“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Saturday, March 04, 2017

It's time the White House goes on the offensive

Mark Levin to Congress: Investigate Obama’s ‘Silent Coup’ vs. Trump

Barack Obama
The Associated Press
by Joel B. Pollak 3 Mar 2017 

Radio host Mark Levin used his Thursday evening show to outlinethe known steps taken by President Barack Obama’s administration in its last months to undermine Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and, later, his new administration.

Levin called Obama’s effort “police state” tactics, and suggested that Obama’s actions, rather than conspiracy theories about alleged Russian interference in the presidential election to help Trump, should be the target of congressional investigation.
Drawing on sources including the New York Times and the Washington Post, Levin described the case against Obama so far, based on what is already publicly known. The following is an expanded version of that case, including events that Levin did not mention specifically but are important to the overall timeline.
1. June 2016: FISA request. The Obama administration files a request with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) to monitor communications involving Donald Trump and several advisers. The request, uncharacteristically, is denied.
2. July: Russia joke. Wikileaks releases emails from the Democratic National Committee that show an effort to prevent Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) from winning the presidential nomination. In a press conference, Donald Trump refers to Hillary Clinton’s own missing emails, joking: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing.” That remark becomes the basis for accusations by Clinton and the media that Trump invited further hacking.
3. October: Podesta emails. In October, Wikileaks releases the emails of Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, rolling out batches every day until the election, creating new mini-scandals. The Clinton campaign blames Trump and the Russians.
4. October: FISA request. The Obama administration submits a new, narrow request to the FISA court, now focused on a computer server in Trump Tower suspected of links to Russian banks. No evidence is found — but the wiretaps continue, ostensibly for national security reasons, Andrew McCarthy at National Review later notes. The Obama administration is now monitoring an opposing presidential campaign using the high-tech surveillance powers of the federal intelligence services.
5. January 2017: Buzzfeed/CNN dossier. Buzzfeed releases, and CNN reports, a supposed intelligence “dossier” compiled by a foreign former spy. It purports to show continuous contact between Russia and the Trump campaign, and says that the Russians have compromising information about Trump. None of the allegations can be verified and some are proven false. Several media outlets claim that they had been aware of the dossier for months and that it had been circulating in Washington.
6. January: Obama expands NSA sharing. As Michael Walsh later notes, and as the New York Times reports, the outgoing Obama administration “expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.” The new powers, and reduced protections, could make it easier for intelligence on private citizens to be circulated improperly or leaked.
7. January: Times report. The New York Times reports, on the eve of Inauguration Day, that several agencies — the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Treasury Department are monitoring several associates of the Trump campaign suspected of Russian ties. Other news outlets also report the exisentence of “a multiagency working group to coordinate investigations across the government,” though it is unclear how they found out, since the investigations would have been secret and involved classified information.
8. February: Mike Flynn scandal. Reports emerge that the FBI intercepted a conversation in 2016 between future National Security Adviser Michael Flynn — then a private citizen — and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The intercept supposedly was  part of routine spying on the ambassador, not monitoring of the Trump campaign. The FBI transcripts reportedly show the two discussing Obama’s newly-imposed sanctions on Russia, though Flynn earlier denied discussing them. Sally Yates, whom Trump would later fire as acting Attorney General for insubordination, is involved in the investigation. In the end, Flynn resigns over having misled Vice President Mike Pence (perhaps inadvertently) about the content of the conversation.
9. February: Times claims extensive Russian contacts. The New York Times cites “four current and former American officials” in reporting that the Trump campaign had “repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials. The Trump campaign denies the claims — and the Times admits that there is “no evidence” of coordination between the campaign and the Russians. The White House and some congressional Republicans begin to raise questions about illegal intelligence leaks.
10. March: the Washington Post targets Jeff Sessions. The Washington Post reports that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had contact twice with the Russian ambassador during the campaign — once at a Heritage Foundation event and once at a meeting in Sessions’s Senate office. The Post suggests that the two meetings contradict Sessions’s testimony at his confirmation hearings that he had no contacts with the Russians, though in context (not presented by the Post) it was clear he meant in his capacity as a campaign surrogate, and that he was responding to claims in the “dossier” of ongoing contacts. The New York Times, in covering the story, adds that the Obama White House “rushed to preserve” intelligence related to alleged Russian links with the Trump campaign. By “preserve” it really means “disseminate”: officials spread evidence throughout other government agencies “to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators” and perhaps the media as well.
In summary: the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.
Levin called the effort a “silent coup” by the Obama administration and demanded that it be investigated.
In addition, Levin castigated Republicans in Congress for focusing their attention on Trump and Attorney General Sessions rather than Obama.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He was named one of the “most influential” people in news media in 2016. His new book, How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

37 comments:

  1. On Monday, Trump needs the Republicans to swear in Rudy Giuliani and Bo Dietel as special investigators.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AshSat Mar 04, 10:31:00 AM EST
    If there were wiretaps on Trump it appears they were legally obtained. If this is the case it is hard to see how Trump can turn it to his advantage.


    BobSat Mar 04, 10:37:00 AM EST
    How do you know the parameters of the wiretaps were not exceeded ?



    4. October: FISA request. The Obama administration submits a new, narrow request to the FISA court, now focused on a computer server in Trump Tower suspected of links to Russian banks. No evidence is found — but the wiretaps continue, ostensibly for national security reasons, Andrew McCarthy at National Review later notes. The Obama administration is now monitoring an opposing presidential campaign using the high-tech surveillance powers of the federal intelligence services.


    Bob 100

    Ash 0

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This points up the great gulf separating Smirk and Quirk.

      Quirk is not naive.

      Smirk is naive.

      Delete
    2. Or, alternatively, Quirk has a firm grasp on human nature, Smirk does not.

      Delete
    3. Lol Deuce cites Bob as evidence.

      Delete
    4. At least someone reads the drivel Bob posts.

      Delete
    5. What in hell are you talking about, nitwit ?

      Deuce is citing Mark Levin via Joel Pollak, a relative of Quirk's.

      Delete
  3. .

    Kevin Lewis, Obama's spokesman, said in a statement: "A cardinal rule of the Obama Administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice.

    "As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen," he said. "Any suggestion otherwise is simply false."


    I believe that. As far as it goes. However, unless there is any evidence to disprove it, this should eliminate any legal issues Obama would need to be worried about.

    DOJ and the FBI, read Comey, will continue to be bashed by Dems and GOP alike on this issue. However, since the warrants would have had to be approved by FISA it appears whatever did happen was legal.

    Now, there could be some complaints about the extent the Obama administration went to assure that info on the FBI investigation was spread through government agencies to assure the investigation wouldn't be deep-sixed when Trump took office. But that's a political discussion not a legal one.

    .

    .

    ReplyDelete
  4. We had an SOS that ran secret computers. Who knows?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who knows? Maybe Trump is in Putin's pocket due to his love of beautiful Russian women and all things gold?
      Who knows?

      Delete
  5. .

    What hasn't been discussed much is the why Trump would put such an incendiary tweet out at 6:30 in the morning.

    It appears to be another example of Trump's ongoing 'tweeticide'.

    It's bizarre but not unexpected. Trump's fascist approach to politicking proved highly successful during the campaign as he rallied that section of the public that had been left behind and were fed up with business as usual. He is now trying to use the same approach in governing. But even fascism requires some successes to be considered viable.

    Trump's daily tweets are equivalent to Big Brother's '2 minutes of hate' broadcasts in 1984.

    It might gin his supporters up to a fevered pitch but that is all it accomplishes. It doesn't get his political appointees through the nomination process. It doesn't help move the Obamacare reform package through. It doesn't help move anything ahead. In fact, it retards progress.

    And, as we have seen in the past, it can sometimes make Trump look foolish.

    1. Trump accused Obama of personally ordering wiretaps of him. [Extremely unlikely]
    2. He made the accusations without offering any proof. [We can only assume where he got his info. We still don't know, now 8 hours later.]
    3. White House staff apparently weren't aware of where this was coming from. They were also caught by surprise.

    I am speculating when I say I think Trump probably saw an article on one of his favorite blogs, Breitbart, smiled to himself, and then without consulting staff as to the appropriate way to proceed
    impetuously began tweeting.

    It could bite him in the ass.

    Again.

    .



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Trump does not drink coffee. Maybe, he should start.

      Delete
  6. .

