A Big Deal


If the intelligence agencies were indeed used for political advantage in the 2016 campaign that is a much bigger deal than Watergate.

6 thoughts on “A Big Deal

  1. Let me get this straight. The FBI reported that Hillary abused the emails. Then they brought up the issue again just before the election.

    Both times it turned out to be nothing.

    I think you are right.

    Hillary would be President but for abuse by the intelligence agencies.


    1. Apples and oranges.

      Hillary was blatantly violating the law and the FBI made excuses for her. Comey said she didn’t mean to do it.

      The Obama administration defrauded the FISA court to spy on the Trump campaign.

      See the difference? Comey was clumsy in his efforts to shield Hillary, but Obama used the power of his office to use our intelligence agencies for opposition research.

      In Watergate, by comparison, Nixon’s campaign used private burglars to attempt to spy on the DNC to uncover evidence of criminal conspiracy by the DNC.

      Watergate was criminal to be sure, but nothing compared to using the power of the Presidency to turn government agencies against the opposition party. That’s Banana republic stuff.


  2. “The Obama administration defrauded the FISA court to spy on the Trump campaign.”

    That has not been determined except in the eyes of Trump and his followers.

    There are multiple investigations going on as we write. If we ever see the results it should shed some more light.

    I imagine the Mueller report would do the same if we ever see that also.


  3. AG Barr’s comment that he believes spying occurred met much incredulity on CNN last night. Barr was heavily criticized for it, as if he had committed some sin that AGs are expected never to commit. This was wild to watch, since it is well established in the public record that spying did occur.

    Famously, for example, Trump Tower was “wiretapped,” and just as famously senior members of Obama’s White House team “unmasked” the names of U.S. citizens in intelligence reports. But listening to the media deniers you would never know that these well-documented events occurred. Instead, the AG was sinful for suggesting the intelligence community may have behaved dishonorably.

    I wonder how much longer our country can survive when even plain realities go unaccepted.


    1. RE: “the bottom line seems to be that the surveillance of Trump Tower for political reasons did not occur.”

      I don’t see how your Wikipedia source confirms that bottom line at all. On the contrary, it confirms the FBI obtained a warrant and used it to conduct surveillance of members of the Trump campaign and it confirms that arguably inappropriate “unmasking” occurred. That’s enough to confirm the “wiretapping” allegation.

      The problem seems to be that “wiretapping” is a sufficiently imprecise term that denying it ever occurred doesn’t prove anything. More importantly, all the denials in the Wikipedia article are made by persons who have something to lose should their role in illegalities be established, which is precisely the question we don’t know the answer to.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s