Sean Hannity Claims FISA and Non-FISA Wiretapping Warrants Were Issued Monitoring President Trump…

In what could have been a great interview, Sean Hannity aimlessly circles his constantus interruptus questioning toward a diminishing conclusion of nothingness.  The interview was scheduled to highlight an explosive new report from Circa News, which claims they have actual evidence the Obama FBI was engaged in electronic surveillance of candidate Donald Trump.

Unfortunately, both the interviewer and the interviewee, Sara Carter, missed the central points, whiffed on the premise of their discovery, and exhaustively used thousands of words that traveled in all directions simultaneously while completely missing the target.

The key parts were: Trump’s servers, spies, monitoring, surveillance, Obama, the FBI, wiretapping, Russia, and FISA/non-FISA warrants were discussed.  Some assembly required.

.

Apparently, based on this FOX ARTICLE, all the explosive investigation information is in an article, on THIS WEBSITE. But that sucks too. So there’s that. If you’re up to the challenge, feel free to assemble the informational matrix in the comments section.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Deep State, Dept Of Justice, DHS, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, media bias, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Russia, Spying, TowerGate, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

242 Responses to Sean Hannity Claims FISA and Non-FISA Wiretapping Warrants Were Issued Monitoring President Trump…

  1. Mike diamond says:

    They should of wire tapped Obama,Valarie Jarrett,and many others before and after Obama was elected,I think we would all be shocked what was spoken!!!!! But we have a news media that would do or say nothing!

    Liked by 1 person

    • maiingankwe says:

      No kidding. The report goes on about how poor little hag was probably getting it from countries who did not want to see her win. What a load of bs. Why didn’t they check out Saudi Arabia and all the other countries who gave millions and millions to her so called foundation. They cannot honestly believe all that money was in the up and up.

      Before that they stated and in frustration claimed all of this, “…wrongly created the impression that intelligence officials have a political agenda.” Sorry, far too late for that.

      I’m sorry, but I did not like the report. It was as if they were passing the buck and it was perfectly alright for them to investigate President Trump before the election etc. All because of unsubstantiated rumors from the media. At least that is my take.

      And you’re right, if they so easily did this to Trump why couldn’t they have done it to the idiot and his friends? It sure would’ve saved us from eight years of hell.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Tom S says:

      Sara Carter is Glen Beck acolyte ??

      Like

  2. shadowcole says:

    i detect a bit of frustration Sundance. 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

  3. CaptainNonno says:

    Did the FBI write this for them? Seems to ignore the probability that Brits or other (Germany) did the surveillance of Trump and assoc. the most worthwhile part was that Obama allowed vast sharing of raw data which led to increase in leaks(DUH) harming both Trump and the IC (those doing their job faithfully). Obama needed access to IC and this is how he got it. Now go find the needles in the haystack.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Matt Musson says:

      The CIRCA article sure looked like a disclaimer written by the Intelligence services. Every time they quoted someone it was exactly what they had to say to let themselves off the hook.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Chewbarkah says:

        I agree 100%. Executive summary of article: “We din du nuffin”. Long version:
        1. The noble, patriotic FBI was merely doing its job in the national interest. Trust us.
        2. Politicians ruined everything and compromised such vital secrets as that the Russian Ambassador’s phones were bugged (who would have guessed!).
        3. Men of straw must also fall: Trump was not the main focus of their investigation, like EVERYONE is now claiming. (Uh, no, no one has claimed that at all. Some propose that the Trump part was “inadvertent” by design.)
        4. The spin regarding the ex-MI5 spook’s hit piece, commissioned by Hillary, is downright funny. The FBI was obligated to investigate opposition research puked up by a ruthless campaign. (Why, exactly?). It also had to confront Trump with it at a “security briefing” to school Trump on how the Russkies use faked up allegations of sexual depravity, propaganda, etc., to compromise their opponents (Who knew?!!). The authors missed the irony that their example was the work of a “well respected” British ex-MI5 spook connected to Hillary, the FBI, and John McCain — but NOT the Russians, Sticking it in Trump’s face wasn’t meant to be a threat or anything.

        Liked by 4 people

        • Maggie says:

          You should read the comments, especially the two from “John Smith.”
          He brings up some info that I had not thought of re DJT and Mossad.
          This story has a ways to go!

          Liked by 1 person

    • Kintbury says:

      I am British, but to me, this means the Brits were interfering in the election against Trump. Also the Ukraine government admitted to the same. Why isn’t anything being said about this. Surely Clinton should be charged?

      Liked by 4 people

      • Sunshine says:

        I agree with you re the Brits are involved. Not a peep from MSM. Very strange.

        Like

      • Oldschool says:

        A question I ask everday for years. I am weary reading and listening to all the “bombshells” that go nowhere. Now that Trump and Sessions are in place, I am hoping there will be some justice. If they don’t serve it up, it will just be shoved under the very lumpy rug we have.

        Liked by 4 people

  4. toriangirl says:

    I’m at the point where I don’t watch any talking head. If I want to know what was said, I’ll read teh transcript free from the white noise of gestures, tone, etc.

    Liked by 7 people

    • hillbilly4 says:

      We are among those who decided to cut the cable cord. We used to watch Fox (cable) News daily. But when we decided to cut-the-cord, part of the reasoning was that Cable News seems to creep toward ‘The View’ kind of free-for-all. CNN is worthless, maybe even harmful, MSNBC is poorly produced with no talent, and Fox has gone daft. Fox devolved when MK was at the helm. Tucker is better than MK. Fox lost Ailes, and the ship is adrift. BillO seems bitter after his messy divorce, they tossed Angela Tantaros aside, brought back poor old Beckle who can’t sit up straight. What was a good nightly line up for news, is stale and out of air. Yeah, they may be Number One for Cable News…and that’s the problem – 10+years as Number 1. There is no NEW energy at Fox.

      Outnumbered is OK, The Five used to be fun. I dunno, it just was not enough quality to justify a high-cost cable bill. Besides, with 300 channels, many nights there was ‘nothing on TV’. Old movies, TVland-type reruns and that show about the ‘dead’ …’Walking around acting dead’ – a very poor quality, violence prone, show all teenagers are watching. You know TV is in trouble when a person can earn an Emmy for grunting.

      We don’t watch golf, tennis, anything NBA, anything NFL.

      So…the adventure begins: Life without Fox News, and cable-tv. Yippe kay yay,

      Oh, to be sure ….CTH is must have.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Lack is not all says:

        Welcome to the club. No cable since the first debate here. Do not miss at all. On the contrary, feel great that I dont waste money in poisons.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Olivertwist says:

          No TV day after O was elected. Feel so much better, CTH is better

          Like

        • hillbilly4 says:

          Exactly. We almost ended cable when MK went nuts in the debate. We realized ANYONE can do MK’s job…and many could do it much better. Then Bill O got stale. Hannity I will miss. Tucker too.l …but they don’t help with the cable-bill.
          The ‘poisons’ aspect is part of the reasoning…some of the ‘cartoons’ on cable are pathetic. One or two are simply great kiddie shows. But we could not let the grandkids watch some of it. And now Disney is openly flaunting the ‘gay thing’.
          Installed an HD antenna….some of the free-tv is real HD…as good as cable. PBS of all things sends a crystal clear 1080 HD that no one can beat. So now, instead of 300 channels, we get 24. And throw in with the deal – a fewer quieter evenings, or maybe music only. I don’t have to watch prima donas play at football, pussies playing pro basketball. Many sports events are on air-tv so you may miss some buy not all

          So in 3 months time, when we are counting the bucks saved…we will raise a glass of champagne to celebrate! ‘Free at last, Free at last, praise God we are free at last’.

          Like

      • toriangirl says:

        I cut the cable and was great for several years. However, I did get an offer from Uverse that made sense. With the money I was paying for channels on my Roku it works out to be just about the same price. I missed the ID channel!

        Liked by 1 person

        • maiingankwe says:

          Torian Girl,
          (Treepers, this is completely off topic, feel free to pass on by if you’re looking for information on article, you don’t have to though.)

          Oh my gosh, I found the ID channel at the hotel I stayed at when I visited my Dad. Those shows scared the bejeezus out of me. Unbelievable what people can do to others. I couldn’t turn it off though if I’m to be honest. I even remember the channel #. 71 I believe. I went from turning the channel to Fox when I’d get settled in to the ID channel, which I found to be much better even for my blood pressure. 😁

          I’m going to have to find the channel on my iPad, since I had seen a lot of the advertising for it. Thanks for reminding me, I had forgotten all about it. You also gave me my second smile for the day, thank you for that. The first was when my husband stole my chocolate digestive cookies made in England and took them to work last night. I looked everywhere for them when I needed my chocolate fix. He thought they were ding dongs in a new package, and thought I had left them for him. He was all thinking what a great wife I was until he opened them up. No ding dongs. Yeah, I’d like to think that would teach him to take without asking, but that’s not going to happen. However, I will go buy some ding dongs for the very first time and put them in his lunch carrier for work one day, down the road of course. I laughed and laughed this morning when he told me how excited he was about the ding dongs and they were my British digestive cookies. I guess it’s one of those times where you had to be there.

          Stay smiling and thank you.

          Liked by 2 people

          • toriangirl says:

            Who doesn’t love Ding Dongs? If you really want to send him over the moon, pack him a Hostess Suzie Q. And thank YOU for the smile.

            Liked by 1 person

            • maiingankwe says:

              Thanks! Great idea. I never eat those things, but when we were shopping together a few days ago he had pointed all of them out. I remember asking which ones he didn’t like, so it would be easier to remember. Suzie Q was not on the dislike list.

              I can’t wait to surprise him. Awesome idea. I will shock him two days in a row now.

              Liked by 2 people

              • toriangirl says:

                When I was pregnant with my daughter many moons ago, they were a guilty pleasure.

                Liked by 2 people

                • maiingankwe says:

                  My husband told our 11 year old daughter the story at the dinner table tonight and we were all falling off our chairs laughing. He was even smart enough to add what an awesome wife he thought he had for putting out ding dongs for him. The poor guy was so happy and excited when at four this morning he remembered he had ding dongs only to find out they were yucky cookies instead. Who makes healthy cookies and then puts milk chocolate on top he asked. England I said.

                  It all started out when our daughter asked us if anything exciting happened to any of us today. I thought that was a nice thing to ask at the table.

                  Oh, and they also cleaned up and said they would do the dishes for me since I made such a nice meal. I’m sure I will find the pans left to clean, but I will take what I can get. It was a nice gesture anyways. I think it’s because I made him his favorite pie.

                  Liked by 2 people

                • toriangirl says:

                  Sounds like you had a wonderful evening. Did you say pie? 🙂

                  Like

                • maiingankwe says:

                  Yes, and it was far too easy. He loves the pudding you stir on the stove. I did chocolate and poured it in a yuuge graham cracker crust and added whipped cream on top. Easy peasy and he’s happy. He even came up later and asked, “Can I have some of that pie?” I mistakenly said, “Yes, I made it for you.” So of course he went running to our daughter yelling, “Mom said you can’t have any pie! She made it just for me!” And then I got, “Mom!!!”

                  Yup, that’s my loving husband for you. I swear they are worse than two kids. Drives me batty. The both of them. They both do this kind of stuff to each other ALL the time. I literally have hundreds of stories like this one. I’m surprised I can still function with the two of them constantly going at it with pranks, lots of pranks, cheating, squabbling, picking, teasing, you name it, they probably have done it or do it on a regular basis. God help me. Sigh.

