more accurate than anyone/anything else on the topic. But that’s my opinion. And I support your right to an opinion. But facts are not opinions.
When wiki sees something that counters something they’ve written, they have a moral obligation to revisit what was said and update it for accuracy. Or they lose credibility. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:17E0:9C30:DD62:88EB:1ED1:D430 ( talk) 18:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
You wrote “Okay, so you copy/pasted all of that text here. So, what does it mean?”
Hmm what does it mean to post a very recent legal document that outlines some of factual background on what has been confirmed about this Spygate investigation, thus putting into context the validity of this investigation into Sussmann and spying on and/or colluding against Trump? Only one reason.
Wiki and many of you who are responding to the individuals who posted about the problem with the Spygate page appear to be tossing out anything contrary to your own beliefs. Including turning a blind eye to what Durham is saying.
From what I’ve read from you and others is claims/insinuations that all the objections you are getting to your Spygate page is from the radical right and right-leaning news shows. You’re even now arguing against what Durham found in his investigation because — it doesn’t seem to fit your narrative.
So what do I want? Honesty, integrity and a lack of bias. Wiki needs to review this legal document (in the context of the whole Spygate issue) and be accurate in what they’re saying rather than relying on newspapers and opinions that serve as confirmation bias for you.
Actually, that’s something both the left and the right should do. But I’m not holding my breath because both sides have proven to be false and self-serving, more than not. Your choice. Review the info and adjust for accuracy. Or don’t. Misinformation and disinformation is alive and well on both sides. You can contribute to it if you wish. Ciao. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:17E0:9C30:DD62:88EB:1ED1:D430 ( talk) 19:30, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
tossing out anything contrary to your own beliefswhen really you fail to understand that Trump was not "spied upon" as the conspiracy theory suggested. Sussman was indicted in September 2021. The filing from this past Friday does not suggest what you say it suggests. – Muboshgu ( talk) 20:57, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
This is no longer a conspiracy theory! Change the definition!!!! 73.113.44.103 ( talk) 18:11, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Better change the heading!! Not a conspiracy theory...truth!! 2600:8807:C185:C500:D907:D492:6F2C:DB90 ( talk) 19:15, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
The spygate was on 2/11/2022 confirmed as a fact by special counsel Dunham. So this entire definition has to be rewritten by a authorized person to reflect that the Clinton campaign with Obama’s Whitehouse did in fact spy on candidate and sitting President Trump. This is a federal crime and is by definition Treason. They conspired to go against United States of America and steal top secret information to harm America. So please make these facts now available since you got it all wrong. Again. 174.251.137.110 ( talk) 00:53, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Special counsel John Durham says he is building a case to show the technology executive with whom an indicted Democratic lawyer was working to build a Trump-Russia collusion narrative gained access to internet traffic at the White House to try and obtain dirt on former President Donald Trump."Building a case" does not mean "confirmed as fact". – Muboshgu ( talk) 01:01, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
steal top secret informationsince we just learned that Trump took 15 boxes of documents, including some marked TOP SECRET, with him to Mar-a-Lago. – Muboshgu ( talk) 01:03, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Coming from guy that spread the russian collusion nonsense is laughable. John Durham's report is a rs 2600:8805:C980:9400:71E5:D6DA:EBEB:A7FE ( talk) 18:06, 15 February 2022 (UTC). It's best Valjean recuse himself from this discussion.
They screw up notifications and are unnecessary. I get email notifications and invariably get sent to the Spygate disambiguation page. Can't we just get rid of them? They don't serve any purpose as the disambiguation page works just fine. One other improvement would be to make the title reflect the contents, which is a normal requirement: Spygate: Trump conspiracy theory. -- Valjean ( talk) 17:12, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Stop lying to the American people. This is not or ever was an conspiracy theory! Read the Durham findings and change these lies! 2600:1000:B128:FB5:A8C2:57AE:FC49:EA9C ( talk) 19:42, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
A wikipedia admin does not know more then the investigator. https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-really-was-spied-on-2016-clinton-campaign-john-durham-court-filing-11644878973 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8805:C980:9400:71E5:D6DA:EBEB:A7FE ( talk) 18:02, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
No im not. You are a sports writer buddy. You are trying so HARD to debunk. Sorry to burst your reality. You believe that Donald Trump colluded with russia lol. You say WSJ is most right wing. But then push the most left wing editorial boards in media NYT is not a reliable source. No credibility as a admin lol 2600:8805:C980:9400:71E5:D6DA:EBEB:A7FE ( talk) 18:08, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
It literally says opinion lol 2600:8805:C980:9400:71E5:D6DA:EBEB:A7FE ( talk) 20:12, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
'They spied on a sitting president' https://www.foxnews.com/media/jim-jordan-durham-probe-clinton-spied-trump 2601:46:C801:B1F0:6996:F51A:8EB2:FC78 ( talk) 20:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
in fact we have the oppositeRhetorical question only: we do? Let's not go down that road here. soibangla ( talk) 21:38, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Muboshgu does not know more then the Durham Investigator and it's all coming out now. Edit the article 2600:8805:C980:9400:71E5:D6DA:EBEB:A7FE ( talk) 18:03, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Trump was spied on per the Durham report and investigation. This is not a conspiracy nor was it ever a conspiracy. Fact is Obama and Hillary Clinton took illegal steps to spy on them candidate Trump and now we find tech was also accessing WH server information to spy on them President Trump. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.213.161.206 ( talk) 20:48, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Right-wing media outlets and Republican politicians, including Trump, are citing Durham's court filing to accuse Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign of spying on Trump because of the use of the data. But Durham's court filing doesn't allege that the pro-Clinton researchers use of internet data meant that there was any eavesdropping on content of communications.– Muboshgu ( talk) 00:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Soibangla's additions (to the John Durham article) of content on this subject are excellent. Durham did not allege that any eavesdropping of Trump communications content occurred. This is an allegation that DNS lookups may have occurred. That activity could not provide any content information. -- Valjean ( talk) 05:58, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
[Durham] slipped in a few extra sentences that set off a furor among right-wing outlets about purported spying on former President Donald J. Trump. But the entire narrative appeared to be mostly wrong or old news — the latest example of the challenge created by a barrage of similar conspiracy theories from Mr. Trump and his allies...The conservative media also skewed what the filing said. For example, Mr. Durham’s filing never used the word “infiltrate.” And it never claimed that Mr. Joffe’s company was being paid by the Clinton campaign.
The Times isn't quoting. That is the Times' statement of fact. WP doesn't operate on a 'Reliable source 1 and 2 disagree so we only add the one we think is true basis'. In this case, The Times - a perennial reliable source is itself saying that Trump was spied upon as a statement of fact.
WP:UNDUE requires that statement of fact to be covered in the article even if you or other editors think it is rubbish based on some other reliable source.
Raise whatever objection you like, raise whatever complaints about Fox you like, The Times is a perennially reliable source and its main statements of fact in a major article are required to be covered. SeanusAurelius ( talk) 19:06, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign paid an internet company to access servers at Trump Tower and the White House in a search for links between Donald Trump and Russia, a US special prosecutor has suggestedis not a statement of fact. I emphasized that clause that is doing a lot to hedge there.
The Clinton campaign was effectively accused of spying by John Durhamis also not a statement of fact. The rest of that article is behind a paywall so I don't know what else it says. – Muboshgu ( talk) 19:13, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
requires that statement of fact to be covered in the articleBut not this article, which is specifically about an alleged embedded person. It's in John Durham#Indictment of attorney where it belongs, unless we decide to split it off into a new article. It's also in Michael Sussmann and Rodney Joffe. soibangla ( talk) 21:31, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
@Valjean: Your totally uncorroborated thesis that The Times just copies Fox without doing independent reporting is your personal fantasy only. There's no evidence for it. The Times is a perennial reliable source. If it has a different view to e.g. CNN or the other left wing media sources you prefer, then they are both required to be covered. SeanusAurelius ( talk) 10:00, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Has nobody on here wanted to take the needed time to update this? This has all been proven wrong.. it's a little unprofessional at the least to just ignore the evidence that nunes came out with in the last weeks. Do better. 2601:989:4582:13F0:FCD8:69:9A94:52B9 ( talk) 22:02, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
|
![]() | This
edit request to
Spygate (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
no further commentary needed
|
---|
Although the Durham investigation is not complete, at the very least, “Conspiracy Theory” should be removed. There is a Federal Investigation that has charged people, and will most likely hand out more charges. Conspiracy theory suggests something is completely fabricated and is 100% false, which this is not. This also defines Spygate as the Obama Admin doing the spying. From the start it was believed to be the Clinton’s, with the White House possibly turning a blind eye. ANGRYTOOCH ( talk) 02:03, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
|