    I get blasted here for being against Trump. I plead guilty. IMO he is simply a personality. As a politician he lacks experience and the capacity for the job.

    But there is a bigger issue.

    Trump thinks he is in charge and what he says goes. He believes the House and Senate are there to pass his budgets and policies.

    Ryan and McConnell view Trump as a convenient means of getting their policies approved into law.

    Hard to say who will come out on top but it is unlikely to be pretty.

    Add to that Trump's governing style, the tweets, centralizing authority in a small (inexperienced) White House staff, generating paranoia among the troops, constant criticisms of all functions with in the government, precipitant decision making and implementation, plans for major cuts in all non-military discretionary departments.

    I just don't think it can be sustained over time. But the results will be what matters, the gap between what Trump has promised and what he ends up giving the people he promised it to and who got him elected.

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      As an extension of that last point...

      It will also be a matter of what Trump takes away from the people who put him in office.

      Giving people things is the mother's milk of politics. How can you lose?

      On the other hand, taking things away from them once granted can be political suicide.

      The people Trump hangs with, who he appoints to his cabinet, the priorities he sets, the legislation he has proposed, the cuts to key programs affecting health and safety factors and access to things like the internet, promises to gut regulations put in place to avoid the banking crisis that let to 2008 and too big to fail, all to fulfill a promise to repeal Obamacare and to pass across the board tax cuts that will end up overwhelmingly benefitting the rich, will tend to dampen the enthusiasm of those who voted Trump into office because he promised to make their lives better not worse.

      .

      Delete
  7. Jordan ain't playing around when it comes to violent criminals and terrorists:

    Jordan hanged 15 inmates at dawn Saturday, including 10 who were convicted of terrorism, in what officials are calling one of the largest executions since the country reinstated the death penalty two years ago.
    The other five prisoners were found guilty of major criminal offenses, including incest and rape, government spokesman Mohammed al-Momani told state-run Petra news agency.
    Among those executed were five prisoners charged in last year's assault on a Jordanian intelligence agency office in the Baqaa refugee camp that left five dead and in an attack against security forces in the northern city of Irbid.
    The other convicted inmates were responsible for separate attacks and bombings dating to 2003,Petra news agency reported.
    Samah Hadid, deputy director at Amnesty International's Beirut regional office, said, "The horrific scale and secrecy around these executions is shocking."
    "There is no evidence that the death penalty addresses violent crime, including terrorism-related offenses."
    The men were hanged at a correctional center south of Amman.
    Jordan had previously imposed a nine-year moratorium on the death penalty. It was lifted in January 2015.
    The government says it has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to terrorism or even perceived sympathy for terrorist groups — even voicing support for such groups is an offense punishable with jail time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. Samah Hadid, deputy director at Amnesty International's Beirut regional office, said, "The horrific scale and secrecy around these executions is shocking."
      "There is no evidence that the death penalty addresses violent crime, including terrorism-related offenses."

      MOME begs to differ.

      Delete
    2. "including 10 who were convicted of terrorism"

      Perhaps the violent crime rate in Hell will go up just enough to balance their lack here on Earth, resulting in no net change.

      Delete
  8. 4. October: FISA request. The Obama administration submits a new, narrow request to the FISA court, now focused on a computer server in Trump Tower suspected of links to Russian banks.

    No evidence is found — but the wiretaps continue, ostensibly for national security reasons...

    ===

    Can't wait to hear Quirk's long and detailed explanation of why this makes perfect sense, and more proof of what a miserable scumbag Trump is.

    He figures that since the MSM is only 90 percent left wing, it's important to give that side of the argument more attention, and dismiss all others as alt this or that, or whatever.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      Had you bothered to read the posts on this issue 'from the beginning' including from the last stream where it started, you would see that I was the first to bring up the Breitbart article and offered that if what the article said was true it would constitute reasons for an investigation.

      That was a first look opinion on my part. As I reviewed the details and saw the White House response, I modified my view.

      Most of the Breitbart article is political smokescreen. Even the parts that are true are irrelevant to the situation at hand, designed to convince the ill-informed and easily confused that there is more there than there is.

      There are two relative points in the Breitbart story, the October wiretap and the fact that Obama pushed through a change that allowed NSA to disseminated classified among other intelligence agencies in the government.

      I gave my opinion on those above.

