Raoul_Luke
I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Against Trump. Moira Liaison this morning was being interviewed on NPR about this week's happenings in DC and she referred to (quote) "President Trumps unfounded claims" that the Obama Administration had him under surveillance. How the ef does she know that the claims are "unfounded?"
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/unfounded
She doesn't possess perfect knowledge in this matter, yet she pronounces him a liar on this matter. First of all, we know that the Obama Administration was "hair on fire" outraged about the notion that the Russians were helping Trump's campaign.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/01/us/politics/obama-trump-russia-election-hacking.html?_r=0
That is fact number one. We also know that there were requests for FISA warrants regarding these suspicions:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/us/politics/trump-russia-associates-investigation.html?_r=0
That is fact number two. We also know for a fact (number three) that Michael Flynn's conversations with the Russian Ambassador were recorded without his knowledge:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/02/14/fbi-needs-to-explain-why-michael-flynn-was-recorded-gop-intelligence-chairman-says/?utm_term=.10fd542d6c05
So we have three facts that suggest there was at least some surveillance of the Trump team by someone, presumably with the awareness of the Obama Administration.
So in fact the correct word she should have used is "unsubstantiated:"
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/unsubstantiated?s=t
Which is what Trump's claim is. We (and the media) have no idea if it is, in fact, "unfounded." But she didn't use the correct word - she used "unfounded." Which she actually has no idea as to whether or not it is (indeed) "unfounded." And that, folks, is how the subversive left creates fake "news" that serves the Democrats' efforts to delegitimize the Trump Administration.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/unfounded
She doesn't possess perfect knowledge in this matter, yet she pronounces him a liar on this matter. First of all, we know that the Obama Administration was "hair on fire" outraged about the notion that the Russians were helping Trump's campaign.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/01/us/politics/obama-trump-russia-election-hacking.html?_r=0
That is fact number one. We also know that there were requests for FISA warrants regarding these suspicions:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/us/politics/trump-russia-associates-investigation.html?_r=0
That is fact number two. We also know for a fact (number three) that Michael Flynn's conversations with the Russian Ambassador were recorded without his knowledge:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/02/14/fbi-needs-to-explain-why-michael-flynn-was-recorded-gop-intelligence-chairman-says/?utm_term=.10fd542d6c05
So we have three facts that suggest there was at least some surveillance of the Trump team by someone, presumably with the awareness of the Obama Administration.
So in fact the correct word she should have used is "unsubstantiated:"
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/unsubstantiated?s=t
Which is what Trump's claim is. We (and the media) have no idea if it is, in fact, "unfounded." But she didn't use the correct word - she used "unfounded." Which she actually has no idea as to whether or not it is (indeed) "unfounded." And that, folks, is how the subversive left creates fake "news" that serves the Democrats' efforts to delegitimize the Trump Administration.