Keeping their eye on you

I don’t know whether this was what Trump intended but the stories about Russian hacking the election have gone absolutely dead, as have almost all stories related to Obama having placed some kind of phone surveillance on Donald Trump himself. Having become blindingly clear that the Obama White House had indeed initiated that surveillance, with the virtual certainty that none of it would have been done without Obama’s complicity, the entire episode seems to have vanished into air. Since there is nothing that can any longer be used in bringing Trump down, it has gone into hibernation across the media and will remain that way unless something happens that the left and the media believe can again be used to undermine Trump.

This is part of what disturbs me about the blog support network on the right. It is entirely defensive. A story that was utterly preposterous, that Trump and his associates had collaborated with the Russians was, and is, treated as a genuine issue that needs to be sorted out, rather than as a pathetic and disgusting ploy by a bunch of leftist loons and their scribes to harm Trump and short circuit his election. Same for the story about electronic surveillance on Trump during the election. Now that it has been dropped by the media, it has been dropped almost across the board. Yet as had been said by many, this is a far worse crime than Watergate and if true, was a blatant attempt to subvert the democratic processes of the United States and steal the election. Spying by a president on political enemies is an evil, bringing us within close proximity to a police state. Had it been a Republican president involved, no other stories short of World War III would have made it to the top of a front page for the next six months until whoever it was had been hounded from office.

So let us have one final look at this surveillance story, old and stone cold news though it may now have become. The table above comes from this: FISA Court: Whatever Obama Wanted Obama Got. This ought to be seen as a massive scandal:

FISA became a rubber stamp for the Obama administration. Between 2010 and 2015, FISA did not deny even one of the 9,400 applications submitted by the federal government. These applications sought “to conduct electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes,” according to reports filed by the U.S. Justice Department. . . .

The court denied a grand total of zero government FISA applications from 2010 through 2015. However, the court did modify some applications that it approved. And the government withdrew some of those it submitted.

That is to say:

9,391 of the 9,400 applications submitted were approved. The court modified 217 of those it approved. And the government withdrew 9.

But the story is dropping off the radar if it has not entirely disappeared since there is no glory in it for the left. To which we may add this: SAME NY Times Reporter Said Trump Team Was Wiretapped In Jan., But Said TRUMP Lacked Evidence In March. Go to the link for details, which will only confirm everything you already know.

And then, of course, there’s this: Obama v. Trump: Strictly Correct & Misleading v. Not Strictly Correct But Fundamentally True. Everything they say is dependent on how you parse the word “ordered”, as in whether Obama ordered the surveillance. The point:

What Obama and his minions (and the Democrats and many in the media) say is likely to be correct, strictly speaking, but fundamentally misleading. In contrast, what Trump says is often incorrect, strictly speaking, but captures the fundamental truth.

This is what almost certainly happened. The Obama White House via FISA or some other agency bugged Trump’s phones. To wait for definitive evidence – and I find it unimaginable what such evidence could be short of a taped conversation – in such a fluid area where you know nothing could have happened unless Obama had given his OK in one way or another is to let them get away with their efforts to undermine the democratic system. The right side of politics are the worst political fighters I have ever seen, and it is not only a disgrace, but is putting all of us in deepest jeopardy.

This entry was posted in American politics, Ethics and morality, Oppressive government, Politics of the Left. Bookmark the permalink.

59 Responses to Keeping their eye on you

  1. john constantine

    Using their American Tax Office to hound conservatives?.

    Their hussein obama might as well have just drone struck all his opponents, domestic as well as foreign.

    Their media would have supplied him with lists and individual journalists would have lit the tories up with infrared laser sighting devices to guide the missiles in.

  2. test pattern

    Simple really. Russia used Bateson’s schismogenesis to get Americans fighting eachother. It worked spectacularly.

    ‘The concept of schismogenesis was developed by the anthropologist Gregory Bateson in the 1930s, to account for certain forms of social behavior between groups. It was built on Bateson’s experience as an OSS intelligence officer in South Asia. Bateson spent much of his wartime duty designing and carrying out “black propaganda” radio broadcasts from remote, secret locations in Burma and Thailand (Lipset 1980:174), and also worked in China, India, and Ceylon.

    The term “black propaganda” simply refers to a technique whereby an individual or group pretends to represent the positions of their enemy, and mixes a preponderance of facts with a careful seasoning of disinformation that will portray the enemy in a negative light. In this work Bateson applied the principles of his theory of schismogenesis to help foster disorder among the enemy. He helped to operate an allied radio station that pretended to be an official Japanese station: it undermined Japanese propaganda by following the official Japanese line but exaggerating it.’

    https://off-guardian.org/2015/02/18/batesons-schismogenesis-as-a-propaganda-tool/

  3. Zatara

    What Obama and his minions (and the Democrats and many in the media) say is likely to be correct, strictly speaking, but fundamentally misleading. In contrast, what Trump says is often incorrect, strictly speaking, but captures the fundamental truth.

    Word parsing is fun right up until the underlying truth sends you to jail.

    This is a train wreck that needs to happen as soon as possible.

  4. Muddy

    Cowards, imbeciles, collaborators, enablers. So many labels to choose from.

  5. mh

    This is part of what disturbs me about the blog support network on the right.

    and

    The right side of politics are the worst political fighters I have ever seen, and it is not only a disgrace, but is putting all of us in deepest jeopardy.

    Agreed. Catallaxy Files is certainly not ‘on the right’, btw.

  6. sabena

    Steve,
    I am glad you have discovered the Streetwise Professor.His site is well worth reading-though he only blogs about once a week(updated on weekends).

  7. val majkus

    I don’t know whether this was what Trump intended but the stories about Russian hacking the election have gone absolutely dead

    indeed the MSM have now resorted to this

    Defending the media against Trump, Katy Tur said:
    “I don’t think any news organization actually claimed that there were direct ties between the Trump campaign and Russian spies”.

    as the article says:

    Seemingly oblivious to the past two months of media proclamations including the New York Times whose headline was: “Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence

    links at the link

  8. OneWorldGovernment

    test pattern
    #2319282, posted on March 8, 2017 at 1:42 pm

    Simple really. Russia used Bateson’s schismogenesis to get Americans fighting eachother. It worked spectacularly.

    ‘The concept of schismogenesis was developed by the anthropologist Gregory Bateson in the 1930s, to account for certain forms of social behavior between groups. It was built on Bateson’s experience as an OSS intelligence officer in South Asia.

    Interesting source you’re quoting from ‘splatter pattern’!

    And I don’t normally follow your posts.

    I see their ‘tag’ under the name “off-guardian” reads “because facts really should be sacred“.

    Whilst I can’t be bothered following up on “Bateson’s Schismogene” I thought it a bit of a shame that “off-guardian” reckons this was developed in the 1930’s based on his time in the OSS.

    OSS was officially formed in 1942.

    because facts really should be sacred

  9. Old School Conservative

    The right side of politics are the worst political fighters I have ever seen, and it is not only a disgrace, but is putting all of us in deepest jeopardy.

    Correct.
    This applies to our LNP as well as the US Republicans.
    With one caveat – inside their party they fight with vicious delight.

  10. Jo Smyth

    The speed with which this is dropping off the radar just proves that the President is in a position to do damage to the Democrats and the MSM. I believe that Donald Trump will let it die a death but he will make it clear that the leverage is there should the need arise in the future. As far as I know, if he chooses to release anything in the future, as the President he could declassify information and make it very uncomfortable for people involved.

  11. Dr Faustus

    The right side of politics are the worst political fighters I have ever seen, and it is not only a disgrace, but is putting all of us in deepest jeopardy.

    The GOP is either facing years of political dominance, or a flogging in 2018 – the outcome turning on the extent, depth, legality of the surveillance of Trump Towers and release of surveillance material. And who knew and authorised what.

    At present, House Republicans are doing a great impression of being embarrassed by The Donald’s outrage at the Obama Administration’s apparent use of the machinery of State against the Republican campaign and Presidency.

    I guess it’s a long game they are playing – but it looks like rather than picking up the constitutional issues that are certainly in play and getting onto the front foot, the GOP is preparing the ground to throw Trump under a bus if the evidence doesn’t stack up to the required CNN/Late Late Show standard of proof.

