The Constitutional Crisis is Here!

[hollodero]

(05-23-2018, 04:26 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Another great opinion piece.

Not really, no.

Quote:Here are eight signs pointing to a counterintelligence operation deployed against Trump for political reasons.

Eight. OK then. Just keep in mind the premise "deployed for political reasons". 8 things pointing to that.

Quote:Secret surveillance was conducted on no fewer than seven Trump associates: chief strategist Stephen Bannon; lawyer Michael Cohen; national security adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn; adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner; campaign chairman Paul Manafort; and campaign foreign policy advisers Carter Page and George Papadopoulos.

So. Now does that prove "political purposes" or does it rather prove Trump chose a bunch of very dubious advisers? You can say it's politics, but there's no evidence supporting that, so that's just an assumption - based on desire. I'd say the latter is undeniably true though.

Michael Cohen is in deep legal problems, and the more we know the more obvious is that he's not clean.
Paul Manafort got indicted and faces a lifetime in jail. It's not the FBI's fault trump hired a guy like that.
Carter Page was in the FBI's crosshairs loooong before Trump. Not the FBI's fault Trump chose someone already on their list.
George Papadopulos pleaded guilty. And bragged about Russian connections in a way that had to draw attention.
Michael Flynn now is a witness for the prosecution. Also, guilty plea. Also, undeclared foreign agent.
And Kushner? He just made a sweet exortion deal with Qatar, he can't get a security clearance, he met with several russian bankers, including sanctioned ones, he has so much shade surrounding him that the FBI would have to deliberately look away to not take interest.

So there's objectively a there there, in almost all cases. Bannon, I don't know why that was, but can one really argue a political motivation when 6 of 7 surveilled people are clearly or at least likely involved in several crimes. I say one can't.

Quote:Electronic surveillance was used to listen in on three Trump transition officials in Trump Tower — Flynn, Bannon and Kushner — as they met in an official capacity with the United Arab Emirates’ crown prince.
The FBI also reportedly wiretapped Flynn’s phone conversation with Kislyak on Dec. 31, 2016, as part of “routine surveillance” of Kislyak.
NBC recently reported that Cohen, Trump’s personal attorney, was wiretapped. NBC later corrected the story, saying Cohen was the subject of a “pen register” used to monitor phone numbers and, possibly, internet communications.

Where's the political purpose? Getting caught up phoning the Russian ambassador who is wiretapped. Of course he is. One can also safely assume that the FBI takes an interest in those Arab crown princes. And in Flynn and Kushner. 

Quote:Another controversial tool reportedly used by the FBI to obtain phone records and other documents in the investigation were national security letters, which bypass judicial approval.
Improper use of such letters has been an ongoing theme at the FBI. Reviews by the Department of Justice’s Inspector General found widespread misuse under Mueller — who was then FBI director — and said officials failed to report instances of abuses as required.

I don't know about the merit of that claim, but for the argument itself, this part doesn't work. It clearly states Mueller used that practice all the time. So using it now has nothing to do with Trump in particular. That's just logic 101. Where's the political purpose?

Quote:“Unmasking” — identifying protected names of Americans captured by government surveillance — was frequently deployed by at least four top Obama officials who have subsequently spoken out against President Trump: James Clapper, former Director of National Intelligence; Samantha Power, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations; Susan Rice, former national security adviser; Sally Yates, former deputy attorney general.

So, people who were involved in lawful unmasking processes spoke out against Trump. What does the one have to do with the other? Nothing, that's what.

Quote:However, it’s been revealed that Power made near-daily unmasking requests in 2016.
Prior to that revelation, Clapper claimed ignorance. When asked if he knew of unmasking requests by any ambassador, including Power, he testified: “I don't know. Maybe it's ringing a vague bell but I'm not — I could not answer with any confidence.”
Rice admitted to asking for unmasked names of U.S. citizens in intelligence reports after initially claiming no knowledge of any such thing.

Clapper also admitted to requesting the unmasking of “Mr. Trump, his associates or any members of Congress.” Clapper and Yates admitted they also personally reviewed unmasked documents and shared unmasked material with other officials.

They did nothing inproper or out of the ordinary. From what I know at least, and I haven't heard about any measures taken against those officials for misconduct. Even if they did something not by the book though, that does not mean an FBI investigation was started for political purposes. They unmasked some folks.

Quote:Former CIA Director John Brennan and Clapper, two of the most integral intel officials in this ongoing controversy, have joined national news organizations where they have regular opportunities to shape the news narrative — including on the very issues under investigation.
Clapper reportedly secretly leaked salacious political opposition research against Trump to CNN in fall 2017 and later was hired as a CNN political analyst. In February, Brennan was hired as a paid analyst for MSNBC.

So these two got media appearances. That doesn't prove an investigation was started for political purposes. In fact, these things have nothing to do with each other, unless of course you accuse Clapper of starting a fake investigation so he could cash in as CNN contributor on that subject afterwards. But no one really would want to believe that, right. OK Brennan, sure, but not Clapper :)

Quote:There’s been a steady and apparently orchestrated campaign of leaks — some true, some false, but nearly all of them damaging to President Trump’s interests.
A few of the notable leaks include word that Flynn was wiretapped, the anti-Trump “Steele dossier” of political opposition research, then-FBI Director James Comey briefing Trump on it, private Comey conversations with Trump, Comey’s memos recording those conversations and criticizing Trump, the subpoena of Trump’s personal bank records (which proved false) and Flynn planning to testify against Trump (which also proved to be false).

Yep, many leaks, mainly about his daily conduct and most coming from his own inner circle. And sure, quite a lot of other leaks too, no denying that. Yet unexplainably, there were zero leaks about the investigation before the election, not even about its very existence. Zero.
So, also zero evidence that an investigation's deployment was politically motivated.

Quote:The FBI reportedly used one-time CIA operative Stefan Halper in 2016 as an informant to spy on Trump officials.
Another player is Comey friend Daniel Richman, a Columbia University law professor, who leaked Comey’s memos against Trump to The New York Times after Comey was fired. We later learned that Richman actually worked for the FBI under a status called “Special Government Employee.”

The FBI used former reporter Glenn Simpson, his political opposition research firm Fusion GPS, and ex-British spy Christopher Steele to compile allegations against Trump, largely from Russian sources, which were distributed to the press and used as part of wiretap applications.

So the FBI uses informants. That proves the FBI is the FBI doing FBI stuff. And only that.
That the investigation doesn't stem from the Steele dossier is common knowledge by now. It also isn't a result of Comey's memos. So this point is completely moot.

Quote:These eight features of a counterintelligence operation are only the pieces we know. It can be assumed there’s much we don’t yet know. And it may help explain why there’s so much material that the Department of Justice hasn’t easily handed over to congressional investigators.

Uh, uh, I know that one! Because everything that makes it to Congress immediately is leaked to the media. In more severe cases, Nunes goes through Trump to declassify. Sure, hand over all kinds of sensitive information to these guys, or else you're clearly guilty of hiding something... :)