Clicky

Close

Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Donor Sadie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    1,352
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,466
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,531
    Thanked in
    749 Posts

    FISA-Gate Is Scarier Than Watergate

    by VICTOR DAVIS HANSON February 8, 2018 12:00 AM

    The press used to uncover government wrongdoing. Today’s press is defending it.

    The Watergate scandal of 1972–74 was uncovered largely because of outraged Democratic politicians and a bulldog media. They both claimed that they had saved American democracy from the Nixon administration’s attempt to warp the CIA and FBI to cover up an otherwise minor, though illegal, political break-in. In the Iran-Contra affair of 1985–87, the media and liberal activists uncovered wrongdoing by some rogue members of the Reagan government. They warned of government overreach and of using the “Deep State” to subvert the law for political purposes.

    We are now in the middle of a third great modern scandal. Members of the Obama administration’s Department of Justice sought court approval for the surveillance of Carter Page, allegedly for colluding with Russian interests, and extended the surveillance three times. But none of these government officials told the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that the warrant requests were based on an unverified dossier that had originated as a hit piece funded in part by the Hillary Clinton campaign to smear Donald Trump during the current 2016 campaign. Nor did these officials reveal that the author of the dossier, Christopher Steele, had already been dropped as a reliable source by the FBI for leaking to the press.

    Nor did officials add that a Department of Justice official, Bruce Ohr, had met privately with Steele — or that Ohr’s wife, Nellie, had been hired to work on the dossier.

    Unfortunately, such disclosures may be only the beginning of the FISA-gate scandal. Members of the Obama administration’s national-security team also may have requested the names of American citizens connected with the Trump campaign who had been swept up in other FISA surveillance. Those officials may have then improperly unmasked the names and leaked them to a compliant press — again, for apparent political purposes during a campaign.

    As a result of various controversies, the deputy director of the FBI, Andrew McCabe, has resigned. Two FBI officials who had been working on special counsel Robert Mueller’s team in the so-called Russia collusion probe, Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, have been reassigned for having an improper relationship and for displaying overt political biases in text messages to each other.

    The new FBI director, Christopher Wray, has also reassigned the FBI’s top lawyer, James Baker, who purportedly leaked the Steele dossier to a sympathetic journalist. How does FISA-gate compare to Watergate and Iran-Contra? Once again, an administration is being accused of politicizing government agencies to further agendas, this time apparently to gain an advantage for Hillary Clinton in the run-up to an election. There is also the same sort of government resistance to releasing documents under the pretext of “national security.”

    There is a similar pattern of slandering congressional investigators and whistleblowers as disloyal and even treasonous. There is the rationale that just as the Watergate break-in was a two-bit affair, Carter Page was a nobody. But there is one huge (and ironic) difference. In the current FISA-gate scandal, most of the media and liberal civil libertarians are now opposing the disclosure of public documents. They are siding with those in the government who disingenuously sought surveillance to facilitate the efforts of a political campaign. This time around, the press is not after a hated Nixon administration. Civil libertarians are not demanding accountability from a conservative Reagan team. Instead, the roles are reversed. Barack Obama was a progressive constitutional lawyer who expressed distrust of the secretive “Deep State.” Yet his administration weaponized the IRS and surveilled Associated Press communications and a Fox News journalist for reporting unfavorable news based on supposed leaks.

    Obama did not fit the past stereotypes of right-wing authoritarians subverting the Department of Justice and its agencies. Perhaps that is why there was little pushback against his administration’s efforts to assist the campaign of his likely replacement, fellow Democrat Hillary Clinton.

    Progressives are not supposed to destroy requested emails, “acid wash” hard drives, spread unverified and paid-for opposition research among government agencies, or use the DOJ and FBI to obtain warrants to snoop on the communications of American citizens. FISA-gate may become a more worrisome scandal than either Watergate or Iran-Contra. Why? Because our defense against government wrongdoing — the press — is defending such actions, not uncovering them. Liberal and progressive voices are excusing, not airing, the excesses of the DOJ and FBI. Apparently, weaponizing government agencies to stop a detested Donald Trump by any means necessary is not really considered a crime.


    Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...rier-watergate

    The only thing that I would add is that this is going to backfire on the press. Unless all of this last year and the whole Russiagate Scandal really is not important to the people? Could it be that I am in the minority in thinking that it matters?
    The left is often not correct, the right is often not right, and we the people are often wronged.

  2. #2
    Donor
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Way Out West
    Posts
    470
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    603
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    648
    Thanked in
    300 Posts


    Absolutely no question about it. If the M$M were capable of honest journalism, FISA-gate would have the American people up in arms over how deeply corrupt and shamelessly partisan our intelligence agencies have become and how smoothly and slickly the presidency can be used to influence elections by misleading the electorate.

    Watergate showed us something was wrong, but FISA-gate shows us that nearly everything is wrong. (So too did the Iran-Contra affair, which the National Review, a rigidly partisan publication, underplays as "wrongdoing by some rogue members of the Reagan government.") It is, or should be, a crime that the corporate media is part of the coverup.

  3. #3
    Donor crone's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    948
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    650
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,112
    Thanked in
    532 Posts


    That is so very well stated I want to use it. Hits that major points and all in 5 sentences.

  4. #4
    Donor
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    fresno
    Posts
    38
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    26
    Thanked in
    18 Posts


    the only problem here is Victor Davis Hanson is a piece of shit.
    not a broken clock, just a piece of shit.

  5. #5
    Donor Sadie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    1,352
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,466
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,531
    Thanked in
    749 Posts


    I would be interested in knowing if you are from Stanford or know him through living in the vicinity? I know nothing except for what I see of his writing, twitter, etc.

    Thanks! He may very well be a bad person, but I don't know the dirt?
    The left is often not correct, the right is often not right, and we the people are often wronged.

  6. #6
    Donor
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    fresno
    Posts
    38
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    26
    Thanked in
    18 Posts


    I dont know him personally, but he is somewhat local and his disgusting column was permitted/published by the local Bee (and elswhere, nationally syndicated Im sure)
    throughout the Bush II years exhibiting the most disgusting perspective and twisted bullshit that elicited endless complaints from readers. An outrage generator when we
    still had some authentic outrage left in us.
    Maybe what is most annoying is his academic cred was originally based in his UCSC Environmental Studies degree, from a time when that school was more toadstool than
    anything else. I also was in that program as Reagan/Bush/Wilson(?) turned it into something more practical from their carbon based perspective.
    I believe he came here to teach just down the road from where we live. Understandable since he is an almond grower here in drought central. Im assuming a lot
    since he was never someone I would pay a lick of attention to, outrageous conservatives being fairly commonplace. I also assume he ended up at Stanford for the same reason
    Condaleeza Rice did. For the betterment of imperial prospects and shelter from civilized people. There just arent many names you can throw out there that make me want to puke that hard.
    I also agree with everything he says there. I dont like that at all. I will think twice about any common ground with that piece of shit imperialist excuse maker. Im not attacking the message.

  7. #7
    Donor crone's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    948
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    650
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,112
    Thanked in
    532 Posts


    And it is worth considering that some of his statements are lies. Well accepted lies, but lies none the less.

    For instance, this statement: "Barack Obama was a progressive constitutional lawyer who expressed distrust of the secretive 'Deep State.' Yet his administration weaponized the IRS and surveilled Associated Press communications and a Fox News journalist for reporting unfavorable news based on supposed leaks."

    Obama was a toady for the imperialist state and for Big Banking/Big War Machinery. There is the fact that he rankled many on the Right due to his being a person of color and due to how, circa 2006 through Oct 2008, he pledged to carry water for progressive causes. But once in office, he immediately put a Wall Street cabinet in place. And Monsanto reigned supreme in that cabinet also. Except for his smiles and his soft spoken-ness, he was not at all a progressive. He policies were repressive. Six wars either continued and increased or else began outright under his leadership.

    He was a President that took to the bully pulpit not one single time, to argue for public option to be included inside the Big Insurers' swindle that came to be known as ObamaCare. He did however take to the bully pulpit in the summer of 2013, when his Secretary of State, HRC, needed to make good on the 32 millions of bribes she took to give rulers in the Middle East their war on Syria.

    During the summer of 2010 Obama undertook a mostly secret deportation of around 750,000 immigrants from south of the border here in California. When you consider that in 2009, he was a "progressive" President, and Congress was majority Dems, how come the DACCA legislation was not put through then? Well, in part it was because all in Congress and the WH were too damn busy giving our economy away to Wall Street.

Similar Threads

  1. Obama and the FISA Court
    By Sadie in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-05-2018, 11:28 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-03-2017, 07:37 PM
  3. The Search for Russia-Gate Prey
    By crone in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-03-2017, 05:07 PM
  4. Barbarians at the Gate By Mike Holmes
    By CNW in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-18-2017, 05:54 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-25-2017, 02:44 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •