Home » Spying on Trump Tower would fit in with Obama’s m.o.

Comments

Spying on Trump Tower would fit in with Obama’s m.o. — 12 Comments

  1. “Obama’s spokesman issued a statement this weekend, declaring, “Neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen.” A sentence carefully crafted with the precision of someone battening down the legal hatches.”

    White House official never ordered …

    Reminds me of another famous Democrat personage still highly esteemed by the left; who swore up and down that,

    “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time, never.” Honest Bill Clinton.

    No, he just shoved his —- in her mouth and a cigar up her ___ and ej—–ated in her face; in the Oval Office. But why no, he most certainly never had sex with that woman, Miss Lewinski.

  2. Lawfare has become another of the MOs that the left and MSM use repeatedly to move their agenda forward. By lawfare, I mean using carefully lawyered statements to deceive and dissemble. Bill O’Reilly calls it spin and he claims to have a “No Spin Zone” on his show. But he gets spun by the lefty focus group tested talking points all the time. It works, that’s why they do it.

    I watched Mark Levin go through a nine point explanation of all the articles (many by liberal media) that spells out the circumstantial evidence for the FISA Court ordered wiretap on Trump Tower. It could all be innuendo and rumor as FISA Court orders are supposed to be need to know only. Surely, if true, someone with a very high security classification is leaking.

    I give it the same credence as I do that the Russians hacked the DNC and Podesta in collusion with the Trump campaign. Not much. Show us the evidence!

  3. There is precedent for Leftists baby hunts and a distinct lack of probable cause, let a lone evidence, to support their allegations.

  4. One of the things that bothered me about the original FISA story was this- I kept wondering how one could be so stupid as to start electronic surveillance of the opposing party’s nominee or his staff. It really is a level different than wiretapping some reporters from an unfriendly news organization. However, on thinking about, if the October FISA request was indeed granted, one might suppose that they did it so that after Hillary was elected, they could use the intelligence to shut up the sore-loser Trump supporters, or to shut down any attempt at litigating the election afterwards.

    After November 8th, however, things get sticky. I don’t think it is a coincidence that the Russian hacking the election angle was suddenly elevated from literally nothing to the only story the Democrats want to talk about. It really does seem like a story created to cover up something else, or at least give post hoc justification for something done unethically.

  5. “Darned if I know. And I think most of the people who say they know are just guessing.”

    Exactly what I was thinking when I first heard this report.

    And, I suspect that we will never know the truth because the news media can’t be trusted either.

  6. This does fit with bho’s MO. He has gotten away with his Chicago Way dirty business for decades now. The msm and his other running dog lackeys will cover for him and orchestrate smoke and mirrors campaigns to obstruct. If this is what it appears to be (not saying that it is); the DOJ needs to be purged asap and a thorough investigation made to find all the dirty laundry.

    Destroy bho’s “legacy” and his public persona and the demcrats will spend a decade or two in the wilderness. Obama is all they have.

  7. Remember all the fuss about Bush’s grades at Yale and it turned out he was a C+ student — better, though not terrifically so, than “Do you know who I AM?” John Kerry.

    Will we ever know Obama’s SAT scores or grades? No MSM journalist I’m aware of has ever expressed the tiniest smidgeon of curiosity here, and when I brought this item up to two I’ve known for a long time at first they denied these were unknown…. then moved right along, nope, nothing, no doubts on display.

    Likewise neither (separately, they don’t know each other) would admit to any doubts about Obama deciding to help knock over Libya without going to Congress or discussing it publicly with anyone. If GWB had done this they would have lost their minds and they wouldn’t even own up to this.

  8. Obama is “Guilty, guilty, guilty!” as the Megaphone Mark character in Doonesbury said of John Mitchell during Watergate.

    That Doonesbury strip was censored by many papers including WaPo.

    The Post managing editor Howard Simons’s explanation: “If anyone is going to find any defendant guilty, it’s going to be the due process of justice, not a comic strip artist. We cannot have one standard for the news pages and another for the comics.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/comic-riffs/wp/2014/04/26/41-years-later-the-post-publishes-spiked-doonesbury-watergate-comic-for-the-first-time-heres-why/

    O halcyon days!

  9. ‘Darned if I know.’

    If Trump was a normal human being, I would side with him since he has little to gain at this point. However, given his history of unhinged accusations, the likelihood is probably closer to 50:50.

  10. I think the Democrats are correct in their contention that the election was “hacked”. However, it wasn’t by the Boogeyman Russians. BHO hacked the election and HRC STILL lost.

    President Trump refuses to be cowed by these losers. My admiration of him grows by the day.

  11. How everyone can be right, and how it depends on what the meaning of “wiretapping” is.
    You have to read the whole thing to follow the logic, but it’s worth it.

    http://libertyunyielding.com/2017/03/06/back-door-trump-clapper-comey-right-wiretapping-trump-tower/
    The ‘back door’: How Trump, Clapper, and Comey could all be right about ‘wiretapping’ Trump Tower
    By J.E. Dyer March 6, 2017

    This is just for fun.
    http://libertyunyielding.com/2017/03/07/short-circuit-trump-hacks-deep-state/

    And it looks like either Dyer reads Dilbert or vice versa.
    Or great minds think alike. Well, devious minds, anyway.

    http://blog.dilbert.com/post/158110404781/wiretapping-word-thinking

  12. “So, who’s telling the truth now?” – Neo

    Who knows?

    We have to remember that the big picture is to drive support for trump and his policies (would hope they be conservative ones, but doubtful on several counts).

    So, the question is NOT so much “who is telling the truth now?”.

    It is, does this narrative build support, or does it distract from such?

    And, is it really trump’s best use of media attention and focus of his (and the WH’s) time?

    Bottom line, if one steps away from the blue vs red for a moment, they will see that leaving an accusation of that magnitude hang in the air without much support behind it is far from convincing.

    Suspicion of how obama COULD do it based on past analogues is hardly enough to tilt the scale for anyone (outside of trump’s core support), as trump has “cried wolf” just too many times.

    It is more likely to hurt trump’s credibility, unless he were to come to the table with something more than mere accusation.

    And, if the suspicion is that obama is capable of abusing his power in this way, what makes us think the broader public won’t see any follow on to this as nothing more than trump doing the same, but in the opposite direction?

    Credibility and integrity are alloyed together.

    AFAICTell, trump hasn’t been sowing either in any significant amounts outside his core support.

    We’ll see.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>