Althouse: "While all this head-spinning legal jibber-jabber goes back and forth, the foundation of the false narrative we’ve been hearing since November 8 has vanished."

March 6, 2017

"While all this head-spinning legal jibber-jabber goes back and forth, the foundation of the false narrative we’ve been hearing since November 8 has vanished."

"Now that we’re supposed to believe there was no real investigation of Trump and his campaign, what else can we conclude but that there was no real evidence of collusion between the campaign and Russia . . . which makes sense, since Russia did not actually hack the election, so the purported objective of the collusion never existed."

Writes Andrew McCarthy.

225 comments:

1 – 200 of 225 Newer› Newest»

Jaq said...: All they have so far is that some spam emails for Trump Resorts landed at Alpha Bank, and that some of their employees clicked on them.

It's all they needed. Unknown Troll breathlessly reported it to us at the time. The story hasn't moved since.; 3/6/17, 5:03 PM
Virgil Hilts said...: Of the 10 best articles I've read since Saturday morning, Andrew probable wrote 4 of them.; 3/6/17, 5:04 PM
Jaq said...: Well reported it without the details I provided and intimated it may have been payments to the Wikileaks hackers.; 3/6/17, 5:05 PM
traditionalguy said...: No wonder Mika is sick to her stomach today. Her job is to tell us what to think, and that SOB Donald Trump just destroyed a carefully crafted Russian Conspiracy Illusion without apologizing to her or her Daddy.; 3/6/17, 5:09 PM
Achilles said...: The left has gone insane since the election. They just cannot accept that most people don't want progressives telling them what to do.

We watched the same people who blew off Obama telling Medvedev he will have more flexibility after the election and Hillary selling North American Uranium to Russia for donations to the Clinton Foundation go totally off the rails with a fantasy about how Trump colluded with the Russians despite the clear fact that the Russians much preferred Hillary's policies. It was pure folly.

Now they are going to watch, after all these years screaming for Bush/Cheney/et al to be frog marched to jail, a whole bunch of Obama's people get frog marched to jail.; 3/6/17, 5:09 PM
Wince said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 3/6/17, 5:13 PM
JackWayne said...: What this is, is more lawfare. I think that's why Scott Walker has been very outspoken recently. He's knows what the Democrats are up to.; 3/6/17, 5:15 PM
Wince said...: Here’s the most interesting part: Now that they’ve been called on it, the media and Democrats are gradually retreating from the investigation they’ve been touting for months as the glue for their conspiracy theory. It’s actually quite amusing to watch: How dare you suggest President Obama would ever order surveillance! Who said anything about FISA orders? What evidence do you lunatic conservatives have — uh, other than what we media professionals been reporting — that there was any investigation of the Trump campaign?

Watch this Bill Whittle video on: GASLIGHTING

Wiki: Gaslighting is a form of manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or members of a group, hoping to make targets question their own memory, perception, and sanity. Using persistent denial, misdirection, contradiction, and lying, it attempts to destabilize the target and delegitimize the target's belief.[1][2]

Instances may range from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred up to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim. The term owes its origin to Gas Light, a 1938 play and 1944 film. It has been used in clinical and research literature.; 3/6/17, 5:17 PM
grackle said...: It’s becoming increasingly evident that Trump Towers was wiretapped by the Obama administration. The excuse is going to be, “Oh, we weren’t wiretapping Trump, we were wiretapping the Russian diplomat.”

You try to get a FISA wiretap on Trump but the FISA court, ordinarily compliant to ANY request, couldn’t stomach it and turns you down. So you go back a few months later with a request to wiretap someone you KNOW will be talking to folks in the Trump Towers. The Russian diplomat is almost certainly going to be talking to people in the Trump Towers because, as you remember well, Russian diplomats ALWAYS talk to transition teams, just as they did when you won. That’s how you subvert the law for political purposes.

It turns out the fishing expedition to get Trump fails to find anything illegal going on which is disappointing - but no matter - you decide to make sure the meetings and conversations are leaked. A few timebombs for your successor. The MSM, the Democrats and the eGOP will do the rest. These, your unofficial but loyal operatives, will manufacture scandal out of the ordinary and commonplace. They have done it many times before with good effect.

You claim the scalp of a careless cabinet selection through the leaks. You claim half a scalp because the Attorney General has a deficit in the testicle area and nervously recuses himself. I am shown vacationing, smiling, watching the show I’ve produced. It’s fun, creating misery for this asshole Trump, his team and his family. Like shooting fish in a barrel.; 3/6/17, 5:41 PM
Bay Area Guy said...: Release the FISA applications!

And, Trump should make Andy McCarthy the No. 2 man in the DOJ, forthwith.; 3/6/17, 5:41 PM
traditionalguy said...: If I was a Globalister I would say it's about time for another 9/11 Hi-jacked Airliners attack, and this time on The White House and The Capitol full of Trump supporters, this time by ISIL. Those things can take time to plan right. Send for Bush II and Cheney. They are still around, somewhere.; 3/6/17, 5:51 PM
J2 said...: The Clintons have so many ties to Russia they may have tried to have even used them ensnare Trump's people. Wouldn't Loretta Lynch do favors as directed by Valerie Jarrett and the incoming administration. Obama had checked out by June.

Again Two words: Tar Mac; 3/6/17, 6:01 PM
Pianoman said...: That was quick.

Down the memory-hole it goes.; 3/6/17, 6:02 PM
Drago said...: J2: "Wouldn't Loretta Lynch do favors as directed by Valerie Jarrett and the incoming administration."

Loretta is very busy making Resistance!! Videos.

There is no way she would ever do anything untoward. Nope. Not even a smidgeon of corruption.; 3/6/17, 6:04 PM
Yancey Ward said...: I will continue to point out this- we still don't know if the story about the FISA applications is true. When the story first broke, it sounded to me like something made up by a Trump-hating reporter or her sources (Mensch is most definitely anti-Trump). However, the more mainstream organizations have all but written themselves that Trump and/or his staff were being monitored before and after the election- note the January 19th article in the NYTimes, for a great example of this.

I don't even know if the FISA story is what Trump is talking about in the tweets, but it is the form of the denials by Obama and his WH staff that causes me to lean toward the original story being true in at least the general details. Only Clapper's denial yesterday seemed categorical, but he has been literally caught lying out right in sworn Congressional testimony in the past.

It is possible for Congress to get to the bottom of this in a single afternoon. You just need to call Loretta Lynch and her deputies to testify publicly under oath with full immunity and clearance to discuss this matter by the present DoJ. They can't lie in such a circumstance without it being uncovered, regardless of what the truth turns out to be.

And, yes, McCarthy is correct- if there was no electronic surveillance, the entire edifice of the Russians-Colluded-With-Trump narrative collapses like a house of cards because it will be prima facie evidence that no in Obama's DoJ took the story seriously in any way- it was just outright propaganda. It also makes dozens of stories in WaPo and the NYTimes to be fake news because they claimed to be supported by electronic monitoring by "unnamed sources". All of those unnamed sources will be completely discredited if Trump's tweets were factually wrong.; 3/6/17, 6:07 PM
Achilles said...: Soon to be heard at your local CNN office: "NOOO!! That was supposed to be BUSH/CHENEY!"; 3/6/17, 6:11 PM
Fabi said...: The second quoted paragraph above is the argumentative sequence from which the left can't escape. Choose both or take neither -- their meme collapses either way.; 3/6/17, 6:11 PM
ddh said...: Schrödinger's scandal.; 3/6/17, 6:11 PM
Sprezzatura said...: Ha.

Nice hack reading of the NYT piece. The dude tells us the NYT is trying to trick us into think things that the piece itself, as he notes, says aren't correct. Presumably if he was right about the effort to manipulate, the NYT wouldn't have explicitly contradicted the supposed manipulation.

Anywho, the mainstream media aren't the ones going nuts. They're just pointing out that DJT tweeted false claims that BHO tapped DJT's phones. Which is true now, and will continue to be true.

The real damage is being done by the cons to themselves who are deciding it's criminal for the Feds to investigate a candidate. Once they realize that DJT lied because BHO didn't have anything to do w/ having DJT's phone tapped, they'll still be wound up and claiming criminality.

But, golly can anyone think of the FBI and congress investigating and leaking re a pol running for POTUS other than DJT?

Not me either.

Carry on.; 3/6/17, 6:12 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: On my blessedly short commute home I listened Mark Levin. He was trying to conflate two things. It is well known that Russian operatives are under almost constant surveillance by US intelligence agencies. This is well known and accepted practice, for good or bad. On occasion conversations between these Russian citizens and US citizens will be monitored. This is what happened to General Flynn, who was apparently aware of the practice but responded with reckless disregard. This is very different to directly monitoring Trump in Trump Tower. There is no evidence that this second thing happened.

There seems to be no argument that Flynn's conversations with Russians were monitored or that there were leaks about these conversations. Otherwise Flynn would still have a job.; 3/6/17, 6:14 PM
Sprezzatura said...: "Otherwise Flynn would still have a job."

