Timothy Birdnow

The Obama Administration has tried to deligitimize Donald Trump, claiming the Russians "hacked" the election to get Trump the Presidency. Numerous people inside the U.S. government are insisting this to be the case - despite a lack of evidence - and this is leading to people like Still in Saigon John McCain to demand congressional investigations and some even calling ti an "act of war" with Obama promising retaliatory strikes.

Then a bogus document surfaced claiming Trump was being blackmailed by the Russians.

Now we this; the Federal Bureau of Investigation sought to use FISA warrants to spy on Donald Trump and his people.

According to the Zero Hedge:

"A new report released today features both the FBI seeking to launch a surveillance operation against an active US presidential campaign, and the ultra-rare case of the FISA courts actually turning down an FBI request to conduct surveillance against somebody.

The report, originating at the Guardian, claims that the FBI had sought broad surveillance powers over four high-ranking members of President-elect Donald Trump’s campaign during the election, claiming them to have had contact with Russian officials.

The FISA court turned the request down, telling investigators they needed to narrow the request.

Though the four are not directly named in the report, it is related to claims in a dossier of Russia having substantial blackmail dirt on Trump, and that dossier centered heavily around accusations against a handful of Trump campaign personnel, including Carter Page, Paul Manafort, and Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, along with Trump’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen, meaning some of them may well be among the targets"

End excerpt.

Andrew McCarthy has this to say:

"The reason the Wall theory was absurd was that a rogue agent would surely manufacture evidence of a crime before he'd manufacture a national-security angle. The process of getting a traditional wiretap is straightforward: FBI crim-div agents and a district assistant U.S. attorney (AUSA) write the supporting affidavit; it gets approved by the AUSA's supervisors; then it is submitted to the Justice Department's electronic-surveillance unit; after that unit's approval, the attorney general's designee signs off; then the AUSA and the FBI present the application to a district judge. FISA wiretaps, by contrast, go through a completely different, more difficult and remote chain of command. In it, the district AUSA and FBI crim-div agents who started the investigation get cut out of the process, which is taken over by Main Justice's National Security Division and the FBI's national-security agents. In other words, if we assume an agent is inclined to be a rogue, it would be far easier (and less likely of detection) to trump up evidence of a crime in order to satisfy the probable-cause standard for a traditional wiretap than to manufacture a national-security threat in order to get a FISA wiretap. No rational rogue would do it.

But now, let's consider the press reports — excerpted in David French's Corner post — that claim that the Obama Justice Department and the FBI sought FISA warrants against Trump insiders, and potentially against Donald Trump himself, during the last months and weeks of the presidential campaign. It's an interesting revelation, particularly in light of last fall's media consternation over "banana republic" tactics against political adversaries, triggered by Trump's vow to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate serious allegations of criminal misconduct against Hillary Clinton — consternation echoed by Senate Democrats during Tuesday's confirmation hearing for attorney-general nominee Jeff Sessions.

From the three reports, from the Guardian, Heat Street, and the New York Times, it appears the FBI had concerns about a private server in Trump Tower that was connected to one or two Russian banks. Heat Street describes these concerns as centering on "possible financial and banking offenses." I italicize the word "offenses" because it denotes crimes. Ordinarily, when crimes are suspected, there is a criminal investigation, not a national-security investigation.

According to the New York Times (based on FBI sources), the FBI initially determined that the Trump Tower server did not have "any nefarious purpose." But then, Heat Street says, "the FBI's counter-intelligence arm, sources say, re-drew an earlier FISA court request around possible financial and banking offenses related to the server."

Again, agents do not ordinarily draw FISA requests around possible crimes. Possible crimes prompt applications for regular criminal wiretaps because the objective is to prosecute any such crimes in court. (It is rare and controversial to use FISA wiretaps in criminal prosecutions.) FISA applications, to the contrary, are drawn around people suspected of being operatives of a (usually hostile) foreign power."

End excerpt.

So, this has nothing to do with the salacious accusations made against Trump in the "dossier' about golden showers and other blackmail material.

In short, this was the use of the power of the Federal Government to attempt to manipulate and interfere with the free elections of the United States. If you were to flip this on it's head and susbstitute Russians for FBI you would have grounds for war.

This smells exactly like an ACORN operation. Now who cut his teeth on ACORN operations? Who was it who had divorce records unsealed by a judge to dig dirt on his political opponent when he was running for the Senate? Who won every election up until 2008 by forfeit after dirt appeared on his opponents?

This looks exactly like the campaign style of Barack Hussein Obama.

In 1996 when Obama decided to run for the Illinois Senate there was a crowded field which included Ulmer Lynch, Jr, Gha-is Askia and Marc Ewell as well as the woman who had vacated the seat to run unsuccessfully for the U.S. Congress - Alice Palmer. Obama's aid filed objections to the legitimacy of all of these candidates. The highly politicized Chicago Board of Elections disqualified all of the candidates except Obama by claiming invalid signiatures on their petitions. Two brought lawsuits in Federal court but, without the internet, couldn't disprove the claims of the CBE even though they disqualified on average 62% of the signiatures. Obama won by default.

According to this website:

"Altogether, Obama’s four opponents submitted 5,865 signatures. Obama and Davis’s lawyer had to carefully scrutinize all 5,865 signatures before the attorney for the Davis-Obama state senate campaign filed formal objections with the CBOE. Because the Davis-Obama lawyer challenged more than 4,000 of Obama’s opponents’ 5,865 signatures, the attorney needed to attend a minimum of two or three full days of hearings while the CBOE compared the signatures from Obama’s opponents with the signatures that the CBOE had on file."

End quote.

Obama then ran unopposed in 2002, in a gerrymandered district designed to keep him in power.

When he ran for the U.S. Senate he had marvelously good luck. Peter Fitzgerald, the Republican who held the seat, was stepping down for murky reasons and Carol Mosley Braun, the Senator Fitzgerald defeated to win said seat, decided not to run for her old seat as she was dogged by corruption charges.

During the primary he faced off against a very well funded Blair Hull, whom he destroyed with allegations of spousal abuse. http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2008/08/obamas_bag_of_tricks.html


Obama wound up running against Republican Jack Ryan, and, desperate for some dirty trick to win, he got a friendly judge to unseal Ryan's divorce records which included some unsavory allegations made against him by his ex-wife. In other words, Obama cheated, and Ryan had to drop out of the race. Political pundit Alan Keyes came in to run, but not being from Illinois he had little chance and Obama sailed to victory.


He has been guilty of dirty trickery ever since.

During the Presidential primary Obama accused Hillary clinton of rank racism. He bullied superdelegate3s into supporting him, according to Roger Simon:

" that Obama operatives were calling members of Congress, all of whom were superdelegates, and threatening to find, fund and run primary opponents against them if they committed to Hillary.

David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, told me his campaign did not do this, though Steve Hildebrand did say that superdelegates were reminded that some would see a racial dimension to overturning the decision of pledged delegates. "We definitely made that argument," Hildebrand said"

Emd excerpt.

And he created the "Obama Truth Squad" WHICH WAS COMPOSED OF PROSECUTORS AND OTHERS IN POSTIIONS TO STRONGARM oBAMA OPPONENTS.

He used the IRS to bully enemies, denying them tax exempt status and whatnot. He has allowed the National Security Agency to collect all manner of data on Americans. He maintained a database on voters and donors, suggesting he may have dirt on them as well. When he ran against Romney he dug up Joe Soptic, and claimed his wife died because Bain Capital - Romney's company - closed the plant where Soptic worked (she actually died many years later.)

Then take the case of the Little Sisters of the Poor. Obama demanded they pay for abortions and birth control, and they could not do so and be true to their faith. He threatened them with titanic fines if they refused to comply. He was willing to destroy the entire order to get his way.

Barack Obama is very willing to attack, even destroy, his enemies. Donald Trump plans to dismantle his "legacy" and Obama would not shy from the foulest of attacks if it suited him.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 12:12 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1555 words, total size 11 kb.