Posted on 08/26/2025 7:17:39 AM PDT by sopo
ot a single member of government is against the system, which is, entirely based on a library of information that captures the electronic data of every American.....
.
FISA becomes so absolutely critical for the interests of the National Security Apparatus....
isn’t a single govt official who would dare step forth to challenge the baseline of the FISA process, because the FISA process is the tool that permits the legal exploitation of the NSA Database.
There was no way for Tulsi to get beyond the block of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), the group that held control of her nomination, while she retained a public opinion that the FISA tool was an unconstitutional exploit that violated the 4th Amendment.
What did Tulsi Gabbard have to do to get through that “advise and consent” process?
She had to accept and affirm that she would never seek to limit, restrict or substantively alter the Intelligence Community access to the NSA database. She had to acquiesce to never blocking or impeding FISA(702) as constructed as a tool to engage the database.....
President Obama supported FISA. Devin Nunes supported the FISA exploit. Kash Patel supports the FISA exploit. Pam Bondi supports the FISA exploit. James Comey supported the FISA exploit. Every corrupt and non-corrupt govt official alike supports FISA. We are told that without it there are great national security threats.
In 2015 Sally Yates blocked any inspector general oversight of the DOJ National Security Division .... The Obama people, under the auspices of FBI “contractors” didn’t use valid FISA authorities to conduct the political surveillance or spying operation, they just used “about” searches of the NSA database itself.....
This was political spying.
This kind of unlawful activity, if exposed, threatens the core validity of the system they weaponized.
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
![]() |
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
What did Tulsi Gabbard have to do to get through that “advise and consent” process?
She had to accept and affirm that she would never seek to limit, restrict or substantively alter the Intelligence Community access to the NSA database.
~~~
This is a Spyola scheme
could call it that, and it’s probably why none of the bad guys ever get prosecuted
Yup.
Here is how it works.
NSA collects data on everyone.
Part of that data becomes the “Senate” file.
NSA staffers dig through the “Senate” file and create a top secret highly compartmentalized blackmail file on each US Senator.
Then the US Senators refuse to confirm Tulsi except on terms dictated by the NSA.
Easy Peasy.
I don’t see any evidence to prove that Rogers didn’t warn Trump. Unlesss I’m missing something, that claim relies on the assumption that Rogers wouldn’t do anything to warn Trump since nobody else will allow questioning of the Constitutionality of gathering all electronic data on everybody.
What am I missing?
I see your point, since Trump did move everything out to Bedminster next day. Maybe that was just his own intuition; it isn’t comprehensive to your point either.
There’s also the fact that Rogers kept the meeting secret. What else would he talk about, that he didn’t want any of the perpetrators of these crimes against Trump to know he was talking to Trump? If he was just talking about setting up a SCIF, why the secrecy?
Women change their minds all the time.
At least by winks and nods ,he could have communicated a lot in FTF.
I may have missed it, but who is saying he didn't?
NSA Director Mike Rogers traveled to New York November 17, 2016, when a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) was set up for President-elect Trump to use following the November 8, 2016, election.
The next day, November 18, 2016, the Trump Transition Team announced they were moving all transition activity to Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey. –SEE HERE– Where they interviewed and discussed the most sensitive positions to fill. Specifically, Defense, State, CIA and ODNI.
The title of the article is “We Can Now Answer the Question - Did NSA Director Mike Rogers Warn Donald Trump on November 17, 2016?”
And the first line of the article is, and I quote:
“The short answer is no; he did not.”
Duh. Thanks.
No problem.
I just don’t see that he made his case in this article though. I can see that tons of people all want the collection of electronic data to continue, but I don’t think it’s clear that this includes Rogers. Rogers did what he could to stop the wrong use of the intel through the means at his disposal but I suspect that he knew it was still going to happen and warned Trump about it. That would explain why he had the meeting with Trump secretly (without the perps breathing down his neck) and it would explain why Trump moved his operations to Bedminster the next day.
But I also think that what he warned Trump about wasn’t just the electronic surveillance that the NSA does on everybody (which is what Sundance is talking about, I believe). I think he also warned him about actual listening/spy devices/bugs where he was. And I think that because if it was just about intercepting phone calls, that would happen at Bedminster too. And I think that because Trump came out and said they were spying on him.
The info Sundance gives is interesting but I don’t think it supports the title question and answer.
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.