  12. Suburban Boy

    One inference I draw from those FISA stats is that any claims that the Deep State bugs (in the widest sense) Americans without the authority of a warrant are most unlikely to be true. Why would they do that when it is a practical certainty that any request for a warrant will be granted?

    There is no reason to assume that FISA is being improperly accommodating to the executive, provided that the information provided to FISA actually justifies the orders under the law. But then the one thing that we can only guess at is this: Exactly how accurate and truthful is the information that the agencies put before FISA when requesting a warrant?

  13. Jo Smyth

    The right side of politics may be the worst political fighters but you are dealing with Donald Trump and we are continually told he is not a politician.

  14. Irreversible

    Delusion is the extreme. Trump is in deep. His faker is catching up and his weird obsession with twitter is escalating his troubles.
    Yet this author thinks all is well. FFS.

  15. JB5

    Failed comprehension at school, did we?

  16. C.L.

    You’re right.
    I don’t know why Trump doesn’t appoint a special prosecutor to go after everyone involved.
    After all, he won. He has been proved right.
    The feeling I have today is, “is that it?”

  17. val majkus

    how easy is it to get a wiretap by an author who ought to know:

    There are two ways to obtain a wiretap – also known as electronic surveillance – on U.S. persons (citizens and permanent residents), and both include the courts. For criminal investigations, the FBI can seek a warrant under Title III of the U.S. criminal code by showing a federal court that there is probable cause to believe the target has engaged, or is engaging in, criminal activity. This is a fairly high standard because of a strong presumption in favor of our Fourth Amendment right to privacy, and requires a showing that less intrusive means of obtaining the same information aren’t feasible.

    The standard for electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes, though, is a little lower. This is because when it comes to national security, as opposed to criminal prosecutions, our Fourth Amendment rights are balanced against the government’s interest in protecting the country. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) allows the FBI to get a warrant from a secret court, known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), to conduct electronic surveillance on U.S. persons if they can show probable cause that the target is an “agent of a foreign power” who is “knowingly engag[ing]…in clandestine intelligence activities.” In other words, the government has to show that the target might be spying for a foreign government or organization.

    But even under this standard, it’s not like the FBI can just decide to stop by a FISC to get a FISA warrant after going through the McDonald’s drive-thru for lunch. To even begin the process leading to a FISA, the FBI has to follow several steps outlined in the Attorney General Guidelines, which govern FBI investigations. First, the FBI has to conduct a “threat assessment” in order to establish grounds for even opening an investigation on potential FISA subjects. If a threat exists, the FBI must then formally open an investigation into possible foreign intelligence activity.

    What does this look like in practice? Well, say, hypothetically, that a group of U.S. persons seem to have not infrequent contact with diplomats known to be Russian spies, whom the FBI are already monitoring. (Pro-tip: While it’s possible that such contacts could be accidental – I mean, hypothetically, the Trump inner circle could be a riot to hang out with socially – spies, particularly Russian ones, are pretty good at what they do and don’t spend time with people unless there’s a good reason.) The FBI might determine that, if the U.S. persons have access to classified information or could otherwise be “developed” for intelligence purposes by a foreign spy service, a significant enough threat exists to open an investigation – this would require at least one layer of approval within the FBI, and possibly more if the investigation concerns high-profile individuals.

    The case still wouldn’t be FISA bound. FISA warrant investigations can’t be opened “solely on the basis of First Amendment activities,” so mere fraternization, even with sketchy people, wouldn’t be enough. The FBI would have to gather evidence to support a the claim that the U.S. target was knowingly working on behalf of a foreign entity. This could include information gathered from other methods like human sources, physical surveillance, bank transactions or even documents found in the target’s trash. This takes some time, and, when enough evidence had been accumulated, would be outlined in an affidavit and application stating the grounds for the FISA warrant. The completed FISA application would go up for approval through the FBI chain of command, including a Supervisor, the Chief Division Counsel (the highest lawyer within that FBI field office), and finally, the Special Agent in Charge of the field office, before making its way to FBI Headquarters to get approval by (at least) the Unit-level Supervisor there. If you’re exhausted already, hang on: There’s more.

    The FISA application then travels to the Justice Department where attorneys from the National Security Division comb through the application to verify all the assertions made in it. Known as “Woods procedures” after Michael J. Woods, the FBI Special Agent attorney who developed this layer of approval, DOJ verifies the accuracy of every fact stated in the application. If anything looks unsubstantiated, the application is sent back to the FBI to provide additional evidentiary support – this game of bureaucratic chutes and ladders continues until DOJ is satisfied that the facts in the FISA application can both be corroborated and meet the legal standards for the court. After getting sign-off from a senior DOJ official (finally!), a lawyer from DOJ takes the FISA application before the FISC, comprised of eleven federal district judges who sit on the court on a rotating basis. The FISC reviews the application in secret, and decides whether to approve the warrant.

    Now, it’s true that since its inception in 1978, the FISC has approved the vast majority of the over 25,000 FISA applications it has reviewed – some estimates put the number at over 99 percent. But that’s not surprising given the extensive process described above. In fact, if some reports are true that the initial FISA applications submitted to the FISC were rejected, prompting the FBI and DOJ to change its targets to the Russian banks doing business with Trump associates rather than the associates themselves (which would only require showing probable cause that the banks are a “foreign power,” which by definition they are), then a FISA application for Trump Tower, if one exists, would have been subject to even more scrutiny than would normally be the case.

    in practice though there’s a difference between procedure and practice

  18. One inference I draw from those FISA stats is that any claims that the Deep State bugs (in the widest sense) Americans without the authority of a warrant are most unlikely to be true. Why would they do that when it is a practical certainty that any request for a warrant will be granted?

    You’re looking at it arse about face, Suburban Boy. All phone and electronic communications in the USA, the UK, Australia, Canada and NZ have been illegally tapped and recorded and shared since the early 1980’s under an agreement called the UKUSA Pact. It was originally known as Project Echelon, and morphed into PRISM in the early 2000’s when internet traffic including email was incorporated.

    The purpose of FISA in the USA and similar required court orders here in Australia are not to approve establishing the tap. The tap already exists, but being illegal, info obtained can’t be used as evidence. It would also be highly embarrassing if knowledge of the tap became public. Obtaining court sanction means the evidence can then be used in legal proceedings, and provides a veneer of legality should knowledge of the tap become public.

    The legality or otherwise of the tap is irrelevant in a lot of cases, since they are never likely to end up in court or become public. So applications for court approval like FISA only happen when the authorities are building a legal case, or there is some chance of knowledge of the tap becoming public.

  19. King Koala

    The right side of politics are the worst political fighters I have ever seen, and it is not only a disgrace, but is putting all of us in deepest jeopardy.

    The traditional right are a bunch of cucks who are being overtaken by the alt right because the alt right is not afraid to go on the offensive, fight fire with fire, and face the harsh truth no matter how un-pc it is.

  20. Rococo Liberal

    You’re over-thinking it Steve.
    The left have suffered a huge defeat.

  21. Tuned into the ABC Breakfast 24 re this issue (don’y ask me why!) & was flabbergasted to hear presenters carp on about how Trump was making unsubstantiated allegations about the phone tapping of Trump tower.

    Um, um…..doesn’t the process of proving a case follow an allegation in our legal system? Yet, having reported that Trump was, in fact, initiating a Congressional investigation, they still breathlessly reported that he had not given any evidence to the media.

    This all makes my head dizzy. Are we living in some sort of Matrix, after all????

  22. Felix Kruell

    The Director of the FBI has said there was no FISA warrant sought or received…unless he’s lying, that puts your word parsing theory to bed.

    Even if all FISA requests from Obama were granted, you still haven’t established that a FISA request was made in the first place…

    As for evidence, Trump is clearly relying on some – why can’t he share it? It’s a big allegation to put out there without some form of evidence.

  23. OneWorldGovernment

    Felix Kruell
    #2319457, posted on March 8, 2017 at 4:13 pm

    The Director of the FBI has said there was no FISA warrant sought or received…unless he’s lying, that puts your word parsing theory to bed.

    Even if all FISA requests from Obama were granted, you still haven’t established that a FISA request was made in the first place…

    As for evidence, Trump is clearly relying on some – why can’t he share it? It’s a big allegation to put out there without some form of evidence.

    Felix Kruell

    It’s a big allegation to put out there without some form of evidence.

    He may know the evidence but he is still subject to their equivalent of our National Secrets Act.

  24. C.L.

    You’re over-thinking it Steve.
    The left have suffered a huge defeat.

    No they haven’t, RL.
    A huge defeat would be hearings and prosecutions and incarcerations.
    Steve’s point is sound. People on the right now tend to be satisfied that a news cycle withdrawal by the left is a ‘win.’

  25. As for evidence, Trump is clearly relying on some – why can’t he share it?
    It’s a big allegation to put out there without some form of evidence.

    A carefully crafted narrative is being played out.
    Each scene in the script is being presented at the required time.
    Today’s act was the latest Wikileaks release.
    You can be sure the storyline will become clear in its own allotted moment.
    Patience, Felix.

  26. C.L.

    The Director of the FBI has said there was no FISA warrant sought or received…

    No he hasn’t.

  27. Infidel Tiger

    9400 applications – 0 denied.

    What an incredibly efficient process it must be.

  28. Zatara

    The Director of the FBI has said there was no FISA warrant sought or received…unless he’s lying, that puts your word parsing theory to bed.

    This is the point where you pony up something to prove that in case you didn’t Know……

  29. People on the right now tend to be satisfied that
    a news cycle withdrawal by the left is a ‘win.’

    Which is probably why Trump isn’t depending on anybody else but himself. I have no idea what is going to happen, but I can recognise well-ordered chess strategy being played out, when I see it. Once he gets to the point of declaring “check” there will be no way out, no escape. And no survivors.

    Trump may, or may not be God, but if he is, he is the God of the Old Testament.
    A most vindictive God.

  30. Zatara

    As Memory Vault suggests, take a chill pill folks.

    Despite the urge for instant gratification it takes time for things to play out.

    As they most certainly will.

  31. Felix Kruell

    OneWorldGovernment:

    He may know the evidence but he is still subject to their equivalent of our National Secrets Act.

    I’m fairly sure those allegation tweets would be a breach of the National Secrets Act as much as the evidence itself then?

  32. Felix Kruell

    CL:

    Sorry, got my wires crossed – it was Director of National Intelligence Clapper who said it (FBI guy just asked DOJ to refute allegations):

    ““There was no such wiretap activity mounted against the president-elect at the time as a candidate or against his campaign,” Clapper said on “Meet the Press,” adding that he would “absolutely” have been informed if the FBI had received a FISA warrant against either.

    “I can deny it,” Clapper said emphatically.”

  33. NewChum

    “I can deny it,” Clapper said emphatically.”

    Same guy lied to congress about NSA surveillance. Not ‘maybe lied’ or ‘probably lied’.

    Lied his face off. As in ‘landed under sniper fire’ level lying. He has zero credibility.

    The NY times are faced with the difficult position of having printed stories in January about how wiretaps showed trump was talking with Russians, or whatever the story was.

    Now they were trying to put one over that there is no evidence of surveillance.

    With no ministry of truth to go back and re-alter the headlines, bit of a tough one to explain their way out of.

    Either they were lying then and the Russian story is false, or they are lying now about no evidence.

    If there was no surveillance, there is nothing to the Russians story (there isn’t)
    If there was surveillance, russian stories would have leaked by now (it hasn’t)

    Trump wins from here on out – a mea culpa if no concrete evidence of Obama ordered surveillance, but has mortally wounded the Russians narrative. Or, if there is concrete evidence, he was right again, and investigation will reveal no Russian contact and maybe some Obama people go down.

    The Wikileaks drop confirms everything that has been said all along and firmly establishes that we are all subject to surveillance whenever an agency decides to. Bit harder to deny trump not under surveillance.

    From here on out the biggest loss that Trump can have is that no concrete surveillance evidence comes out. But he has put his enemies in the position of having to prove a negative (impossible) while having to walk back their previous attacks to avoid creating circumstantial evidence. All at the same time people’s trust in governments not to snoop on their business is at an all time low.

    Media companies outplayed – again. All because they have had a dream run for 10-15 years and are lazy and sloppy.

