March 14, 2017

Dennis Kucinich: "I have never gone public with this story, but when I saw the derision with which President Trump’s claims were greeted—and notwithstanding our political differences—I felt I should share my experience."

"... I can vouch for the fact that extracurricular surveillance does occur, regardless of whether it is officially approved. I was wiretapped in 2011 after taking a phone call in my congressional office from a foreign leader."

141 comments:

Bay Area Guy said...

"Extracurricular surveillance" is exactly right and why the Left had so many qualms about the Patriot Act.

What changed? (I giggle)

traditionalguy said...

Dennis has guts. And the we Deplorables thank him for being the truth teller in a lonely media world that has become All Fake News All the Time, or the CIA will Kill You with psyops using pretend intelligence reports.

Chuck said...

This is bullshit, Professor Althouse. With all due respect; there is no justification for Trump's Twitter storm on this subject and no one should engage on that.

Trump Tweeted that "President Obama was tapping my phones in October." He personalized it as to Obama, accusing him of being a "Bad (or sick) guy!" Trump implied illegality in the process, comparing it to "Nixon/Watergate." And the provocatively specific, "Is it legal for a sitting President to be 'wire tapping' a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier[.]"

The weird punctuation, etc., was all in the originals.

Trump should be backing the fuck down, and apologizing. No one in official life in Washington should talk to the bastard, until he makes a comprehensive apology for this defamatory shitstorm.

Trump = bad (or sick) guy.

WisRich said...

Someone else agrees with Mr. Kucinich:

"Fox News Judicial Analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano claimed “three intelligence sources” say President Obama looked to British spy agency GCHQ to obtain transcripts of conversations involving President Donald Trump on “Fox & Friends” on Tuesday."

Just saying.

Rae said...

Trump should be backing the fuck down, and apologizing. No one in official life in Washington should talk to the bastard, until he makes a comprehensive apology for this defamatory shitstorm.

There's ointment for the butthurt, Chuck. Go to the nearest CVS.

sunsong said...

Kucinich is a good guy!

YoungHegelian said...

It's kinda hard to have lived through the political ferment of the late 60s & 70s & not believe that if the government intelligence services can spy on American citizens without credible fear that they will be exposed & punished, they will do so. Has human nature changed in the interim?

If anything, it's much easier to spy on communications now, since it's all TCP/IP traffic & it's all moving through the same "pipes".

Chuck said...

Kucinich's own story does NOT support the notion that his congressional office phones were "wiretapped."

Kucinich's story is that a recording of him talking to Gaddafi's son in Lybia was recorvered in Lybia (possibly and I might say presumably from a U.S. intelligence office there after it had been attacked and overrun by terrorists). I find that unsurprising, and unconcerning, and it is assuredly a story that would have been treated in a way that was 180 degress different, if Fox News was not working hard to supply some sort of backing to Donald Trump.

Drago said...

"lifelong republican" Chuck: "Trump should be backing the fuck down, and apologizing. No one in official life in Washington should talk to the bastard, until he makes a comprehensive apology for this defamatory shitstorm."

You're going to have to speak up.

I can't hear you over the 6 months of continuous (with no evidence) charges of Trump (named personally) being in collusion with the Russians as well as the braying of certain leftists and "lifelong republicans" who eagerly ran with the fake-on-its-face golden showers "dossier" nonsense.

Summary: dems/left/"lifelong republicans" take timeout from calling Trump and his supporters Nazi's, murderers, totalitarians, fascists, traitors to demand an immediate apology from Trump about what they deem to be over the top accusations.

My response: You first.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Chuck, you faggot, you are such a disloyal American. You are wise not to use your real name.

The Cracker Emcee said...

"sunsong said...
Kucinich is a good guy!"

I imagine Kucinich will be going under the Lefty bus any minute now. Deviationists will be required to self-criticize.

WisRich said...

Drago said...

Summary: dems/left/"lifelong republicans" take timeout from calling Trump and his supporters Nazi's, murderers, totalitarians, fascists, traitors to demand an immediate apology from Trump about what they deem to be over the top accusations.

My response: You first.


*golf clap*

Chuck said...

You see, Drago; you don't have that on me. I've never done that. I don't call Trump and his supporters "Nazis, murderers, totalitarians, fascists, [or] traitors." I count myself among the conservative critics of the media (Dan Henninger, James Taranto, Bernie Goldberg, Brent Bozell) who have NEVER given the left-leaning mainstream media a pass on liberal bias or hyperventilating and hysterical abuse of conservatives.

This is different. Trump needs to prove that Obama "tapped" his phones, or apologize. Just like John McCain has said.

I might suggest that Trump "shut the fuck up" but that's not good enough now. "Shut the fuck up," is what some adult should have told Trump at about 5:30 am on 4 Mar 2017. Now, Trump can't shut the fuck up. He needs to speak up and apologize.

Drago said...

"lifelong republican" Chuck: This is different. Trump needs to prove that Obama "tapped" his phones, or apologize. Just like John McCain has said."

John McCain and you can both go jump in a lake.

Your "Moby-ness" is on full display everyday and you aren't fooling anyone. As for McCain, I'm just happy that he finally has another republican President he can attack on a continuous basis just as he did with Bush. McCain is clearly happiest when he can fully align with his natural constituency: Chris Mathews.

Hey, what a coincidence! He likes Chris Mathews and you are fond of links to MSNBC!

Peas in a pod.

khesanh0802 said...

Here's a link to The Hill,for those who can't link to Fox(me).

exhelodrvr1 said...

Chuck,
Unfortunately, Trump has to fight fire with fire, or he loses. And in this case, "losing" means the future of the country going down the tubes.

Drago said...

exhelodrvr1: "Chuck, Unfortunately, Trump has to fight fire with fire, or he loses."

exhelodrvr1, you have stumbled onto the precisely the result that "lifelong republican" Chuck seeks: the reestablishment of democrat supremacy in Washington.

rehajm said...

I haven't been following all the play by play on this story. Chuck thinks it's important so at least I know it's not.

Nyamujal said...

@Chuck
" "Trump should be backing the fuck down, and apologizing. No one in official life in Washington should talk to the bastard, until he makes a comprehensive apology for this defamatory shitstorm.""

The sequence of events is all too familiar now:
1. Trump makes an outrageous claim to distract attention from an issue.
2. The media loses its shit.
3. His supporters, including commentors on this blog accept his claims at face value and furiously search for evidence to back his claims.
4. Our hostess Ann gets incredibly pedantic and persnickety about the language used by the media (point 2) to hold Trump accountable.
5. When confronted with the facts, Trump surrogates insist there's something fishy and urge Congress to investigate.
6. After the punt to congress, congressional Republicans pass on this bullshit because they know it to be patently false and have more important things to do.

Rinse and repeat.
I'm going to need daily Scotch transfusions to get through four years of this...

Jim said...

Dennis must have the most incredible game in the world. Saw him in Kansas City at FarmAid with his breathtakingly beautiful wife. Ever since, I have given his pronouncements more weight even though I'm as far right as he is left.

Angel-Dyne said...

Chuck: Kucinich's story is that a recording of him talking to Gaddafi's son in Lybia was recorvered in Lybia...

OT, but next time you find yourself having difficulty exercising adult self-control over your juvenile urge to be an annoying prissy-pot about spelling/grammatical errors in other people's comments...

Just sayin'.

khesanh0802 said...

Does anyone else think that Chuck has gone over the edge? Drago appears to be wasting his time and energy trying to engage the un-engageable!

Drago said...

Nyamujal: "The sequence of events is all too familiar now:
1. Trump makes an outrageous claim to distract attention from an issuej"

For the last 6 months we have been wading through the democrat/left/MSM/"lifelong republican" filth of accusations that the Trump campaign colluded directly with Putin and Putin's allies to "hack our election".

