Former DNI James Clapper: “I Can Deny” Wiretap of Trump Tower -NBC NEWS Meet The Press, Sunday, 10:14 AM.
Phew!!!
I am so glad that’s over with!!!
But…
But…
Wait minute!!!
Isn’t this the same James Clapper who testified to the Senate that the NSA didn’t surveille “innocent American citizens???” Sans beard? (Tradecraft gone amok. Maybe he thinks we won’t recognize him?)
Oh.
Yes it is.
Let us look a little deeper into this “denial,” please.
There are so many loopholes in it that it would put a block of swiss cheese to shame.
Read on.
Ready?
Here goes. (All quotes from the same NBC story. And I do mean “story.” Emphases mine.)
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper on Sunday denied any suggestion that Trump Tower communications were wiretapped before the election.
For the part of the national security apparatus that he oversaw, “there was no such wiretap activity mounted against the president, the president-elect at the time, or as a candidate, or against his campaign,” Clapper told Chuck Todd in an exclusive interview on Sunday’s “Meet The Press.”
Notice the first escape hole. If he wasn’t “overseeing” it, he had no knowledge of it. Plausible deniability 101. “Do whatever you got to do. I don’t want the details. Do it and don’t get caught. If you do get caught, you’re on your own.”
Like dat.
Like Nixon and the plumbers.
When Todd asked him whether he could confirm or deny if a FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court Act) order for this existed, Clapper declared, “I can deny it.”
But…did it happen without a FISA approval?
Asked again whether there was a FISA Court order to monitor Trump Tower, Clapper said, “Not to my knowledge.”
Translation: “Whatever happened, I didn’t know about it.”
Clapper said that if any wiretap like that occurred, he would “certainly hope” that he would be aware of it.
Hope springs eternal when trying to avoid implication in a crime.
“I can’t speak for other authorized entities in the government or a state or local entity,” he added.
Yup.
Clapper was also asked on “Meet the Press” if he had any evidence that the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russian government while the Kremlin was working to influence the election.
“Not to my knowledge,” Clapper said, based on the information he had before his time in the position ended.
Hmmmm…
Maybe he’s…heard things…since then?
“We did not include anything in our report … that had any reflect of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians. There was no evidence of that included in our report,” he said. “We had no evidence of such collusion.”
Followed immediately by:
When asked whether he still believes that Russians interfered in the U.S. election to help Donald Trump, Clapper said, “Yes, I do.”
Blind faith?
Please!!!
On Sunday, he added that “it would be very healthy to completely clear the air on this subject” and noted that the current inquiry by the Senate’s Select Committee on Intelligence into the matter will be able to look at the issues from a broader context than they would.
“I do have confidence” in the Senate effort, he said, calling it “truly bipartisan.”
True.
“Bipartisan” in a united, Permanent Government kind of way. Aim? To get rid of the new gang in town, of course. Or at the very least, to confine them to penny ante rackets and one ineffective term in office.
Clapper said it was important to get to the bottom of these issues “because it’s such a distraction.”
“Certainly the Russians have to be chortling about the success of their efforts to sew [sic] dissension in this country,” Clapper added.
A “distraction?”
From what, exactly?
Inquiring minds want to know.
All others apparently do not give a shit past getting rid of all of these deplorables now in office or at the very least crippling their attempted takeover of the rackets now in place.
Stay tuned…
Stay tuned for more interminable legalistic parsing of the facts of the matter.
Watch.
This week will be a liar’s holiday.
On both sides.
Watch.
AG
Nov. 16, 2016-U.S. News
Not much more to say, is there.
He’s fighting for his life.
Here is why Clapper’s not already in jail, in my opinion.
Translation?
Sure.
He’s got the goods on a lot of people…DemRats and RatPubs both. They know it; he knows they know it and if they continue not to call him on his evasions he in turn will continue keepta potentially unherdable bunch of info cats in his bag.
Business as usual in Washingtoon, D.C., the Capitol of the Untied States of Omertica.
Business as usual.
When will it end?
When someone like Clapper comes clean.
Watch.
ASG
When someone like Clapper comes clean.
Probably someone lower on the totem pole.
Like…say…a John Dean-level functionary?
Remember him?
I do.
The kicker in there?
A reduced prison sentence.
Watch.
Who will be the designated Dean?
And from which camp?
Stay tuned.
More at 7.
Or tomorrow.
Or the day after…
Sometime soon.
Bet on it.
My bet?
Somebody close to Trump.
Watch.
AG
heh — you might as well be speaking Greek to those desperately seeking a combination of Watergate and the Cold War. (Generational envy?) On the latter, how cool spy-craft was in all those spy novels. They also seem to have an odd notion that Watergate was somewhat manufactured and Democrats were in the lead on its unraveling. Eight months in and they aren’t as far along as Watergate was on June 17, 1972.
See my newest diary …
○ Where’s Larry Johnson In the Intelligence Game?
Previous links to leaked intelligence info and Rupert Murdoch concern:
○ Rupert Murdoch’s Louise Mensch a Hillary Supporter
○ J’Accuse Rupert Murdoch On Stalinism and Sheeple – His WSJ
Coziness no one can deny, between the Clintons and “master spy” for the Mossad, Rupert Murdoch
○ In Iowa, Clinton Is Pressed on Murdoch – NY Times, the Caucus | Nov. 25, 2007|
A lovely quote concerning applause from the white males in the audience.
The President of the United States has the power to declassify any classified document and the power of command over the armed forces and intelligence community. The attorney general can request declassification of a FISA court order.
It is still bluff-counterbluff.
If Trump had the evidence and was inclined to use it, it would already be out there.
But as propaganda war it is an interesting if irrelevant tactic. From his perspective all it will do is keep the Democrats busy and be unprepared for 2018.
IMHO it’s just another of the non-specific accusations against Obama when there are much closer possible targets.
You’re assuming that Trump’s team has secured copies of the orders. March 5, 2017 President Trump Directs White House Counsel To Find FISA Warrants.
Trump doesn’t understand the notion of the Department of Justice being able to act independently of political pressure because he’s an authoritarian freak who wants people to just does whatever the hell he wants. Not only does he not understand how the government works, he doesn’t care. He has absolutely no respect for democratic norms and is a threat to the survival of the republic.
This is a stupid response to a comment reporting that Trump has ordered the WH counsel to find the FISA orders. So, even if he doesn’t know anything and doesn’t care, he has staff that does and also know how to get the boss to issue the order for them to act.
Pursuant to my generous link on how a special prosecutor is appointed, note the following from The Guardian
Why isn’t the (acting) Deputy AG handling this?
You ask:
“Why isn’t the (acting) Deputy AG handling this?”
Let me count the ways:
No…on second hand, there are too many possibilities to even begin to count.
The initial one that comes to mind is the term”acting” applied to said Deputy AG. In a vast bureaucracy like the Justice Department, the first rule is “Cover your own ass.” Not really occupying a position of strong authority, foot dragging is a strong possibility.
So is guilt on a very high and powerful level. The word comes down from above…threats, promises…the usual PermaGov hustle. A slowdown results.
Or…word comes down that one move may imperil a further, more serious move down the line. Again…feet are dragged.
Or…word comes down that the preferred guilty parties are provably innocent; the preferred innocent parties are provably guilty, and it’s time to start another part of the hustle before the whole rotten deal falls apart.
We will likely never know the truth of the inner dealings. Too complex. We will be left in the following position, as Karl Rove said to Ron Suskind in 2002:
We will be left to try to figure out what happened with no real knowledge of anything other than the results of the various and sundry secret hustles.
This coming week promises to be very…interesting.
AG
Odd. If Comey really wants it done (so far all we have on this are anonymous FBI sources), the acting Deputy AG can do it and nobody can stop him. Of course, Trump can fire both Comey and the acting Deputy AG and slit his own throat in the process unless Trump has evidence that they issued a false statement.
(The acting Deputy AG, Boente, was appointed acting AG by Trump after he fired acting AG Yates. When Sessions was confirmed Boente moved down to acting Deputy AG. Boente is a career AG employee and he’s not new to serving in an “acting” position.) Here’s where Trump’s Deputy AG nominee is. Given the track record of Special Prosecutors post-Watergate and absent an existing super-slam-dunk case (but if there were, sane people would already know enough to recognized it), this will drag on for years with little to nothing accomplished.
You discount the possibility (probability?) that Comey has internal enemies that want him to screw up and feed him disinformation. I’ve spent half my life in government bureaucracies. Management plays vicious power games. Only the worker bees care about the mission. For managers it’s all about power and position. The corrupt also care about money.
Can’t see it in this instance — specifically Comey’s non-official denial that the FBI did not get a warrant to eavesdrop on TrumpCo communications. If there’s one thing an FBI Director will know, it’s the FISA warrants the agency secures.
Assuming that his denial is authentic, then there’s only two official possibilities. It’s true or he’s protecting the FBI. If a FBI anti-Comey internal faction exists in this, it would be feeding TrumpCo. Under that scenario, what would they have to gain by passing along disinformation? That would take down Trump and turn Comey into a hero. Thus, Trump either didn’t get anything from anti-Comey FBI or what he got is true. For now, I’m going with the former.
As for DOJ making Comey’s statement official, Sessions can’t, and the next three in the chain of command are serving in an acting capacity. The Deputy AG is out as soon as Trump’s nominee is confirmed or Trump fires him. Not clear if Trump has nominated anyone for Asst AG or Solicitor General, but the acting Deputy AG and Solicitor General were appointed by Trump. Regardless if they are political partisans or not, they’re attorneys and wouldn’t rush in to issue a statement from Comey before they’ve reviewed a matter on which they are unlikely to have had any preexisting knowledge of. At the institutional level, Comey would know that, but Comey also very much wants to keep his job.
Therefore, at this point, and again assuming that Comey’s denial is authentic, it has to be true that the FBI didn’t secure a FISA warrant. Doesn’t mean that they didn’t apply for one and get shot down, that a rogue FBI faction unbeknownst to him went the extrajudicial route, or that top level FBI staff is clueless as to what one or more other agencies did.
The thing about Comey is that when pushed to bend the law, he bends only so far. I would say too far, but old fashioned standards seem to have disappeared. It’s difficult not to read his statement on Hillary’s emails as an indication that in his mind (which is influenced by his partisanship) he was bending as far as he could. (Entirely possible that his staff disagreed with him and concluded that no crime existed.) Which brings me to his 10/28/16 letter.
HillaryInc cites that as the reason for her loss. As if Comey did it for strictly partisan reasons and to help Trump. A high risk gambit for Comey. Were there a few thousand voters in MI, PA, and WI that hadn’t previously made up their minds on the HRC’s emails and this news would change their votes or cause them to go third party or not vote? Hard to believe. And if such voters didn’t exist, then Comey would be out of a job that he wants to keep. Was he just playing it “by the book?” Perhaps in his mind (and doubt his internal documents didn’t support that), but there sure weren’t many attorneys in the country that agreed. There has to be more to this story.
CIA may have been wiretapping Trump, with or without Trump. I wouldn’t put anything beyond them, including a CIA/KGB (or whatever the Cheka is called these days) deal.
Assume you meant to say “with or without FISA.” But there are sixteen intel agencies (not counting the hidden or off the books ones we don’t know about); so fingering the CIA in this instance may be disinformation. Apparently with the active participation of the CIA. Even Nixon couldn’t get the CIA to cross that bridge in ’72-’73 and step in as the fall guy.
Considering their available resources, what would be more shocking than possible illegal spying on TrumpCo is how little evidence they came up with and/or how low rent their propaganda was. One thing that the Whitewater crazies and the current Russophobe crazies forget about Watergate was that real crawly things emerged with each shovel of dirt in the Watergate investigation. As I mentioned in another comment, if we set the initiation of “get Trump” for ties to Russia investigation in mid-June 2016 when the DNC made the claim that Russia hacked its system (recall that was before they or anyone knew that DNC emails would be or had been forwarded to Wikileaks), what have they come up with in almost nine months?
Background:
The Watergate break-in (the one we learned of in real time) was also in mid-June before the election. By March 1973 the burglars had been convicted and McCord was squealing (not that the public knew that in real time). However, within days of the burglary is was known that the burglars were associated with CREEP. John Mitchell resigned as head of CRP in July ’72, and he was a long-time and close associate of Nixon; not some random rightwing sleazebag like Manafort that Trump didn’t know.
What has also seemed to be lost of that history in the minds of ordinary people is that the DNC break-in was only a small piece of the Watergate story. The Nixon WH and CRP had been engaging in many criminal and election rigging activities. If businessman Trump is half as dirty as liberals now claim, why the hell hasn’t he been indicted long ago? Shady dealers, don’t last that long on their own. So, has someone been protecting him?
YES, MARIE!!!
Especially the last two sentences.
Now if we could only figure out who has been protecting him!!!
Could it be…
Ayatollah Khamenei would probably agree.
The question is…which of his many minions is running the best game?
We gonna find out, soon enough.
The ones who remain standing?
Them’s the bad guys.
The baddest guys.
Bet on it.
AG
Satan? Well she did pick him to run against her.
Putin! Doncha know Putin also controls NBC and that’s how he did the voter mind-meld for Trump. It’s so simple when lots of imaginary dots are connect.
Seriously, once in “the club” members don’t have to worry as long as they don’t cross that members only special line. No individual or personal protection for club members is even necessary. Works better that way because it insulates all members from any potential culpability should another member cross the line.
Trump is probably confused because it’s not only allowed but expected that club members will compete with other club members for the WH. And it’s not as if he wasn’t in the club before the Clintons could get their asses out of Little Rock and Obama hadn’t even gone to law school. In “the club” pecking order, he was more entitled to the title than Hillary. So much so that he didn’t need all those makeovers to polish up his classless, nouveau riche roots. Or so he figured.
Assume you meant to say “with or without FISA.” Yes, was typing fast. Thank you. Also my internet connection comes and goes randomly so while I’m typing it may or may not get into the box as the browser freezes.
Regarding 16 agencies didn’t Bush or Obama put them under some umbrella angency? As if that did anything more than insulate them even more.
My favorite whipping boy is the CIA due to their Gestapo lineage.
http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/gehlen.htm
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB146/
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/CIA%20Hits/GehlenOrg_CIAHits.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2006/07/nazi-j03.html
First heard of this stuff on National Public Television – before they were cowed by Republican Congressmen who threatened to cut their funding for being too Liberal.
Here’s the list, and yes there are all under the command of the DNI. However, except for the CIA, all the others are under a federal department and some also have a parent agency. So, as DNI, James Clapper should be the one person that could answer the question as to all the IC operations wrt Trump during the election. Assuming the intended cooperation and coordination has been accomplished which I doubt. Too bad he’s a liar.
Robert Parry more thoroughly covers what I’ve been trying to say in Washington Tips into Madness. Would add that it’s not limited to Washington but 90% of the country. The outposts of sanity being as limited as they were in Gulf War I. Also disagree slightly with his “Bill Clinton Echoes” section. The GOP was furious that they lost the WH, but they didn’t give a crap about GHWB.
Amusing to recall that Republicans once believed that Clinton was some sort of KGB agent. As ludicrous as those that for the past nine years have believed that Obama is a Marxist/Kenyan Socialist Commie. Bet they never considered this: A Friend of the Devil
Probably not a Poppy motive, but Parry wanted to cite the Clinton example for its “Kremlin agent” charge. Goopers in 92/3 were worried more about this young, talented, charismatic Dem just elected prez catching fire with the public to the extent that he would hold the WH for 8 years, then hand off to his young, handsome and able VP. If Clinton was going to be in office for a while, the GOP needed to muss his hair a bit, and more, to ensure they could make gains in 94 and thereby stymie Clinton’s policy proposals, and then have a fighting chance in 96 or 2000.
Re Parry, there was an interesting exchange yesterday on DemNow! between Bob Parry and the talkative Harper’s reporter Scott Horton.
Shorter Parry: The charges aren’t ridiculously impossible, but as yet no proof has been presented.
Shorter Horton: Finds very important the evidence of Trump advisers meeting with the Russian ambassador in Cleveland during the convention, leading to a change on Ukraine in the platform.
Horton confidently stated the overall charges on improper Russian influence on Trump will lead to Donald’s ouster.
I didn’t have the heart to pull up that DemNow segment. Maybe Scott Horton didn’t absorb Watergate in real time (he would only have been 17-19 years old and not so many are political junkies by that age; plus the draft and Vietnam War didn’t figure into his life), but he most definitely, particularly as a lawyer, should have absorbed Whitewater. He’s not at the top of my list for thoughtful and insightful journalism, but considered him reliable.
It’s interesting how infrequently and in real time, thinkers/writers/lawyers/journalist are really challenged to demonstrate their core competency. So very few don’t flub in those moments. I’m reminded of:
And Gary Webb who to my mind was murdered by the press and his colleagues for doing top-notch journalism. (Escobar’s son has recently published and book and discloses that his father was associated with the CIA.) Meanwhile, it’s rare for journalists to pay a price for shoddy work. Many in fact get very wealthy off shoddy, or worse, work.
Who were the journalists and lawyers that, again in real time, stood up and said that the Wen Ho Lee case was a pile of crap? Did those piling on, including Bill Clinton and Bill Richardson, pay any price for their strident and wrong accusations against Lee?
For me, getting it right or wrong in the first write is less important than what went into the conclusion. Was all the available and verifiable evidence used? Was it logical and rational? Are biases and prejudices absent? Or was it no better than flipping than flipping a coin or rolling dice?
Why I’m so harsh on the WMD matter is that those that got it wrong, failed all of my tests. Parry’s use of Whitewater/etc. as analogy is okay, but it’s only Whitewater/etc. as it developed over seven years that’s apt. NYTimes and Gerth began pushing the Whitewater story in 1992, but it didn’t grip DC and Republicans in Congress until much later. The FBI opened an investigation early on (when?), not surprising because at that time the agency is dominated by Republicans, but it was slow going because it was complicated and the documented record was thin. It was what Clinton did in office that first year that raised eyebrows and was politically damaging. Take away the disorganization of the Clinton WH, his appointment of Hillary to chair of the health care study, Hillary going after the WH travel office, and Vince Foster’s suicide, Whitewater would have remained in the background as something old and minor. But hand the opposition solid kernels while in office, expect a feeding frenzy which won’t die down unless there is no there there. With the Clintons there’s always some there there (and which they make too much effort to hide and thereby, contribute to the suspiciousness of it). Perhaps no more than your average skivvy politician (which Americans have a high tolerance for), but more than the a squeaky clean politician.
In addition to that there was Waco — the ATF 2/28/93 raid (initiated before Clinton’s term and carried out before any of his team would have been in place). That handed the mess to the FBI, Reno (confirmed 3/11/93) inherited the mess, and screwed it up. (Good intentions or even going by the book doesn’t count for much when it gets screwed up.) Smarting from that, in January 1994, Reno appointed a special counsel, Robert Fiske, to look into Whitewater/etc (and that etc specifically included the death of Vince Foster). In July, a day after the independent counsel act was revived she requested that Fiske be appointed Independent Counsel, but the Special Division judge instead went with Ken Starr.
Maybe the FBI/DOJ are incapable of performing a fair and thorough case when the subject is a politician (ie Bob McDonell), but special prosecutors and independent counsels, excluding Cox and Jaworski (and perhaps Fiske), have left much to be desired (ie US vs Libby) I don’t have an answer for this, but sense that there must be a better way than what we now have.
Reminds me of the subtitle of a book about the eastern Front of WW I (yes, one), “Clash of Empires”.
Joel’s comment is on point because it explains why the President so thoughtlessly tweeted his accusations against Obama. A normal President would work with his White House counsel before, or instead of, lashing out publicly and recklessly, without the information he needed to understand what he was doing.
I think leading your response to this comment with your “stupid” insult was uncalled for.
Michael McFaul – question:
Jeremy Scahill answer:
It’s like a bad movie: No one to root for.
See my new diary ….
○ GCHQ and EU Intelligence Eavesdropped on Trump Tower Communication
Danny DeVito
Preferably two or three real ones.
Danny…an old friend. I wrote the music and ran the band for his first starring stage role. in 1974 at the off-Broadway theater La Mama. Good people.
Glad to see him involved.
ASG
It seemed to me that he was more active than usual in 2015-16, but my impression my have been distorted by my attention during that time.