| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
Where’s the Smoking Gun?
Representative Devin Nunes is now going to have a closed door session with FBI Director James Comey and NSA Director Mike Rogers, as the House Intelligence Committee looks into “topics” that include whether the Obama administration used the guise of “legally authorized top-secret surveillance of foreign targets” to spy on the Trump transition team and spread throughout the government, far and wide, “unmasked” information concerning what the Trump team was doing and to whom they were talking between the November election and Trump’s inauguration.
At least, we must hope this is the purpose of the session. Nunes simply must ask Comey and Rogers to restate their allegation that Trump was wrong about being spied on by the Obama administration and explain how what Nunes has learned comports with their prior statements. Then Nunes needs to inform the American people asap.
Democrats are upset that an open hearing with (former Director of National Intelligence) James Clapper, (former CIA Director) John Brennan, and (former Deputy Attorney General) Sally Yates has been canceled (or delayed). That they’re upset is puzzling, given that it doesn’t seem likely that those three would relish being under oath while having to explain how and why the unmasking took place.
Surely Nunes suspects that the results of legal surveillance of foreign individuals (Mr. Nigel Farage, perhaps?) talking to or about Trump and/or his associates was mined for information that could be used for political purposes by Trump’s opponents (namely, the incoming Obama “shadow government” and the Democrat Party, not to mention the mainstream media).
Nunes discovered that names of U.S. citizens were “unmasked” in analyses and reports and that information about these citizens, especially members of Trump’s transition team, was then deliberately disseminated throughout the government at as low a level of classification as possible.
The information, according to Nunes and Representative Peter King, was not necessary to the reports. Rather, instead of having intelligence or national security value, the documents helpfully supplied who, what, when, where, and why details about the Trump transition to as many people as possible who were then working in the Obama administration (and who perhaps are still employed under Trump).
These reports, when seen by Nunes, apparently alarmed him, perhaps because, as a member of the transition team himself, he was also named in them. But that’s just speculation. Time will tell, if We the People are ever allowed to learn the truth about what Nunes saw.
Anonymous sources sent these reports to Nunes, who shared what he read with President Trump because he felt that the President has a right to know.
How is it that Trump was not given all of these intelligence reports as part of his transition to the presidency? The very transition that Trump’s predecessor, Obama, had promised to facilitate! One might easily expect an incoming president to be brought up to speed by having him review the most recent set of intelligence reports that had been “disseminated” far and wide.
Remember that astounding story claiming that intelligence agencies were keeping information from President Trump, supposedly from their fear of leaks? Perhaps these reports about spying ON Trump are exactly the information being kept FROM Trump!
Consider this:
Nunes said he did not have that material in hand. He noted he had “viewed” the documents this week. And he said that he hoped to receive copies of the material “from the NSA and other agencies” on Friday, over the weekend, or early next week. He also indicated that there were more documents related to this matter than he had seen. Nunes added that he had been aware of the “unmasking” prior to reviewing the documents he saw. [emphasis added to quotes]
Yes. “More documents.” We shouldn’t be surprised about that, nor should anyone doubt that these documents exist. After all, the New York Times told us all about these many reports before Trump’s inauguration. They also hinted at the Obama administration’s haste to throw them out there:
At intelligence agencies, there was a push to process as much raw intelligence as possible into analyses, and to keep the reports at a relatively low classification level to ensure as wide a readership as possible across the government — and, in some cases, among European allies.
All designed to do what? Ensure leaks to the media? Preserve information that could be later used politically by the “shadow government?” Archive data from a source that would, at least in theory, no longer be accessible to Obama and his outgoing people? Provide ammunition to Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans to use to keep these Russian conspiracy theories going, to give Comey continued “justification” to prolong his “counterintelligence investigation” as a never-ending fishing expedition designed to sully President Trump and hamstring his administration?
As Patrick Buchanan wrote,
For what benign purpose would U.S. intelligence agents spread secrets damaging to their own president — to foreign regimes? Is this not disloyalty? Is this not sedition?
On Jan. 12, writes [The Wall Street Journal’s Dan] Henninger, the Times “reported that Attorney General Loretta Lynch signed rules that let the National Security Agency disseminate ‘raw signals intelligence information’ to 16 other intelligence agencies.”
Astounding. The Obamaites seeded the U.S. and allied intel communities with IEDs to be detonated on Trump’s arrival. This is the scandal, not Trump telling Vlad to go find Hillary’s 30,000 missing emails.
Former CIA officer Col. Tony Shaffer explained:
Shaffer said that due to the simplicity required to “mask” an American’s name during an incidental wiretap, … the leak of Gen. Michael Flynn’s name was “accidental on purpose.”
“Clearly they were after gossip because it was political,” Shaffer said, maintaining that the alleged wiretap had nothing to do with Russia.
The “political appointees” in the intelligence community knew exactly what they were surveilling for, Shaffer said, adding that the case is “much worse than Watergate by an order of magnitude.”
He said that even if the surveillance was done legally, the “unmasking” of Americans’ names and the leaking of the information are felonies.
We the People need to see the “smoking gun” that was reported to exist before Nunes decided to take the issue into closed session. This scandal cannot be hidden behind closed doors, kept from the People under the guise of “national security” or to protect the legacy of our “first African-American president.”
President Trump needs to drain the swamp and he must start with these agencies that have allowed themselves to be used against us.
Yes, against the American people. We the People elected President Trump. He’s our president. He’s their president, whether they like it or not. The truth must come out. Felonies must be prosecuted and punished.
We the People must know whether or not our intelligence agencies were corrupted and politicized under Barack Obama.
We must be assured that this can never happen again in our country.
#####
Source: https://wtpotus.wordpress.com/2017/03/25/wheres-the-smoking-gun/
