Every day I try to move awake from Fake News Conspiracies
and Obama’s Deep State outrages, THEN I run across another news story that
simply brings my blood pressure to a boiling point.
I propose to aggregate some of these news tidbits I consider
to be acts of treason.
I will begin with a stand-alone cross post from Mark
Alexander of The Patriot Post looking at the hypocrisy of the
Leftist MSM in posting news that fingers a wiretap against Trump YET denies
that President Trump has any proof of being wiretapped.
JRH 3/8/17
*************
The Faking News Fakers: 'Wiretaps? What Wiretaps?'
The Trump/Putin myth — delegitimizing Trump's election
to keep the administration off-balance and derail his agenda.
Mar. 8, 2017
Email Update Sent 3/8/2017 1:07 PM
“But the fact being once
established, that the press is impotent when it abandons itself to falsehood, I
leave to others to restore it to its strength, by recalling it within the pale
of truth. Within that, it is a noble institution, equally the friend of science
and of civil liberty.” —Thomas Jefferson
Despite all the fake media hysterics, keeping the “Trump and
Putin rigged the election” myth alive has nothing to do with
facts. But it has everything to do with delegitimizing Trump’s
stunning victory, keeping his administration off-balance and derailing his
agenda.
As usual, leftists and their media sycophants never let
facts get in the way of a political hatchet job.
Last weekend, Donald Trump tweeted a sensational claim —
that the Obama administration tapped his phones during the 2016 presidential
campaign between Trump and BO’s corrupt heir-apparent, Hillary Clinton. The Democrats' public relations
department, a.k.a. the mainstream media, responded with howls that there was no
evidence of any wiretaps, much less evidence Obama knew about any wiretaps —
just more Trump paranoid hysteria.
However, Patriot Post editor Thomas Gallatin provided
a heap of evidentiary substance for Trump’s claims,
given that news of wiretaps on senior
Trump leadership, while Obama was in office, had been widely
affirmed by the same Leftmedia outlets now denying Trump’s claims about
wiretaps. Some of the more notable MSM print and talkinghead “journalists” even
cited these wiretaps as sources for their “reports” on Trump.
Gallatin pointed out that the MSM was “disingenuously
dismissive” in rejecting Trump’s charge, especially given that an initial
request to wiretap Trump’s team was turned down by the FISAC (Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act Court), but subsequent requests were granted.
Allow me to elaborate.
In June 2016, after Trump had clinched the Republican
nomination, Obama’s Attorney General Loretta Lynch tried to meet secretly with Bill Clinton on a tarmac at Phoenix
Sky Harbor International Airport. A few days later, after a visit to the White
House, Lynch’s Department of Justice asked the FISAC for wiretaps not just for
communication devices in Trump’s office but specifically for Trump’s phones.
This request never would have been
submitted without Lynch’s consent, which she never would have
given without Obama’s consent. (If only the NSA could produce a transcript
of that conversation.) While FISAC most often rubber stamps
requests, the court denied the Obama administration’s first request because it
was a fishing expedition based on speculation of criminal activity.
On 21 July Trump became the Republican nominee. A week
later, The Washington Post and other media outlets began propagating the Trump/Putin collusion myth.
In October, a month ahead of the presidential election,
looking for any shred of evidence that might corroborate the myth, Obama’s
Department of Justice again asked FISAC for wiretap warrants for Trump’s
office, this time (according to our sources) omitting Trump’s name specifically
and making the request on broad speculation about national security concerns.
FISAC approved that request, and since such permissions apply, by extension, to
others mentioned in the intercepted communications, we may fairly assume that
Trump’s name was mentioned and, consequently, his lines were monitored.
Recall if you will that a week before the election, Hillary
Clinton posted this social media message: “Computer scientists have uncovered a
covert server linking the Trump organization to a Russian-based server.”
Huh? Did she mean the “scientists” at the Department of
Justice? Was she confusing this with the discovery of her own “covert servers”?
In fact, no such evidence of the Russian link has been
discovered.
Sidebar: However, there were direct links between
Tony Podesta, brother of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, and Russians,
who paid him more than $170,000 for six months of “consulting” to influence
Clinton and ensure, once elected, she would reduce the sanctions Obama was
compelled to impose after Putin invaded Ukraine. His firm was paid $24 million
in fees in 2016, mostly from foreign interests.
Back to the media’s now-acute case of wiretap amnesia — they
now insist that Trump’s wiretap accusations have no merit.
Allow me to direct your attention to a headline on the front
page of The New York Times on Inauguration Day, January 20th, which
boldly cites Trump wiretaps as its source for information regarding assertions
about collusion between Russia and Trump’s campaign leadership team.
According to Times writer Michael Schmidt, “American
law-enforcement and intelligence agencies are examining intercepted
communications and financial transactions as part of a broader investigation
into possible links between Russian officials and associates of President elect
Donald J Trump. … The
FBI is leading the investigations, aided by the National Security Agency, the
CIA and the Treasury Department’s financial crimes unit. … The investigators have
accelerated their efforts in recent weeks but have found no conclusive evidence
of wrongdoing. [So, why is this front-page news on Inauguration Day?] One
official said intelligence reports based on some of the wiretapped
communications had been provided to the White House.”
Got that? Again, “some of the wiretapped
communications had been provided to the White House” — while
Obama was still in office.
This week, the same Times writer, Michael Schmidt, under the
headline “Trump Offering No Evidence,” asserts that Trump “accused former
President Barack Obama of tapping his phones at Trump Tower the month before
the election, leveling the explosive allegation without offering any evidence.”
The same “no evidence” headlines were atop The Washington
Post and other MSM outlets.
Terrible!
Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just
before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!
For the record, while Trump’s
social media wiretap messages were intended to imply that Obama had knowledge
of the wiretaps, as is too often the case with such “loosely worded messaging,”
he provided the MSM yet another “huge” opening to focus on the fallacy of his
“literal message.”
Frankly, all of us should be
able to take the literal words of a United States president posted on social
media, literally. There is now a predictable MSM blowup pattern when Trump’s version of
literal departs from the rest of the world’s reality, and these self-inflicted
wounds continue to cost him precious political capital.
In this instance, the MSM
used his literal messages to divert from the questionable legality of the
wiretaps and their propagation of the Trump/Putin myth, and focus instead on
the fact there is currently no evidence of Obama fingerprints
on, or knowledge of, those wiretaps — even though Schmidt wrote in January that
the wiretapped communications were provided to the White House
while Obama was in office.
Let me reiterate: The July
and October wiretap requests never would have been submitted
without Lynch’s consent, which she never would have given
without Obama’s consent. But there will likely be no fingerprints or electronic
trail on these consents. Obama’s staff would have most certainly ensured that
he had “plausible deniability” in regard to any knowledge of politically
motivated wiretaps.
Former Attorney General
Michael Mukasey concludes, “I think [Trump is] right in that there was
surveillance and that it was conducted at the behest of the attorney general —
at the Justice Department.” But proving it is another matter.
That notwithstanding, there
is plenty of reason for anyone with an ounce of healthy skepticism to conclude,
with high probability, that Trump’s communications were intercepted and, with a
reasonable level of confidence, that Obama was aware of those wiretaps.
Of course, the first victim
within Trump’s administration to be felled by these “non-existent wiretaps” —
orchestrated and illegally released by some yet-to-be determined government
hack while Obama was in office — was Trump’s nominee for
National Security Advisor, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.
Flynn, as you may recall, was
the most vocal former high-ranking military officer who opposed Obama’s
nefarious “Iran Nuke Deal,” which is
precisely what put him in the sights of Obama’s deep state operatives who
remain within the FBI and/or CIA.
After his confirmation in
January, Flynn was bushwhacked with a complicated web of media accusations
based on wiretap transcripts, which were illegally distributed
to Obama-friendly MSM outlets.
Though the Flynn transcripts indicated
no wrongdoing, in February he fell
on his own sword and resigned in order to minimize the
collateral political damage to the Trump administration. (For the record, the
CIA and the Departments of Justice and Treasury are now being sued by Judicial Watch, on
behalf of Flynn, to see whose fingerprints are on those wiretaps.)
Amid the wiretap wars this
week, you may have missed this conclusion about the Trump/Putin election
collusion from former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.
According to Clapper, there wasn’t “any evidence” found by the CIA or FBI in
their investigations that would indicate “any reflection of collusion between
members of the Trump campaign and the Russians.”
The New York Times conceded
as much in January and again in February, so why was this a front-page headline
story?
But as noted previously, the
Leftmedia never let facts get in the way of a political hit piece — until
they’re caught in a BIG propaganda lie. In the
light of truth, the political cockroaches scurry for cover.
Andrew McCarthy, a former
assistant U.S. attorney and respected legal analyst, summarized the lie: “The
specter of an investigation — breathless media reports of FISA-court
applications, wiretaps, surveillance of agents of a foreign power, and
mysterious servers; painstaking analysis of shady financial transactions
involving Russian banks and funding streams — seems to make the outlandish
conspiracy impossible to dismiss out of hand.”
McCarthy continued, “Into
this misleading ‘Russia hacked the election’ narrative, the press and the Dems
injected a second explosive allegation: Not only did Russia hack the election,
but there are also enough ties between people in the Trump orbit and operatives
of the Putin regime that there are grounds to believe that the Trump campaign
was complicit in Russia’s hacking of the election. Transparently, the aim is to
undermine the legitimacy of Trump’s election victory.”
As for the Leftmedia
retreat, McCarthy notes, “Now that
they’ve been called on it, the media and Democrats are gradually retreating
from the investigation they’ve been touting for months as the glue for their
conspiracy theory. It’s actually quite amusing to watch: How dare you suggest
President Obama would ever order surveillance! Who said anything about FISAC
orders? What evidence do you lunatic conservatives have — uh, other than what
we media professionals been reporting — that there was any investigation of the
Trump campaign?”
Constitutional attorney Mark
Levin, former chief of staff to Ronald Reagan’s Attorney General Edwin Meese, asserts that while “No
evidence is found” tying Trump or anyone on his team to Russia, “the wiretaps
continue.”
Levin concludes, “The issue
isn’t whether the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign or
transition of surrogates; the issue is the extent of it.”
Which leads me back to my
original assertion: The Trump/Putin myth being propagated by the Democrats and their Leftmedia propagandists has
nothing to do with facts and everything to do with derailing Trump’s agenda.
However, Trump’s social media messages are certainly assisting their cause.
Footnote: Unfortunately, some
of the “conservative media,” most notably Fox News, are reading off the same
Beltway memos being broadcast by the Leftmedia — but then they also have
advertising to sell… Fox News now has a
lower rating for “somewhat credible” and higher rating for “not
credible” than CNN, according to recent news credibility polling.
Semper Vigilans Fortis
Paratus et Fidelis
Pro Deo et Libertas — 1776
Pro Deo et Libertas — 1776
___________________
Your Patriot Post team
of editors and staff depend entirely on the voluntary
financial support of
Patriots like you. We are not sustained by any political, special interest or
parent organization, and we do not accept advertising. Thank you for
supporting the Patriot Fund!
The Patriot Post is protected speech pursuant to the "unalienable
rights" of all men, and the First (and Second) Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States of America. In God we trust. Copyright © 2017
The Patriot Post. All Rights Reserved.
REPRINTING, FORWARDING AND
POSTING: Subscribers may reprint,
forward or post original content from The Patriot Post, in whole or
part, in accordance with our Terms
of Use, with the following
citation: "The Patriot Post (http://patriotpost.us/subscribe/)"
The Patriot Post
PO Box 507
Chattanooga, TN 37401
PO Box 507
Chattanooga, TN 37401
About The Patriot
Post
Mission
From our 1996 inception, with
sage advice from conservative protagonists William F. Buckley (National Review,
Emeritus), Ed Feulner (Heritage Foundation, Emeritus) and our National Advisory Committee, The Patriot Post has been steadfast in
our mission advocating for individual rights and responsibilities, supporting
the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and
promoting free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values.
Thanks to our fellow Patriots
across the nation, and our devoted team of editors, technical and creative staff, and
support personnel, The Patriot Post has grown from its humble
beginnings into a highly acclaimed touchstone
of Liberty for conservative leaders across our nation, and the leading online
resource for First Principles.
Our objective is to equip the
current generation of American Patriots with
the right information to more effectively "Support and Defend"
the unalienable Rights of Man, as
enumerated in our Declaration
of Independence, and codified by
the Rule of Law enshrined in our Republic's Constitution. Since our first day in circulation, The Patriot has
been an indispensable resource for the force multipliers in our ranks, who have
enlisted many others to the eternal cause of Liberty.
The Patriot Post frames current political and policy issues in the
correct constitutionally constructionist context established by our Founders
and supported today by the plurality of Americans who uphold the most basic
tenet of our Republic: "that all men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are
Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
