Skip to content

Why surveillance and profiling of Trump remains Obama`s secret weapon

March 22, 2017

The vigorous denial by F.B.I. and other Intelligence Agencies (including the British Secret Service) of ever having secretly eaves-dropped on Donald Trump`s Campaign Headquarters doesn`t mean much.

Firstly eaves-dropping is a clandestine activity.

With the entire nation critically scrutinizing President Trump`s now infamous tweet about being eaves-dropped by the lingering shadow of former-president Obama, there`s no disputing that his perception was not-only accurate, but possibly a cry to his voter-base for help.

It`s no co-incidence that Obama and former Attorney General Loretta Lynch were setting-up residence only a few blocks away from the White-house where they were conducting daily secret meetings with the likes of George Soros. While on the political disinformation front, Adam Schiff from the Special Congressional Investigation team was blurring the boundary between the now defunct propaganda theory of “the Russian Collusion” was narrowing the mission linguistically as the Ongoing Investigation into Trump (by none-other than the F.B.I.

Another disturbing discovery was that Obama had used his last days in office to dismantle the long-standing firewall separating electronic communications between all 19 Intelligence Agencies.

What ensued was a snowball-effect of electronic chatter enthusiastically disseminated by the hostile media recklessly spewing the highest levels of classified material in an effort to inflict pain on the young Administration at any expense.

What normally would be private and sacred, was not only being exhibited to our adversaries, (not deemed worthy of an investigation) but being used as an ongoing ambush in-waiting to complete the soft coup by members of “the Deep-State”, holdovers within the Intelligence Community and their political hacks,

Several days later, in a Special Hearing based on a fabricated hypothesis that Trump was in cahoots with our lethal enemies – the Russians, a pasty-looking F.B.I. Chief Comey would testify that the source of the leaks was the “Incidental Surveillance” ongoing on Trump and his campaign. Hence the implication of Obama, who had obtained (after 2 requests) a FISA Warrant against his rival, prior to the election upset.

Comey has been simultaneously denying Trumps claim of being under surveillance, while refusing to put this question to rest, on the basis that Trump is part of an "ongoing investigation", echoing Adam Schiff`s statement.

The Security-Leaks, Comey testified, were the byproduct of the Incidental Surveillance from the FISA Warrant, which he could no-longer control, given the dismantling of these Cyber-Security barriers by Obama during his last week in Office.

No-one has questioned the source of who had authorized the investigation of a sitting President. Were that to emerge we would be a step closer to the revelation of who`s behind the soft coup: having a Trump function under a state of continuous threat by the former Administration, who having been dealt a surprise electoral defeat, were now resorting to “plan-B”.

Nor the fact that it had already caused General Michael Flynn, Trumps new National Security Adviser, to resign. while forcing newly appointed Attorney General Jeff Sessions to recuse himself to avoid a similar fate.

Equally bewildering was that the espionage being conducted against Trump and his campaign-staff, and Cabinet Appointees had been authorized by a FISA Warrant.

While this warrant is highly intrusive, it applies to obtaining surveillance of foreign diplomats, with whom Trump`s transitional team are permitted, and expected to liaise. The origin of the term “Incidental Surveillance”, is that when tracking the activities of foreign diplomats, information obtained during discussions with American citizens are not the focus, and as a matter of procedure are erased.

When such a warrant is abused, it places any third-party defenseless, since the human mind cannot recall with accuracy the exact conversation,to be able to accurately repeat it later under scrutiny. Furthermore, in order to justify the FISA Warrant, Obama took the additional measure of expelling thirty five Russian diplomats, something he would never have to justify, nor did he find necessary, prior to setting-up the plot ensuring that all the pieces were in place.

Obama`s well-placed surrogates would fail to find anything to justify the violation of the President`s First Amendment. The plan to sabotage the newly elected president would be to create a mechanism of on-going “Incidental Surveillance” against the entire transitional team, and later use the Intelligence-gathering to ensnare the new Cabinet.

The purpose of the investigation was of course to obtain the FISA Warrant for the “Incidental Surveillance” for Obama to use against his future rivals; not any Russian mischief: that was the last thing on Obama`s mind. What threatened him was to sabotage any team Trump would assemble to begin damage-control. Flynn would be the first target of this delayed time-release, illegal, Executive Abuse of Office. Flynn constituted the greatest threat to his legacy, considering his intimate knowledge of that a nuclear-Iran would pose to global security.

The triad of the FISA Warrant,  the intended data-gathering on his prime-targets using “Incidental Surveillance”, and the subsequent change of rules conducive to widespread dissemination and  release of classified material would create the desired toxic potion while providing sufficient distance from the threat of any push-back: the instant prosecution for multiple felonies including incrimination of political rivals by cunningly bypassing privacy-rules.

Following 9/11, President George Bush signed into Law the “Patriot Act”, an Executive Action whereby for the duration of the National Emergency, the President grants himself far-reaching powers.

While the violations of the Constitution`s First Amended was far-reaching and indefinite, it lacked a compass. But it empowered the Executive Branch of government the powers to conduct sweeping surveillance of all U.S. citizens, at home or abroad.

With the arrival of Obama, the targets of this surveillance -net would evolve to include anyone perceived by the President as a threat to the central authority of the State, a basic principal of his Bolshevik mentors like Saul Alinsky, who crafted the methodology of nation take-down from within.

No-one questioned how Obama would shape his definition of who met the definition of “enemy of the State”. What we later discovered was that certain sub-groups (the likes of Muslims and all illegal aliens), would be shielded and exempt from surveillance.

In contrast, individuals whom Obama despised, such as Tea-Party members, and  patriots belonging to various Right-wing Conservative groups, were not only placed under surveillance, but were being punished through repeated I.R.S. audits, the denial of Tax-Exempt Status, and land-confiscations.

Not only was the N.S.A. routinely downloading billions of electronic conversations of ordinary American citizens, but they were performing meta-analyses that allowed them to be profile individuals and communities based on their degree of “desirability”.

Some of us who had experienced the Bolshevik Revolution or Holocaust first-hand, experienced this “selection-process” as an eerie dejavu.

Conservative intellectuals raised in academic institutions found their ranks swelling with radical members of left-wing ante-American and radically ante-Zionist agitators, many from the Middle East. While conservative bodies of students and faculty found themselves becoming an increasing minority, victims of hate-crimes, and increasingly endangered.

The simultaneous removal of words like “Muslim”, or “Jihad” from our genre of conversation was dismissed as not being relevant or pertinent to this conversation. The contradiction wasn`t even raised in the context that the terrorism that invoked passage of the “Patriot Act” was being conducted by those whom Obama was exempting.

This explains why we were unable to prevent the killing of 14 Marines at Fort Hood by the radicalized  Nidal Hasan, despite his having  sent 18 e-mails to a radical imam in Yemen before the attacks, and the Tsarnaev brothers, who were reportedly radicalized by watching Anwar Al-Awlaki lectures.

On the contrary, illegal aliens and individuals from Middle-Eastern countries were being treated like Sacred-Cows. Following their terrorist attacks, media was loathe to use language or expose nationalities, preferring to characterize them as “shooters” and “gunmen”. One cannot help notice how compliant the media have been in this denial of an obvious reality: one for which we were paying the price in terms of human life, in exchange for avoiding “racial profiling”.

While hundreds of mosques began springing-up in the U.S. (and Europe), they were enjoying exemption from State-directed surveillance, despite the accumulating anecdotal evidence showing that our prized academic institutions, together with prisons and mosques, had become the hub for radicalization.

Trump`s pro-growth, ante-immigrant, anti-globalist sentiments placed him clearly at the top of the pyramid of “undesirables”.

If anyone poses a threat to Mr. Obama`s obsession to create a New World Order, its Trump.

No wonder he would implant himself at the epicenter of the “deep state”, a term describing an assurance of a carry-over of a dark plot planted in America 24-years previously.

Comey has clearly shown himself to be willing to brazenly carry this allegiance to this dark agenda by participating in what some describe as a “soft-coup”, by continuing an illegal investigation of his new boss.



Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: