Blockbust Dialog Between Tucker And GG

It turned out to be more of a dialog than just an interview. Greenwald explains what's going--what's been going on since WW2--lucidly. I really like that he refers to the US as a National Security State in which the Intel agencies hold the whip hand over the Legislative Branch that's supposed to be conducting "oversight". Look, few of us feel much sympathy for any of our rulers, including members of the House and Senate. Nevertheless, if we are to preserve some minimal degree of freedom, we have to have some sort of workable system. As it is, and as this dialog makes absolutely clear, things seem to be spiraling out of control:

.@ggreenwald & Tucker Carlson Discuss The Implications Of The NSA Leaking His Communications To Journalists

Glenn: “It is one of gravest crimes in the US code for the NSA to leak the contents of communications that it intercepts between a foreign official & an American citizen.” pic.twitter.com/pbJB2QgoJa

— The Columbia Bugle 🇺🇸 (@ColumbiaBugle) July 8, 2021

UPDATED: Tucker Carlson Redux

The revelation that the Tucker Carlson email around which the NSA spying controversy has swirled was part of an attempt by Tucker to arrange to interview Vladimir Putin makes a lot of things more clear.

First of all, the likely scenario now is that, as NSA says, Tucker was not targeted. Rather, Tucker's email came to the attention of analysts because it was directed to someone close to Putin--someone who would be a key intermediary in getting any interview ball rolling. The target wasn't Tucker, per se, but Russian nationals, particularly those close to the Russian leadership.

So far, so good. There's no problem with this. That's well within normal national security bounds.

Where the problems start is with the decision by the Zhou regime to have its agents--NSA, FBI, whoever--leak the contents of Tucker's email to various regime proxy media outlets, i.e., the usual liberal suspects. The strategy, as Tucker explains it, seems to have been that these regime proxies would leak hints that Tucker is somehow a Russian agent. The idea would be that the interview with Putin was to be part of a Russian disinformation op targeting "our democracy"--meaning, Dem political interests. The Dems were probably also trying to devise ways to tie this in to their Domestic War on "Terror" via "Russian hacking".

Even worse, the leaks might hint that Tucker is personally controlled by Putin--just like Trump, doncha know. The Dems and their media proxies haven't yet taken to referring to Putin as Vlad The Impaler, but short of that Putin is the all purpose Boogey Man that Dems think they can use to hoodwink conservatives, destroy Tucker's credibility, and keep their own base enmeshed in a world of conspiracy theories.

So, where do things stand?

NSA Denies That Tucker Was Ever A 'Target'

But of course that was never the issue. It's one of those non-denial denials. Glenn Greenwald points that out at somewhat greater length:

First, it's bizarre that @NSAGov allow no replies.

IOW, NSA's non-denial tweet allowed no responses. 

Second, NSA has used this same deceit for years: they can spy on US citizens' communications without "targeting" the American.

Third, NSA has extremely broad authorities to collect communications without "targeting" a person. https://t.co/vAgaSS0x1k

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) June 30, 2021

The real question has never been whether the NSA collects communication data regarding all USPERs, including Tucker Carlson. It does. The real question is, Has an investigative agency acquired the data that NSA has, beyond a doubt, been collecting with regard to Tucker Carlson? If so, the investigative agency must be doing so by virtue of a warrant and must have an open full investigation--if not on Tucker himself as the subject, then on someone with whom Tucker is in contact. Let's hear from the FBI.

In the meantime, there's this:

And just FYI: the Pentagon just suspended a pro-Trump security official for "unauthorized disclosure of classified information" from the NSA -- meaning, presumably, that she leaked NSA activities to someone she wasn't supposed to talk to about it:https://t.co/OqCECPj6rr

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) June 30, 2021

What's The Story Re Tucker?

As I'm sure you know, Tucker Carlson has announced that a "whistleblower"--which, in this context, I take to mean simply an informed source--has told him that he (Tucker) is being "spied on" by the National Security Agency (NSA):

I assume that the NSA collects all communications that it's able to collect--phone calls, emails, texts, whatever. If it's technically possible for NSA to collect some category of data, they do:

Whether and how that data gets put to use is a longer story. We're all familiar with the fact that the FBI for years appears to have been accessing the NSA databases for routine checks on people, without the legally required predication for running such checks. The exact parameters of this illegal activity aren't clear, except that it appears to have definitely occurred in politically sensitive situations and for political reasons. Some may wish to disagree with that conclusion, but that the activity was in fact illegal is inarguable, whatever the motives. Also inarguable is that there have been no known consequences for the actual individuals who were responsible.

Today's Must Read: The other secrets inside Grenell’s satchel

Thomas Lifson at American Thinker has a terrific summary of J. E. Dyer's most recent article. Here's a link to the original Dyer article, which is lengthy. I had considered doing a post on it, but quickly realized it'd be difficult cutting much: Beyond Biden, Brennan, and Clapper: How Grenell’s satchel tells us this is on the right track.

Lifson's summary offers a more gradual entry into the full article--I recommend both: The other secrets inside Grenell’s satchel are the key to the biggest political scandal in US history.

To give you a taste, here are two Adam Housely tweets that Dyer quotes:

Adam Housley
@adamhousley 

Ooooooh brother. Massive surveillance...that’s what’s been found. “MASSIVE” is the way it was sent to me. 

10:09 PM · May 11, 2020

Adam Housley
@adamhousley 

As I’m told the list Grenell brought over is much larger than anything involving Flynn. “The exact tasking flow is hard to discern because the stuff was flying everywhere.” 

1:54 PM · May 12, 2020

BONUS SECOND MUST READ:

WaPo's new mantra is Just Don't Report

About Those NSA Databases

Larry Johnson has a great post today over at Sic Semper Tyrannis: We Were Warned About the Deep State, but Refused to Listen. Read it all--it's not that long. Here's a thumbnail of it, and the two videos that Johnson links (also not that long), which really give a great picture of Deep State capabilities. Be sure to watch both.

To start with, it's necessary to understand that there are no real good guys in this--except for the whistleblowers. Binney and Tice are real whistleblowers, not bureaucratic, political hitmen like Ciaramella and his ilk.

The expansive data collection that continues to this day began shortly after 9/11, under Dubya--and accelerated under Obama. For all the posturing by elected officials, it has been bipartisan pretty much from the start.

In one of the videos, Bill Binney--the same guy who says that the DNC "hack" was an inside job--maintains that this expansive program is 1) not necessary to protect against terrorists, and 2) increases the size of the haystack that needs to be searched. Binney and Tice communicate the true extent of the domestic spying--and it's mind blowing.

Here's what Johnson says with specific reference to what was done to Trump:

DiGenova: Mike Rogers Is The "Rosetta Stone" For John Durham

Joe diGenova did a dynamite interview yesterday that puts a lot of things in perspective. In the first half of his interview he addresses the recent news that Admiral Mike Rogers, former head of NSA, is cooperating voluntarily with USA John Durham's investigation (cf. Bad News For The Deep State). DiGenova's remarks here are important for providing a glimpse at the enormous range and complexity of Durham's investigation. Consider--as wide ranging as IG Horowitz's FISA report may have appeared, it didn't even touch most of what diGenova addresses here. Yet what diGenova talks about is crucial to an understanding of the development of the Russia Hoax as we now know it, and therefore to the development of the all important conspiracy case that I've discussed. I most recently addressed the connection between these issues and the development of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation in The Devin Nunes - Dan Bongino Interview--a post that provides useful background and additional legal/administrative material on all this. The scope of it all is almost mind boggling.

In the partial transcript that follows the host questions and comments are paraphrased, but diGenova's words are very literal. He misspeaks a few times, but I've left that as is--although I've interjected some explanatory comments.

UPDATED: Tres Amigos Agree: Barr's The Guy To Do It

Mike Huckabee had three smart lawyers on his show last night to talk about how the "collusion tables" were going to be turned on the Dems: Rudy Giuliani, Robert Ray (former Whitewater Special Prosecutor) and Joe DiGenova.

DiGenova, among other claims to fame, was "there at the founding" of the FISA court (FISC). All three agree that Bill Barr, with his deep experience in the legal world of the CIA and his time at DoJ during a turbulent period of politics, is the perfect guy to take on the job of draining the Swamp and that he has the will to do it. Despite the focus, below, on the FBI and James Comey, they also agree that John Brennan at the CIA was at the center of the whole coup attempt.

Perhaps as importantly, DiGenova outlines some of the investigative behind-the-scenes events that tell us that Barr has the tools in place to do this. All this takes place during a seven minute segment of a longer video, from roughly 14:00 to 21:00.

To highlight, here are some of the important things that DiGenova notes. Much of this has already been discussed at various times, but DiGenova lays it out fairly succinctly so it's a good refresher:

• For four YEARS the Obama Administration conducted an illegal spying operation, via access to NSA databases;
• The mechanism for the spying was through the FBI, which provided four private contractors illegal access to NSA databases;
• Adm. Mike Rogers, former head of NSA, personally went to the Chief Judge of the FISC and worked with her for months during 2016 to explain to her how this happened;
• The FISC has already ruled that this operation violated the law, that Sally Yates and John Carlin at DoJ knew about it and lied to the court;
• The FISC has already been told by DoJ who lied to the court, and that report has already been given to Bill Barr--he knows;
• IG Horowitz will produce his FISA report in late May or early June;
• IG Horowitz will produce another, separate, report focused on  James Comey alone; that report will be a "bombshell" that will produce criminal referrals.

UPDATE:

Paul Sperry‏

@paulsperry_

BREAKING: The next hoax to fall -- that the Russians interfered in election "to help Trump win." Stay tuned ...

12:41 PM - 2 Apr 2019


Paul Sperry‏‏

@paulsperry_

BREAKING: FBI agents Joe Pientka and Mike Gaeta, along with DOJ official Stu Evans, are figuring prominently as witnesses in IG Horowitz's investigation of department FISA abuses. The findings in the forthcoming IG report are said to be "devastating."

11:36 AM - 25 Apr 2019


George Papadopoulos
‏
@GeorgePapa19

Replying to @paulsperry_
I have been told that Michael Gaeta was Joseph Mifsud’s handler in Rome.

12:24 PM - 25 Apr 2019


Paul Sperry‏

@paulsperry_

DEVELOPING: It is now looking as though there is more evidence that Obama had a heavier hand in interfering in the 2016 election than Putin

1:12 PM - 25 Apr 2019

UPDATES: The Spy In The Trump Campaign

Sundance at Conservative Tree House has a fascinating blog up tonight. He begins from a tweet by George Papadopoulos:

George Papadopoulos‏ @GeorgePapa19

While I cannot disclose the information publicly, it’s a fact that both me and congress know who the SPY within the campaign was. Congress will likely include it in a report later on. Eyes were everywhere during 2016.

3:05 PM - 28 Oct 2018

Sundance posits that the source was the former US Representative from Michigan, Mike Rogers--not to be confused, as we'll see, with former NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers. Rogers, the former US Rep., was a Special Agent for the FBI in Chicago from 1989 - 1994 (I didn't know him, but recall hearing the office buzz when Rogers resigned to go into politics). More to the point, after leaving the House in 2014, having served as Chairman of the Permanent Select Committe on Intelligence, Rogers joined the Trump campaign in 2016 as national security adviser. Sundance points out Rogers' dodgy role in the Benghazi whitewash and then asks: "So how did Decepticon Rogers come to be an advisor to the Trump campaign?" Unfortunately, he offers no views on that.

Rogers was abruptly terminated within days after the election--much to the dismay of the Washington DC establishment. For example, in the Washington Post David Ignatius reported the dismissal in telling terms:

Just how far the new administration may depart from long-standing U.S. national-security policies was demonstrated by Rogers’s own departure.

You could imagine the jaws dropping Tuesday across the intelligence community when people heard the news of Rogers’s ouster. ... the intelligence agencies literally don’t know what to expect next.

Sundance himself ties Rogers' dismissal to the well known visit of Admiral Mike Rogers to Trump Tower a few days after the election, which led to the move of the Trump transition team headquarters from Trump Tower to a Trump golf resort in Bedminster, New Jersey. However, once again, sundance offers no further details.

The question, then, becomes: What would the NSA Director have to do with a human source inside the Trump campaign? Wouldn't that be the purview of the FBI? Would the NSA Director even know of the existence, much less the identity, of such a source? And even supposing that Admiral Rogers disclosed the existence and identity of a human source inside the Trump campaign, why would that necessitate a removal of the Trump transition team from Manhattan to rural New Jersey? Wouldn't removal of the source from the transition team solve the problem, without the need for a disruptive move?