                  Like

        • hanna693 says:

          Glad to hear from another Discover I.D.fan. It has been my guilty pleasure for years. Cannot stand Homicide Hunter though, that narrating detective is disgusting, he won’t shut up!

          Like

  5. Justin says:

    1) Generally, another source(s) confirming that neither Trump, nor his team, were colluding with the Russians.
    2) Asserts that the spying and leak concerning General Flynn’s phone conversations violated the Espionage Act.
    3) Confirms (again) the existence of the FISA request from October.
    4) Separates the Trump server investigation from the FISA requests.
    5) Confirms that the server investigation turned up no evidence of Trump colluding with Russians.

    That’s about all I take away from this. Not much that was terribly new here.

    But, nonetheless, it is serious. Someone needs to go to prison.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Kintbury says:

      I read somewhere that the server was actually in one of the hotels and the Russian bank was a frequent user of the hotel. If that is true, the money wasted on this crap must be horrendous.

      Like

    • Bert Darrell says:

      I always say: confiscate the Obama’s passports. They own a mansion by the sea in Dubai and we have no extradition treaty with United Arab Emirates..

      Like

  6. Jeff says:

    Meh ….still comes down to who do you believe . How can that divide be bridged is the question . Something ” YUGE ” has to happen to galvanize us .Somthing that even the CNNuts can’t deny .

    Would they CNNuts believe a graphic video of WJC and an underage girl SEX TAPE ? Pedogate ?

    Sarah Carter used to do spots on THE BLAZE . That network lost all semblance of credibility . Not that FOX has any either . Watch the video without sound now that you know what was said .

    Sarah Carter seems ready to explode with information and Sean is throttling her back . Almost like a person ready to EXPLODE with the DETAILS of a wonderful experience . She almost can’t contain herself .

    The only words of importance is that NO EVIDENCE of RUSSIAN collusion with Trump was found ….period .

    The rest of the information goes to claims of credibility of source and those who have seen the information Sarah Carter has from her sources .

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Looks pretty obvious to me. Camp Clinton expected to leave the 2nd debate at Washington University with Trump’s scalp in hand. We went into that weekend treated to P-gate to mount pressure against him. She had just come off a fantastic showing at the first debate but that week is also when the Podesta emails began at WL – which was why they went for the kill shot with the Billy Bush tape when they did. Backed into a corner, Trump holds a pressers right before the second debate with actual victims of abuse by B Clinton. He went into that debate mad and wasnt afraid to say what popped in his head which is exactly what he should have done rather than trying to appear more presidential “because you’d be in jail”. At some point after debate number two the decision was made to pull some Spy strings which is apparently when the monitoring of Camp Trump began. One week prior to election, Clinton herself as well as Dingy Harry started touting that explosive things were going to be coming out about Trump. <—-because they had knowledge of monitoring? When nothing was found a scramble was made by insiders and the infamous Dossier (which was full of absolute absurdity) was circulated to the media who all thought it was too low brow for even the most biased to try to pitch with a straight face. When it did come out that's to the Maverick's highly publicized convo with Comey (late Nov early Dec) many admitted it had been already circulating for weeks or months.

    That's all I have relevant to topic. The rest is a rant and can and probably should be disregarded lol.

    J Palmieri of Camp Clinton tweeted right before election a reminder that any "bombshells" from Wiki are probably fake. The bombshell never came and in absence of that bombshell Pizza Gate took off as a conspiracy instead. There was certainly something going on there at Ping Pong but children sacrifices by Pagan's is about as absurd as the Dossier. Actually it's way worse and it's embarrassing to have that tied to me just because I supported Trump. Sitting two businesses by the same owner for Bucks F&C and PP atop a defunct subway tunnel perhaps had some sort of VIP component to it but that doesn't mean it was a kid dungeon. I can't believe I had to type that btw. It could just be a place for certain customers to hit the peace pipe out of the public view. Or at absolute worst case scenario (still highly highly unlikely) was it somehow had a link between children that went missing from Haiti (for Med treatment) and ended up being groomed for work on Epstein Island. That much deserved a closer look given some of the people involved…but child sacrifices lost all credibility almost as if by design. Comet is a sketchy dude but for the love of pizza not because it's finally proof that Dems = Pagans. He's sketchy because he's a perv but not all pervs are kid touchers. Think about this even at the worst case and how unlikely it would be. The wives of politicians supporting or aiding and abetting child trafficking totally unknowingly (or even knowingly) under the auspices of short term adoption. Is it insane for me to suggest that females are too smart and too caring to not eventually catch on to something so despicable? Any bombshell would be in the form of Clinton Cash as opposed to real life version of the Dragnet movie. But interestingly enough it falls right into that category that Democrats try to paint anyone who opposes them as believing that Dems are sycophants who can't be saved and must be dealt with once and for all. That's not how I view my friends who don't agree with me. They do ignore info willingly but they aren't worthless humans who sacrifice children in rituals. Enough of that nonsense.

    Why was Cheryl Mills (H's State CoS) running a taxpayer funded garment factory and living in Haiti after the earthquake while still serving as State CoS? That IS the bombshell if you ask me. It was a CGI bombshell. But no Paganism so that is boring *sigh*.

    Also there was something Extremely fishy about the State Dept Fire on the 7th floor or 8th floor or both. According to emails H wasn't there but she never actually stated that. She wrote emails asking about the status in third person instead of first person. Wasn't this supposed to be where she slipped and fell and bumped her noggin one of the times. State Bldg, whether it was Pre-Action Sprinklers or Wet Pipe Sprinklers the operation works the same, sprinkler heads only discharge where the melt link is 1-melted or 2-broken. It had to reach a minimum of 155* anywhere there was discharged water unless of course the melt link didn't melt hint hint. The news reported a contractor starting a fire which is plausible since they would only call out the monitoring system portion of the fire system or smoke detector heads and the sprinkler system would still be able to activate but not call out on the call from smoke alone. They said 8th floor on the news and H's emails were about a fire on 7th floor. There were also drafts of a resignation with no sender id and no subject in those emails from her private server dating back to Oct and Nov 2012. But what I'll never understand is why WL only showed redacted versions of those emails. I don't think they ever saw the raw text form of them. Or if they did they agreed to only post the FOIA versions as redacted by State. But those emails unredacted would likely be the bombshell.

    One more thing. The infamous menu of dishes in Podesta's emails from my experience with having liberal friends, likely was code for mind altering substances…Not kids. And yes for obvious reasons pol's will be very very careful about that.

    Rant over. Sorry for rambling lol.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Charles says:

    Sundance: “If you’re up to the challenge, feel free to assemble the informational matrix in the comments section.”

    Ok.
    http://circa.com/politics/fbi-probe-of-donald-trump-and-russia-during-election-yielded-no-evidence-of-crimes

    Charles’ personal synopsis of the Circa article is that the “sources” are likely FBI endeavoring to clear themselves of illegally wiretapping President Trump. The sources imply the FBI routinely monitors Russians in the US, and the leaking of Podesta’s emails and the hacking of the DNC servers concerned the FBI that Russia was trying to influence the election.

    (Charles’ side note: As we know from the recent Wikileaks revelation of the CIA’s hacking tools, that possibly could have been a false flag by the CIA or anyone who obtained a copy of those tools to implicate Russia or at least steer any investigators away from the true hackers.)

    So, pointed at Russia, the FBI undertook a probe of Russian activity related to the election and Trump. Perhaps the 1st FISA application was at the behest of the CIA or the FBI, specifically about Trump, but it was rejected. The FBI felt compelled to vet the “Trump Dossier”, and a FISA warrant was approved in October, although the FBI claims “there were no intercepts of Trump’s phone or emails” and that “Separately, they used traditional investigative techniques to review a computer server tied to the the soon-to-be-president’s businesses in Trump Towers in New York but located elsewhere.

    (Charles’ side note: Well maybe the FBI didn’t use “wiretapps” but somebody obviously did or the conversations of Flynn wouldn’t have recorded. And then somebody recorded and leaked President Trump’s conversations with the Presidents of Mexico and Australia. Nor do the sources comment on aspects of the “Trump Dossier” being a hoax by 4chan. The FBI seems to have taken it all at face value from a British intelligence agent, and while the FBI admits details are uncorroborated, the FBI didn’t seem to make any effort to corroborate the sources used by British intelligence agent.)

    Ultimately the FBI concluded nothing improper or illegal against Trump was ever corroborated, not the dossier, not Russian contatcs, not servers in Trump Tower, and not Michael Flynn’s conversations. “But there was no concrete evidence of bribes, illicit money or other criminal activity related to the Russian effort to influence elections. So the FBI proceeded to process security clearances for key Trump players about to take jobs in the new administration, the sources said.

    But Russia was blamed for hacking and try to influence the election. “The information gathered during 2016 by the FBI, however, did further a robust portrait already being built by numerous intelligence agencies, like the National Security Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency and Directorate of National Intelligence, that Russia and its related actors had taken actions like hacking to influence the U.S. election with the apparent aim of hurting Hillary Clinton’s election chances or helping Trump.

    Trump and Obama were briefed in December. Trump used the briefing to proclaim “fake news” about the dossier, while Obama expelled Russians and imposed sanctions. Obama then issued an E.O. to widen dissemination of FISA approved intercept information, and after Trump took office parts of the intercepted information began to be leaked.

    Charles’ side note: Unaddressed by the sources (I presume to be FBI), are:
    Who requested the first FISA warrant that was rejected?
    What was the impetus for the FBI to seek a FISA warrant? Was it the “Trump Dossier”?
    Did AG Lynch request the 2nd FISA warrant that was approved? What were the limits of that FISA warrant?
    Under what authority were Trump’s conversations, as U.S. President, with the Presidents of Mexico and Australia recorded?

    My personal conclusion is someone phished Podesta’s emails and someone else hacked the DNC servers, possibly using the leaked CIA hacking tools, and possibly leaving breadcrumbs to implicate the Russians. Assuming Obama’s CIA was pro-Clinton/Democrat, hacking the DNC servers would seem to do more harm to their “cause”. More likely it was someone else, possibly Russia, (or Israel using the CIA’s leaked tools made to look like Russia).

    When this wasn’t enough to get a FISA warrant against Trump, the “Trump Dossier” was fabricated and fed to the FBI who then had to act. The CIA then took advantage of the FISA intercepts to wiretap Trump (seemingly still ongoing), and Obama took advantage of the intercepted information to disseminate it widely so it would be leaked.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Trumped says:

      It’s handled like a conspiracy nut theory but the DNC leak was most probably done by an intern. WikiLeaks offered 20 k+ to find the murderer of dem operative Seth Rich.
      DNC didn’t give the FBI opportunity to investigate the leak/servers and instead hired a private Corp.(to hide how the leak came about)

      Liked by 1 person

  9. Wee2low says:

    Sometimes I wonder why some hosts have guests on their show at all. While I understand Hannity has a very large microphone, it’s the same show everyday. Each 15 minute segment is 12 minutes of Hannity “setting the table” followed by 3 minutes of the guests trying to get a work in edgewise while Hannity talks over them.

    Liked by 1 person

    • hanna693 says:

      I agree – he will ask a question of them and keep talking. And just when they are about to nail a great point home, he will cut them off. It is very strange, I have noticed it for years. He needs to improve and quit playing that game.

      Like

  10. hillbilly4 says:

    THE info is in the Headlines – FBI investigating Leaks. You can be sure that if this is in the common news market- its a false lead. REAL FBI folks don’t work through the common news outlets.
    The more troubling part is IF the CIA is doing ANYTHING domestically.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. AmericaFirst says:

    The two most amazing things are that in 21 months of surveillance the powers-that-be could not find anything (really speaks to Trump’s character and integrity) to use against Trump’s campaign, thus necessitating the Russians did it trial by innuendo, and that the American Pravda could find anything at all to be so unsalable to the true believers that they would decline to publish the dirty dossier, considering how consistently low they’ve gone the last two years.

    The other thought which continues to amaze me is that there are SO MANY people who call themselves Americans who are happy with the continued dissipation of America, both in and out of government. I know many, and yes, they are intelligent, educated, and old enough that they should be wise. The numbers are staggering, and what it portends for our future is disheartening. I’ve thought this since the disastrous results of 2008, but this election season has hammered it home.

    We need quite a few more white hats than we are seeing.

    Liked by 4 people

  12. NebraskaFilly says:

    Pretty much every country (well, at least developed countries) try to influence elections everywhere else. Why don’t we clean out our own backyard first? FOCUS ON SOROS AND ALL OF HIS AFFILIATED GROUPS!!!! Most likely will bring ALL of these traitors out into the sunlight at some point in the process!

    Liked by 1 person

  13. not2worryluv says:

    Sean Hannity is an insecure driven individual who continually tries to assure himself he’s the smartest man in the room.

    We stopped watching him after the election. He babbles over every guest. I believe he beats Obama in using the word “I”.

    Glad Tucker Carlson is in the slot before Hannity. It would be drudgery watching or ai

    Like

    • NorthIdaho says:

      Agree on Hannity. He is annoying. Stopped tuning in to Tucker also. Just don’t trust the guy. Only Dobbs left.

      Like

  14. not2worryluv says:

    Sean Hannity is an insecure driven individual who continually tries to assure himself he’s the smartest man in the room.

    We stopped watching him after the election. He babbles over every guest. I believe he beats Obama in using the word “I”.

    Glad Tucker Carlson is in the slot before Hannity. It would be drudgery watching or ai

    Like

  15. TexasDude says:

    The focus on Hannity is a mistake by this post. It’s as if Hannity personally slighted Sundance.

    Like

    • Tejas Rob says:

      I think Sundance is just as frustrated as I am at Hannity’s propensity to talk over his guests. He brought this person on but instead rambled himself about things we already know. I think it’s an unconscious thing he does from being on radio where you don’t want dead air.

      But yes, the takeaway shouldn’t be Hannity rambling, it should be there were two FISA warrants. There will be a paper trail, it should come out if Congress does their job investigating. Hopefully Gowdy will go full bore on this.

      Liked by 2 people

      • TexasDude says:

        And this tendency by Hannity means what to Sundance or anyone else?

        Don’t link to him, don’t listen to or watch him, but this “thing” with Hannity not only distorts Sundance’s analysis, but makes the story be about Sundance and Hannity.

        What’s the purpose behind posts such as?

        Like

        • Tejas Rob says:

          Well, it seems Sundance saw the same thing I did, an important development buried by Hannity babbling on and on. Hannity broke the story and was the only one covering it, so of course he is going to be mentioned. Sundance was spot on that you’ll have to dig through Hannity’s word salad to find the story.

          Like

          • hanna693 says:

            If Hannity would just shut up, he would be a great interviewer. He would not let her drive the point home. This was an important topic, what is wrong with him? When any guest is on, he starts babbling these same talking points over them he’s used for years; it’s quite childish. I do appreciate his support for Trump, but he needs to let his guest finish talking. I missed the show, but I know what Sundance meant.

            Like

  16. angryduc says:

    They didn’t even cover the part of what the FBI or NSA and Obama did that is most egregious. Warrants are only needed if you want to use the information sought there, in the public. They don’t go get warrants to listen to targets blindly all the time.

    They listen to targets first to determine how they want to manipulate a piece of evidence either in court or in the press or to obtain more evidence. Then they go get a warrant to begin a disinfo/manipulation campaign. This is how law enforcement uses these assets. Anyone who thinks the Alphabet agencies don’t tap without a warrant is living in a fairy tale.

    Like

  17. Thomas says:

    I believe Hannity is a great guy and wants the best for the country,but how the hell did he make so far as a tv and radio personality? He really does just go in circles its very frustrating to listen and watch

    Liked by 2 people

    • EJ says:

      He drives Sundance nuts, because of all the interruptions. But give him credit where credit is due. He was behind Trump almost all the way. He gave Trump a platform to speak and is reporting our side of the current circumstances.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Tejas Rob says:

        >He drives Sundance nuts, because of all the interruptions.

        Sundance isn’t the only one. I watched the interview as it happened and was equally frustrated.

        >But give him credit where credit is due. He was behind Trump almost all the way. He gave Trump a platform to speak and is reporting our side of the current circumstances.

        Pretty sure Sundance gives Sean the same credit and respect for just that, however it doesn’t mean we can’t complain about his style. I find him virtually unwatchable and am not able to listen to his radio broadcasts for this very reason. It’s a bad habit Hannity got into and he needs to stop.

        Liked by 1 person

  18. I wouldn’t attack the messenger (Sean). He jumped on the Trump train long ago and has been a huge (yuge) plus for the campaign and Trump’s presidency.

    Liked by 2 people

  19. merlintobie says:

    I like Sean Hannity (and The Conservative Tree House).

    Like

  20. TexasDude says:

    So, Sundance hates Hannity’s missing the story by missing the story himself?

    Come on!

    I like both Sundance, CTH, and Hannity.

    We do not have to like each other, but this pettiness resembles the NeverTrumpers; so work together to get our country righted.

    Like

  21. Sean makes me nuts too, but I like him and he is a warrior for us and DJT.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. 4beagles says:

    I find Bill O’Reilly far more annoying than Hannity.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. jeans2nd says:

    This is long and may well end up in spam. That’s ok. Deleting it is ok, too (but pls read first).

    The second server is a fake server, set up by Evan McMullin and the NeverTrumpers and known by, possibly colluded with, the Obama/Clinton Cartel. Metadata on the second server was altered, inserting “evidence” to point to Russia as having “hacked” the second server.

    Obama, Lynch, Comey, et al, used the fake second server to obtain the Oct FISA warrrant. The Oct FISA warrant, based on the fake second server, was therefore fraudulent.

    Selective information was “leaked” to the NY Times and Wash Post, to delegitimize Pres Trump and the presidency of Pres Trump and the Trump Adminstration.

    Eavesdropping on the Russian ambassador is SOP. Everyone knows that. What is not SOP is using the words of a private citizen, Adm Flynn, and to use them fraudulently. Adm Flynn said nothing wrong in Flynn’s communications with the Russian ambassador. Adm Flynn’s words were leaked and spun to insinuate something that was not there.

    Sadly, the Russian ambassador conversation was the second Flynn “misspeak” (the first was in regards to Iran), so Flynn’s neglecting to properly notify VP Pence re: the Russian ambassador conversation was the third strike.

    Hannity did ok, as did Sara Carter and the Circa/Fox articles, for complete dummies without an ounce of sense nor technical knowledge in their heads, who, while chasing the Big Scoop and the Big Story completely missed the target. Imo.

    What is concerning is all the selective leaks and the spinning and politicization of this entire mess. No wonder Pres Trump is furious.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. angryduc says:

    To SD or whomever may be collecting the timeline.

    Tonight was listening to Alex Jones as he recounted events of this fall and it dawned on me that Hillary Clinton began made the claim that 17 different law enforcement agencies had reviewed this information about the Russians hacking as early as the third debate. (On or about October 19th, 2016)

    That is long before Barack Obama gave the authorization via his EO days before the inauguration.
    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/10/21/17-intelligence-agencies-russia-behind-hacking/92514592/

    Barack goes back and make this an “authorized” or legal dispersal AFTER THE FACT.
    This claim may have been made even before one of the FISA requests.

    Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s