Something similar could have been Manafort's problem, too.; 3/6/17, 6:16 PM
Chuck said...: Wow, Andy McCarthy seems to have a lot of new fans, since his contribution to the "Against Trump" issue of National Review.; 3/6/17, 6:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Pure bullshit. No one is telling anyone to believe there was never an investigation of Trump and associates to begin with. Of course there was and still is.

"But have you noticed? While all this head-spinning legal jibber-jabber goes back and forth, the foundation of the false narrative we’ve been hearing since November 8 has vanished. Now that we’re supposed to believe there was no real investigation of Trump and his campaign, what else can we conclude but that there was no real evidence of collusion between the campaign and Russia . . . which makes sense, since Russia did not actually hack the election, so the purported objective of the collusion never existed."; 3/6/17, 6:16 PM
Achilles said...: 3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

The real damage is being done by the cons to themselves who are deciding it's criminal for the Feds to investigate a candidate. Once they realize that DJT lied because BHO didn't have anything to do w/ having DJT's phone tapped, they'll still be wound up and claiming criminality.

This was said without irony by a supporter of Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama.

And I love how you are arguing that Nixon was wrongly impeached because he did't order the Watergate break in.

You don't even pretend to act in good faith.; 3/6/17, 6:18 PM
Fabi said...: That's very binary of you, Chuckles.; 3/6/17, 6:19 PM
Sprezzatura said...: "And I love how you are arguing that Nixon was wrongly impeached because he did't order the Watergate break in."

Perfect.

Thank you.

As I said, y'all will be so wound up that you can't turn back. You must say that the FBI and feds (e.g. congress) are committing crime by investigating a POTUS candidate.

Hint: Watergate was illegal. I know you don't get the reason I'd point that out. So, please, do

carry on.; 3/6/17, 6:22 PM
Achilles said...: Chuck said...
Wow, Andy McCarthy seems to have a lot of new fans, since his contribution to the "Against Trump" issue of National Review.

He put the blunt truth into words. I have been saying the same thing for months. There are a lot of apparatchiks that broke the law by leaking classified information. A lot of deep state lefties are going to jail and some of them are going to point the finger at the people at the top to get out of some jail time.

The fact that you lefties have been cheering on McCarthyism since the election and are now getting called on it? Please keep attacking Trump. He would have let you all slink off into the nether while he carried out his agenda. But the more you people push this coup attempt the harder he is going to crush you. Please keep pushing. I want all of them crushed.

This is glorious.; 3/6/17, 6:25 PM
Anonymous said...: 3rd rate intellect wrote:
The real damage is being done by the cons to themselves who are deciding it's criminal for the Feds to investigate a candidate.

So, it is good to see 3rd Rate getting past denial. That statement alone indicates he believes the Trump side of the story.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Inga, you give post-menopausal people a bad name.; 3/6/17, 6:28 PM
JackWayne said...: However, PB, if you deny that using FISA, although legal, to spy on a political candidate for President is wrong, then you have stepped over the edge. Which is it? I am not asking whether Trump is correct on his accusations. I am asking about your understanding of our Social Contract.; 3/6/17, 6:30 PM
n.n said...: And so progresses another liberal baby hunt with an abortion. Not the "baby", but the abortionist. Cosmic karma.; 3/6/17, 6:35 PM
Achilles said...: 3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

Perfect.

Thank you.

As I said, y'all will be so wound up that you can't turn back. You must say that the FBI and feds (e.g. congress) are committing crime by investigating a POTUS candidate.

Hint: Watergate was illegal. I know you don't get the reason I'd point that out. So, please, do.

FISA = FOREIGN surveillance intelligence act.

I made the first word really big for you because you are an idiot and you might ave missed it. The NSA was never intended to be turned on political opponents. Neither was FISA.

Also illegal among other things:

1. Sharing intelligence with people who do not have proper clearance, i.e. reporters.
2. Sharing intelligence without names of citizens redacted.
3. Sharing intelligence with other federal agencies.

Obama "changed" those last two in late december so the NSA could spread that information around to 16 other agencies. He din't have the constitutional authority to change Statute 1783, 50 U.S.C. ch. 36. guess he doesn't care about all of the reporters that are now in line for prosecution as well.

This whole scandal was predicated on illegal acts and it is fun to watch people like you defend things that Nixon never even thought of doing.

So many of your buddies in DC are going to jail and most will go quietly because that is how the community works. But will Obama go quietly?; 3/6/17, 6:35 PM
Drago said...: "lifelong republican" Chuck: "Wow, Andy McCarthy seems to have a lot of new fans, since his contribution to the "Against Trump" issue of National Review"

Unlike some "lifelong republicans", Andy McCarthy is a lawyer who is clearly capable of examining issues dispassionately based on available evidence without allowing personal demons/psychoses/previous political positions to sway him.; 3/6/17, 6:35 PM
Anonymous said...: If the candidate for President was doing illegal activities during the campaign, there is absolutely nothing wrong in investigating him. Just because he was a presidential candidate doesn't mean he was or is untouchable.; 3/6/17, 6:37 PM
Michael K said...: The lefties are tied in knots. They make even less sense than before.; 3/6/17, 6:37 PM
Michael K said...: Unknown/Inga doesn't even know that FISA is not about "illegal."; 3/6/17, 6:37 PM
Sprezzatura said...: "So many of your buddies in DC are going to jail and most will go quietly because that is how the community works. But will Obama go quietly?"

Lock him up.

Carry on.; 3/6/17, 6:38 PM
Caroline said...: If Trump's tweets turn out to be wrong he can just blame it on the fake news coming from the MSM. Too funny...; 3/6/17, 6:38 PM
harrogate said...: All these comments with Trump's Twitter account as the foundation.

Sad.; 3/6/17, 6:39 PM
Drago said...: Unknown: "If the candidate for President was doing illegal activities during the campaign, there is absolutely nothing wrong in investigating him. Just because he was a presidential candidate doesn't mean he was or is untouchable."

LOL

Freder keeps insisting that no lefties are making the arguments that Unknown keeps making! Often in the same threads.

Freder is claiming that because he recognizes the obvious: the Dems are all backing off the Fake News talking points re: Trump illegality.

But not Unknown!

It's one thing to get thrown under the bus. It's another to swear up and down that you are not being thrown under the bus as the wheels roll over you!; 3/6/17, 6:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael K,

It's illegal to commit espionage, dumbass.; 3/6/17, 6:41 PM
Fabi said...: Achilles@6:35 -- nailed it.; 3/6/17, 6:42 PM
David Begley said...: A theory from Glen Reynolds,

"Alternatively, the spying on Trump was real and wholly political, and the Russians-under-my-bed thing was a cover story hatched after Hillary unexpectedly lost, when it became apparent that Trump, and America, would find out sooner or later what had been done."; 3/6/17, 6:42 PM
Anonymous said...: I'm fully aware that there is something called a Title 3 wiretap.; 3/6/17, 6:42 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: harrogate said...
All these comments with Trump's Twitter account as the foundation.
Sad.

This is a criticism of Althouse more than her commenters. The commenters are happy to argue about anything. They like arguing. The more trivial the premise the more they like it.; 3/6/17, 6:45 PM
Drago said...: Unknown: "Michael K, It's illegal to commit espionage, dumbass."

Unbelievable! Now the crazies are screaming Espionage!

Hey Unknown, why don't you just throw in ringing doorbells and running away while you are at it!

I gotta tell you Unknown, that little bit of lunacy is definitely a keeper!; 3/6/17, 6:46 PM
Fabi said...: Please explain how Trump, as a then-private citizen, could conduct espionage? Do you even understand the requisite elements of your charge, Unknown?; 3/6/17, 6:46 PM
Sprezzatura said...: "However, PB, if you deny that using FISA, although legal, to spy on a political candidate for President is wrong, then you have stepped over the edge. Which is it?"

Presumably it's the same sorta thing as any other legal investigation the FBI and or congress do to a POTUS candidate. If legal investigations of one candidate are a good and just effort to lock her up. Then, how can a legal investigation of another candidate be a reason to lock up the investigators who didn't do anything wrong/illegal?; 3/6/17, 6:47 PM
Anonymous said...: Espionage; 3/6/17, 6:49 PM
Sprezzatura said...: Fabi,

I've seen no proof that DJT did it. But, to answer a generic hypothetical, would violating the Logan Act be some sorta act of espionage?; 3/6/17, 6:50 PM
Drago said...: ARM: "The more trivial the premise the more they like it."

Using the intelligence agencies to spy on domestic political opponents is about the most trivial thing one could discuss I guess.

Thanks for keeping it in perspective ARM.; 3/6/17, 6:50 PM
Michael K said...: Folks, we are dealing with idiots who can't even keep their stories straight.

It would be funny if it did not tell us how stupid the left is.

I wonder how they remember to breathe.; 3/6/17, 6:51 PM
Achilles said...: AReasonableMan said...

There seems to be no argument that Flynn's conversations with Russians were monitored or that there were leaks about these conversations. Otherwise Flynn would still have a job.

If Flynn hadn't lied to Pence he would still have a job. Having a member of a transition team for a president who is about to take office in a month or so discussing issues with the Russian ambassador seems eminently reasonable.

But many things that Obama did 8 years ago seem to be bad when Trump does them. You people have gone insane.; 3/6/17, 6:52 PM
rhhardin said...: People voted for Trump because he knew how to throw sand in the media's gearbox.

Trump's just doing his job.

It's a representative republic.; 3/6/17, 6:52 PM
Drago said...: So, to catch everyone up: the lefties have retreated to new potential charges of espionage and Logan Act Violations.

With doorbell ringing and running away in reserve should they require it.; 3/6/17, 6:53 PM
Michael K said...: Just pitiful.

Just pitiful.; 3/6/17, 6:54 PM
Drago said...: I wonder if wearing white after Labor Day is an impeachable offense?; 3/6/17, 6:56 PM
Fabi said...: I'm pleased you could insert a link, Unknown, but you still haven't demonstrated that you understand the elements of your charge. You don't -- or you wouldn't have made it.

I don't think a FISA judge would buy that argument, Jelly, because FISA addresses surveillance and a suspected violation of the Logan Act addresses criminality.; 3/6/17, 6:56 PM
Drago said...: What else can the left now hang on Trump?

Dangling a participle? Improperly requesting sweet and sour sauce? Shoes on the couch in the first degree?; 3/6/17, 6:57 PM
Anonymous said...: claiming to be a citizen and voting is a crime. Should Obama have been investigated about his confusing claims about his birthplace? Nice to see you advocate for that.

Inga, you were never aware: Read up on FISA. If Obama inserted himself in a criminal investigation (i.e. not a FISA-related issue) then he broke some laws there, too. Suspected criminals have rights, you know.

Obama's cornered no matter which way it goes...unless there was no investigation, no FISA-taps. You maintain that the investigation is real (you and Freder should chat) so how do you reconcile that?
I know!! You'll just resort to your ignorance and situational ethics.; 3/6/17, 6:59 PM
Limited blogger said...: Funny, the 'narrative' has all but vanished from Google's TOP STORIES feed.; 3/6/17, 6:59 PM
M Jordan said...: We're living through "The Crucible." Waiting for the scream scene.; 3/6/17, 7:01 PM
Achilles said...: harrogate said...
All these comments with Trump's Twitter account as the foundation.

Sad.

I have been talking about this for months. Trump's twitter account obviously has more reach than some spook's rantings on a blog and now you people are being forced to deal with it. I have a lot more behind my posts than a couple tweet's.

Sad is right, for all of the apparatchiks that broke the law and are about to go to jail for a long time.; 3/6/17, 7:01 PM
Michael K said...: I guess we can now return to the previously scheduled discussion of a recipe for rye bread.

I ordered some rye flour today.

I baked some a few years ago.

It was pretty good with beer and sausage.

Now, we can settle down and watch Trump build the wall and keep out the muzzies. We watched "Zero Dark Thirty" again last night.; 3/6/17, 7:01 PM
Lewis Wetzel said...: SRm wrote:
On occasion conversations between these Russian citizens and US citizens will be monitored. This is what happened to General Flynn, who was apparently aware of the practice but responded with reckless disregard.

This more or less echoes McCarthy's argument. If this is all they've got, there is "no there" there" regarding the Dem's "the Russians hacked the election!" conspiracy theory. The more that is leaked from intelligence sources about Trump and the Russkis, the more it looks like the JD, FBI, or the CIA was spying on Trump's campaign.
The more evidence they have that Trump colluded with the Russians, the more it appears that Obama wiretapped Trump and/or his aides. That was McCarthy's point (the truth value of the leaks doesn't matter).
What, BTW, was the legitimate purpose of recording an American citizen's conversation with Kislyak? Surely it was not to gather information that could be leaked to politically damage the American citizen.; 3/6/17, 7:04 PM
Achilles said...: Unknown said...
Espionage

Is that what Hillary did when she took classified information off of the secure government servers and stored it on her personal server? Or when she told her maid to print out classified material for staffers who didn't have the proper clearance?; 3/6/17, 7:05 PM
Fabi said...: You can see the lefty dejection in several blog comboxes. A few days ago they had Trump in their grasp, now they're trying to rewrite the entire "scandal". Lulz; 3/6/17, 7:07 PM
n.n said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 3/6/17, 7:10 PM
Bob Loblaw said...: There seems to be no argument that Flynn's conversations with Russians were monitored or that there were leaks about these conversations. Otherwise Flynn would still have a job.

True, though even the FBI admits there was nothing inappropriate in those conversations.

What the whole Trump wiretapping scandal boils down to is intent. If the FBI lied to a FISA court about the true object of its investigations it's, to quote Joe Biden, "a big fucking deal".; 3/6/17, 7:11 PM
n.n said...: Post-normal journalism, amplified by partisan JournoLism, is a first-order cause of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Narrative Collapse.; 3/6/17, 7:11 PM
Caroline said...: People are kidding themselves if they think that the administration of a sitting president caught spying on the opposition candidate during an election would not be a scandal of epic proportions for so-called "scandal-free" Obama. In addition to the spying, Obama and his wife went on the campaign trail for Hillary, and used the power of the office of the Presidency to bad mouth Trump. Talk about hacking an election...

Are these people too young to remember Watergate? The left better hope Trump's tweets are incorrect. In this scenario the only ones tarnished are the lying media and their fake news, and the dopey Dems who've been pushing the bogus "Russia hacking" story.

But if Trump's tweets are accurate, I would imagine Obama and his people might be willing to make some deals-- like plug up some leaks, maybe?-- to make sure the truth never sees the light of day. Have we heard from Loretta Lynch yet?; 3/6/17, 7:12 PM
Bob Loblaw said...: Inga, as fast as the Obama people are leaking what Trump had for breakfast yesterday don't you think we'd have heard about it by now if there were any hint of collusion with foreign powers?; 3/6/17, 7:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Night Owl: That last sentence made my dick harder than calculus.; 3/6/17, 7:16 PM
Caroline said...: David Begley said:
A theory from Glen Reynolds,

"Alternatively, the spying on Trump was real and wholly political, and the Russians-under-my-bed thing was a cover story hatched after Hillary unexpectedly lost, when it became apparent that Trump, and America, would find out sooner or later what had been done."

It's a good theory. People here on Althouse have been saying it as well.; 3/6/17, 7:18 PM
glenn said...: So if I have this right the damming information that the NYTWAPO folks have been obsessing about couldn't have come from the leaks the NYTWAPO wrote about in January because there weren't any leaks. Ladies and gentleman, we have here the very first immaculate information conception. Fall on your knees and bask in the light.; 3/6/17, 7:21 PM
Lewis Wetzel said...: Blogger Bob Loblaw said...
. . .
True, though even the FBI admits there was nothing inappropriate in those conversations.
. . .

So the only illegality that occurred was the leak itself.
Didn't PB&J comment, on another thread, that what made Watergate a real scandal is that there was a real crime at the bottom of it?; 3/6/17, 7:23 PM
glenn said...: "There seems to be no argument that Flynn's conversations with Russians were monitored or that there were leaks about these conversations. Otherwise Flynn would still have a job."

True, though even the FBI admits there was nothing inappropriate in those conversations.

Maybe Gen. Flynn was a lightning rod. Stay tuned.; 3/6/17, 7:24 PM
Lewis Wetzel said...: Drudge is reporting that Grassley wants the FBI to explain in detail its relationship with the British spook who wrote the Trump dossier. Could get interesting.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/322553-grassley-probes-fbis-ties-to-british-spy-who-investigated-trump; 3/6/17, 7:29 PM
Sebastian said...: Yes, the foundation of the false narrative has vanished. But that won't stop them. Heads have to roll.; 3/6/17, 7:52 PM
Unknown said...: Haven't we all been assuming that the NSA wiretapped Trump? Where else are we getting all the leaks about Trump people meeting with Russians? As Mark Levin pointed out, the papers have been alluding to it for months.

I assume that Trump was bugged and that the surveillance found nothing. Why? Because if they had found a smoking gun it would be all over the news right now. It's also consistent with the constant leaks about Trump members meeting Russians, leaks that don't manage to reveal the content of conversations. The leaks enough info to make people suspicious, but if they had something real I think we would have heard it.

Shoot, where did all those Michael Flynn transcripts come from? God?; 3/6/17, 7:54 PM
chickelit said...: Night Owl asks: Have we heard from Loretta Lynch yet?

Isn't she making cryptic videos reminding people that it's OK to march and die in the streets? That's an underreported move on her part. There's a whiff of populist desperation in it. I wonder if she is still allied to Obama and ValJar in that secret coven convening in Obama's D.C. house?

McCarthy's theory doesn't mention how the Dems will have no choice now but to accept that Clinton's electoral loss had a real cause upon which they might care to reflect.; 3/6/17, 7:57 PM
Anonymous said...: "Haven't we all been assuming that the NSA wiretapped Trump? Where else are we getting all the leaks about Trump people meeting with Russians? As Mark Levin pointed out, the papers have been alluding to it for months.

Shoot, where did all those Michael Flynn transcripts come from? God?"

Yes! Absolutely.; 3/6/17, 7:58 PM
chickelit said...: McCarthy's theory doesn't mention how the Dems will have no choice now but to accept that Clinton's electoral loss had a real cause upon which they might care to reflect.

I mean, there are important midterms next year which the Dems cannot afford to blow off now that their attempted coup has failed.; 3/6/17, 8:02 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: It occurred to me that if you believe Trump was in collusion with Russia, making Trump a Russian puppet let's say for the sake of argument. Why would you say wiretap his underlings only. But whatever you do don't listen in on the target the big guy himself cause you know it would look bad or whatever.

The only explanation I can suggest is that they think we are morons.; 3/6/17, 8:20 PM
tim maguire said...: Re: Reynold's theory, Obama is obviously capable of having Trump bugged and obviously they thought Clinton would win and are the type to get careless because they think they'll get away with it. But I'm a believer in Occam's Razor and in never ascribing to malice that which is adequately ascribed to incompetence. I don't think there was ever any complicated plan, just a bunch of glorified crooks doing what comes naturally--cheating.; 3/6/17, 8:21 PM
Earnest Prole said...: The scaffolding now visible: Like Mark Felt and Watergate, someone in the deep state has illegally obtained evidence of ancillary wrongdoing by someone in the Trump camp, and dreams of drip-drip-dripping it to the Trump-hating press in a manner that will justify bringing down the President.; 3/6/17, 8:22 PM
Michael K said...: Tucker Carlson just had a Democrat Congressman for the Intel committee trying rather unsuccessfully to fend off the obvious.

Also, either Inga got sane or we have another unknown around.; 3/6/17, 8:26 PM
Anonymous said...: "The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (FCPA) (15 U.S.C. § 78dd-1, et seq.) is a United States federal law known primarily for two of its main provisions, one that addresses accounting transparency requirements under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and another concerning bribery of foreign officials."

Was there a Title 3 wiretap of Trump Towers related to this?

Up next.; 3/6/17, 8:27 PM
JPS said...: 3rdGradePB_,

"But, to answer a generic hypothetical, would violating the Logan Act be some sorta act of espionage?"

Huh?

I must be missing something here. The Logan Act refers to private citizens conducting their own diplomacy. Espionage is revealing information to a foreign country that our government does not want them to have. I'm no lawyer, but I'm going to say that nothing about a Logan Act violation implies (or excludes) committing espionage. The two seem independent of each other.

But I'm glad to see the left broaden their repertoire from the Emoluments Clause, anyway....; 3/6/17, 8:29 PM
Rumpletweezer said...: If Obama goes to jail for this will his library have a replica of his prison cell in it?; 3/6/17, 8:30 PM
Anonymous said...: DONALD TRUMP’S WORST DEAL The President helped build a hotel in Azerbaijan that appears to be a corrupt operation engineered by oligarchs tied to Iran’s Revolutionary Guard.

Wow, as if colluding with Russia wasn't enough.; 3/6/17, 8:38 PM
Jaq said...: As if it took collusion with Russia to beat the most hated candidate the Democrats have ever put up.; 3/6/17, 8:40 PM
Jaq said...: If revealing secrets to foreign governments is espionage, then Hillary using her BlackBerry on foreign soil for official business was espionage.

It is child's play to listen in on one of those when you have access to the phone network's equipment, which every government does as a condition of the license of the cellular operator.; 3/6/17, 8:43 PM
traditionalguy said...: You know DJT has them by the short hairs, because the Dem guys being interviewed by Cable shows are reverting to simply calling Trump names. He is suddenly just a crazy clown...because...because...because no one would ever believe any bad stuff about the CIA, NSA and FBI.

Apparently the three named bureaucracies are immaculately conceived truth tellers since J Edgar Hoover taught them never to deceive the public or blackmail enemies.; 3/6/17, 8:43 PM
Anonymous said...: This needs a Trump's in trouble tag.

"A Trump hotel project seems to have involved a front for Iran's Revolutionary Guard

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/6/14827604/trump-tower-baku

The key points:

The Trump Organization partnered with an Azerbaijani businessman to build Trump Tower Baku, a hotel project in the country’s capital that, for a variety of reasons related to location and macroeconomic conditions, seemed like a very dubious economic prospect.

The Trump Organization did not actually develop the project, but rather was paid to license the brand and for consulting services related to the hotel and the Trump brand — Trump people seem to have been fairly intimately involved as service providers.

“The Azerbaijanis behind the project were close relatives of Ziya Mammadov, the Transportation Minister and one of the country’s wealthiest and most powerful oligarchs.”

US diplomats have described Mammadov as “notoriously corrupt, even for Azerbaijan.”

The Mammadovs were also deeply in business with an Iranian-owned firm called Azarpassillo, and Davidson quotes an expert on Iran who says “It looks like Azarpassillo is a front organization for the Revolutionary Guard.”

The story raises two related legal issues.

One is whether Trump’s business ties to an extraordinarily corrupt Azerbaijani family involved violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, a law that Trump has been sharply critical of in public but which remains on the books and which Attorney General Jeff Sessions swore during his confirmation hearings he was committed to upholding.

The other is whether the Mammadov-Azarpassillo nexus violates US sanctions against Iran. The legal rules barring US firms from receiving funds that originated with a sanctioned Iranian entity, which certainly includes the Revolutionary Guard, are quite strict. You can’t simply say you didn’t know that the developer who was paying you for your licensing services was actually getting his money from a Revolutionary Guard front group. You need to do strict due diligence."; 3/6/17, 8:55 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Unknown - why would you care? - your guy gave 400 million of our tax dollars directly to the Iranian Oligarchs. On pallets.; 3/6/17, 8:59 PM
Fabi said...: Foreign Corrupt Practices Act -- drink!; 3/6/17, 9:01 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: "Seems" = We don't have him yet, but it really looks bad!; 3/6/17, 9:02 PM
JPS said...: Unknown:

From the article -

"and Davidson quotes an expert on Iran who says 'It looks like Azarpassillo is a front organization for the Revolutionary Guard.'"

Well, I mean, if Yglesias quotes Davidson quoting an unnamed expert, that just about settles it for me. When do we impeach?; 3/6/17, 9:04 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: from the bowels of Unthink:
"A Trump hotel project seems to have involved a front for Iran's Revolutionary Guard."

Seems

"The Trump Organization did not actually develop the project" but!

"But Trump’s Atlantic City casinos paid $10 million in fines two years ago for noncompliance with federal rules about money laundering. The Trump SoHo project also seems to have been a front for money laundering, though Trump himself evades legal liability for that one on the grounds that he didn’t actually own the project."

"And the fact that there may be crimes associated with this deal — [best part here it comes!] or with other deals that we don’t happen to have in-depth journalism on — is one reason that an independent inquiry into the Russia situation is dangerous for Trump.

Seems!; 3/6/17, 9:06 PM
JPS said...: I'm awfully glad the left is so scrupulous about what accusations it levels against whom, unlike our president. Otherwise I might be tempted to suggest that Vox and others are basically throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks.

I don't like or trust Trump, but keep working on me, lefties. I will before long.; 3/6/17, 9:07 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Vox - lol.; 3/6/17, 9:07 PM
CWJ said...: Apparently Unknown et al. must have hired Mayflower, North American, or Beaman because no way Two Men and a Truck could move the goalposts that far that fast.; 3/6/17, 9:09 PM
JackWayne said...: PB said - Presumably it's the same sorta thing as any other legal investigation the FBI and or congress do to a POTUS candidate. If legal investigations of one candidate are a good and just effort to lock her up. Then, how can a legal investigation of another candidate be a reason to lock up the investigators who didn't do anything wrong/illegal?

Nice deflection PB. Your problem is this - the missing emails were real. There was a real security breach from a person acting as SoS. The FBI had to investigate. And they said they found wrongdoing but it was not actionable. The Trump "investigation" however was not about him. It was about his associates. The government recorded conversations and released them to the press. You may find both cases to be exactly the same. What I find that you are willing to give up our Social Contract to eliminate the Republican Party. Pretty ugly stuff.; 3/6/17, 9:28 PM
Clyde said...: Hopefully Barack Milhous Obama and his henchmen/women get what's coming to them.; 3/6/17, 9:29 PM
Yancey Ward said...: McCarthy is right- the decision tree here is binary:

(1) If you really believe Trump did collude with the Russians to get himself elected, you do get warrants for electronic surveillance of all the actors you think are involved, including Trump himself.

(2) If you don't believe in the conspiracy, you don't get warrants for electronic surveillance. However, you might give out selective leaks about such non-existent surveillance.

You can choose one or the other, you can't choose both. That is McCarthy's point, and it is really inarguable at this point.; 3/6/17, 9:29 PM
chickelit said...: tim in vermont said...As if it took collusion with Russia to beat the most hated candidate the Democrats have ever put up.

Hey! It was "her turn" and still is.; 3/6/17, 9:32 PM
Yancey Ward said...: The third possibility is still one I don't want to accept- they didn't believe in the conspiracy, but chose to use surveillance anyway for purely political purposes. That leads to jail time for someone. Not impossible, but I can't believe given the Nixon history they would be that stupid.; 3/6/17, 9:32 PM
wildswan said...: News From Hot-Air Gate - Appointment in Samarra edition
The whole "I have seen leaks but there was no surveillance of Trump" is now like a Saturday morning cartoon show where Wiley Coyote (the mainslime media) runs out over over a canyon, continuing to run on empty air till he looks down, realizes there is no there there and then drops like a stone to the canyon floor. And you hear Roadrunner (the blogsters) giving a crazy laugh from the distance. Because Obama ordered the transcripts from the non-surveillance to be distributed so widely that they could never be all gathered up again and hidden.

PS So, when is a Democrat going to explain how they intend to help American workers?; 3/6/17, 9:39 PM
Clyde said...: Rumpletweezer said...
If Obama goes to jail for this will his library have a replica of his prison cell in it?

Maybe when California paroles O.J. then Obama can have his old cell.; 3/6/17, 9:41 PM
Sprezzatura said...: "You may find both cases to be exactly the same."

Your own assessment is that they're both the same re the legitimacy of putting the investigators (FBI/congress) in the slammer. Both investigations were legal, both investigations had leaks.

Go after the leakers for both? I sorta like knowing the truth, even via leaks. But, it would be justifiable to prosecute the leakers from both sides.

BTW, there's also another sorta leaker. The Russian gov re HRC related emails. But, they get a pass because our Social Contract is cool w/ the Russians trying to promote the Republican Party.

Makes sense to me.

Carry on.; 3/6/17, 9:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Who the hell is saying there was no surveillance of Trump and associates? This is a canard the right is now pushing. Of course there was some sort of electronic surveillance, a damn good thing too.; 3/6/17, 9:54 PM
roesch/voltaire said...: The only way to sort out these so-called false narratives is have an impartial investigation into what if any involvement Trump's people had with Russia, and how, why, and who ordered or did not order the FISA tap, taps. Until then nothing has vanished.; 3/6/17, 9:55 PM
chickelit said...: BTW, there's also another sorta leaker. The Russian gov re HRC related emails. But, they get a pass because our Social Contract is cool w/ the Russians trying to promote the Republican Party.

Remind me again of the evidence implicating that the Russians hacked the DNC. It's clear that there were hackers, but who insists that it was "the Russians"? Especially now that the coup has failed? Maybe it's time to get to the bottom of that one.; 3/6/17, 9:57 PM
chickelit said...: My theory is that the whole vilification of "the Russians" had two objectives: (1) It was supposed to resonate with "Heartland Americans" -- precisely the cohort which rejected Hillary: (2) Amping up Russophobia means job security and full rice bowls for a sizable number of Deep Staters based in D.C. These are some of the same people who reject or poo-poo the threat of radical Islam -- people like HRC who can't even say the words.; 3/6/17, 10:06 PM
Sprezzatura said...: My bad, Chick.

I forgot that was the 400 lb dude in the basement.

Thanks for the reminder.; 3/6/17, 10:11 PM
Sprezzatura said...: BTW, Does anyone else think this is funny:

"If the ban were announced with a one week notice, the "bad" would rush into our country during that week. A lot of bad "dudes" out there!"

since today the new ban was announced w/ a one week notice period before implementation?

Even you hardcore DJT apologists must think that's sorta funny?; 3/6/17, 10:12 PM
Sprezzatura said...: I think in one of these threads one of y'all asked where DJT's tweets influence his policy.

Well, the tweet above sure didn't influence the policy.

It's like his staff wrote the policy to make him look like a moron.

Odd.; 3/6/17, 10:14 PM
Drago said...: Unknown: "Who the hell is saying there was no surveillance of Trump and associates?"

LOL

The lefties are ricocheting around like crazy and contradicting each other all over the place.

This is what happens when major narratives collapse.

It's simply more of what we've seen ever since the lefty elites got their rear ends handed to them on Nov 8/9.

And it won't stop for the next 8 years, and that's a very very good thing.; 3/6/17, 10:15 PM
Fabi said...: "The Russian gov re HRC related emails."

Still awaiting any evidence that it was indeed the Russian government.; 3/6/17, 10:15 PM
Drago said...: Fabi: "Still awaiting any evidence that it was indeed the Russian government"

There isn't any. Which is why you will never see it.

It will simply become part of the lefty folklore that helps them deal with uncomfortable realities.

For instance, it wasn't a lifelong commie who had lived in the Soviet Union and loved Cuba that shot Kennedy. Oh no, it was the "right wing atmosphere in Dallas" that pulled the trigger.

This will be another of those lefty bubble "things".; 3/6/17, 10:18 PM
Anonymous said...: No Drago. That is what you want them to do. No one has said there was no survellience, what they've said is that Obama didn't order it, the DOJ orders such things.; 3/6/17, 10:20 PM
Fabi said...: I believe the DoJ is in the executive branch. The buck stops with Mom Jeans. Sad!; 3/6/17, 10:23 PM
Fabi said...: The way this FISA incident is unfolding, Obama, Lynch, Clapper, Jarrett and others could face serious legal proceedings. The first one to flip always gets the best deal.; 3/6/17, 10:28 PM
Anonymous said...: Trump said "Obama" wire tapped him. I don't think we need to re-argue what Trump said, that's been done for hours and hours now. Whoever the hell ordered survellience on Trump and associates, are the real heros of this story. Good for them!; 3/6/17, 10:28 PM
Anonymous said...: It could've been a Title 3 wire tap also.

Foreign Corrupt Practices Act...bottoms up!; 3/6/17, 10:32 PM
chickelit said...: Ungnown said...No Drago. That is what you want them to do. No one has said there was no survellience, what they've said is that Obama didn't order it, the DOJ orders such things.

It must have Loretta Lynch fingerprints. Isn't she busy apologizing for riots in advance? Has she moved into the Coven yet?; 3/6/17, 10:35 PM
Sprezzatura said...: BTW,

Where are y'all re Obamacare 2.0?

In the 08 primary and the entire election BHO was strongly anti-mandate. HRC was pro-mandate, and BHO attacked her for it. So, this new plan helps to implement BHO's favored plan.

The Rs do take out coverage for lady stuff and they have down the road whacks at Medicare and subsidies (though that could be a doc fix type of thing, that just gets bumped every year). They get rid of taxes on rich folks and they add back tax deductibility for execs making more than half a million. But that's SOP: blow up the budget but keep the handouts.

Anywho, is that win?; 3/6/17, 10:39 PM
chickelit said...: Unknown said...Whoever the hell ordered survellience on Trump and associates, are the real heros of this story. Good for them!

How about an old-fashioned ticker tape parade for Loretta Lynch. She stood by her man!; 3/6/17, 10:39 PM
Anonymous said...: Unknown said...'Whoever the hell ordered survellience on Trump and associates, are the real heros of this story. Good for them!'

And the Fascist self-identifies again. INGA! She-Wolf of the Nazis! Playing near you!; 3/6/17, 10:52 PM
Drago said...: Unknown: "Whoever the hell ordered survellience on Trump and associates, are the real heros of this story. Good for them!"

Lol

Clapper says there were no FISA warrants, and he would know.

So if taps did occur they occurred without appropriate justification/oversight.

Yet the NYT and the rest of the MSM reports that multiple senior intelligence officials confirmed the wiretaps for those reports.

Do you see where this is going? Hint: not to some hotel in the middle of nowhere!

Keep hope alive.. and open that third boxed wine! You are going to need it!

Carry on!; 3/6/17, 10:53 PM
Drago said...: I love how Unknown keeps using the term she just learned today: Title 3 Wiretap!

Lol; 3/6/17, 10:55 PM
Fabi said...: It sounds both official and ominous, Drago! Lulz; 3/6/17, 11:00 PM
JackWayne said...: PB, where are the links to leaks from the FBI re the first investigation? There were leaks about the emails on Weiner's laptop for the second investigation. The FBI managed to keep the first investigation leak free. But my main point was that Clinton was the target of the FBI. Trump was not. But you are fine with leaks about Trump. That is where your support for our Social contract fails.; 3/6/17, 11:06 PM
chickelit said...: Drago said...I love how Unknown keeps using the term she just learned today: Title 3 Wiretap

Wait until she gets to Title IX wiretaps. The "you can't tap that" wiretap.; 3/6/17, 11:07 PM
Guildofcannonballs said...: Everyone laughing out loud know I laugh with you, I LAUGH OUT LOUD TOO BECAUSE PROGS ARE DUMB AND STUPID AND HOMICIDAL SO I LAUGH OUT LOUD AND LET EVERYONE KNOW HOW FUNNY THEY ARE AND HOW SMART I AM TO NOTICE LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLLOLLLOOOLOLOLOLOLOOLOLOLOLOOLOLLLOLOOLOLLOOLLOLOLOLOOLOLLLOOLOLOLOOL!!!!

Someday all the boring cliches will be edited out so all comments will be one lol after another, pure lol with no bullshit filler using any other words mixed in to muck up the essential meaning.

LOL; 3/6/17, 11:12 PM
Sprezzatura said...: "But my main point was that Clinton was the target of the FBI. Trump was not. But you are fine with leaks about Trump."

You must realize that leaks can only be re a target of an investigation. Right?

So, why don't you rephrase this in a way that keeps track of what was leaked and who those leaks were regarding. IOW, if DJT wasn't a subject of leaks or investigation, you should rephrase w/ references to the folks associated w/ him that were targets.

And, re the first investigation there were tons of leaks re HRC's goose being cooked, and if there wasn't a prosecution there was going to be all sorts of FBI folks resigning because a BHO order was the only thing that could have stopped the prosecution.

Stuff like this:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/01/klein-comey-and-a-lot-of-other-fbi-agents-will-resign-if-hillary-is-not-indicted-video/; 3/6/17, 11:15 PM
HoodlumDoodlum said...: Consistency is the tool of reactionaries, repressives, and wreckers.

Just wait. When the next edition of the Newspeak dictionary comes out problems like this will be eliminated.

Trump has always been under investigation. Trump was never under investigation.; 3/6/17, 11:16 PM
Jaq said...: I seriously doubt Unknown Troll is Inga. Inga had a brain. She actually showed up here on election night when everybody thought Hillary was going to win to buck up the other liberals who were starting to shit pickles after the Florida and North Carolina results came out. She thought she was going to gloat that night, I am guessing.; 3/6/17, 11:17 PM
Danno said...: ARM said..."This is a criticism of Althouse more than her commenters. The commenters are happy to argue about anything. They like arguing. The more trivial the premise the more they like it."

This is really rich, coming from a guy who will post 50 rebuttal comments on a single thread.; 3/6/17, 11:19 PM
chickelit said...: 3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...The Rs do take out coverage for lady stuff and they have down the road whacks at Medicare and subsidies (though that could be a doc fix type of thing, that just gets bumped every year).

That reminded of the day when our HR person came to explain "what's new" with healthcare at the Big Law firm I worked at then. This was circa 2010. I was the only male in a room of 7 or 8 females including the HR person. "There's nothing new for you" she said after explaining all the new stuff for the ladies.; 3/6/17, 11:19 PM
Jaq said...: As it is, we have a couple low wattage trolls who are sure they are going to find a pony under all of the horse shit being shoveled by the WaPo and the New York Times.; 3/6/17, 11:19 PM
Jaq said...: This is really rich, coming from a guy who will post 50 rebuttal comments on a single thread.

Made me laugh too.; 3/6/17, 11:21 PM
Guildofcannonballs said...: Could you imagine if someone had the genius to write something like "hey I was drinking a tasty beverage when I read your comment, and what you wrote was so insanely funny I shit myself, came all over the cat kneeling by my feet, got the lockjaw somehow, gave myself an aneurism, popped an eye out, and then RUINED MY KEYBOARD (can you even believe it!!?!!!?!!!? HOW CRAZY!!!!!!!!) when the tasty beverage exited my oral cavity completely uncontrollable?

Since the greatest minds of us older generations were fucked nobody would ever, ever think so originally as to resemble what I just wrote, but the imagining of it still fills the mind with a wonderment most delightful.; 3/6/17, 11:22 PM
chickelit said...: What Dems have to do to win elections again is to stop pandering to subsets of the population and shoving the results in faces of people who see no benefit(s). No more "ladies only" healthcare projects. No more only "black lives matter" instead of "all lives matter." It's quite simple. No more favoritism.; 3/6/17, 11:24 PM
Fabi said...: "You must realize that leaks can only be re a target of an investigation. Right?"

Jelly doesn't realize the difference between law enforcement investigation and surveillance. Lulz; 3/6/17, 11:26 PM
Sprezzatura said...: ""There's nothing new for you" she said after explaining all the new stuff for the ladies."

Are you saying that there were women-specific health issues that had been historically not covered (because they didn't also affect men), and the new plan was a remedy? Were typical male things already covered, so there's no man-specific care that needed to be added?

Or is your angle more like: 'The whores got birth control and I didn't get limp dick pills'?; 3/6/17, 11:41 PM
Jaq said...: Personnel is policy. I put nothing past the Obama era appointees to the DOJ. I am sure they are all the same as the IRS. Wait until the hard drives all start to fail and set to the shredder before they could be examined by third parties, and the backup tapes get destroyed. That's how Obama's appointees handled the IRS investigation. Nixon was a piker with just erasing 18 1/2 minutes of tapes.

Hillary destroyed thousands of emails, her emails ended up on the computer of a known internet pervert, evidence was destroyed in real time on Reddit, nobody cared! But some spam emails from Trump Luxury Resorts end up at a Russian bank, and it's a constitutional crisis!; 3/6/17, 11:43 PM
chickelit said...: Are you saying that there were women-specific health issues that had been historically not covered (because they didn't also affect men), and the new plan was a remedy? Were typical male things already covered, so there's no man-specific care that needed to be added?

There are obviously plenty of "man-specific" care issues not covered. Evidence? Male mortality rates vs. female mortality rates and how those rates reversed historically.

My point was the particular smugness with which Obamacare (and private plans which anticipated it) was/were rolled out. Perhaps I forgot to mention that the HR person also said I would be paying more for less.

But Obama was schooled from the get-go by liberal women. To this day he surrounds himself exclusively with liberal female advisors.; 3/6/17, 11:51 PM
Chris Lopes said...: You would think that my fellow Trump critics would see the problem with normalizing the idea of the executive branch spying on political opponents. I mean if Trump is as bad as I think he is, giving him the green light to use a Sessions run DOJ against people who happen to tick him off ought to send chills up your spine. So either they don't think Trump is smart enough to do that, or they don't think he's as bad as I do.; 3/6/17, 11:53 PM
Jaq said...: Well, Hillary was the alternative on offer Mr Lopes, Hillary and a continuation of this same DOJ that created this stinking mess.

I don't love Trump, but he makes some defensible points, and the alternative was far worse.; 3/7/17, 12:01 AM
JackWayne said...: PB, your memory is faulty or you're lying. The "leaks" about Clinton came from statements from Judicial Watch regarding email they had obtained through FOIA. There were statements from the Congressional Benghazi investigation. There were hacked documents published by Wikileaks. There was a lot of out in the open information about Clinton's emails. But I don't remember and can't find ANY leaks from the FBI or DOJ during the investigation. Therefore I conclude that you are fine with the ends justifying the means. You are OK with undermining the Social Contract.; 3/7/17, 12:07 AM
Sprezzatura said...: "I mean if Trump is as bad as I think he is, giving him the green light to use a Sessions run DOJ against people who happen to tick him off ought to send chills up your spine. So either they don't think Trump is smart enough to do that, or they don't think he's as bad as I do."

Or, they know that it's a certainty that the DJT folks will push the law as far as they can--like w/ not paying taxes. That makes DJT smart. Figurative green lights are irrelevant.; 3/7/17, 12:12 AM
Sprezzatura said...: Ok Jack,

1) You seem sorta strange. I'm not sure you fully grasp my level of concern re your assessment that I'm a liar. My last handle included the word 'lyin_PB..." Anywho, I'm sure most folks really care what you think. So, that's good for you.

2) Here's some jabber about the folks who would resign w/o an HRC indictment:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3886942/Resignation-letters-piling-disaffected-FBI-agents-wife-urging-admit-wrong-Director-Comey-jumped-chance-reopen-Hillary-investigation.html; 3/7/17, 12:21 AM
Achilles said...: Unknown said...
Trump said "Obama" wire tapped him. I don't think we need to re-argue what Trump said, that's been done for hours and hours now. Whoever the hell ordered survellience on Trump and associates, are the real heros of this story. Good for them!

This is the left everyone. They are not good people. Their only goal is to send people who disagree with them to jail. They will take the FISA program, a program specifically tailored to foreign threats and intelligence, and use it on their domestic political opponents.

Also note their political goals are to erase our borders and import people who hate this country and the freedom it grants it's citizens. They want to take your guns so you can't fight back. They want taxes as high as possible so they decide how to spend your money.

There will be no reconciliation with these people. They will go to any length. They must only be defeated.; 3/7/17, 12:21 AM
Sprezzatura said...: Presumably, Jack,

you can see that that leak is damaging for the D POTUS candidate? Presumably it doesn't look good for you if a big chunk of the FBI will resign if you're not indicted.

Not to mention that when there is no indictment and folks don't resign, it's hard to not see that this leak was meant to use deception to harm the D candidate in the public.; 3/7/17, 12:26 AM
Achilles said...: Chris Lopes said...
You would think that my fellow Trump critics would see the problem with normalizing the idea of the executive branch spying on political opponents.

Took a while, but that's the thread winner right there.

The problem Chris is almost all of the Trump critics on this thread, all except you apparently, are really really stOOpid with 2 O's.; 3/7/17, 12:28 AM
Achilles said...: 3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

Not to mention that when there is no indictment and folks don't resign, it's hard to not see that this leak was meant to use deception to harm the D candidate in the public.

I can see people with families not wanting to disrupt their lives. But it does highlight the fact that there really is no honor at the FBI anymore.; 3/7/17, 12:30 AM
Sprezzatura said...: "But it does highlight the fact that there really is no honor at the FBI anymore."

W/ at least one exception. Doc Mike's kid.; 3/7/17, 12:44 AM
Achilles said...: 3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

W/ at least one exception. Doc Mike's kid.

She is a Hillary supporter so that would be wrong. It took complete contempt for the rule of law to support hillary which would make her unfit to work at a law enforcement agency.; 3/7/17, 1:05 AM
Lewis Wetzel said...: PB&J wrote:
Or, they know that it's a certainty that the DJT folks will push the law as far as they can--like w/ not paying taxes. That makes DJT smart.
Spoken like a man who pays more taxes than he is required to pay!
I've never been able to figure out the obsession with the taxes a politician pays or does not pay. It can mean hypocrisy of the person is on the Left, but not if they are on the right. I mean, most politicians are rich. If a Lefty pol says I'm not taxed enough!", and parks his yacht strategically to lower the taxes on it, well, it's hard to get more intellectually dishonest than that.
On the other hand, if DJT payed a billion dollars a year in taxes, it would decrease the 2016 budget deficit by 0.2%. DJT not paying taxes is not a deficit driver. Government services are not increased or decreased no matter what the level DJT is taxed at. Who cares? It's like the mafia being angry because some victim has figured out a clever way not to pay his bump.; 3/7/17, 1:06 AM
Anonymous said...: Even though I can't stand Michael K, I'd say that his FBI liberal daughter is worth 10 of you Achilles. Who the hell do you think you are, saying she is unfit to work at law enforcement you stupid weirdo extremist. I see you as a flunky, I see her as a successful bright independent young woman. You would never make it into the FBI with your odd personality.

"W/ at least one exception. Doc Mike's kid."

"She is a Hillary supporter so that would be wrong. It took complete contempt for the rule of law to support hillary which would make her unfit to work at a law enforcement agency."; 3/7/17, 1:17 AM
Lewis Wetzel said...: "Unknown" wrote:
You would never make it into the FBI with your odd personality.

J. Edgar Hoover.

Made to look foolish with the quote of single name, by God, that's some kind of record!; 3/7/17, 1:48 AM
Bob Loblaw said...: This is a criticism of Althouse more than her commenters. The commenters are happy to argue about anything. They like arguing.

Do not.; 3/7/17, 1:55 AM
Anonymous said...: Idiot Wetzel, there is a whole battery of psychological testing done nowadays to get into the FBI, now you look stupid.; 3/7/17, 2:01 AM
Lewis Wetzel said...: Oh, "Unknown", one of the other people Obama's JD wiretapped was an FBI agent who leaked, and when his computer was searched they found child porn on it. Get a grip. Come over here to the fact based world. There is good work to be done, and we have cookies!
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/24/us/fbi-ex-agent-pleads-guilty-in-leak-to-ap.html; 3/7/17, 2:21 AM
grackle said...: Schrödinger's scandal.

Brilliant.

They're just pointing out that DJT tweeted false claims that BHO tapped DJT's phones. Which is true now, and will continue to be true.

I don’t believe Trump’s claim is false. I believe that it is all too obvious that Obama wiretapped Trump Towers and also made sure it would be leaked – which was the overreach that collapsed the narrative.

Obama should have been satisfied with getting away with illegally wiretapping a political opponent and left it at that but he just had to gild the lilly and do the leaks. It must have been very disappointing to Obama that no illegal or salacious material was found so Obama decided to leak the mere ordinary fact that meetings and conversations took place to see if his operatives in the MSM could fabricate some bullshit, which as usual they did. That mistake left Trump room to create his own narrative.

Obama, the MSM and the Democrats pimp a false narrative based on nothing so Trump creates a counter narrative based on articles published by the MSM itself which are cited by Mark Levin on FoxNews here and here.

Trump’s “claims” have the advantage of being plausible because of Obama’s past behavior of using the IRS to squelch the Tea Party and the DOJ to spy on Fox reporter James Rosen and his family. We all know that Obama doesn’t hesitate to use every dirty trick in the book.

Meanwhile the MSM steadily loses credibility. Trump’s immunization against the MSM continues. This Trump supporter is very satisfied with events.; 3/7/17, 3:32 AM
exhelodrvr1 said...: tim,
"I don't think there was ever any complicated plan, just a bunch of glorified crooks doing what comes naturally--cheating."

Crooks who have been getting away with it forever (at least as far back as Obama's Illinois campaigns) and thus getting more and more complacent about it.; 3/7/17, 3:46 AM
Jaq said...: I guess we know that Trump doesn't pay any taxes through political leaks from the IRS. But that's the ONLY agency Obama corrupted, swear to God.; 3/7/17, 4:23 AM
Jaq said...: Podesta, founder and chairman of the Podesta Group, is listed as a key lobbyist on behalf of Sberbank, according to Senate lobbying disclosure forms. His firm received more than $24 million in fees in 2016, much of it coming from foreign governments, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. Podesta is the brother of John Podesta, who was.. [the guy whose password was p@ssword...]

Media? Utterly incurious, It's like Leonardo DiCaprio getting his eyebrow waxer flown in for the Oscars then lecturing us on global warming. It is obvious that the press does not care a whit about contacts with the Russians. What they do care about is advancing their politics.; 3/7/17, 4:34 AM
Anonymous said...: ddh: Schrödinger's scandal.

&

HoodlumDoodlum: Consistency is the tool of reactionaries, repressives, and wreckers.

Just wait. When the next edition of the Newspeak dictionary comes out problems like this will be eliminated.

Trump has always been under investigation. Trump was never under investigation.

Good ones, both.; 3/7/17, 6:49 AM
sparrow said...: What's really illuminating is the extreme disparity between how Hilary's email scandal was treated and this Trump/Russian story. Hilary's scandal was substantial, consequential, and under ordinary circumstances criminal on a first degree felony level. Yet she got a near total pass. While the Trump-Russian conspiracy theory is insubstantial and unsupported; almost entirely rumor based, and it's launched a congressional investigation (thanks to feckless repubs) and gotten high profile press coverage. So much for equality under the law. The dominant lefty culture has been exposed, again.; 3/7/17, 6:50 AM
sinz52 said...: Let's have the investigation of possible Russian interference in our electoral process.

If Mr. McCarthy is right, the investigation will wrap up quickly.

But it's still very much worth having to clear up a lot of things and produce a report that we can learn lessons from.; 3/7/17, 7:07 AM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: Bob Loblaw said...
Do not.

Do too.; 3/7/17, 7:19 AM
Michael K said...: No more "ladies only" healthcare projects. No more only "black lives matter" instead of "all lives matter." It's quite simple. No more favoritism.

The Democrats can't do this because it's all they have. Remember Bill Clinton's "Sister Soulja Moment?"

That was the old D Party when they could show they stood up for the common man. This party is the one which allowed the BLM fat women to take away Bernie's Mike at the rally, This is the party that had Al Sharpton in the White House 40 times while he owed $5 million in back taxes.

They sold their soul.

As for my daughter, She is a lefty like most government employees are lefties. At her law school graduation, as I was picking up the check for the dinner for 12 or 14, she said, "Dad your day is over because you are a white male."

I laughed so hard I almost dropped my credit card.

Even holding those conventional feminist views, Hillary was more than she could stomach.

I have another daughter who was a Bernie supporter. She is an artist who speaks four languages and spent summers in Ecuador running an archeological site at 14 thousand feet elevation.

Both of them are terrific and I don't mind their politics.

I have conservative kids, too.

They are as smart as sparrow.; 3/7/17, 7:25 AM
damikesc said...: If the candidate for President was doing illegal activities during the campaign, there is absolutely nothing wrong in investigating him.

FISA specifically cannot be used to determine illegal anything. Using FISA courts to try and build a criminal case would lead to the case being tossed out cold due to rampant violations of the US citizens' Constitutional rights.

...and it's funny given that nobody can demonstrate a single crime. Can you name what crime was allegedly committed?

It's illegal to commit espionage, dumbass.

What, specifically, is the allegation of what information Trump or his people passed onto the Russians?

Then, how can a legal investigation of another candidate be a reason to lock up the investigators who didn't do anything wrong/illegal?

FISA investigations have literally nothing to do with legal/illegal and cannot be used for that type of an investigation.

Wow, as if colluding with Russia wasn't enough.

How much did Obama give Iran? Shall we go into the lovely people Clinton met with while Sec of State who donated handsomely to her "charitable foundation"?

This is not a line of inquiry that will go well for you.

"A Trump hotel project seems to have involved a front for Iran's Revolutionary Guard

How, uh, would you label Obama sending billions to Iran with no Congressional approval?

BTW, there's also another sorta leaker. The Russian gov re HRC related emails. But, they get a pass because our Social Contract is cool w/ the Russians trying to promote the Republican Party.

The Republican Party advocates pipelines, more drilling, a more robust military, and a more robust NATO. Literally none of that supports Russia. Republicans aren't terribly fond of noted Russian client state, Iran.

We just don't think a war with Russia is a great idea.

Who the hell is saying there was no surveillance of Trump and associates? This is a canard the right is now pushing.

This is actually the Dem claim. Trump is saying, quite openly, he was being spied on. The Dems are saying he is lying.

No one has said there was no survellience, what they've said is that Obama didn't order it, the DOJ orders such things.

The Obama admin DOJ. If they cross the line, the President is obligated to stop them.; 3/7/17, 7:37 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: "Podesta, founder and chairman of the Podesta Group, is listed as a key lobbyist on behalf of Sberbank, according to Senate lobbying disclosure forms. His firm received more than $24 million in fees in 2016, much of it coming from foreign governments, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. Podesta is the brother of John Podesta, who was.. [the guy whose password was p@ssword...]"

Podesta - The money grubber to the Clintons money grubbing.

with a repeat; 3/7/17, 7:42 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Unknown Inga is cool with the left kicking down doors and searching homes without warrant, too.

She's cool with the "It was the video" lie, Michael Brown/15 year old boy named Rachel "hands' up don't shoot" lie.. alright with 30,000 bleach-bit erasures. she's cool with a private server (not be be confused with private e-mail) used by top position in our government for the purpose of hiding the secret stuffing of the Clinton Family Foundation coffers by international players (including Russia) ... etc... it's all good! Media is cool with it all, as well.; 3/7/17, 7:47 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Hillary was going to give Podesta a big role in our government. A top position where the money grubbing could continue. *shiver* scratch fever.; 3/7/17, 7:57 AM
Matt Sablan said...: "The Obama admin DOJ. If they cross the line, the President is obligated to stop them."

-- I remember when the government knew the place the buck stopped.; 3/7/17, 8:00 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: sparrow 6:50 - indeed.

Had any other person in the GOP set up a private server while head of a top cabinet position (or even a lesser cabinet position) the media would have crucified. Embarrassment, end of career, jail, or all of the above.

Instead, the media ho-hummed and flat out paved the way for their precious first female(D).; 3/7/17, 8:03 AM
dreams said...: Check this out. Obama is an enemy of our country.

"In its last days, Obama Inc. made it easier to pass along unfiltered personal information to the other agencies where Obama loyalists were working on their investigation targeting Trump. The NSA pipeline now makes it possible for the shadow White House to still gain intelligence on its domestic enemies.

And the target of the shadow White House is the President of the United States.

There is now a President and an Anti-President. A government and a shadow government. The anti-President controls more of the government through his shadow government than the real President.

The Obama network is an illegal shadow government. Even its “light side” as an opposition group is very legally dubious. Its “shadow side” is not only illegal, but a criminal attack on our democracy.

When he was in power, Obama hacked reporters like FOX News’ James Rosen and CBS News’ Sharyl Attkisson. He eavesdropped on members of Congress opposed to the Iran Deal. Two men who made movies he disliked ended up in jail. But what he is doing now is even more deeply disturbing.

Obama no longer legally holds power. His Deep State network is attempting to overturn the results of a presidential election using government employees whose allegiance is to a shadow White House. Tactics that were illegal when he was in office are no longer just unconstitutional, they are treasonous."

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/266022/obamagate-exposing-obama-deep-state-daniel-greenfield; 3/7/17, 8:17 AM
dreams said...: "Obama’s third term has begun. Our Republic is in danger."

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/266022/obamagate-exposing-obama-deep-state-daniel-greenfield; 3/7/17, 8:19 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: You just need to call Loretta Lynch and her deputies to testify publicly under oath with full immunity and clearance to discuss this matter by the present DoJ.

What makes you think she'd take that deal? Didn't she, like her predecessor, decline to testify to Congress-- essentially taking the 5th?; 3/7/17, 8:21 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Shamelessly lifted from insty: wisdom and clarity from VDH:

"If the progressive media and intelligence agencies were hand-in-glove leaking damaging rumors about Trump, and if none were yet substantiated, then the issue reversed and turned instead on a new question: How were they trafficking in confidential intelligence information if not from skullduggery of some sort? No wonder that some smarter observers backtracked from the Russian-Trump collusion charges of the past six months, given that the leaks were less likely to be credible than they were criminal. The accusers have become the accused. And who would police the police?

The media and the anti-Trump Republicans decried Trump’s reckless and juvenile antics as unbefitting a president. Perhaps, but they may have forgotten Trump’s animal cunning and instincts: Each time Trump impulsively raises controversial issues in sloppy fashion — some illegal aliens harm American citizens as they enjoy sanctuary-city status, NATO European partners welch on their promised defense contributions, Sweden is a powder-keg of unvetted and unassimilated immigrants from the war-torn Middle East — the news cycle follows and confirms the essence of Trump’s otherwise rash warnings. We are learning that Trump is inexact and clumsy but often prescient; his opponents, usually deliberate and precise but disingenuous."

boom.; 3/7/17, 8:30 AM
Matt Sablan said...: Mike: I believe, technically, you MUST testify to take the 5th. Not testifying is different (for example, technically, juries aren't supposed to make a negative inference from someone taking the 5th, but they are free to do so for not testifying, I think.); 3/7/17, 8:31 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Eight years of a fawning press have made the Left reckless.; 3/7/17, 8:31 AM
Michael K said...: Didn't she, like her predecessor, decline to testify to Congress-- essentially taking the 5th?

I don't remember Lynch or Holder claiming the fifth.

Now is the time, with a new Executive Branch, to call Lerner and grant immunity so she is in no danger that the fifth would apply to.

Then contempt of Congress could be punished.; 3/7/17, 8:32 AM
Michael K said...: And it would be a perjury trap if underlings were then called later.; 3/7/17, 8:32 AM
Matt Sablan said...: (It just normally is that the person who normally elects not to testify is a defendant, and that is understood to be an extension of the 5th amendment, as opposed to being called by Congress where you're not a defendant. At least, I think so. Not a lawyer.); 3/7/17, 8:36 AM
Jaq said...: Any pony today?; 3/7/17, 8:51 AM
Michael K said...: AA, I just read that and it rings true.

The rest of the week should be interesting.

Now, if Congress can only get health care right.; 3/7/17, 8:54 AM
Jaq said...: Hey look! Wikileaks points out that the Obama era CIA is hacking Samsung TVs and turning them into Telscreens, just like in 1984. That's the power liberals handed over to Trump.; 3/7/17, 8:56 AM
Big Mike said...: Now, if Congress can only get health care right.

They didn't.; 3/7/17, 9:03 AM
HoodlumDoodlum said...: It'd be a fun academic endeavor to catalog the shift from single-person identification to group identification in news/Media reports for different politicians in different types of stories. I suspect you'd find that when reporting negative stories about Repubs the stories were likely to identify the problem with the Repub official whereas when reporting negative stories about Dems the stories were more likely to identify the problem with the administration, or the agency, or the nameless bureaucrat, etc.

Bad federal Katrina response? Well, that's "Bush's FEMA."
IRS scandal while Obama's in office? Well, that's "rogue employees" or Lois Lerner, not the Obama Administration.
Coal slurry spill (that happened prior to Bush even taking office)? Evidence of "Bush's troubling environmental record." Even though the mining company was fined Bush is to blame for not pursing the company further and getting more money for affected residents--Bush himself.
Obama's EPA actually causes the Gold King Mine disaster? "Low level government employees made mistakes." Even though Colorado and New Mexico were indisputably harmed and the disaster itself was unambiguously and admittedly caused by EPA officials, the EPA's claim of sovereign immunity as a tactic to avoid paying for the damage they did does not in any way reflect badly on Obama himself--even though it was his agency.

Etc.; 3/7/17, 9:13 AM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: Seems that Obama is the big winner this week. He has gone from incompetent diversity hire to criminal mastermind, capable of controlling the levers of government while still on extended vacation. He has done this simply by taking up residence in Trump's head. He has some prime real estate there.; 3/7/17, 9:22 AM
Achilles said...: Michael K said...

Even holding those conventional feminist views, Hillary was more than she could stomach.

Apologies. I am glad to hear she kept her soul.; 3/7/17, 9:25 AM
Achilles said...: AReasonableMan said...

Seems that Obama is the big winner this week. He has gone from incompetent diversity hire to criminal mastermind, capable of controlling the levers of government while still on extended vacation. He has done this simply by taking up residence in Trump's head. He has some prime real estate there.

You are not really that stupid are you?; 3/7/17, 9:26 AM
Big Mike said...: @Achilles, oh yes he is. In fact if anything it's fair to say that he's more stupid than a you imagine. Think of John Clease's Black Knight in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail."; 3/7/17, 9:30 AM
Matt Sablan said...: "I suspect you'd find that when reporting negative stories about Repubs the stories were likely to identify the problem with the Repub official whereas when reporting negative stories about Dems the stories were more likely to identify the problem with the administration, or the agency, or the nameless bureaucrat, etc."

-- One of many reasons I prefer a Republican president to Democrat president; only one will ever be held accountable (even for things they couldn't be responsible for.); 3/7/17, 9:36 AM
Big Mike said...: @HoodlumDoodlum, if it was up to me I'd make Gina McCarthy and all her direct reports clean up the Animas river with teaspoons and toothbrushes.; 3/7/17, 9:45 AM