Trump accuses Obama of tapping Trump Tower phones

[Perd Hapley]

S.O.P.

If Republicans do something wrong, report the something. If Democrats do something wrong, report the Republicans as trying to capitalize on it.

e.g. "Republicans Pounce..."

Yup. I'm wondering if Trump started this whole circus just to snooker the media to focus on something they would have otherwise ignored.

[makattak]

I've lately been wondering that when dealing with liars who believe there is no truth,  perhaps a liar is the answer.

https://youtu.be/UWQZKqibPvQ


(Yes,  I'm quoting the wisdom of Pirates of the Caribbean)

[Perd Hapley]

I've lately been wondering that when dealing with liars who believe there is no truth,  perhaps a liar is the answer.

https://youtu.be/UWQZKqibPvQ


(Yes,  I'm quoting the wisdom of Pirates of the Caribbean)

"In normal times, evil would be fought by good. But in times like these, well, it should be fought by another kind of evil."

--Dame Judi Dench
(not from The Pirates of the Caribbean)

[230RN]

Accusations are cheap.  Defense is expensive.

Defense is expensive....

[DittoHead]

Devin Nunes is now the "embattled" House Intelligence Committee Chairman after Schiff and Pelosi called for him to step down but I doubt he's going anywhere. He apparently cancelled this weeks meetings though which is unfortunate because I'm sure they would have been interesting, or at the very least entertaining. Thankfully we have Trump keeping things interesting and at the same time helping us keep our eye on the really important stuff: Hillary Clinton!
This is by far my favorite news story of the year, new twists & turns everyday.

[Chester32141]

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/03/28/oh-my-president-obamas-own-defense-deputy-admits-obama-white-house-spied-on-candidatepresident-elect-trump/#more-130586

Sounds incriminating to me ...

Sometimes when a person is deep inside an echo-chamber of like-minded ideologues, they  might not realize what they’re saying is rather revealing to those on the outside. That’s the set up for former Obama administration official Evelyn Farkas (Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense) appearing on MSNBC and admitting first hand knowledge the Obama administration spied on candidate and president-elect Donald Trump’s transition team to gather “intelligence” for political use.

[Monkeyleg]

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/03/28/oh-my-president-obamas-own-defense-deputy-admits-obama-white-house-spied-on-candidatepresident-elect-trump/#more-130586

Sounds incriminating to me ...

Sometimes when a person is deep inside an echo-chamber of like-minded ideologues, they  might not realize what they’re saying is rather revealing to those on the outside. That’s the set up for former Obama administration official Evelyn Farkas (Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense) appearing on MSNBC and admitting first hand knowledge the Obama administration spied on candidate and president-elect Donald Trump’s transition team to gather “intelligence” for political use.

I haven't even seen anyone on Fox comment on that story. I listened to the interview. Why the silence?

[Chester32141]

I haven't even seen anyone on Fox comment on that story. I listened to the interview. Why the silence?

It's on FOX's Website now ... The crawl mentions Ben Carson's being confirmed which took place on 3/2/17 ... looks like MSNBC may have held on to this video for a while ...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/29/former-obama-official-discloses-rush-to-get-intelligence-on-trump-team.html

[MechAg94]

It's on FOX's Website now ... The crawl mentions Ben Carson's being confirmed which took place on 3/2/17 ... looks like MSNBC may have held on to this video for a while ...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/29/former-obama-official-discloses-rush-to-get-intelligence-on-trump-team.html

I love the concern that all this "evidence" of wrong doing by Trump needed to be preserved when these same people had been stonewalling just about every investigation into wrong doing by the Obama administration.

[DittoHead]

3/2/17 ... looks like MSNBC may have held on to this video for a while ...

Yeah this is kind of old, Farkas has been out there saying this (and other crazy stuff) for a little while now.

One player in these sordid efforts at disinformation is former Obama Pentagon official Evelyn Farkas.

Ms. Farkas, who was a deputy assistant secretary of defense handling Russia and Ukrainian issues, resigned in September 2015 because she grew frustrated with President Obama’s handling of the Russian annexation of Crimea and its occupation of Eastern Ukraine.

So she joined the Hillary Clinton campaign as an advisor, noting that Mrs. Clinton “got it” on Russia.

Ms. Farkas has appeared repeatedly in media outlets and op-ed pieces, peddling her bill of goods questioning whether Donald Trump has been “compromised” by Russia.

Last month, she called for an independent investigation into Trump administration ties to Russia in mid-February 2017, saying the core question was, “Are you susceptible to blackmail from a foreign entity or individual?”

On Wednesday night, she told MSNBC host Brian Williams that she was part of an effort, described by the New York Times, to “preserve” classified intelligence about the alleged Trump-Russia ties, by making sure it was sent to Democrats on Capitol Hill.

[Ben]

This is (maybe) an interesting development. As mentioned in the comments, I have to wonder why he is initiating this, especially with the "immunity" caveat. On the face of it he makes it sound like he has dirt on Trump, however he could just be asking for immunity to protect himself from the vengeance of the left if they don't like what they hear.

http://twitchy.com/sd-3133/2017/03/30/bombshell-report-mike-flynn-willing-to-testify-in-exchange-for-immunity/

[DittoHead]

I would guess that since since no one agreed to give Flynn immunity so far and now his lawyer is going to the press about it, he's not gonna get it.
Also I'm pretty sure Kushner, Page, Stone, & Manafort all volunteered to talk to the committees without any immunity. So there's a lot of people they can to talk to first before they have to offer any immunity. He's gotta wish he never said this on TV:

When you are given immunity, that means you have probably committed a crime.

[Scout26]

And the worm continues to turn:

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-03/top-obama-adviser-sought-names-of-trump-associates-in-intel

[230RN]

Heh.  "Dueling investigations." 

[DittoHead]

surveillance reports Rice ordered one year before the 2016 presidential election

Before the Iowa caucasus even That's way before the FBI even started the Russian interference investigation.

[makattak]

Before the Iowa caucasus even That's way before the FBI even started the Russian interference investigation.

As I saw noted elsewhere, if true, this likely means the Obama administration was spying on other potential Republican nominees.

[Hawkmoon]

It sems Ms. Rice is changing her story -- again? Circling the wagons ...

http://lawnewz.com/video/susan-rice-wont-deny-trump-unmasking-requests-despite-claiming-ignorance-just-weeks-ago/

Unlike her flat out denial two weeks ago, the answers Rice provided today to Andrea Mitchell seem to square somewhat with Nunes initial allegations — that perhaps legal and lawful surveillance conducted by the Obama administration likely included American citizens incidentally swept up in the intel dragnet.

So, it would appear that Rice is now rapidly changing her story as more facts continue to come out about what really took place in the final months of the Obama administration, related to potential surveillance, even initially incidental, of members of the Trump transition team.

[Ben]

It sems Ms. Rice is changing her story -- again? Circling the wagons ...

http://lawnewz.com/video/susan-rice-wont-deny-trump-unmasking-requests-despite-claiming-ignorance-just-weeks-ago/

Yup. Makes it very difficult for the MSM that's defending her based on the "it was her job to do that" defense. If it was in fact her job*, then there would have been no reason for her to flatly deny knowing about such a thing, as if it was some kind of outrage to suggest she had the ability.

*It is in fact within the job description of senior national security advisors to unmask US citizens, given very good non-political reasons regarding national security for doing so. It does not appear to be the case here, and her initial denial is solidifying that.

[RocketMan]

It's all well and good about Rice unmasking US citizens caught up in foreign surveillance, but who here really thinks she will face sanctions over these violations of the law?  We have seen this kind of thing before.  She was a Democrat highly placed in a Democrat administration, meaning she automatically gets a pass.

[Monkeyleg]

The latest Democrat defenses boil down to this: the Trump surveillance story is a distraction from the Russia investigation, and the surveillance was "incidental". (The Democrats have discovered a new official word they like).

The FBI and CIA said last year they found no evidence of contact by the Trump team with the Russians. The Dem's keep demanding further investigations anyway, as it makes it look like the Trump team is guilty. Meanwhile, we have this "distraction" that is actually a crime at the highest levels of the Obama administration.

As for incidental, if they were surveilling the Russian ambassador, for example, and came across a conversation with Flynn, that would be incidental. Multiple intel reports with Flynn's name unmasked is not "incidental". It's a pattern. Multiple reports with multiple team Trump members unmasked is not "incidental" any more than winning the Powerball lottery six times in a row.

[Hawkmoon]

Plus:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446415/susan-rice-unmasking-trump-campaign-members-obama-administration-fbi-cia-nsa

As Director Comey explained, in answering questions posed by Representative Trey Gowdy (R., S.C.), those three agencies [FBI, CIA, and NSA] do collection, investigation, and analysis. In general, they handle any necessary unmasking — which, due to the aforementioned privacy obsessiveness, is extremely rare. Unlike Democratic-party operatives whose obsession is vanquishing Republicans, the three agencies have to be concerned about the privacy rights of Americans. If they’re not, their legal authority to collect the intelligence — a vital national-security power — could be severely curtailed when it periodically comes up for review by Congress, as it will later this year.

Those three collecting agencies — FBI, CIA, and NSA — must be distinguished from other components of the government, such as the White House. Those other components, Comey elaborated, “are consumers of our products.” That is, they do not collect raw intelligence and refine it into useful reports — i.e., reports that balance informational value and required privacy protections. They read those reports and make policy recommendations based on them. White House staffers are not supposed to be in the business of controlling the content of the reports; they merely act on the reports.

[DittoHead]

There would have been no intelligence need for Susan Rice to ask for identities to be unmasked. If there had been a real need to reveal the identities — an intelligence need based on American interests — the unmasking would have been done by the investigating agencies.

Why does she (or anyone in her position) even have that ability at all then?

And apparently she was not responsible for unmasking Flynn

two members of the Trump transition team had been unmasked by intelligence reports reviewed by Republican lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee.

One of them is Flynn, and the other transition team member hasn’t been publicly identified.

The GOP official, who the Journal said was familiar with deliberations by fellow Republicans on the intelligence committee, said Rice had requested the unmasking of at least one transition team member, but Flynn was not among them.

[makattak]

Why does she (or anyone in her position) even have that ability at all then?

And apparently she was not responsible for unmasking Flynn

Your quote is not dispositive.

The official in question said he knew she asked for two unmaskings, but Flynn was not one of the two he knew she asked for.

That does not prove that she did not ask for Flynn to be unmasked, it just means that he knows two for certain that she asked for, and neither of which are Flynn.

So, the quote does nothing but confirm she was asking for unmaskings; that is, unless you think the GOP official has complete knowledge of Executive Branch workings?

[DittoHead]

That does not prove that she did not ask for Flynn to be unmasked

Sure, nothing is going to prove that she didn't.

So, the quote does nothing but confirm she was asking for unmaskings; that is, unless you think the GOP official has complete knowledge of Executive Branch workings?

There was a lot of speculation that the documents Nunes went crazy over and have now been shared with the House Intelligence Committee would show that Rice was the one who unmasked Flynn. According to this source/article that's not the case. It is possible there are other documents out there (that the HIC doesn't have) that would show she unmasked Flynn. Is there anything that suggests that though, and if so why weren't they included with the stuff sent over to the HIC?

[makattak]

Sure, nothing is going to prove that she didn't. There was a lot of speculation that the documents Nunes went crazy over and have now been shared with the House Intelligence Committee would show that Rice was the one who unmasked Flynn. According to this source/article that's not the case. It is possible there are other documents out there (that the HIC doesn't have) that would show she unmasked Flynn. Is there anything that suggests that though, and if so why weren't they included with the stuff sent over to the HIC?

The claims of the spreadsheet and unmasking were not made by Mr. Nunes, therefore, I'm not very surprised to find that his data do not include that information.

Maybe there's a lot of spies who are getting pretty angry that a significant portion of the American people is starting to believe they are nothing but partisan hacks and multiple counter leaks have begun in response to the clearly political leaks suborned by the Obama administration?