Share This Article with a Friend!


100 Days of Trump: What part of Obama’s Trump Tower wiretap does the media not get?

As information continues to trickle in about the Obama administration’s role in fanning the flames of Russian complicity in last year’s election, it’s becoming clear all the diversionary tactics the Democrats are employing of late are meant to distract the public from their own activities.

In Obama’s last-ditch attempt to find dirt on Donald Trump in the days before the new president was to be Donald Trumpelected last November, apparently the Justice Department was doing a little snooping of its own.

Elliot Smilowitz of The Hill reports, “President Trump on Saturday claimed President Obama had his ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower before Election Day, tweeting the accusation without offering evidence.

“’Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!’ he wrote.

“’Is it legal for a sitting President to be ‘wire tapping’ a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!’ he added in subsequent tweets. ‘I'd bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!’”

Of course the media pretended they didn’t know what Trump was talking about and all-but passed it off as another unfounded rant from the eternally paranoid neo-Nixonian president. Smilowitz speculates Trump’s source (for his accusation) may have been a Breitbart article published on Friday but it was more likely derived from an article published by Andrew C. McCarthy of National Review on the Michael Flynn situation (which is mentioned in the Breitbart piece).

McCarthy reported on February 15, “[In] June 2016, the Obama Justice Department sought permission from the FISA court to conduct a national-security investigation against Trump insiders — and perhaps even Trump himself — on suspicion that they were acting as agents of a foreign power. The FISA application is said to have ‘named’ Trump, though it is not clear whether that means the Justice Department was targeting him as a surveillance subject. Apparently, though, the application was so thin that even the FISA court, though notoriously accommodating of government surveillance requests, declined to approve a warrant.

“Still the Obama Justice Department did not give up. In October, virtually on the eve of the election, it submitted a second FISA application — this one more narrowly tailored, avoiding mention of Trump himself. The FISA court granted this application. Indications are that the investigation is ongoing, targeting former Trump advisers Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, and Carter Page.”

So it certainly looks like the Obama people were listening in to Trump’s communications in the days before the election. The fact that nothing has come out to this point must indicate the search came up empty -- otherwise why wouldn’t Obama have included the findings in the “intelligence report” that concluded the Russians hacked the election in favor of Trump?

Meanwhile the media plays dumb in all of this, preferring instead to shove microphones in front of Democrat faces screaming “Russians, Russians, Russians!!!” and “resign, resign, resign!” and “impeach, impeach, impeach!”

At the same time I’m not sure Trump is doing himself any favors by tweeting about this matter, but if the media isn’t going to dig deeper into the real issue of “Russians” and the Democrats’ quest to tie the Trump campaign to Putin, something had to be done to get the story out there.

This is all devolving into one big sorry political shouting match back and forth between the two parties. Both sides can’t be right. The Democrats are using the implication of guilt to maintain a foothold on relevancy. I would counsel Trump to stick to the agenda; for if he does that – as he did last Tuesday night -- he can’t lose.

Democrats’ dust-up over Sessions is nothing other than a good old fashioned diversion

In the days that followed the universally well-received speech President Donald Trump delivered to the joint session of Congress last week, the Democrats were desperate. People liked the “presidential” Trump so much that even some of the president’s political enemies predicted there would now be many more people willing to work with him on his agenda.

For the “#Resistance” that has become the Democrat Party, good feelings surrounding President Trump removes their excuse for existence. Why “resist” something that’s perfectly reasonable and even…likable?

So the Dems dipped into their bag of political tricks and pulled out the old fashioned military concept of diversion. As defined by MilitaryFactory.com, “diversion” means:

The act of drawing the attention and forces of an enemy from the point of the principal operation; an attack, alarm, or feint that diverts attention.”

In other words, position troops in plain sight to make the enemy think you’re attacking point B; meanwhile, your main force heads undercover around the flank intent on attacking point A.

In political terms, the Democrats are using their baseless claims against Attorney General Jeff Sessions to divert attention from their main target: President Trump himself.

The reactionary media went nuts over the Sessions matter. It won’t work, however. First and foremost, Sessions didn’t do anything legally actionable.

Andrew C. McCarthy  (the same one quoted above) of National Review wrote, “It is fair enough for critics to maintain that Sessions should have been clearer. But if we consider this matter not as a political dispute but a potential perjury prosecution, then the burden was on Franken, not Sessions, to be clearer. The witness’s obligation, as a matter of perjury law, is to refrain from willfully providing testimony that is both false and intended to deceive the tribunal. The burden is on the questioner to remove all doubt or ambiguity by asking exacting follow-up questions…

“So, was Sessions’s testimony inaccurate? Sure, especially taken out of context. But was it perjurious? Not even close. The context, established by Franken’s questioning, elucidates that when Sessions denied communications with Russians, he was denying that he had spoken with Russian officials as a Trump surrogate, particularly in any relation to the misconduct described in the dossier.”

I wish McCarthy had been one of my professors in law school – I might have graduated higher in the class if he had been.

But whether you understand the perjury concept or not it’s clear there’s a very high legal standard for Democrats to satisfy in order to show Sessions did anything culpable during the brief exchange with Franken, which was just a tiny sliver of his grueling and tedious senate testimony on January 10.

Let’s not forget Sessions was the first Trump nominee to face the Democrat inquisitors in committee hearings. Sessions was grilled mercilessly until late in the evening that day over the purported (and unsubstantiated) “racist” statements he’d made thirty years ago as well as the Democrats’ pet fixation on the Russians – among other things.