  34. cohenite

    Felix Kruell

    #2319512, posted on March 8, 2017 at 5:00 pm

    CL:

    Sorry, got my wires crossed – it was Director of National Intelligence Clapper who said it (FBI guy just asked DOJ to refute allegations):

    ““There was no such wiretap activity mounted against the president-elect at the time as a candidate or against his campaign,” Clapper said on “Meet the Press,” adding that he would “absolutely” have been informed if the FBI had received a FISA warrant against either.

    “I can deny it,” Clapper said emphatically.”

    Which begs the question: where did they get the info about Trump and his allies alleged connections with the Russians if not from wire-tapping?

  35. Zatara

    “I can deny it,” Clapper said emphatically.”

    That wouldn’t be this James Clapper, the one who lied to Congress under oath and somehow never got prosecuted for it under the Obama DoJ would it?

    You aren’t doing your case much good felix.

    I’m fairly sure those allegation tweets would be a breach of the National Secrets Act as much as the evidence itself then?

    Really? Do explain how.

    Please.

  36. Leo G

    There was no such wiretap activity mounted against the president-elect at the time as a candidate or against his campaign

    The surveillance must have used listening devices that could not intercept the part of any conversation on a fixed line telephone service.

  37. Felix Kruell

    NewChum:

    “The NY times are faced with the difficult position of having printed stories in January about how wiretaps showed trump was talking with Russians, or whatever the story was.”

    As I understand it, they wiretapped the Russian Ambassador, and therefore heard the conversations between him and Trump’s people. That’s not the same thing as wiretapping Trump Tower.

  38. Jannie

    If Obama set up some surveillance apparatus, then maybe originally it was intended to operate during the Hillary Democratic administration. After the unexpected election of Trump, then the apparatus’ focus would have been more directly Trump.

    What value did Citizen Obama expect to get from spying on Pres Hillary?

    Obama did not want Hillary to win. He would lose his job as top dog in the Left. Maybe he knew Trump was going to win, and he would still be top dog in the Left, with a surveillance apparatus to use against the new guys in place. The Deep State may have one top guy pulling the strings. This sounds like a friggin conspiracy theory.

  39. Felix Kruell

    Zatara:

    If we’re going to hold past lies against someone, I’m afraid Trump’s going to win that game…

    I don’t know if Clapper’s lying this time. But the onus isn’t on me to prove he isn’t. I’m not the one making the allegation. If you’re going to make that kind of allegation, you need to provide some proof. If you can’t provide it due to the National Secrets Act (or whatever it’s called), then you don’t get to make the allegation (in public).

  40. NewChum

    As I understand it, they wiretapped the Russian Ambassador, and therefore heard the conversations between him and Trump’s people. That’s not the same thing as wiretapping Trump Tow

    Uh huh. And you heard that from Clapper? Snigger.

    Just a coincidence that Obama signed a last minute order on allowing surveillance to be shared, virtually guaranteeing leaks.

    What s the FISA request for? Russians again?

    The NY times have shut up about it, as per the original thread. That alone tells you they are up the brown creek, sans paddle.

  41. OneWorldGovernment

    Felix Kruell
    #2319509, posted on March 8, 2017 at 4:58 pm

    OneWorldGovernment:

    He may know the evidence but he is still subject to their equivalent of our National Secrets Act.

    I’m fairly sure those allegation tweets would be a breach of the National Secrets Act as much as the evidence itself then?

    Felix Kruell

    Not sure if you know how security works and that’s okay.

    I have alluded a couple of times on here that I am bound by the Australian Secrets Act for ever.

    I have also alluded a couple of time I have walked into places in Canberra that most people would not believe.

    I went into one sensitive area that was completely burnt out on one floor and it sure didn’t look like spontaneous computer burn out.

    What can I tell you. Nothing.

  42. Paul

    This is what almost certainly happened. The Obama White House via FISA or some other agency bugged Trump’s phones
    Absolutely. Once Congress look at the evidence provided to FISA to approve the spying and tapping, they will see it’s all fake, because we all know there is no evidence against Trump with the Russians.
    Either way, Obama or Lynch of the DoJ could have submitted this fake evidence, as they are the only ones who can present it to FISA.
    And isn’t it such a coincidence that ALL media outlets have basically shut up in unison, as if word came from Obama head office to STFU.
    No doubts a co-ordinated subordination of Trump.
    Lynch will squeal like a pig once she is charged with treason, and told it will be 20 rifles at dawn against the wall.
    All the other squealing pigs will follow.
    Obama is fucked. The demoRats are fucked.
    NO Mercy Trump.

