What the Obama administration did may have been worse than Watergate (and unlike the allegations against Trump, there is actual evidence).
8 thoughts on “Did Obama Hack The Election?”
Comments are closed.
What the Obama administration did may have been worse than Watergate (and unlike the allegations against Trump, there is actual evidence).
Comments are closed.
Even the way this is covered Rand; another throw-away story. A Breitbart news “conspiracy theory” story that is forgotten as soon as it is reported practically. The NSA has the tech to monitor millions of phone call a day (they do) this was reported about a year or so ago. This is called “incidental intelligence gathering” because they don’t “look at it”. Thus when Trump says in effect, what the F is going on (all the leaks) do they have my (Trump Towers) phones “wiretapped” ?, in a tweet; the mainstream media pounces. Never mine all the info about the NSA surveillance data; that is quickly forgotten, a “wiretap” is a wiretap; some guys in a van or something outside of Trump Towers. And/or a “court order” signed by a judge. Ha, ha, ha Trump is crazy/delusional, should be impeached. Meanwhile the previous administration skates on any responsibility for what is happening. Practically a total erosion of our privacy via phone, internet, cell whatever.
Notice how every time Trump’s claim that he was wiretapped pops up, they include a clause in the same sentence that there is zero proof. But when they talking about Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, they never put the zero proof disclaimer in the same sentence, often its not even there at all.
The DNC’s media is really good at using language to imply contacts is more nefarious than they are. Rather than give any specifics, they just reference “contacts” as something nefarious. If they said a contact was an RT appearance or a meet and greet where many other Democrats and Republicans were there, it sounds a lot less sinister, which is why they don’t do it.
“Notice how every time Trump’s claim that he was wiretapped pops up, they include a clause in the same sentence that there is zero proof.”
“Zero proof”…yes of a wire tap as such. Whatever that still even means in the context of this situation. But remember Trump in the original tweet put “wire tap” in quotations; our esteemed main stream media chose to take it literally, no mention made of even the possibility of the FISA authorized NSA data collection being the source of the copious leaks.
“But when they talking about Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, they never put the zero proof disclaimer in the same sentence, often its not even there at all.”
And even worse they never bother to tell us what exactly (or even approximately) what is/are the crimes that said “collusion” is supposed to be. If Jared Kushner setup or tried to setup a “back door” communication with the Russians what crime is that supposed to be? Like many other Presidents before him didn’t used back door communications between our friends and foes alike? Especially in this era of “leaks” seemingly occurring at will one can easily see why one would want to.
Not to mention Obama’s “back-door” talks w/Iran 2008. convinced them they’d get a better deal from his presidency as opposed to the Bush adm. current talks. We all know how that turned out.
Oval Office tapes, Rand, Oval Office tapes.
It is the absence of such tapes (lesson from Watergate learned) that allowed Mr. Obama to pursue the “limited hang-out route.”
Rose Mary Woods is busy transcribing them, and they won’t be released until she has finished. (Earlier release if she accidentally reformats a drive or two, resulting in an 18.5 Terabyte gap…)
Jewish groups that were targeted by the IRS were also spied on by Obama’s NSA.
For a guy who spied on everyone, you think Obama’s foreign policy and negotiations in international affairs would have been better. But when our country’s adversaries and Obama both want the same things…
Law has been weaponized. Make everything illegal then provide waivers for political allies. Or simply ignore the law. Where there’s no crime, simply report as if there were. The media seems so delusional that outright lies are promoted and defended.
It appears the Trump admin is prosecuting minor players which may lead up the chain, but moles are everywhere to derail the process.
Sessions seems to lack focus and backbone, but it’s still early.
‘Back-channel’ communication has another name… ‘normal’ What would be abnormal would be a single ‘authorized’ channel. Communication doesn’t work that way.
It’s time the admin more often said, “Yes, we’d did that (if they did.) So what’s your point? If there is a crime, prosecute. If not, STFU!”
Kids natively know how to continuously ask “Why?” This admin should do something similar… Yes/No/Declaration of fact, followed by…What’s your point? Continue until it’s ridiculously obvious the media has nothing.