There is no proof.

There is no offer of proof.

There is simply continuous innuendo.

The accusation of collusion is so outrageous I think we are going to need to see some actual evidence.

So, where is it?

And if you don't have it, perhaps you should simply....what's the phrase? Oh yeah, dems/left/"lifelong republicans" should be backing the fuck down, and apologizing. No one in official life in Washington should talk to the bastards, until they make a comprehensive apology for this defamatory shitstorm.

Drago said...

khesanh0802: "Does anyone else think that Chuck has gone over the edge? Drago appears to be wasting his time and energy trying to engage the un-engageable"

There is no "engagement" with "lifelong republican" Chuck as he is flying under hilariously false colors.

That would be like trying to engage with Rachel Maddow or the head of the DNC! Or, of course, any of a hundred minions at Media Matters.

Chuck said...

Fuck off, you liar Drago.

I have never alleged any "collusion" between the Russians and the Trump campaign. I have stated repeatedly that any attempt by anybody to undermine national confidence in the 2016 electoral outcome is wrong.

Unknown said...

Why did Kucinich take a call from Qaddafi's son? If it was discovered on recording in Lybia, why does Kucinich come to the conclusion his phone was bugged? I respect Kucininich a great deal, but this just doesn't ring true.

On a darker note,

"Chuck, you faggot, you are such a disloyal American. You are wise not to use your real name."

Time to use some of that "moderation". Are threats from one commenter to another now allowed?

khesanh0802 said...

@Nyamujal What facts? That's the problem. So far there are no "facts" for Trump's accusation or for the Russian gambits; only inferences, guesses and unconfirmed "assessments". Because of the nature of the "intelligence community" (very suspect) and its CYA actions both these "crises" are fact-free.

Drago said...

"lifelong republican: Chuck: "Fuck off, you liar Drago"

No.

Drago said...

"lifelong republican" Chuck: "I have stated repeatedly that any attempt by anybody to undermine national confidence in the 2016 electoral outcome is wrong."

The entire democrat party and leadership is using innuendo to undermine national confidence in the 2016 electoral outcome.

All in the service of de-legitimizing Trump's win.

Any specific democrat you'd like to call out for doing this?

LOL.

Not to worry there "lifelong republican". Everyone already knows you won't!

The Cracker Emcee said...

"Time to use some of that "moderation". Are threats from one commenter to another now allowed?"

Like when noted cyber-pugilist Chuck threatened Dr. K? That kind of threat?

Chuck puts a lot of time into his mobying but his act has worn very thin. I doubt anyone here believes he's a Republican, lifelong or otherwise.

Hagar said...

So, the "intelligence community's" story is that "we" did not intercept Trump's phone calls, it was the Brits who did the dirty deed, and we are entitled to share information from the Brits, so there; it was all legal!

Well that would probably also account for DNI Clapper's peculiar language when he was asked about this - I though it sounded like one of his "least untruthful answers"!

Aren't lawyers wonderful?

roesch/voltaire said...

It is helpful that Althouse is able to re-write and correct the Trump tweets so can understand what he really means. Yes I would suspect given the number of folks in his campaign that had conversations with Russians that some sort of surveillance was taking place. Ever since the FBI recorded who I walked with in the streets of Milwaukee, among other things, while I was an organizer for SDS, I have been convinced of a wide range of surveillance activities only increased by the cyber sophistication of NSA, but to claim that Obama wiretapped Trump's phone is a long stretch of the truth of how these matters work.

bagoh20 said...

There are always nuts out there claiming to be under surveillance by the government, but in the past, the famous ones, like John Lennon, or reporters and exposers like the modern reporters in Obama's sites, always ended up being right about that suspicion, despite the always present denials. Considering that history and the stakes involved for those in power this time, what's the chance that they didn't consider Trump worth doing one more illegal thing after all the rest. The overwhelming odds are that we will find out this happened, and as always nobody will be punished for it, which is why it keeps happening, and why it's not realistic to expect it didn't.

Drago said...

R/V: "Ever since the FBI recorded who I walked with in the streets of Milwaukee, among other things, while I was an organizer for SDS, I have been convinced of a wide range of surveillance activities only increased by the cyber sophistication of NSA, but to claim that Obama wiretapped Trump's phone is a long stretch of the truth of how these matters work."

Ah yes, the anti-anti-communist, pro-Soviet SDS.

Big surprise.

jaydub said...

It's kind of cute how people are asking Trump to appologize to Obama for saying what the NYT was implying at the time he said it, while giving Obama a pass on appologizing to Trump for setting up a shadow government to undermine the legitament government.

Mark said...

And another comment section ruined by the Chuck show -- which includes you folks getting off by responding to him. All of you are part of the Chuck problem.

YoungHegelian said...

@R/V

I have been convinced of a wide range of surveillance activities only increased by the cyber sophistication of NSA, but to claim that Obama wiretapped Trump's phone is a long stretch of the truth of how these matters work.

Clapper & others have, by things said but mostly unsaid, strongly hinted that it was the FBI who tapped the Trump associates. If it was the FBI, it was either 1) rogue or 2) under the command of the DoJ. If DoJ, they were either 1) rogue or 2) under the command of President Obama.

I can't see how answering "rogue" makes Obama look any better than directly blaming him for the actions of those in his chain of command.

Static Ping said...

Kucinich is a loon.

Then again, the paranoid are much more likely to notice when they really are being watched.

J2 said...

Drago @ 11:24

Exactly. Well done. Thank you

Bob Ellison said...

Were you really an organizer for SDS? I'd like to read that story.

Hagar said...

Kucinich is indeed a loon, but an honest loon.

Chuck said...

The Cracker Emcee said...
"Time to use some of that "moderation". Are threats from one commenter to another now allowed?"

Like when noted cyber-pugilist Chuck threatened Dr. K? That kind of threat?

Chuck puts a lot of time into his mobying but his act has worn very thin. I doubt anyone here believes he's a Republican, lifelong or otherwise.

That is a rotten example and you know it. Michael K had, for months, attacked me personally with comments about my needing "therapy" or "meds." Repeatedly, and after countless demands and warnings from me to cease and desist.

Yes, it is time for Alathouse to crack down on moderating all of the personal attacks on these Comments pages. There have been many personal feuds here, some of which ended badly and some of which ended quietly. There have been bitter debates between persons of hardened political viewpoints. But I cannot think of anyone offhand that has gotten more attacks of a purely personal nature than me. And I am certain that it has to do with three things:

1. Politically, I am barely different from Scott Walker, or Ron Johnson, or Jim Jordan, or Chief Justice Roberts or Associate Justices Thomas and Alito. I ain't no Garage Mahal. And so the charges that I am a lefty plant all fall into the realm of "personal" since nobody has any big policy argument that they can lay at my feet.

2. My own attacks on Trump are generally personal. Because, very simply, I think that the guy is personally idiotic, venal and mendacious. I suppose that prompts personal counter-attacks on me, even though I have not once initiated a personal attack on any Althouse commenter.

3. As someone who is personally anti-Trump, I am a minority here, and there is always a sort of gang mentality in settings like this. For better or worse (much worse, I'd say), the stratification of our national political debate has become such that even without any overt support for Trump by Ann Althouse, her studied tolerance of Trump, her overlooking of so many Trump foibles, and her frankly brilliant deconstruction of the mainstream media's offenses in covering Trump, have created a kind of pro-Trump meeting place. Where I am not welcome and do not wish to be warmly received.


Bay Area Guy said...

There is one significant claim that has yielded no evidence:

1. Russia colluded with Trump to interfere with the 2016 Presidential election.

The Dems have pushed this claim. In fact, various intelligence officials have leaked a bunch of confidential surveillance product (likely the fruit of a FISA warrant) to the WaPost and NYTimes to push this claim.

However, DNI James Clapper said publicly there's no evidence of collusion. But his voice has been largely ignored.

So, Trump responded with another significant claim made via Twitter.

2. Obama 'wiretapped' Trump during the campaign

The Dems have freaked out in response. Yes, Trump was a bit imprecise in his "tweet," but the most likely truth, is that in October 2016, AG Loretta Lynch made a FISA application, purporting to investigate the Russians, which was granted, and, surprise, surprise, via "extracurricular surveillance" caught some Trump communications on his computer or telephone.

Also, most likely, Lynch did this with Obama's permission, either direct or tacit.

I'm not saying this was illegal. If ordered by the FISA court, it's legal. But leaking the communications obtained is no doubt illegal.

To clarify all this once and for all, I say, Release the FISA applications!

AReasonableMan said...

roesch/voltaire said...
Ever since the FBI recorded who I walked with in the streets of Milwaukee, among other things, while I was an organizer for SDS, I have been convinced of a wide range of surveillance activities only increased by the cyber sophistication of NSA


I have an friend who was an immediate family relative of a foreign national leader, who was only nominally a US ally. My friend complained to me regularly that his phone was tapped. I told him that if were leading national security I would tap his phone and mine as well.

For good or bad, conversations with foreign nationals are fair game in our surveillance state.

Nyamujal said...

@Drago
"And if you don't have it, perhaps you should simply....what's the phrase? Oh yeah, dems/left/"lifelong republicans" should be backing the fuck down, and apologizing. No one in official life in Washington should talk to the bastards, until they make a comprehensive apology for this defamatory shitstorm."

Little known fact, in my free time I moonlight as a spy with access to top secret information :-)
There's a simple solution to this - a bipartisan select committee to look at the evidence and settle the matter once and for all. Would you be in favor of that? If nothing untoward is found, you'll have all the evidence you need to shut up the likes of Chuck for at least the next four years.

Drago said...

"lifelong republican" Chuck: " ..her studied tolerance of Trump, her overlooking of so many Trump foibles..."

I think you mean Althouses unwillingness to accept at face value the unstated premises and assumptions, as received wisdom, as well as the continuous barrage of mindless attacks against Trump offered up the dems/left/"lifelong republican" loons in addition to her demanding that logic and reason be employed has made this a venue where anyone who either supports Trump OR DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY ATTACK TRUMP FOR EVERYTHING might determine discussions here might be interesting.

Drago said...

Nyamujal: "Little known fact, in my free time I moonlight as a spy with access to top secret information :-)
There's a simple solution to this - a bipartisan select committee to look at the evidence and settle the matter once and for all. Would you be in favor of that?"

We already have that.

That's not what the dems want.

They want a Special Prosecutor in order to bottle up the investigation for a longer period of time during which the obama appointees and holdovers can continue to leak innuendo to their MSM pals.

You and your lefty amigos/"lifelong republican" allies aren't fooling anyone.

Bruce Hayden said...

"So, the "intelligence community's" story is that "we" did not intercept Trump's phone calls, it was the Brits who did the dirty deed, and we are entitled to share information from the Brits, so there; it was all legal!"

The problem is that this does happen, and has at least since 9/11/01. It came up shortly after that in regards to FISA and wiretapping of Muslim terrorists sitting in caves in Afghanistan talking on their burner phones with supporters back here in the US. We routinely let the Britts, and a couple other countries (Aus, NZ), surveil our people, and we return the favor, mutually skirting our respective privacy laws. Still, hard to believe that this would work with Trump Towers. Kuncinch? Sure - the target is overseas, and there is a decent chance that the fiber that his call from Lydia transited crossed the U.K. somewhere.

Prior to amending the PATRIOT Act, where a phone call was wire tapped was critical in determining how calls involving US Persons (and esp if in the US) were handled under FISA. If the calls were intercepted when the fiber came ashore in NJ, the protections were at their highest. Much less so, if intercepted when the fiber goes offshore, in, I believe, Scotland, Spain, Japan, or Australia (from memory) headed here. Making things more interesting, at least AT&T was gratuitously routing calls through the US that didn't need to come here, at the behest of the NSA. Which is why there was a lot of "you scratch our back, and we will scratch yours" going on with these allies - it essentially allowed interception of calls coming into your country w/o the need for warrants.

One reason that I suspect some of this going on with the Trump campaign and transition, is that there has been a lot of talk about declassification. As I read FISA, not even the President can declassify "minimized" conversations or data involving a US Person intercepted here in the US. Minimization is minimization. There are no provisions in FISA about the information being classified, or that the President can declassify it and release it, if he wants (arguably, he could, under Separation of Powers, but that would put him on prong three of Jackson's Youngstown concurrence, where his power is the weakest). But intel received from an ally is different - it is subject to classification, and not FISA minimization.

YoungHegelian said...

I think it's important to keep in mind one very important distinction here -- Presidential campaigns are completely non-governmental organizations. They are private corporations. Some of their "employees" may also be members of one of the branches of government, but the campaign duties of these present office holders can not overlap with their campaign work.

As such, when it comes to national security issues, campaigns are only owed as much deference as would be given to a normal American citizen, i.e. not much.

The FBI no doubt thought, like everyone else except Mick, that they'd be working under Pres. Clinton 2. But, they got Pres. Trump. The guy they wiretapped is now their boss.

That the FBI tapped the Trump campaign because of national security concerns is within their purview. That Pres. Trump fires their sorry, motherfucking asses out the door in a fit of pique is also, unfortunately for the FBI & DoJ, within his purview.

PB said...

When all is said and done, history should show that Obama was the most lawless, dictatorial president in history with policies that failed to achieve stated, public objectives, achieved a disastrous divisiveness in our country. He was enabled by a party and partisan supporters solely focused on winning at all costs.

AReasonableMan said...

Chuck said...
Michael K had, for months, attacked me personally with comments about my needing "therapy" or "meds." Repeatedly, and after countless demands and warnings from me to cease and desist.


MK likes to needle people because he is very lazy and can't be bothered thinking about anything beyond recalling one of his tired anecdotes. You should ignore him

it is time for Althouse to crack down on moderating all of the personal attacks on these Comments pages.

I disagree with this, but it would be good if commenters themselves realized that they are hurting Althouse's blog/finances with these endless an hominem attacks. The number of unique commenters seems to have fallen quite a bit in recent years and also the quality and diversity of the comments has declined.

I am a minority here, and there is always a sort of gang mentality in settings like this.

This is an indictment of many commenters and it is not invalid, but it is not universally true either. Robert Cook rarely says anything negative about any one else, for example, despite being routinely dismissed as commie scum.

Ann Althouse, her studied tolerance of Trump, her overlooking of so many Trump foibles ... created a kind of pro-Trump meeting place.

This is a business decision, that may or may not work out. Difficult times for right wing commentators. Meghan McArdle has apparently already drawn the ire of the right simply by pointing out the obvious regarding RyanCare.

Mark said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dr Weevil said...

I believe the appropriate phrasing would be "Fuck off, but not in your office, please". If you want to look like a foul-mouthed fool who can't handle rational argument, you should at least get the phrasing right.

Unknown said...

The bullshit on Althouse continues to accelerate. Go back and read again Trump's tweetstorm about Obama to understand what Trump actually said and why what Trump said has serious repurcusions.

Althouse distractions are becoming pretty obvious.

J2 said...

I would be shocked if Trump was not the subject of surveillance.

It would be considered correct to do it given that he is a threat to the deep state. Think of the millions of dollars collected by the Clintons. The people, corporations, foreign governments that gave this money were expecting to get something in return. Now
because of the surprise election they get nothing.

These intelligence honchos: Clapper, Hayden are natural allies of the Clintons. For god's sake Leon Panetta was head of CIA. That is telling.

I always come back to this thought. I don't think Obama really cares about what's going on and I doubt whether he was instrumental in this.

Who benefits if "dirt" is dug up on Trump, (especially pre-election). The Clintons. This is them.

Again I say, two words: Tar Mac

J2 said...

And the British intelligence angle. It's way possible. Because "plausible deniability".

Bruce Hayden said...

"For good or bad, conversations with foreign nationals are fair game in our surveillance state"

Yes and no. FISA still applies if one party is a US Person (citizen or legal resident), esp if both interception and the US Person are here in the US. It is likely that if they have some tie to a potential enemy (e.g. The Russian ambassador), that there is a standing FISA warrant for all of their calls. They are the official target, so the standards are a bit lower. But FISA minimization is still required in order to protect the privacy of the US Person involved. Essentially that means that their identity must be protected to the extent possible, for national security (or to rephrase, a showing has to be made that non-deletion/non-suppression of ID is required for national security reasons), and the conversation, email, etc deleted upon determination that they didn't, here, pose a national security risk. Which means that if a Trump person talked to the Russian ambassador about the Knicks game the night before, and there is no reason to believe that it was a coded conversation, then, at a minimum, the identity of that Trump person should have been deleted. And maybe even more so if you are talking about little league football.

The Drill SGT said...

"Fox News Judicial Analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano claimed “three intelligence sources” say President Obama looked to British spy agency GCHQ to obtain transcripts of conversations involving President Donald Trump on “Fox & Friends” on Tuesday."

Bruce Hayden beat me to it. I have no direct knowledge of the incidents at hand, but there is a close relationship between the SIGINT collection agencies of the "Five Eyes". e.g. US, Aust, Canada, NZ, Brits. Each is forbidden from collecting internally, but able to feed their collections on the turf of the others.

Yancey Ward said...

Like I wrote over a week ago now- it is easy to get to the bottom of this. All that has to happen is for the relevant Congressional committee to subpoena Loretta Lynch, James Comey, and John Brennan in addition to their direct reports within the Obama Administration, put them under oath, and ask the simple question- were the alleged FISA taps requested, and were they granted? Only a fool would lie in that circumstance. In fact, were I in Trump's position, I would give over zero evidence until that is done.

As for Kucinich's claim, I find it not all that persuasive given the identity of the party he was talking to- it is highly likely it was the second party that was the subject of surveillance, not Kucinich.

YoungHegelian said...

@Unknown,

Go back and read again Trump's tweetstorm about Obama to understand what Trump actually said

If someone says "In 1942, Roosevelt went to war", that doesn't mean that Pres. Roosevelt was pushing around his wheelchair on the deck of an aircraft carrier or in the Sahara desert. It means his administration went to war. This figure of speech is called "metonymy" & it's used all the time in daily speech.

If Pres. Trump was wiretapped before 1/20/2017, "Obama" did it. I can't understand why that claim is at all controversial.

Dr Weevil said...

There's one fact that pretty well proves Trump is right: Obama doesn't deny it. He denied ordering a FISA wiretap, but did not deny requesting one, or allowing an officious subordinate to request one, or approving of someone arranging one, or any of a dozen other ways the job could have been done with his knowledge and consent, but without his direct order. His 'denial' was so circumscribed and lawyerly, it was tantamount to a confession.

Besides, how were Gen. Flynn's conversations recorded, if not with the permission of the White House?

Drago said...

This just in: Putin invades Crimea!

Which is strange since I never saw any photos of Putin carrying a weapon while invading Crimea.

YoungHegelian said...

@Yancey,

As for Kucinich's claim, I find it not all that persuasive given the identity of the party he was talking to- it is highly likely it was the second party that was the subject of surveillance, not Kucinich.

Kucinich dealt with this in his interview with O'Reilly. Because of the separation of powers if an intelligence agency comes across a situation where a member of Congress is in the picture, they must cease their surveillance immediately. Kucinich cleared his conversation with congressional council before he had it. That is all he was required by protocol to do.

Once it was discovered by the NSA/CIA/FBI, that they had a sitting member of Congress as one of the parties, the recording should have been destroyed.

Drago said...

This just in: Obama claims to be "good at killing"!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/03/obama-drones-double-down_n_4208815.html

Where are the photos of Obama killing anyone?

Bay Area Guy said...

@ARM,

"For good or bad, conversations with foreign nationals are fair game in our surveillance state"

Is it fair game to leak those conversations to the press for political purposes?

The Cracker Emcee said...

"That is a rotten example and you know it. Michael K had, for months, attacked me personally with comments about my needing "therapy" or "meds." Repeatedly, and after countless demands and warnings from me to cease and desist."

Since he is a worldly fellow and undoubtedly a distinguished medical professional, I have to respect Dr. K's diagnosis of your mental state, Chuck. Clearly, you have some anger issues and struggle with processing reality.

Yancey Ward said...

Unknown's comment is an example of why I think Trump was largely correct in his tweeted accusations- all of Obama's defenders have taken the exact same line- that Obama himself didn't order the the surveillance. With someone like Unknown, it is just a troll following the party line, but the way members of Obama's White House staff have used it really is a classic non-denial denial. In other words, they don't dare make a categorical statement that Trump and/or his staff were absolutely not under electronic surveillance by the US government prior to the election.

I don't know if Congress has the balls to subpoena the department heads of the Obama Administration connected to this accusation, but they need to do so, and soon. Don't ask them to come- back it up with an enforceable subpoena.

Chuck said...

YoungHegelian said...
@Unknown,
Go back and read again Trump's tweetstorm about Obama to understand what Trump actually said
If someone says "In 1942, Roosevelt went to war", that doesn't mean that Pres. Roosevelt was pushing around his wheelchair on the deck of an aircraft carrier or in the Sahara desert. It means his administration went to war. This figure of speech is called "metonymy" & it's used all the time in daily speech.
If Pres. Trump was wiretapped before 1/20/2017, "Obama" did it. I can't understand why that claim is at all controversial.


No, that dog won't hunt.

Trump made it expressly personal as to Obama; accusing him of some personal pathology in the process; a "Bad (or sick) guy!" Trump could have specified "the Obama Administration," or "Comey," or "Loretta Lynch," or "[FISA] Judge Boasberg," or some such thing.

And that is precisely why the claim is so controversial. Plus, Trump made it about basic personal illegality, comparing it to "Nixon/Watergate."

Trump left himself absolutely no room on this one. And that is giving Trump the benefit of the doubt. Just think about the origin of this baloney. Trump, reading some far-right wacko website, and reacting. Without benefit of counsel, or (apparently) any editing, or fact checking. A high school student newspaper operates with more self-control.

Drago said...

This just in: Obama "got" Bin Laden! And he was a SEAL team leader!!

http://www.weeklystandard.com/dem-senator-obama-led-seals-mission-kill-bin-laden/article/650242

Snip: "Yesterday, when introducing President Obama at a campaign event in New Hampshire, Senator Jeanne Shaheen, a Democrat, said that the president "led the mission that brought Osama bin Laden to justice".

"And let's not forget that this is the commander in chief who finally led the mission that brought Osama bin Laden to justice," said Shaheen."



Ron Winkleheimer said...

Speaking of Trump:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfCCwEf_J5A

YoungHegelian said...

@Chuck,

Trump made it expressly personal as to Obama; accusing him of some personal pathology in the process; a "Bad (or sick) guy!" Trump could have specified "the Obama Administration," or "Comey," or "Loretta Lynch," or "[FISA] Judge Boasberg," or some such thing.

It's a fucking 142 character tweet, buddy! You speak according to the limitations of your medium. Our point above still obtain: this was defensible metonymy. If the tapping happened before 1/20/2017, it happened on Obama's watch. The buck stops with him. If he didn't know, well, he should have known about something this politically explosive.

Phrasing it nicely doesn't change the fact: If (& it's still "if") the Obama administration tapped the Trump campaign, we've got a political shitstorm rolling into the valley. If the tapping didn't happen, Trump needs to do a loooooooot of public penance. If it did, the Obama admin deserves much worse than a nasty tweet.

Chuck said...

The Cracker Emcee said...
"That is a rotten example and you know it. Michael K had, for months, attacked me personally with comments about my needing "therapy" or "meds." Repeatedly, and after countless demands and warnings from me to cease and desist."

Since he is a worldly fellow and undoubtedly a distinguished medical professional, I have to respect Dr. K's diagnosis of your mental state, Chuck. Clearly, you have some anger issues and struggle with processing reality.


And that is even worse bullshit, bucko, because he's not a mental health professional at all and if he were, he'd be under ethical obligations to not engage in any public diagnosis of a person not his patient. He's a surgeon (I think) and has never met me (I know).

And if I moderated this blog, Michael K would have been given a timeout long ago. "Darrell" would have earned his timeout for his bland, witless assertion that he got some personal satisfaction out of his visualizing kicking me in the face:

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2017/03/fantastic-theater-experiment-male.html?showComment=1488928980559#c7383310389687528049

And now you'd have earned yourself a timeout for much the same.





Ron Winkleheimer said...

Chuck is really freaking out. He must realize that most people think Trump is correct.

But of course, since the Obama admin couldn't conceive that a Trump victory was possible, they didn't think they had to worry about anything coming to light.

Bruce Hayden said...

"That the FBI tapped the Trump campaign because of national security concerns is within their purview. That Pres. Trump fires their sorry, motherfucking asses out the door in a fit of pique is also, unfortunately for the FBI & DoJ, within his purview."

Again, yes and no. If the FBI legally wire tapped the Trump campaign, they either had to acquire a wiretap warrant from a District Court judge that there was probable cause to believe that a crime had been committed, or was being planned (and, no, the Logan Act doesn't count here, not having been enforced for over 200 years now, and being violative of the 1st Amit). Or, a FISA warrant from a FISC judge, after a showing that the target of the warrant posed a national security risk to the US. Both types of warrants require sworn statements by federal agents, and FISA warrants further require approval by the AG. If anyone in the Trump campaign was targeted by a wiretap order, there will be paperwork to document it, and that paperwork will include the sworn affidavits to support it. They may be highly classified, but the sitting President has ultimate classification authority, which means that if he (or his AG) wants to see the warrant paperwork, he/they cannot legally be denied. I have little doubt that if facially legal warrants were obtained targeting Trump or his campaign, the legal justification will be reviewed by the Sessions DoJ, and anyone swearing a false or misleading affidavit will do jail time. And hopefully the Lynch DoJ attys presenting the warrant applications too.

As I have said earlier, much easier if it was the Russian ambassador who was being targeted. No doubt there has been a standing FISA warrant for their phones since FISA was enacted over 40 years ago. And, indeed, FISA was enacted with that in mind, the tapping of the landlines used by any Soviet block or ChiCom people they could identify (and the easiest to identify are their ambassadors). A cumbersome warrant process was just fine, since getting new phone service was slow and cumbersome. It just failed miserably when the NSA was faced with terrorists using burner cell phones.

Drago said...

"lifelong republican" Chuck: "And that is even worse bullshit, bucko, because he's not a mental health professional at all and if he were, he'd be under ethical obligations to not engage in any public diagnosis of a person not his patient."

Yeah, "lifelong republican" Chuck just wrote that, without irony.

If only Chuck and his lefty friends would layoff certain members of a certain family with that "public diagnosis" bit.

YoungHegelian said...

@Bruce,

If the FBI legally wire tapped the Trump campaign, they either had to acquire a wiretap warrant from a District Court judge that there was probable cause to believe that a crime had been committed,

The tapping may have been done completely legally & with good cause. If, however, the target is now your vindictive boss whose sole discretion you are at the mercy of, I would say that you are now in a world of hurt. It really sucks to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Drago said...

YH: "It really sucks to be in the wrong place at the wrong time."

Like being a self-described MI based political savant and electoral genius who couldn't even read the tea leaves in his own state, much less the rest of the nation.

The Cracker Emcee said...

Well Chuck, I'm sure your usual mental health professional has prescribed for you many times. But they won't work if you won't take them!

Unknown said...

It used to be "I disagree with what you have to say, but will defend to the death your right to say it!"

Chuck's version is, "I disagree with what you say, and I will do my best to shut you up and call you names because I'm just a fascist like that! Rock on, leftists, as you riot and assault people who say stuff you don't like--I totally agree that people need to be silenced!"

--Vance

Chuck said...

Ron Winkleheimer said...
Chuck is really freaking out. He must realize that most people think Trump is correct.


"Most people" didn't even vote for Trump. And of the minority that voted for Trump, a great many of them, like me, voted for Trump as a defensive vote; against the Democrats, and with only the lowest expectations for Trump himself.


Chuck said...

Unknown said...
It used to be "I disagree with what you have to say, but will defend to the death your right to say it!"

Chuck's version is, "I disagree with what you say, and I will do my best to shut you up and call you names because I'm just a fascist like that! Rock on, leftists, as you riot and assault people who say stuff you don't like--I totally agree that people need to be silenced!"

--Vance


This is the Trumpkin problem, isn't it? I suggest that Trump should get off Twitter and shut the fuck up -- after a comprehensive apology -- and the Trumpkins think I am talking to them. Donald Trump is not a commenter here.

Drago said...

The Cracker Emcee: "Well Chuck, I'm sure your usual mental health professional has prescribed for you many times. But they won't work if you won't take them!"

Maybe they are placebos because, lets face it, sometimes there's nothing to be done.

Drago said...

In any event, looks like Kucinich will need to be culled from the lefty herd for his "mistake" in offering up what he thinks is relevant information in this discussion re: govt surveillance.

As with Lieberman, you can't touch a toe outside the borders of the lefty plantation and expect to survive.

Drago said...

"lifelong republican" Chuck: "Donald Trump is not a commenter here."

Okay, so we'll add "The President of the United States" to the list of individuals who do not comment here.

We'll add it right next to "Individual with MI political insight" on that list.

Let's hope we can expand the list before the next election!

Unknown said...

No, Chuck.... lemme point you upthread, wherein you stated this:

Quote:

And if I moderated this blog, Michael K would have been given a timeout long ago. "Darrell" would have earned his timeout for his bland, witless assertion that he got some personal satisfaction out of his visualizing kicking me in the face:

And now you'd have earned yourself a timeout for much the same.

/EndQuote (having deleted a link)

That's you, Chuck, expressing your desire to silence at least three posters here.

You are the one expressing the need to silence, to censor, to remove opposition to your view. At least you haven't called for these posters to be murdered like many leftists. Funny, though--any calls from Chuck to silence our leftist trolls like Sunsong, ARM, or Inga? Why, I do believe no such calls from Chuck can be found.

Res ipsa loquitur.

--Vance

Drago said...

Vance: "Res ipsa loquitur."

Pardon me, but I was told there would be no Latin prior to the cocktail hour.

Thank you.

Angel-Dyne said...

Chuck: And now you'd have earned yourself a timeout for much the same.

Chuck the hall monitor.

Mark said...

If getting a warrant is itself pre-textual, that doesn't make the later activity legitimate.

Chuck said...

No, Vance; I AM SINGLING OUT A SMALL HANDFUL OF COMMENTERS WHO REGULARLY ENGAGE IN AN EXTREME OR REPETITIOUS FORM OF PERSONAL ATTACKS.

I have no problem with disagreement. I disagree, very respectfully, with Professor Althouse on occasions. I have disagreed with people on this blog for years prior to the Trump Phenomenon, and have gone mostly unnoticed in doing so.

You got nothing, Vance.

AReasonableMan said...

Unknown said...
Funny, though--any calls from Chuck to silence our leftist trolls like Sunsong, ARM, or Inga?


Maybe because none of the mentioned commenters have expressed a desire to see Chuck kicked in the face?

Chuck said...

Angel-Dyne said...
Chuck: And now you'd have earned yourself a timeout for much the same.

Chuck the hall monitor.


And you; you are the low-grade freak who warned me that "Snitches get stitches," when I commented that ordinarily I'd just email Althouse privately with a report of a Commenting abuse. But that I wouldn't this time because Althouse and Meade should enjoy a peaceful and pleasant vacation.

You've got a lot of freaking nerve.

Angel-Dyne said...
Chuck: On some other occasion, I might copy that comment and email it to Althouse.

Snitches get stitches, rat boy.
3/7/17, 6:49 PM

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2017/03/fantastic-theater-experiment-male.html?showComment=1488928980559#c7383310389687528049



Mark said...

OK, so -- 56 uses of the word "Chuck" in 90 comments so far. Typical.

Enough with the Chuck Show.

Chuck said...

Mark said...
OK, so -- 56 uses of the word "Chuck" in 90 comments so far. Typical.

Enough with the Chuck Show.


What is typical, Mark, is that my first comment here was at 10:56 BT. (Blog time.) It was aimed at the substance of the Althouse post, and was in fact directed by name at Professor Althouse. (I felt comfortable in saying something like, "This is bullshit," to her because 9 out of 10 times that I correspond with her it is to praise her or else to alert her to something I think she might want to blog.)

Three minutes later was the first of many personal attacks on me. Leading off with my being directed to CVS, for a topical medication for my "butt hurt." From a commenter with whom I have never corresponded.

That, Mark, is whatcha call "typical."


Ann Althouse said...

"This is bullshit, Professor Althouse. With all due respect; there is no justification for Trump's Twitter storm on this subject and no one should engage on that."

Why would Kucinich give Trump a boost?

Drago said...

Chuck: "From a commenter with whom I have never corresponded."

Why be so formal? This is a blog for heavens sake.

Drago said...

Althouse: "Why would Kucinich give Trump a boost?"

ugh!

...must control self....too many jokes....

Birches said...

I'm so proud of Kucinich. This is real bravery.

AReasonableMan said...

Ann Althouse said...
Why would Kucinich give Trump a boost?


Wants to share interesting personal anecdote regardless of its relevance?

Bruce Hayden said...

"The tapping may have been done completely legally & with good cause. If, however, the target is now your vindictive boss whose sole discretion you are at the mercy of, I would say that you are now in a world of hurt. It really sucks to be in the wrong place at the wrong time."

Agreed, but the scenario we heard about last week, where they got turned down for a domestic wiretap warrant, then a FISA warrant, only to get a more limited one approved in October may be more accurate. We shall see. The thing is, that police, FBI, etc routinely don't include everything they know on warrant applications. Normally works just fine, except, maybe when they neglect to mention that they are targeting Trump's people, and Trump is elected their boss. Then failure to include such relevancies could be detrimental to their continued freedom.

The reality is that warrant applications are often slanted. They shouldn't be, but that is the reality. Normally, it is "no harm, no foul". But, I expect that the probable cause or reasonable suspicion affidavits will be gone over with a fine tooth comb, looking not only for what was alleged, but also for what was missing that could have been relevant to the judge. And the latter is wher, I suspect, the real gold is buried (FBI agents are too smart and well trained to lie by commission, but many seem to do so by omission on a regular basis).

Chuck said...

Ann Althouse said...
...
Why would Kucinich give Trump a boost?


Wonderful question.

I say, it is because Dennis Kucinich is now an employee of Fox News. Hence, his breaking this story on the Fox News website in a copyrighted column.

http://www.foxnews.com/person/k/dennis-kucinich.html

Kucinich is in fact a 3-4 year employee of Fox News.

Earnest Prole said...

Saif al-Islam Gadhafi, son of Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi, calls Dennis Kucinich. Why wouldn’t American intelligence be listening?

Bay Area Guy said...

This is the Trumpkin problem, isn't it? I suggest that Trump should get off Twitter and shut the fuck up -- after a comprehensive apology -- and the Trumpkins think I am talking to them. Donald Trump is not a commenter here.


Trump has 26 Million followers on Twitter. He tweets something on Friday, all the news shows go apeshit on Sunday. Why on earth would he give it up? He's controlling the news cycle.

Chuck said...

Birches said...
I'm so proud of Kucinich. This is real bravery.

3/14/17, 2:08 PM


I'm curious; when exactly did "pride" become your leading reaction to Dennis Kucinich? What was your leading thought concerning Kucinich before?

My leading thoughts on Dennis Kucinich were always a mixture of derision, humor, disgust and loathing. He is perhaps the most pro-Iranian, anti-Israel member of the House of Representatives in his lifetime. He favors nationalized, socialized healthcare for all. And banning handguns nationwide. He wanted to impeach Dick Cheney, and George W. Bush. And on and on and on.

So what part of Kucinich makes you proud?

FullMoon said...

Chuck says
This is different. Trump needs to prove that Obama "tapped" his phones, or apologize. Just like John McCain has said.

Sure. After the thorough investigation. Does that seem reasonable?

Chuck said...

Bay Area Guy said...
This is the Trumpkin problem, isn't it? I suggest that Trump should get off Twitter and shut the fuck up -- after a comprehensive apology -- and the Trumpkins think I am talking to them. Donald Trump is not a commenter here.


Trump has 26 Million followers on Twitter. He tweets something on Friday, all the news shows go apeshit on Sunday. Why on earth would he give it up? He's controlling the news cycle.


So it is all about -- and only about -- the messaging and the news cycle.

I say that Trump should shut up on Twitter because he has regularly used the medium to put out recklessly false and defamatory things. I hope somebody sues him. That plaintiff will need to get in line, of course. There are a lot of Plaintiff(s) v. Trump lawsuits.

Amadeus 48 said...

Trump did what he always does--goes to the emotional truth via Twitter. It drives our betters in the news media crazy. Take a look at the Jan 20 hard-copy NYT. Wiretapping in print on the front page. On Friday, March 3, Mark Levin goes through all the mainstream media reports of surveillance of the Trump campaign. Trump picks it up (maybe in his press briefing), and launches his Tweets--essentailly saying, "Who do these Obama people think they are, spying on me during a hard-fought election campaign? That is what Watergate was about!"
Now, the item on the menu for that weekend was going to be "Can Sessions survive?" Instead, the MSM are stuck circling the wagons around Obama with no facts to do it with. They have never acknowledged that they smeared Team Trump by publishing the leaked fact of all this government surveillance.
The groupthink, the laziness, the stupidity, the dishonest partisanship of the MSM were all on full display.
Now Kacinich comes out and says these people on Team Obama did this a lot.

Drago said...

"lifelong republican" Chuck: "So it is all about -- and only about -- the messaging and the news cycle."

Look who just showed up! Hilarious.

Amazing that you aren't running campaigns. You're some kind of political genius.

Drago said...

"lifelong republican" Chuck: "He wanted to impeach Dick Cheney, and George W. Bush."

Somebody wanting to impeach a Republican President?

Yeah, I hear that's goin' around.

Drago said...

Amadeus: "The groupthink, the laziness, the stupidity, the dishonest partisanship of the MSM were all on full display"

Well, the MSM and their "lifelong republican" allies.

Drago said...

"lifelong republican" Chuck: "He is perhaps the most pro-Iranian, anti-Israel member of the House of Representatives in his lifetime."

Hilarious.

Uh, pro-Iranian, anti-Israel? That would be the entire democrat party and the leftist snowflakes on campus as well. Not that you'd notice of course. You being some sort of political savant.

AReasonableMan said...

Chuck said...
He is perhaps the most pro-Iranian, anti-Israel member of the House of Representatives in his lifetime. He favors nationalized, socialized healthcare for all. And banning handguns nationwide. He wanted to impeach Dick Cheney, and George W. Bush.


I am starting to warm up to the guy.

Bruce Hayden said...

Let me add to my last point. I was talking about AUSAs (Asst US Attys) performing cost/benefit analysis on potential cases. They work for the politically appointed USA (US Atty) who is the chief law enforcement official in a federal judicial district (one USA per district, 93 districts means 93 USAs). For the most part, the USAs don't get involved in cases, at least not low level ones like D'Souza's de minimus campaign finance violations. Unless they are either personal and/or political. This was at least political, and maybe personal, given his animus towards D'Souza. He got personally involved, and pushed hard for 5 years, instead of the probation normally called for under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. The judge did depart from the guidelines, but not nearly as much as Bahara was pushing him to do.

You may be happy with a law of men, where your friends and your enemies determine whether you go to prison or not. I am not, and prefer a nation of laws, where we are all treated the same under the law. A lot of those on the left are about to find out why, with the levers of power now in their enemies' hands. I just hope that some of Bahara's fingerprints can be found on the warrants to wiretap the Trump people (Trump Tower is in his old district, which means that if there were warrants issued, he was involved).

Drago said...

ARM: "I am starting to warm up to the guy"

Throw in "willing to knife a couple of Israeli children on the beach" and ARM's your man!

Amadeus 48 said...

Fox is working on a story that may indicate that Obama went around the FISA process by asking the Brits to access the NSA database regarding Team Trump.

Nice guy. Not a whiff of scandal.

Drago said...

Amadeus: "Nice guy. Not a whiff of scandal"

Nor "smidgen".

FullMoon said...

Bruce Hayden said...


unconfirmed rumors as of this broadcast claim ..... Bahara's fingerprints can be found on the warrants to wiretap the Trump people (...no doubt he was involved).

Chuck said...

Bruce Hayden said...
...
You may be happy with a law of men, where your friends and your enemies determine whether you go to prison or not. I am not, and prefer a nation of laws, where we are all treated the same under the law. A lot of those on the left are about to find out why, with the levers of power now in their enemies' hands. I just hope that some of Bahara's fingerprints can be found on the warrants to wiretap the Trump people (Trump Tower is in his old district, which means that if there were warrants issued, he was involved).


So, Bruce; any thoughts on why Trump met with Preet Bahrara after the election last November, and specifically and personally asked him to plan to remain in office after the inauguration?

Angel-Dyne said...

Chuck to me:

"Chuck the hall monitor."

And you; you are the low-grade freak who warned me that "Snitches get stitches,"


Yeah, and? You've been perfectly consistent in behaving like the class tattle-tale, and I've been perfectly consistent in calling you the class tattle-tale. What's your point?

(Since I am not Chuck, I will not now indignantly emit a long link-annotated spergy spray of indignation, indignantly explaining why I am NOT a low-grade freak.)

Drago said...

"lifelong republican" Chuck: "So, Bruce; any thoughts on why Trump met with Preet Bahrara after the election last November, and specifically and personally asked him to plan to remain in office after the inauguration?"

Probably wanted to be seen to be "reaching out across the aisle". We've seen how that worked out.

So Trump has decided these obama guys that Chuck loves should all be sent packing. So Trump sent them packing. And on cue the lefty and "lifelong republican" lunatics immediately take issue.

Unexpectedly.

Drago said...

Angel-Dyne: "(Since I am not Chuck, I will not now indignantly emit a long link-annotated spergy spray of indignation, indignantly explaining why I am NOT a low-grade freak.)"

Thread winner.

AReasonableMan said...

Drago said...
Throw in "willing to knife a couple of Israeli children on the beach" and ARM's your man!


I am disappointed with the predictableness of this comment. I was hoping for something more outré. Yet another sad indicator of the decline of this blog. You people need to work harder, try to find the best in yourselves and bring it to the table every time. Try to think outside the box and eschew low hanging fruit. Be more proactive and make certain that every single comment has a value-added component. I am not asking for a paradigm shift or even data-driven analysis, but we need to circle back to understand what made this blog great in the first place. People, people you were once the rock stars of the blogging world, but now the synergy is depleted. You need to take it to the next level and return to your core competency while becoming more results orientated. It could be a state of the art feature rich win-win for everyone.

FullMoon said...

Chuck said...

....So, Bruce; any thoughts on why Trump met with Preet Bahrara after the election last November, and specifically and personally asked him to plan to remain in office after the inauguration?


C'mon Chuck.(Shark) President Trump played him like the minnow he is. Just like he played Mitt and RFK. Bring 'em up to his joint just to show 'em who's boss. Now, of course he lied, that is what he does, right? We all expect it, other Presidents "misspoke", Trump lied.

AReasonableMan said...

Once again, my Lofty Ambitions To Shovel Entire Width Of Driveway were Scaled Back To Only Shoveling Thin Path For Car.

Achilles said...

Chuck said...

This is different. Trump needs to prove that Obama "tapped" his phones, or apologize. Just like John McCain has said.

I got a better idea. How about DC and the people in it start obeying the law and adhering to the constitution. While they are at it they can also start finding new jobs.

If they do not wish to comply they will be made to comply. Fuck you people. All of you. You aren't better than us, you just think you are. The harder you all make it on yourselves we will be right there. And the republican vichy traitors will be first in line.

Achilles said...

Chuck said...

So, Bruce; any thoughts on why Trump met with Preet Bahrara after the election last November, and specifically and personally asked him to plan to remain in office after the inauguration?

Preet Bharara?

You are so disingenuous.

The Drill SGT said...

Bruce Hayden said...Normally works just fine, except, maybe when they neglect to mention that they are targeting Trump's people, and Trump is elected their boss. Then failure to include such relevancies could be detrimental to their continued freedom.


I thought there were admonitions in the FISA process about not withholding "material" facts in the sworn affidavits


HoodlumDoodlum said...

117 comments, 64 hits for "Chuck." Sad.

Drago said...

ARM: "I am disappointed with the predictableness of this comment. I was hoping for something more outré."

You sir, are a harsh task master!

I do feel oddly emboldened to take greater strides towards outlandishness and other extraordinary measures.

Bay Area Guy said...

@Chuck,

I say that Trump should shut up on Twitter because he has regularly used the medium to put out recklessly false and defamatory things. I hope somebody sues him. That plaintiff will need to get in line, of course. There are a lot of Plaintiff(s) v. Trump lawsuits.

Simple Yes or No question: Do you think Obama's DOJ surveilled (via a lawful FISA warrant) computers/phones on a server at Trump Tower?

Sorry I lied two follow ups:

2. If so, do you think this surveillance captured any communications of Trump or his campaign staff?

3. If so, do you think any of these communications were leaked to the WaPost and/or NY Times?

Crazy Jane said...

Kucinich is a pretty wacky guy, and he was not a particularly effective congressman. It's a stretch to imagine that he would be able to influence Libya or American policy in Libya, but it is possible that a Libyan politician could think otherwise.

Under the circumstances, why did government security officials bother playing their tape for Kucinich? Why not just keep it in reserve against the unlikely possibility that it led to something worse? Again, what did they think Kucinich could DO?

The Obama administration was unusually active in tapping journalists' phones and email, and it was unusually zealous in prosecuting government employees who were whistleblowers. President Obama's early pledge of the "the most transparent administration ever" was a hollow joke by the end of his first term. Add in his first secretary of state's personal server, and you've got a perfect storm of strangeness. These efforts could have been meant to conceal or control, or they could have reflected paranoia or simple unwillingness to play by the rules. So many people have clammed up about everything from the IRS to what was said to Putin and other foreign leaders that we are unlikely to know what happened until the history is written.

Trump's screw-ups will be publicized as they occur, and he will have to face the consequences. In general, this is better.

AprilApple said...

Who killed Seth Rich?

Laslo Spatula said...

Tales of a Real Republican….

You cannot become a lifelong Republican without learning certain things:

ONE: Don't let people shit in the Caviar. They're going to act like they were all invited inside The Club -- and they were NOT, we did NOT invite them -- and then they are going to sidle up to the table and they are going to drink our alcohol and they are going to shit in our Caviar. These are NOT REPUBLICANS...!

TWO: Never give an Inch. It is like fucking the Mexican busboy in the ass in the storage closet at The Club: go balls deep and STAY balls deep. DO NOT PULL OUT until YOU decide it is time to pull out. Then wipe your dick on his apron. Now he's marked: that makes him your BITCH...

THREE: When in Doubt, Demand Apologies. I did NOT fuck that Mexican busboy in the ass, and if I did, it was HIS misunderstanding. Apologize, Mexican Busboy! If you lie about this shit again I will fuck you in your sorry Mexican ass a Second Time! I WILL MAKE YOU EAT MY ASS BURRITO...!

FOUR: Become exquisitely versed on the usage of the TIME OUT. I'm like fucking Charles Bronson, bitches, and I'm going to Bronson a TIME OUT on all of your asses...! Charles Bronson wouldn't put up with your shit, and I won't either! Because I'm like Charles Fucking Bronson! I'm so Bronson I make Clint Eastwood look like a bent-over Mexican Busboy! That I fucked in the ass! BRONSON, BITCHES: BRONSON...!

FIVE: I'll get to Number Five later, you pussies: I'm a bit winded. Need to sit down for a moment. That fucking Mexican busboy BETTER NOT HAVE GIVEN ME A DICK DISEASE...

I am Laslo.

Tom said...

Access is denied to this link bow.

Michael K said...

Man, I'm glad I missed this one !

Chuck said...

Bay Area Guy said...
@Chuck,
...
Simple Yes or No question: Do you think Obama's DOJ surveilled (via a lawful FISA warrant) computers/phones on a server at Trump Tower?

I don't know. Who does know? If Trump knows, he should say, after have popped off for no good (national security) reason on Twitter. My supposition is that the answer is "No, there was no FISA warrant covering telephones at Trump Tower."

Sorry I lied two follow ups:

2. If so, do you think this surveillance captured any communications of Trump or his campaign staff?

Your premise has failed with me, but I'll answer anyway. Other surveillance might have picked up communications between Trump staff and foreign agents, apart from any DoJ or FISA warrants. Again, I don't know.

3. If so, do you think any of these communications were leaked to the WaPost and/or NY Times?

Maybe. I don't know. There are a lot of leaks in Washington. Some I like better than others, but I wouldn't condone any of them, ever, as a matter of law. Remember, Donald Trump said he loved Wikileaks.


A to the C said...

I saw Penis Tekuk Makassar open for Angry Samoans at Fender's Ballroom in '85. They were intense.

Jack Wayne said...

Wow! Angry Samoans. Great blast from the past.

Rusty said...

Chuck said...
"This is bullshit, Professor Althouse. With all due respect; there is no justification for Trump's Twitter storm on this subject and no one should engage on that.

Trump Tweeted that "President Obama was tapping my phones in October." He personalized it as to Obama, accusing him of being a "Bad (or sick) guy!" Trump implied illegality in the process, comparing it to "Nixon/Watergate." And the provocatively specific, "Is it legal for a sitting President to be 'wire tapping' a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier[.]"

The weird punctuation, etc., was all in the originals.

Trump should be backing the fuck down, and apologizing. No one in official life in Washington should talk to the bastard, until he makes a comprehensive apology for this defamatory shitstorm.

Trump = bad (or sick) guy."

I would love, Love, to get a glimpse of the cartoon you have running in your head. However, I fear that such an exposure would make me just as loony as you.

grackle said...

Trump should be backing the fuck down, and apologizing.

There’s transcripts of private conversations published by the press. The only way to obtain them is by surreptitiously listening to the conversations. That Trump Towers was illegally surveilled by the Obama administration is obvious. It has even been reported by the NYT. The only mystery left is which of the many available methods was chosen by Obama to cover his tracks.

… it is assuredly a story that would have been treated in a way that was 180 degrees different, if Fox News was not working hard to supply some sort of backing to Donald Trump.

Newsflash to Chuck: FoxNews is Shepard Smith and Chris Wallace. FoxNews does the opposite of providing “backing” to Trump. I counted several lies, distortions and glaring omissions of facts about Trump in listening to FoxNews for under an hour. FoxNews is not as obvious as MSNBC but it still gets its licks in.

Chuck must be referring to the opinion shows like Hannity and Tucker Carlson. But our Chuck is not one for distinctions of that sort. Get your bullshit straight, Chuck.

Are threats from one commentor to another now allowed?

Nobody’s threatened Chuck. Try again.

His supporters, including commentors on this blog accept his claims at face value and furiously search for evidence to back his claims.

You don’t have to search far. Evidence is easy to find. Evidence #1: Transcripts of private conversations have surfaced that could only have been obtained illegally and surreptitiously by third parties. Obama cut his eyeteeth on dirty tricks. But ignoring the obvious is part of the NeverTrumper DNA.

Our hostess Ann gets incredibly pedantic and persnickety about the language used by the media (point 2) to hold Trump accountable.

Our hostess has a nicely operating bullshit meter and sometimes holds the MSM and other assholes accountable for their fucking lies. For me it is one of her more endearing traits.

For good or bad, conversations with foreign nationals are fair game in our surveillance state.

Bullshit. It is illegal to reveal the private conversations of Americans even if they are talking to a foreign national. It is NOT “fair game.”

Chuck said...

grackle said...
...
That Trump Towers was illegally surveilled by the Obama administration is obvious.


Prove it. Or find somebody to prove it. Show your work. I just finished saying essentially "I don't know." You are much more arrogant, it seems. You do know, apparently. So now explain yourself.

Better yet, the President, who trashtalked his way into this divisive national kerfuffle, should prove it. Prove it, show it, or shut the fuck up.

I am going to bookmark this, tocome back to it when we all know more about these claims made by Trump.

And yes; about FNC...

Chris Wallace is wonderful. I have been fun-scolding Althouse for years, about her apparent fascination with Meet the Press, when Fox News Sunday is the superior program. Sheppard Smith is a freak. A bit of a frightening freak to me, personally. But yeah he has done a pretty fair job of calling out Trump on some of his most egregious bullshit. One that I saw live, was Shep's follow-on to the Trump East Room press conference where Trump had been caught red-handed in his lie about the biggest electoral college win since Reagan. It almost made me a fan of Sheppard Smith. Almost.

Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity are just dumb. O'Reilly has some great producers, and gets a few good guests. Hannity is getting closer and closer to being 100% unwatchable. Tucker Carlson is still finding his way, production-wise. I liked watching him in what may now be his most famous/infamous interview, with Connecticut Democrat Jim Himes. Himes, a smart and capable adversary got Tucker to admit that Trump's Tweets were a bad idea. Of course he didn't change Tucker's mind about anything; he had no chance. But he held his own, which was in itself very interesting. I kind of like Tucker. I know how smart he is. I wish he weren't inside such a protective bubble of Trumpdom.

Here's the Jim Himes interview:
http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/01/04/tucker-carlson-battles-democrat-lawmaker-over-obamacare

President-Mom-Jeans said...

I think that Michael K was right in his diagnosis of Vichy Chuck.

I'd also like to go on record that I would not enjoy seeing Chuck get kicked in the face. However, if I was on a jury charged with determining guilt or innocence on an assault or battery under that set of facts, I would have to take a long hard look at extenuating circumstances.