Posted on 02/15/2017 10:16:18 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
As an attorney with prior professional experience dealing with Sally Yates, I can imagine no one better who needs to be put under investigation herself. Now, information leaks that Sally Yates knew about surveillance being conducted against potential members of the Trump administration, and disclosed that information to others. Even Richard Nixon didn’t use the government agencies themselves to do his black bag surveillance operations. Sally Yates involvement with this surveillance on American political opponents, and possibly the leaking related thereto, smacks of a return to Hoover-style tactics. As writers at Bloomberg and The Week both noted, it wreaks of “police-state” style tactics. But knowing dear Sally as I do, it comes as no surprise.
The Evidence
According to published reports, someone was eavesdropping, and recording, the conversations of Michael Flynn, while Sally Yates was at the Department of Justice. Sally Yates knew about this eavesdropping, listened in herself (Pellicano-style for those who remember the infamous LA cases), and reported what she heard to others. For Yates to have such access means she herself must have been involved in authorizing its disclosure to political appointees, since she herself is such a political appointee. What justification was there for an Obama appointee to be spying on the conversations of a future Trump appointee?
Consider this little tidbit in The Washington Post. The paper, which once broke Watergate is now propagating the benefits of Watergate-style surveillance in ways that do make Watergate look like a third-rate effort, references the FBI “routinely” monitoring conversations of Americans if those conversations happen to be with foreign diplomats, and then notes there were “subsequent intercepts” of Flynn’s calls. The paper additionally noted Yates listened to “the intercepted call,” even though Yates knew there was “little chance” of any credible case being made for prosecution under a law “that has never been used in a prosecution.” Indeed, the paper details an apparent effort by Yates to misuse her office to launch a full-scale secret investigation of her political opponents, including “intercepting calls” of her political adversaries.
Did Yates obtain a warrant for this activity? Did she disclose to the White House she was working for (as a temporary hold-over) that she was using her office to intercept their calls whenever she could? Did she then leak intercepted calls to the press, as it is apparent she is leaking part of the story now? These are facts that call for investigation, and Yates should be a prime target of that investigation.
This concern with abuse of surveillance dominated much of the jurisprudence of Justices like Justice William Douglas. (This was the era of cinematic tours de force like The Conversation, which captured the cultural concern with so much surveillance in the new technological age). Justice Douglas’ jurisprudence, in part, led to laws like section 2511 of Title 18 of the codified United States law.This law prohibits any unauthorized interception or disclosure of communication made over the phones, in person or by electronic means. Most critically here, subsection (e) makes it a crime for anyone to “intentionally disclose, or endeavor to disclose, to any other person the contents of any wire, oral or electronic communication” even if the intercept, itself, was authorized. This is the law Yates may have violated, and certainly warrants further investigation.
Closing Argument
This is the same Sally Yates that volunteered to stay on as a holdover to “help” the Trump transition, then refused to defend the President’s executive orders in court, ordered others to disobey his instruction to defend it, and then grandstanded in the country for personal fame for not doing her job. Now, she’s neck-deep in the Flynn scandal, and there needs to be a further investigation. She may be deserving of her own turn as a lead character in Orange is the New Black.
I’m glad the writer calls this Watergate. That was nothing more than an information gathering spy mission. In pre internet days that meant a burglary.
Same thing, and 1000 times worse.
At first I thought this was from LazNewz. Working on expanding your Brand could be Yuge in the long run....
This is a good article.
Lock her up with H->!
Haul in Lurch and Hussein too.
If hse is found to be the leaker, execute her.
That clearly makes her an accessory / co-conspirator !
and that makes her involvment criminal.
Ping
If she is found to be the leaker, execute her.
It’d be better if he told us something new, something we don’t already know about Sally, considering he’s implying he really knows Sally Yates.
As long as the press provides cover for underhanded actions against Trump nothing will happen to the conspirators. I wonder where the GOP is? Oh yeah, I believe they want Trump to fail. They aren’t helping him at all and they will pay the price when they come up for reelection.
Wasn’t Sally acting AG when the President’s phone calls were leaked, Australia and Mexico.
Another fascist Obama skank. Lock her up.
I want to know if their was a warrant abs if it was FaiSA....if so then Trump needs to clean out that nest of vipe s
In Gitmo, which is where enemy combatants belong.
bump
The Republicans are SLOW- FOOTED, SLOW-WITTED WEAK SISTERS!!
If and WHEN they get around to do an investigation, it will be MONTHS from now and result in NOTHING!!
Love your dedication, but have a bit of an alternative explanation for some of this. Never had a matter with Ms. Yates, so I will accept your review of her.
I think the Bureau was not monitoring Flynn’s calls when he talked to the Sovs, but rather were monitoring the Sovs when they spoke with Flynn.
If the Sovs were known intel POIs, then it is reasonable to assume Bureau was conducting approved electronic surveillance on them. It’s not that Flynn was being objectively monitored, but rather his conversation was recorded when Flynn spoke to the Sovs in that legally recorded conversation, just as anyone who called the Sovs would have been.
That is not improperly obtained evidence, but it is Horse Hockeys
Now regarding Yates herself, she, as so many liberal lawyers do, set herself up to improperly use her office to try to derail the incoming administration. For that, I would have asked if she needed 5 minutes to remove at personal pictures from her office while the nice security officer here escorts her out of the building.
Be well. Keep our powder dry. The fight has just begun.
Lock her up...Jeff Sessions is going to be working overtime to drain the swamp.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.