The Briefing Room
General Category => Editorial/Opinion/Blogs => Topic started by: Bigun on December 07, 2017, 09:13:35 pm
-
Why the Deep State Is at War With Trump
12/06/2017 David Stockman
If you were a Martian visitor just disembarked from of one of Elon Musk's rocket ships and were therefore uninfected by earth-based fake news, the culprits in Washington's witch-hunt de jure would be damn obvious.
They include John Brennan, Jim Comey, Sally Yates, Peter Strzok and a passel of deep state operatives -- all of whom baldly abused their offices. After Brennan had concocted the whole Russian election meddling meme to sully the Donald's shocking election win, the latter three holdovers -- functioning as a political fifth column in the new Administration -- set a perjury trap designed to snare Mike Flynn as a first step in relitigating and reversing the voters' verdict.
The smoking gun on their guilt is so flamingly obvious that the ability of the Trump-hating media to ignore it is itself a wonder to behold.
After all, anyone fresh off Elon's rocket ship would learn upon even cursory investigation of the matter that the National Security Agency (NSA) intercepts electronically every single communication of the Russian Ambassador with any person on US soil -- whether by email, text or phone call.
So the clear-minded visitor's simple question would be: What do the transcripts say?
In fact, a Martian visitor would also quickly understand that the entire world -- friend, rival, foe and enemy, alike -- already knows of NSA's giant digital spying operation owing to Snowden's leaks, and that therefore there are no "sources and methods" on the SIGINT (signals intelligence) front to protect.
Accordingly, the disinterested Martian would undoubtedly insist: Declassify the NSA intercepts and publish them on Facebook (and, for old timers, on the front page of the New York Times) so that the truth would be known to all.
The Deep State Watergate
Of course, that would punch a deep hole in the entire RussiaGate witchhunt because NSA, in fact, did record Flynn's late December conversations with Russian Ambassador Kislyak. And there was not a single word in them that related to alleged campaign collusion or otherwise inappropriate communications by the in-coming national security adviser to a newly-elected President who was three-weeks from inauguration.
Indeed, as explained below, Mueller has effectively told us that Flynn's communications with Kislyak were clean as a whistle.
Accordingly, there was no reason whatsoever -- as in none, nichts, nada and nugatory, too -- for the FBI's January 24th interview of Flynn. Four days after the inauguration, Acting Attorney General Sally Yates and the FBI were wasting the time of the new President's national security advisor for no earthly reason except to administer a "gotcha quiz" on what they knew from the transcripts to be completely innocent conversations with the Russian Ambassador
The content of the calls was entirely about pending policy matters. That is, the UN security council resolution condemning Israel's settlements policy and Obama's belligerent new anti-Russia sanctions. With respect to both of these matters, the incoming President had a publicly known policy position different from the incumbent's, and about which his team was completely entitled to communicate with official foreign ambassadors...
More: https://mises.org/wire/why-deep-state-war-trump
-
Can the Deep State finally be exposed? I sure hope so. :pop41:
-
The 'C' word again...coup.
-
The 'C' word again...coup.
And thankfully the coup seems to be coming apart at the seams.
-
This article is a must-read.
It seems that the case against Flynn relies on NSA-acquired conversations with the Russian ambassador.
Such evidence would require Flynn to be unmasked.
During discovery, Flynn's legal team should be able to find out how this was authorized.
The rather thin case against Flynn could backfire significantly.
-
While Nixon himself did not go to prison, a few of his top lieutenants did. Halderman, Erlichman, Dean, etc.
So it would not be too much to ask the same for Comey, Brennan, Rice, etc.
They became brazenly aggressive. They thought they would not get caught, since Hillary would win.
I believe they knew they were bending or breaking the law. That little "intentional" thingy Comey himself mentioned when he dismissed email crime for Clinton.
Back in the Watergate era, I think most Americans felt Nixon's operatives had abused the power they held.
Tennessee Sen. Howard Baker asked famously, "what did the President know, and when did he know it?"
For high ranking people, a strategy is to "not know," in order to preserve "plausible deniability."
-
This article is a must-read.
It seems that the case against Flynn relies on NSA-acquired conversations with the Russian ambassador.
Such evidence would require Flynn to be unmasked.
During discovery, Flynn's legal team should be able to find out how this was authorized.
The rather thin case against Flynn could backfire significantly.
And THAT sir is EXACTLY what they are desperately trying to keep from happening!
This is Watergate X 1000