      To your question on this post...

      1. We have no proof the wiretaps continued other than Levin and the right wing press saying so.

      In fact, the FBI has said nothing. Neither has DOJ.

      2. If anything illegal was done, people should be prosecuted. There doesn't appear to be evidence that anything illegal was done at this point. However, it seems like it would be real easy to prove if anything illegal was done. Trump is the friggin president.

      3. Trump accused Obama of personally ordering the wiretaps. He wasn't talking about the Obama White House or the Obama administration but Obama. There is no proof of that now nor, IMO, will there be any.

      4. The biggest circumstantial evidence of Obama's direct influence on the investigating was his moves with the NSA. However, that's a political issue not a legal one. Trump can try to spin it any way he wants.

      .

      Delete
  9. Quirk did not answer, here's Trump's:

    ===

    Donald J. Trump‏Verified account
    @realDonaldTrump

    Follow
    More
    The first meeting Jeff Sessions had with the Russian Amb was set up by the Obama Administration under education program for 100 Ambs......

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      I answered this on the last stream dipshit. Go look it up.

      Sorry, if I can't operate on Maui time.

      .

      Delete
  10. It doesn't get his political appointees through the nomination process.

    ===

    Democrats bear NO responsibility, the MSM tell us so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ...or Quirk.
      (A distinction without a difference.)

      Delete
    2. .

      Most presidents would be making phone calls, twisting arms, holding press conferences demanding that his nominees get fair hearings. Trump is too busy tweeting out conspiracy theories.


      .

      Delete

  11. "Drawing on sources including the New York Times and the Washington Post, Levin described the case against Obama so far,"

    ===

    Quirk -

    How about dismantling Levin's argument for us, instead of just another repetitive screed against Trump?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      How about presenting Levin's argument.

      I've seen them referred to, talked about, referenced but I've never seen them.

      What are they?

      .

      Delete


  12. "In summary: the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.
    Levin called the effort a “silent coup” by the Obama administration and demanded that it be investigated.
    In addition, Levin castigated Republicans in Congress for focusing their attention on Trump and Attorney General Sessions rather than Obama."


    ===

    Trump's the Fascist: The MSM and you know who tell us so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quirk cites a lack of experience on the Trump team:

      Obama certainly did put his experience as an Alinskyite Community Organizer to "good" use.

      Delete
    2. .

      As for the term 'fascist' as applied to Trump. I would be glad to argue that with you point for point anytime you would like.

      If the quote you put up just above was from Levin it mirrors almost exactly one I posted earlier on this stream.

      I put up a post on that action by Obama when it happened in January. I condemned it then because of the way it degrades privacy rights for every American citizen. I couldn't understand why he would order it then at the 11th hour of his presidency when he should have been packing up the silverware and china. If he did, as it looks like now, do that, sticking it to all Americans for political reasons, tp make sure Trump didn't deep six the FBI investigation when he got in office, I condemn it even more.

      That said, it would be a political issue not a legal one.

      I've been preaching this since my day one on this blog. When will you chumps ever get it?

      They are ALL dicks.

      I merely concentrate on those that are affecting me most at the moment. To do more would be exhausting.

      .

      Delete
  13. DidSheSayThat @SonnieJohnson

    Trump invites Blacks with ideas on improving communities. Obama invites them to perform.

    http://didshesaythat.com/

    ReplyDelete
  14. "Neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false," Lewis said in a statement.

    The statement did not address the possibility that a wiretap of the Trump campaign could have been ordered by Justice Department officials.

    The White House did not respond to a request to elaborate on Trump's accusations.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      Why should they?

      Trump accused Obama of personally ordering wiretaps on Trump and Trump Towers. If true, that would I believe be illegal.

      The Obama team responded.

      Trump should have a lawyer write his tweets. They would be a hell of a lot longer but it might keep him from being mocked.

      .

      Delete
  15. Damn, that Quirk is a long winded son of a bitch.

    One must admit though, he knows what he knows, and thinks he knows, and even what he doesn't know.

    That is to say, he knows everything.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Can you recall when O'bozo used the IRS to harass and harm conservative American citizens, Quirk ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And don't use the "I" word in your response.

      "I", "I", "I"...you and Obama are gonna wear that word thin.

      Delete