Search This Blog

Tuesday, March 7, 2017

Some Important Questions

Here are a few important questions:

1.  Since the election, we have heard repeatedly from the media and (usually unnamed) Democrat sources that there has been an ongoing investigation of the supposed ties and cooperation between Donald Trump and his campaign on the one hand and Russia on the other hand.  Usually, those reports mentioned that wiretaps or bugs had obtained recordings of conversations (like the one between General Flynn and the Russian ambassador in December.)  On the day of the inauguration, the New York Times ran a major story detailing how the intelligence agencies had given a report on Trump/Russia ties to the Obama White House which included transcripts of wiretapped conversations.  Then over the weekend, President Trump said that his campaign was bugged by the Obamacrats.  Suddenly, the media and the old Obama forces have been screaming that there was no wiretapping or bugging and that there was not even any investigation of Trump or his campaign.  Which is it?  Were the media and the Democrats lying when they told America for months that there was this investigation based upon wiretaps etc.?  Are the media and the Democrats lying now when they say that no such investigation took place?  Both cannot be correct; in one case, at a minimum, the media and Democrats are being untruthful.

2.  For months, the media has been reporting that the Obama Administration sought FISA warrants on two occasions in order to conduct surveillance on the Trump campaign.  The first warrant -- according to multiple stories in many media outlets -- actually mentioned Trump by name, and it was denied by the FISA court.  The media stories also tell us that in October, another FISA warrant was sought and this time the request was granted.  This FISA warrant did not mention President Trump, but it was focused on possible contacts from Trump Tower to the Russians.  Through all these swirling stories, no one in government ever denied that these FISA requests had been made.  After President Trump said that his campaign had been bugged, the media and the Democrats have rushed out to say that there were no FISA requests.  Of course, the main spokesman for that position was former DNI Clapper who is no slave to the truth.  So which is it?  Were the months of stories about FISA warrants and investigations into the Trump campaign just BS or did the Obamacrats actually wiretap the Trump campaign?  Assuming that the Obamacrats were not acting totally illegally (like in Watergate) to bug the opposition, one of these has to be false.  So which is the lie being told by the media and the Democrats?

3.  In December, the phone conversation between General Flynn and the Russian ambassador was taped during "routine" surveillance of the Russian.  US law requires that when surveillance of this sort is conducted and it is recognized that someone on the phone is an American citizen, a procedure called "minimization" has to be followed.  That often means ending the surveillance, but it always means taking a series of steps to protect the identity of the American on the phone and disclosure that he or she has been taped.  Failure to follow the minimization procedures is a felony punishable by a prison term.  The Flynn conversation was not only taped, however, but the contents were leaked to the media.  That leak had to come from the Obama administration.  Who was the leaker?  Why was the minimization protocol not followed once it was clear that Flynn was on the line?  Why did Obama and his people take no steps to stop the leaks?  Indeed, Obama took steps to make such leaking easier to do and harder to find.

4.  Each time the subject of supposed cooperation between the Trump campaign and the Russians is investigated, the conclusion has been that there is no evidence of any collusion or cooperation between the Russians and the Trump people.  This is always buried deep in the articles on the subject if it is mentioned at all.  Why is it, after all this time, that we are still hearing calls for more investigation absent any evidence to support the claims?  The standard Democrat/media answer is that the charge is so serious that it needs to be investigated anyway.  Well now we have another extremely serious charge: namely, that the Obama administration wiretapped the Trump campaign during and after the election.  The same people who justify the need for a Russia connection investigation absent evidence are saying that we cannot investigate the Obama bugging of Trump because there is no evidence.  That's wrong, of course.  We know that Flynn's conversation with the Russian ambassador was recorded through a wiretap, so there is evidence.  But the real question is why is not evidence needed to investigate the Russia allegations while the equally serious allegations of Obama bugging Trump needs no investigation?

If someone can answer these questions, he or she will deserve a medal.

No comments: