Posted on 05/17/2018 4:02:13 PM PDT by Liz
President Trump touted a report saying the FBI under ex-Pres Obama spied on the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential race, saying that the revelation could be "bigger than Watergate."
“Wow, word coming out that the Obama FBI 'SPIED ON THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN WITH AN IMBEDDED INFORMANT,'" the president tweeted in reference to a National Review report published last week.“Andrew McCarthy says, 'There’s probably no doubt that they had at least one confidential informant in the campaign.' If so, this is bigger than Watergate!”
The report alleges that Obama-led agencies used their surveillance powers to monitor the Trump campaign.
This is not the first time that the Obama administration has been accused of spying on the Trump campaign. Last year, Trump accused the former president of wiretapping Trump Tower shortly before the 2016 election. “Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my 'wires tapped,' in Trump Tower just before victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!" the president tweeted in March 2017.
"The president used the word 'wiretap' in quotes to mean broadly surveillance and other activities during that," former WH press secretary, Sean Spicer, said. "There is no question that during the Obama administration, there were actions about surveillance, and other activities, that occurred in the 2016 elections."
Oh, puh-leeze! This passed Watergate a year ago.
thefederalist.com
FBI Officials Admit They Spied On Trump Campaign: Under John Brennan, the CIA operated as an opposition research outfit for the Hillary Clinton campaign. It appears from leaked news stories in the British press that Brennan’s oafish spying on Trump began around April 2016, right after Trump’s biggest primary victories. As it became urgently clear to Brennan that Trump was going to face off against Hillary, Brennan turned to “intelligence partners” in Europe for dirt on Trump. But they didn’t have any, save some pretty skimpy material on “contacts” between Trump campaign officials and Russians…
No question.
Game on, Mr. President!
“This is not the first time criminal indictments have been issued against former Obama Admin officials, although some Democrats question the political motives.
At some point, the American people will tire of this criminality drumbeat, said NY Senator Chuck Schumer. “
sarc /
Nothing will come of any of this. If it does, I will happily admit that I was wrong.
This is a massive conspiracy of high treason. In need of Nuremberg-style treason trials and MASS hangings on the national mall.
Watergate is not even a blip on this corruption radar
Our government is in the hands of the enemy, the question is how will we respond? And let’s not talk about politics and elections, it’s too late. We should now fear our government and be prepared to take our country back. We need leadership.
Nobody drowned in Watergate.
But . . . but . . . Stormy is bigger than anything!!!!
Seth Rich didn’t work for Nixon
(HAT TIP PAS) We know this whole investigation was “By The Book”. Obama told them it had to be by the book.....
after the fact (in January after they had been at it for a long while). /s
Obama’s NSA adviser Susan Rice wrote a CYA memo to herself and confessed to a series of crimes that added the time line and inferences about what the outgoing Obama administration illegally concealed from incoming President Trump and his aides.
(CYA memos are rarely a good idea. Most often, they reveal things the author never intended——ala Susan Rice’s now-infamous email to herself.)
powerlineblog.com
SUSAN RICE WRITES AN EMAIL TO HERSELF........the extraordinary email Obama’s National Security Advisor Susan Rice wrote to herself at 12:15 on January 20, 2017........within minutes of President Trump’s inauguration must have been her last act, more or less, before she vacated the White House. So obviously the email was important to her. But why would it be important to send an email to herself (the only person copied was one of her aides)?
If you read the email, along with Senator Grassley’s letter to Rice, it is obvious that it is a CYA memo. But the question is, whose A is being C’d?
Most attention, so far, has focused on the first two paragraphs of the email, which describe a meeting that occurred around two weeks earlier. The participants included
<><>Barack Obama, <><>Joe Biden, <><>James Comey, <><> Sally Yates–who turns up like a bad penny whenever skulduggery is afoot– <><>and Rice:
Rice made sure to underscore that Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities “by the book”.
Rice writes Obama stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book.
This is pure boilerplate. It represents, obviously, the company line. But Rice did not write her email to cover Barack Obama’s rear end. If she or anyone else had wanted to document the claim that Obama said to proceed “by the book,” the appropriate course would have been an official memo that copied others who were present and would have gone into the file. (My guess is that such a memo was written, but we haven’t seen it.)
The important part of the email is not the paragraph that purports to exonerate Obama, but the paragraphs that follow: “From a national security perspective, however, President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.”
The next paragraph of the email remains classified and has been redacted. The email concludes: The President asked Comey to inform him if anything changes in the next few weeks that should affect how we share classified information with the incoming team. Comey said he would.
CONCLUSION Why did Susan Rice send herself an email purporting to document this part of the meeting? Because she was C’ing her own A. Rice was nervous about the fact that, at the president’s direction, she had failed to “share information fully as it relates to Russia” with President
Trump’s incoming national security team. Her actions violated longstanding American tradition. Outgoing administrations have always cooperated in the transition to a new administration, whether of the same or the opposing party, especially on matters relating to national security.
Susan Rice is far from the brightest bulb on the tree, but she was well aware that by concealing facts ostensibly relating to national security from her counterpart in the new administration–General Michael Flynn–she was, at a minimum, violating longstanding civic norms.
If Rice actually lied to Flynn, she could have been accused of much worse. So Rice wanted to be able to retrieve her email, if she found herself in a sticky situation, and tell the world that she hid relevant facts about Russia from the new administration on Barack Obama’s orders.
What were the secrets that Obama wanted to keep from the new administration? We can easily surmise that the fact that the Steele memo was paid for by the Democratic Party; that the FBI had to some degree collaborated with Steele; that the Clinton campaign had fed some of the fake news in the dossier to Steele; and that Comey’s FBI had used Steele’s fabrications as the basis for FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign were among the facts that Obama and his minions didn’t want Michael Flynn and Donald Trump to know. Susan Rice, we can infer, was told to keep these secrets, and if anyone ever asked why she had failed to disclose them to Michael Flynn and others on Trump’s team, or even lied to those people, she would have the defense that President Obama ordered her to do it.
There may be more to it than this. The redacted paragraph likely contains more information about what it was that Rice wasn’t supposed to tell the Trump team. One of these days, we will learn what was blacked out.
The fact that Michael Flynn was Susan Rice’s counterpart in the incoming administration may also be significant. We know that the FBI agents who interviewed General Flynn–even Peter Strzok!–reported that they didn’t think he had lied about anything. And yet, Obama’s DOJ and Bob Mueller’s “investigation”–basically a continuation of Obama’s corrupt Department of Justice under another, less accountable name–persecuted Flynn to the point where he finally pled guilty to a single count of lying to the FBI in order, as he says, to end the madness and the financial drain.
Why were the Democrats so determined to discredit General Flynn? Perhaps because they wanted to pre-empt any outrage that may otherwise have followed on revelations that the Obama administration’s National Security Advisor hid important facts from her successor during the transition, and may have lied to him about those facts, in violation of all American tradition.
The entire Kenyanesian Usurpation was 100 times Watergate.
Every one of the revelations that have come out so far would be impeachable. Every single one. The affair would have been characterized as a coup de etat, as a subversion of the Constitution and of the Bill of Rights, as a historical attempt to subvert the traditional peaceful process of succession that has kept out country safe from violent revolution for more than 150 years.
There would be massive demonstrations in Washington DC and other large cities around the country, and around the world. There would be demonstrations in London, in Germany, in the Scandinavian countries.
There would have been multiple television specials, and probably one or two Hollywood movies about the gigantic, burgeoning scandal already produced. We would have gotten to know every single person who had been surveilled, who had had their privacy destroyed. There would have been allegations that teenage sons and daughters had their private lives invaded. There would have been stories about how PDJT and his staffers sat around laughing at the private secrets that were being reported to them by audio and video means.
The President would have been denounced by BOTH parties, in BOTH houses of Congress.
Every comedian in the country would have made the entire gross, indecent outrage the center of their act.
Retired Republican and Democrat politicians would have been interviewed and would have expressed their outrage.
“Could be”??? President Trump?
Is a trillion times bigger than Watergate exposing a much wider and expansive gang of criminals in government and co-conpirators in press and other platforms.
Wake up and smell the covfefe, Mr. President.
THIS JUST IN: Then-CIA Director, John Brennan, sucked up bgtime to get a job with Hillary;
he worked tidbits from the phony ‘Pee Dossier’ into Obama’s Daily Intel Briefing (PDB)
My takeaway is that Brennan and Hillary pegged Obama correctly......
<><> Obama was stupid enough to believe it......
and
<><> too stupid to understand he was reading falsified intel.
I love how The Donald toys with his opponents before the kill. Best election EVER.
The crimes at the tail end of the Kenyanesian Usurpation pale in comparison to the crimes committed before that and the violation of our Constitution by BOTH parties.
Barack Obama is NOT a natural born citizen.
People born of foreign nationals inherit foreign citizenships and are not naturally Americans.
Precisely what the founders were excluding with the natural born citizen requirement.
Yeah....he’s a great troller.
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.