As McCarthy indicated, it’s true Sessions could have been clearer on what he meant by “no communications” with the Russians. But at the time of the testimony it was obvious to all what he meant by “no communications”. He was talking about the presidential campaign.

This whole thing is nothing leading to nothing from nothing. It’s a big paper wrapped box with Styrofoam popcorn packing balls and no gift. It’s a diversion. The Democrats are basically saying “Hey, look at that!” in trying to turn the world’s attention away from Trump’s mounting popularity and effectiveness.

And it wouldn’t work in any case, because there’s no way Trump would ever ask Sessions to step down over something so trivial as what the Democrats are claiming.

W. James Antle III of the Washington Examiner wrote, “Sessions is a much more important figure in Trumpworld than ousted National Security Adviser Michael Flynn ever was. The administration is layered with his associates. Deputy White House chief of staff Rick Dearborn and senior adviser Stephen Miller were top Sessions staffers.

“Trump's immigration policy, a critical part of his appeal during the primaries and the general election campaign, was shaped substantially by Sessions. Sessions arguably played as big a role in guiding Trump toward nationalism and populism as chief strategist Stephen Bannon.”

Sessions’ value to Trump goes well beyond policy or personnel. Sessions’ impeccable character gives the administration a boost in an area where it’s seen as lacking. Since the Democrats and their voters have been so insistent all along that Trump is “unfit” for office, the president needs cabinet members who command respect.

And if there ever was a man who fits that description, it’s Jeff Sessions.

Sessions’ integrity is the number one reason why Democrats are working so hard to damage him in the minds of the public. If their ridiculous charges of racism wouldn’t stick, why not try to make him out to be a liar? You can’t have a liar in the position of Attorney General, right?

Unless you’re a Democrat, of course. Obama’s AGs Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch were about as truth challenged as they come in Washington – and that’s saying a lot. For example Lynch said she and Bill Clinton were swapping stories of “golf and grandchildren” during their meeting in Phoenix last summer near the end of the investigation into Hillary’s emails and whether the Democrat nominee would be formally charged.

Bill may be a nice guy but I doubt he’s really that interested in Lynch’s grandchildren’s activities…and he cheats at golf.

Did Lynch lie? Did the Democrats demand she recuse herself from the investigation?

Lynch’s made up story wasn’t under oath, but it doesn’t matter. Everyone knows what she and Bill were talking about, even her Democrat apologists.

The rest is history. America elected Donald Trump -- and Jeff Sessions and a host of others came along with him and are busy making America great again. No “diversion” is going to distract from it either.

#NeverTrump reemerges to bash on the president and Jeff Sessions

In assessing the ever-changing circus atmosphere enveloping American politics today, there is one thing Republicans must do if they’re to succeed going forward: recognize who the real “enemy” is and rally around the president and his agenda. The good guys aren’t hard to spot.

Unfortunately, it appears President Trump is not getting that party support.

Anna Giaritelli of the Washington Examiner reports, “Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., on Saturday said the country is ‘in the midst of a civilization-warping crisis of public trust’ following President Trump's alleging the Obama administration wire-tapped the campaign headquarters last October.

“’The President today made some very serious allegations, and the informed citizens that a republic requires deserve more information,’ Sasse said in a statement released Saturday afternoon. ‘[T]he President's allegations today demand the thorough and dispassionate attention of serious patriots. A quest for the full truth, rather than knee-jerk partisanship, must be our guide if we are going to rebuild civic trust and health.’”

And just where does Sasse believe these “dispassionate” patriots would come from? On the Senate side, maybe Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin would be willing to listen and that’s only because he’s running for reelection next year in a state that went for Trump by 42 points. For the Democrat House delegation, who would handle the matter?

This lack of “civic trust and health” was cultivated accusation by accusation over the years by the “evil party” of character assassination, behind-the-scenes disruptive organizing and violence, abortion deniers and environmentalist freaks. Throw in a generous gang of Hollywood celebrities and the always compliant media and you’ve got a tidal wave of “resistance” against anyone who went to Washington to alter the status quo.

Trump may be a little rough around the edges but he is that agent of change the voters chose in 2016. If you don’t believe it, check out all the pro-Trump rallies that took place on Saturday.

Conservatives and Republicans have an argument to make concerning the Democrats’ underhanded tactics. It should be made and instead of knee-capping the president of your own party, Republicans should be out pointing the finger in the direction of the real culprits.

Sasse was a #NeverTrump leader during the campaign last year. Independent candidate Evan McMullin was too – and he’s even back in the news bashing Jeff Sessions. Joining with the Democrats, McMullin called on Sessions to step aside.

Jim Jamitis of RedState wrote, “I think it’s time to call a spade a spade and say that Evan McMullin is simply an opportunist trying to exploit a Democrat fabricated controversy to benefit himself politically. There is still an active McMullin SuperPAC out there and I’m sure appearances like this one on CNN are helping to fill its coffers…

“I think McMullin is simply trying to cast himself as the chief Trump critic on the right to set up his future political ambitions. Demanding Sessions’ resignation is a cynically calculated attack on something he probably realizes is, as Senator Ted Cruz put it, a ‘nothing burger.’”

McMullin presented himself as the “conservative” alternative to Trump last year. But if he joins Democrats in smearing the reputation of a man like Jeff Sessions, what’s “conservative” about that?

Republicans need to stop the wishy-washy “join the crowd” mentality of kicking the party leader when things get hot. As shown above, there certainly is evidence that Obama’s administration engaged in wiretapping. What’s so difficult to admit?

Share this