  43. Alex Pundit

    Mark Levin lays it out all beautifully,

  44. Zatara

    If you’re going to make that kind of allegation, you need to provide some proof. If you can’t provide it due to the National Secrets Act (or whatever it’s called), then you don’t get to make the allegation (in public).

    Fair enough Felix, and that’s what, for the moment, the Congressional investigating committees are for.

    I for one would be very pleased if they recommend an independent prosecutor to continue their work and take this thing entirely to the wall so to speak.

    However, Trump saying he was being bugged in a 140 character Twit is the most minute issue possible in the overall situation where entire transcripts of US citizens were bugged and then leaked to the press.

  45. Rasputin

    I am a bit disappointed that the real point has been missed. It appears that the CIA was using stolen Russian malware as one of the tools in its surveillance arsenal, which naturally leaves Russian DNA behind as evidence, and it is this which allowed the Democ Rats to say with some certainty that traces would show a Russian connection even though the intrusion was from the American side. There should be a word to describe this sort of duplicity….. But words fail me. Perhaps Sinc could run a competition to find a word to describe nano perfidy!

  46. Obama v. Trump: Strictly Correct & Misleading v. Not Strictly Correct But Fundamentally True

    Obama v. Trump: True But I Want To Pretend It Isn’t v. Lies That Confirm My Prejudices

  47. Jannie

    Roger L. Simon
    WikiLeaks’ CIA Download Confirms Everybody’s Tapped, Including Trump

    Remember the old joke about the definition of a paranoid — someone who knows all the facts?
    Well, we’re all paranoids now because — since Tuesday’s, unprecedented in size and scope, Wikileaks document dump of massive cyber spying by the CIA — everything we ever thought in our wildest imaginations is true… and then some.

    The question about whether President Trump was tapped has been reduced to a joke.  The real questions are how often and from how many places.  The answer would probably shock us, if we were ever to learn the truth.  (And did President Obama know what they were doing?  Either that or the CIA, FBI or NSA wasn’t telling him. You decide.)

    From PJ Media

  48. Obama must go to Jail!! Go directly to jail and not pass go.

  49. Cradock's Choice

    Steve Kates, this is the first bombardment in response and it has shattered the enemy, who never expected it. Nobody has ever counter-attacked them before.

    The left did their usual lying and crimnal activity to set Trump up with that whole Russian crap. Then they started the usual post-election attacks to knock over his major supports.

    They got Flynn (and I think trump was surprised by that, after all he left Clinton alone), next targets were Sessions, Conway and the big prize, Bannon.

    With those 4 gone, Trump would be permanently crippled.

    Instead of going for Pelosi or Schumer or some other major leftard, Trump kicked over the poker table and went straight for Obama’s throat.

    This has been devastatingly effective, the entire ‘get Trump’s major supporters’ and the ‘Russian links’ campaign have both collapsed and the criminal leftards are scrambling to cover Obama – and they cannot do it. They were too cocky and stupid and they did not cover their tracks when they set it all up. We now have the truly desperate US Democrat-MSM telling us that they lied about Trump and wiretaps and Russians as recently as 20 Jan (NYT front page) in a desperate effort to cover Obama.

    What’s the next move by Trump? Don’t ask me, I do not know. But we do know it will be unexpected, ruthless, and very entertaining: and that it will explode many a leftard’s head.

    We are already ankle-deep in splodied leftardish heads, his next move will make it knee deep.

  50. pbw

    RasPutin,

    I’m glad you brought this up. According to the preliminary analysis by the ProtonMail folks of the latest CIA leaks, includes this beauty.

    Framing other governments
    We were alarmed by the discovery of a tool that allows the CIA to potentially frame foreign governments for its cyber warfare acts. It works as follows. Imagine that each government or a hacking group has its own signature move or malicious software or a combination of both that it uses to attack its targets. After a while, whenever an attack occurs, it can be linked to to group based on that fingerprint.
    WikiLeaks reports that a program ran by its Remote Devices Branch called UMBRAGE “collects and stores an extensive library of attack techniques”. According to Vault7, amassed techniques include those that are frequently used by Russia.
    Some of the techniques currently at CIA’s disposal via UMBRAGE include: keyloggers, password collection, webcam capture, data destruction, persistence, privilege escalation, stealth, anti-virus (PSP) avoidance and survey techniques.
    Vault7 reveals that the CIA has also produced rules on how its malware should be hidden when deployed to avoid any fingerprints leading back to the US or the agency.

  51. Boambee John

    m0nty,

    What was it the journalists said in the GW Bush era: “Fake but accurate”?

    Their own meme biting them on the bum!

  52. Rob MW

    Many leaks can be stopped by putting just one finger in the right hole. Flynn was in Trump Tower when he phoned the Russian Embassy. Trump 100 – Obama 0 (simples)

  53. john constantine

    Anybody wonder why their hussein obama destroyed all the old white house computers and generously bought [with taxpayer debt] all brand new computers for the incoming Trump presidency?.

    Thought it was a toss-up between covering hussein’s tracks and creating back door opportunities to monitor the new computers.

    Looks like covering up his sins was the winning reason.

  54. J.H.

    Felix Kruell
    #2319457, posted on March 8, 2017 at 4:13 pm………. “The Director of the FBI has said there was no FISA warrant sought or received…”

    It doesn’t matter what Director Comey of the FBI said…. It’s what the New York Times said….

    The NYT informed the people of the United States of America and President Trump, that a FISA warrant had been granted… They also had a headline in another story that said words to the effect that “Trump Towers had been Wiretapped”….

    The Mainstream media informed the public of America that Trump had been “Wiretapped” and that “FISA warrants had been issued.”

    That’s what the American people heard. Whether it is true or not is irrelevant. The fact is, that it was said.

    …. and that’s the Fact that Trump used.

  55. Solitarius

    Steve,

    So it’s dawning on everyone now the FISA court is functioning in a politically partial manner.

    We’ve yet to hear a denial from the Department of Justice or the National Security Agency with regard to Trump’s accusation of wiretapping.

    Obtaining favourable approvals from the FISA court is only a part of the story. Obtaining the authority of the FISA court to retain digital material is essential to get the evidence to begin with. The technical capability to record for all intents and purposes lies with the NSA. Though the CIA has recently been shown to have similar technical capabilities on a much smaller scale; The NSA has the industrial scale tools to carry off the assignment without raising a sweat.

    So the legal authority is established by the FISA Court. The technical capability by the NSA. This leaves the willingness to disseminate the information safely to the public. For this we have the fourth estate’s journalists and their code of ethics that provides “off the record” protection to sources. Yet one piece of the jigsaw is missing.

    The missing piece of the jigsaw is the willingness of someone in the NSA to pass on the information to a journalist. The chances of this happening are fairly slim but not impossible. Afterall they had Snowden. Nonetheless it’s not practically assured and if it did happen, it might not happen within a politically advantageous timeframe. Thus something needed to be done to spread the NSA evidence out more widely in a legal manner to gain political benefit. Enter Obama. An administrative amendment was executed by Obama in the final days of his government to allow sharing of NSA data with the remaining 16 intelligence agencies. Thereby broadening out the scope of persons who could potentially be willing to leak the material to a friendly journalist. The old adage of the best way to keep a secret is to not tell anyone holds true in reverse. In the facebook era, it wouldn’t take a great leap of intellect to realise giving state secrets the social media treatment is guaranteed to subjectivise matters.

    It’s now up to Trump to ensure the leakers are rooted out and convicted. The administrative changes Obama made ought to be rescinded. The FISA court and the act itself must be reformed. Lastly, the rule of law must be evenly applied.

  56. mh

    290,000 Jobs Created in Trump’s First Month, Shattering Expectations

    President Donald Trump has received a huge boost for his economic agenda with the news that the U.S. created 298,000 new jobs after his first full month in office, shattering expectations by a margin of over 100,000.

  57. Rusty of Qld

    Hey Troops, the Yanks have their corruption and cover-ups but have a look at Michael Smith News site and see how much corruption and cover-up has and is going on here for the last 25 years or more!!!!

  58. B Shaw

    Steve, has there been a hold-up with “The Art of the Impossible”?
    No delivery to my door yet.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *