It’s not what they say, its’ what they don’t say. In the ongoing investigation of any possible ties, or as the words have changed, coordination. Between Russia and the Trump administration, which includes the allegation of “wiretapping” or surveillance. As to the wiretapping, “no information has been found to support that.”
First of all the word wiretapping and not surveillance was used. Second, what was said is no information was found to support that. What it didn’t say is there was no information found to deny that either. But of course, the question was worded in such a way as to allow Comey to respond in the way he did. There was no attempt to correct the question as to wiretapping or surveillance of any kind. That quite frankly is a huge omission!
What’s more bothersome, is none of the GOP picked up on that, including Trey Gowdy. At least on the segments that were live. The DNC has been more interested in attempting to continue asking question that are very specific and detailed, which they know can not be answered. The obvious intent is to air the question for the public to hear. In the way it is asked or stated, guilt or condemnation is inferred.
Beyond that, he said, “I” have no information. That only means he has none, not that it doesn’t exist. It is in the realm of possibility that he could have instructed that such information not be given to him and retained in some department until further notice. That way he can claim he, his person, to his knowledge, literally and figuratively has no information.
In this group of smoke and mirriors such things are simply everyday possibilities. While no claim can be made again, none can be denied either. That has conveniently been disregarded and strangely never entered the conversation, even though it certainly could have been. A statement such as, I have no information to support or deny this claim, would have been more appropiate.
The whole investigation and the questioning of Comey looked to be completely scripted and if anything politically motivated rather then genuine testimony. On several occasions Comey’s answers should have elicited a response like, “are you serious? Give me a real answer!”
Most hearing this form of questioning are likely to treat it the same way as most talking heads. Believable, which is unfortunate. What we have here, is a failure to recognize a setup! The DNC has come prepared for a witch hunt. Our GOP has come expecting a fair fight. It would seem to be more than crystal clear that the DNC has no intention of any such thing. Subterfuge, distortion, innuendo, manipulated questions, hoax, ruse, wile, ploy, stratagem, dodge, bluff, pretense, deception, fraud, blind,
smokescreen, are all tactics put in play by the DNC as a whole. Intent to create what is not there by simple suggestion.
As mentioned before like the individual who casts aspersion at another. Even though the justice system claims an individual is innocent until proven guilty, that only works in court. In public it tends to be the opposite. The thinking is no one would make such a defamatory claim if there were no grounds. As has clearly been shown time and again, it isn’t so.
Back to the case in point, is the continual repetition of connection between Russia and the Trump administration and or it’s people. Time and again the same comment from the intelligence sources has been the same. There is no evidence of any collusion…period. You would think that would be enough to put this to rest. The horse isn’t dead enough yet!
As said by another, if they didn’t have this to harp on, what would they talk about? The ACA? All they have helped accomplish for the constituents they supposedly represent? The continual obstruction that keeps our government from operating at full force? The charade continues as much as anything to keep focus off the DNC, and all that could be directed at them once the GOP gets people in place. They are definitely doing all that’s possible to avoid the cleanup!
Of greater curiosity is the very people in a position to know about this claim of collusion. The various parts of our intelligence community, have repeatedly made a very clear, concise, simple statement. There is no evidence of any illegal activity. Yet the ones who keep insisting there must be something are the very ones who know nothing, and have dirty laundry to hide in so many areas. It’s what they don’t say that could be most condemning.
A wild goose chase. The intent is to keep on suggesting with the hope a repeated untruth, or lie, will eventually be believed. The DNC is frantically trying to build a fire. All they have accomplished is a smoke screen and not even sparks. Sort of like trying to get an oily rag to burn, or green wood. Smokin’!
Can you imagine any greater desperation than a bunch of rats on a sinking ship? Translate that to a swamp drying up. Maybe you’ve seen what happens on the Discovery Chanel in the Kalahari Desert in the dry season. All the life is affected in drastic ways to survive. How about when there is a forest fire? What happens to all the wildlife? Let that image be somewhat what may well happen with those against the current administration as they are weeded out. That includes a bloated justice system harboring judges that believe they make law rather than interpret it.
Juan Williams of Fox News, tries to make a case of Comey stating the investigation into Hillary Clintons crimes was being reopened just days before the election was and no mention of that about the Trump administration. What Williams, an avowed Liberal, didn’t say is that Clinton had already been convicted of crime, lying on repeated occasions, and nothing of the kind could be said about then candidate Trump! An obvious slanted view, as expected, by Williams. It’s what he didn’t say.
We listen to politicians and what they say. Unfortunately listening carefully they generally say a lot of words without ever being committal. Words like perhaps, possibly, maybe, there’s a good chance, odds are, if, assuming, potentially, on condition, it could, and many other such conditional words and phrases. They must become adept at making this sound natural and sincere. “Just like I sincerely want you to understand how good the odds are you potentially understand this.” What do you think was just said?
“There is no information that supports that.” Is anything really being said in that phrase? No! It leads you to believe there is no proof, or no information at all. What is missed is what it’s answering. In this case as it relates to “wiretapping” by and directly related to Obama. It DOES NOT cover whether there is any information pertaining to surveillance. In particular in the broad sense. This could include, eavesdropping which is not the same as wiretapping, such as with a “bug.”
A piece of malware attached to email correspondence that can give access to stored information or worse. Electronic or digital monitoring, that does not come under the exact classification as wiretap. So the choice of words is so key to everything we hear from politicians.
Other means of tracking include Data Mining which is the practice of examining large databases in order to generate new information. Also Data Profiling which is collecting statistics or informative summaries about that data, and the process of examining data available from an existing information source. A skilled analyst can discover facts about a person that they might not even be consciously aware of themselves. (Wikipedia)
Now it gets real when you consider the digital and electronic age we are in. Now it’s not just a paper trail. There is a “social trail,” and many other types of digital trails such as that left by a credit card. Once a pattern of search on Google is uncovered, a particular website can store a cookie on the searcher IP address. Our own Homeland Security clearly states it uses “data collected from consumer credit and direct marketing agencies—such as Google.”
One that is far more difficult to detect yet exceedingly effective is “the Mole.” Also known as “informants,” “operatives,” or “informants.” Another is satellite imagery which can be used to observe the activities of U.S. citizens. The comes “Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) chips that are as small as a grain of rice and inserted under the skin. Of course one of the easiest may be the cell phone. Smart, up to a point.
Granted these methods of surveillance are not word centric, rather device. It’s when a statement is made as it refers to a specific type of surveillance, all the rest is left out. The leaves open a multitude of surveillance methods that can and likely were used against the GOP campaign. It also does not cover the fact that the President of the United States has the authority to order electronic surveillance by the NSA on any person in the USA without suspicion, probable cause and without a warrant.
Now this was strongly denied by Comey in the investigation taking place as it concerns possible ties between Russia and the Trump Administration. What is even more interesting, is because the CIA and NSA have access to a warehouse of all digital records of any kind in the U.S. All Obama had to do was request this information, and it could never be tracked since it was not actually invasive as most of the previous methods would have been.
So back to the statement, “There is no information to support that claim.” For wiretapping, but not for gaining access to digital information captured and stored by NSA. Call it covert, or any other name you want. It was never ordered, which is the “key” word here. Since it was already captured and stored, it was just a matter of “review” of data already on file with the NSA, and maybe CIA as well. Theres a good chance HLS has access to it too.
It’s what they don’t say. No one has asked about these digital files the NSA has on had, and whether they have been reviewed specifically by Obama prior to the election directly on Candidate Trump or his staff. Whether or not someone will finally wake up and force an answer to that information will be interesting. I think I will suggest this as a potential story for Fox News, especially since Judge Napolitano has already hit on this in a video back on March 19th.
Becareful as you listen to this video, because he very carefully makes suggestions as to how even the NSA could have been bypassed, by the possibility of using a foreign intelligence service friendly to the U.S. potentially having or given access to those digital files. On translating the digital information to a readable English document, this could then have ben given to Obama with no trace whatsoever.
While the British Intelligence service was “suggested” as a possibility, Great Britain has strongly denied this. While the suggestion of possibility was made, it’s not certain a charge of actual cause ever occurred. The response none the less created some immediate action from our ally across the Atlantic.
So imagine instead that a foreign intelligence organization interested in doing harm to the Russians, sees an opportunity to arrange some sort of a reciprocal agreement for information of use to them in exchange for obtaining similar content from our NSA data. It doesn’t take much to consider the strong possibility when taking into account the massive files our government has.
Think I’ll go check for some cookies to eat…on my cell!