Watergate was physical break-in at a Campaign HQ • Trump Towers was a cyber break-in at a Campaign HQ
Watergate was physical break-in at a Campaign HQ
A president was impeached and thrown out of office for it because they said he had to have known about it.
Trump Towers was a cyber break-in at a Campaign HQ
A former president who cannot be impeached was celebrated instead, because he said he could not have known about it. His party backing his narratives and enabling the felonies committed based on speculation and hope, a fishing expedition to find criminality where none existed, went into denial mode and blamed Vladimir Putin or whomever they can cite for that day, for the cyber break in at Trump Towers, from which, even after FISA warrants, no evidence of criminality or influence had been uncovered.
After months of speculation and unsubstantiated charges to this day, the diabolical narratives we hear repeated daily on CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times and WashPo to turn the public against lawful governance, there’s not a SINGLE shred of evidence linking Donald Trump or his associates, or even the Russians, to fixing the election in Trump’s favor, or violating American democracy.
Factually, the ONLY Americans who violated democracy and the people’s freedom and obstructed the people’s will were the former president and his associates and cronies. Inasmuch their wiretapping efforts on specious grounds and warrants granted on the president’s behalf or orders giving him cover, was disclosed on election day by the very same New York Times and their media mates who today deny it ever happened. Just as they continue their FAKE NEWS narratives in their disingenuous War on Donald Trump and the People of these United States who want a functioning government – the very reason they had elected this president.
“Not taking no for an answer, the Obama Justice Department evidently returned to the FISA court in October 2016, the critical final weeks of the presidential campaign. This time, the Justice Department submitted a narrowly tailored application that did not mention Trump. The court apparently granted it, authorizing surveillance of some Trump associates.
First, as Obama officials well know, under the FISA process, it is technically the FISA court that “orders” surveillance. And by statute, it is the Justice Department, not the White House, that represents the government in proceedings before the FISA court. So, the issue is not whether Obama or some member of his White House staff “ordered” surveillance of Trump and his associates. The issues are (a) whether the Obama Justice Department sought such surveillance authorization from the FISA court, and (b) whether, if the Justice Department did that, the White House was aware of or complicit in the decision to do so. Personally, given the explosive and controversial nature of the surveillance request we are talking about—an application to wiretap the presidential candidate of the opposition party, and some of his associates, during the heat of the presidential campaign, based on the allegation that the candidate and his associates were acting as Russian agents—it seems to me that there is less than zero chance that could have happened without consultation between the Justice Department and the White House.”
THE LID: “On January 19th and 20th 2017, The NY Times reported that wiretaps of people on the Trump team were passed along to the Obama White House, one of the story’s authors was Michael S. Schmidt. On Saturday that same Michael S. Schmidt was one of the reporters who wrote the story, “Trump, Offering No Evidence, Says Obama Tapped His Phones.”
That’s right, the same NY Times reporter who was one of the sources for the President’s claim, said that there was no evidence for the claim.
The first story by Mr. Schmidt appeared on the NY Times website the evening of January 19, 2017 and appeared on the front page of the paper the morning of Inauguration Day, January 20, 2017:
WASHINGTON —American law enforcement and intelligence agencies are examining intercepted communications and financial transactions as part of a broad investigation into possible links between Russian officials and associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump, including his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, current and former senior American officials said.
The continuing counterintelligence investigation means that Mr. Trump will take the oath of office on Friday with his associates under investigation and after the intelligence agencies concluded that the Russian government had worked to help elect him. As president, Mr. Trump will oversee those agencies and have the authority to redirect or stop at least some of these efforts.”
NOTE: THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES CONCLUDED NO SUCH THING.
THEY – ALL OBAMA OPERATIVES – HAD ASSUMED THEM AND REPORTED ON THEIR ASSUMPTIONS.
DESPITE HIS CLAIMS TO THE CONTRARY THAT HE DID NOT WIRETAP TRUMP TOWERS OR TRUMP ASSOCIATES, FORMER PRESIDENT OBAMA IN FACT OVERSAW THE AGENCIES THAT DID – AND REPORTED DIRECTLY TO THE OVAL OFFICE.
“This is the ultimate in liberal media bias. In January the New York Times’ Michael S. Schmidt perpetuated the rumor that team Trump had Russian connections, and to support his point he said that Trump’s people were wiretapped. However when President Trump claimed his people were wiretapped, the same guy, Michael S. Schmidt said there was no evidence.
Either the Times editors and Mr. Schmidt are trying to skew the story, or they are all suffering from a form of dementia and have no memory.”
(Emphases are this author’s)
“President Trump’s early Saturday morning tweeting has exploded to the forefront an uncovered scandal I’ve been talking about since early January (including in this weekend’s column): The fact that the Obama Justice Department and the FBI investigated associates of Donald Trump, and likely Trump himself, in the heat of the presidential campaign. To summarize, reporting indicates that, prior to June 2016, the Obama Justice Department and FBI considered a criminal investigation of Trump associates, and perhaps Trump himself, based on concerns about connections to Russian financial institutions. Preliminary poking around indicated that there was nothing criminal involved.
Rather than shut the case down, though, the Obama Justice Department converted it into a national-security investigation under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). FISA allows the government, if it gets court permission, to conduct electronic surveillance (which could include wiretapping, monitoring of email, and the like) against those it alleges are “agents of a foreign power.” FISA applications and the evidence garnered from them are classified—i.e., we would not know about any of this unless someone had leaked classified information to the media, a felony.”
Committing a number of felonies, Obama operatives and associates at the intel agencies leaked the information solely to benefit Democrats and damage Donald Trump. Yet to date, not a single shred of evidence was produced by the fabricators of the narratives to substantiate the charges, media-generated innuendo, allegations and assertions, connecting Donald Trump to Russian influence or of violating democracy.
In fact, the very opposite has happened, as this writer wrote exactly two months and two years ago respectively: