Is “unmasking” the Republican version of “collusion”: dramatic huffing and puffing in lieu of something truly worth huffing and puffing about?
Don’t want to miss the video below on this one.
It has been uncovered by Sara Carter and he colleague John Soliman have confirmed that before Obama left office in October of 2016 he ordered that Trump Towers, ‘ headquarters be wire tapped.
That doesn’t speak loudly in favor Trump’s security team at the time, but now he has the Secret Service watching over his every move.
That “investigation,” as has been pointed out, is a counterintelligence probe, not a criminal one.
Its purpose is to gather information about the Putin regime’s activities in order to thwart its schemes.
Yet, the matter has been reported as if its aim were to build a criminal case against Trump.
What, Mueller is biased?
THE NATIONAL REVIEW
by Andrew C. McCarthy
August 4, 2017
Why must we speculate about whether the Obama administration abusively exploited its foreign-intelligence-collection powers in order to spy on Donald Trump’s political campaign?
After all, Trump is president now.
If he was victimized, he’s in a position to tell us all about it.
The president is in charge of the executive branch, including its intelligence agencies.
He has the authority to decide what intelligence information, and intelligence abuses, can be declassified and made public.
There can be little doubt about it, in the end, Robert Mueller will play the jackal, fire him before he gets his chance.
When Barack Obama was running for president in 2008, he bashed the Bush administration’s “enhanced” interrogation techniques for high-value terrorist detainees.
See the entire article below.
His campaign promised that there would be a public accounting.
When he became president, Obama promptly ordered the declassification and public dissemination of government memos outlining the techniques.
Like many Obama critics, I disagreed with the merits of this decision.
But there was no denying the president’s authority to reveal the information.
He had objected to what he argued were abusive practices by the intelligence agencies under the guise of national security.
As president, he was in a position to expose evidence of the practices, both to back up his allegations and to push for policy changes.
So, why hasn’t Trump taken a page out of this book?
Why are we still guessing whether political spying occurred when the alleged victim is now in a position to tell us one way or the other?
Its principal purpose is to determine whether there should be legislative changes in the laws that govern intelligence-gathering (e.g., Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which is up for reauthorization soon).