President Trump Tweets McCarthy Article: “There is no doubt that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign”…

President Trump draws attention today to an article written by Andrew McCarthy.

NY Post […] “As night follows day, we were treated to the same Beltway hysteria we got this week: Silly semantic carping over the word “spying” — which, regardless of whether a judge authorizes it, is merely the covert gathering of intelligence about a suspected wrongdoer, organization or foreign power.

There is no doubt that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign. As Barr made clear, the real question is: What predicated the spying? Was there a valid reason for it, strong enough to overcome our norm against political spying? Or was it done rashly? Was a politically motivated decision made to use highly intrusive investigative tactics when a more measured response would have sufficed, such as a “defensive briefing” that would have warned the Trump campaign of possible Russian infiltration?

Last year, when the “spy” games got underway, James Clapper, Obama’s director of national intelligence, conceded that, yes, the FBI did run an informant — “spy” is such an icky word — at Trump campaign officials; but, we were told, this was merely to investigate Russia. Cross Clapper’s heart, it had nothing to do with the Trump campaign. No, no, no. Indeed, the Obama administration only used an informant because — bet you didn’t know this — doing so is the most benign, least intrusive mode of conducting an investigation.” (read more)

This entry was posted in AG Bill Barr, Big Government, CIA, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, FBI, IG Report Clinton Investigation, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Spygate, THE BIG UGLY, TowerGate, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

273 Responses to President Trump Tweets McCarthy Article: “There is no doubt that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign”…

  1. archie says:

    The only way to prevent this in the future is to stop voting for republicans. Don’t give them money either. Vote for Trump MAGA candidates only. The GOP has been uniformly anti-Trump and only a few have bothered to lift a finger to help him over the past three years.

    Liked by 5 people

    • accurite1 says:

      Stupid comrad


    • Donald says:

      That raises a point I have wanted to bring up. I get the same solicitations to donate that I imagine most of you get. I made several donations but have stopped because they all go to the Republican Party and from there who knows where. Is it possible to donate directly to the Trump campaign without giving to the Republican Party?

      Liked by 2 people

      • Laure says: monthly donations go directly to the Trump campaign…I have been donating since 2015…my insurance policy…autopay…I will look for the info but it should be easy to find…


      • I won't back down says:

        If you have any elderly people in your life please for the love of all that is holy look at their mail and bank statements they are probably donating kind of on auto-pilot. A good tell tale sign is how many “free” calendars they have from ASPCA, AARP, etc. Even if they only donate to a particular party or candidate one of the ways that those groups make the most money is by sharing (aka selling) their donor lists. I call it the “sucker” list.

        Once “they” find someone willing to donate that means to them that the spigot is on and there is a living breathing donor on the other end of the phone or address. My opinion is that Fox news serves a sole purpose to anger and vex the crowd over age 65 and it is a known fact that the faculties of the elderly to discern a scam diminishes with age (look at who advertises there during the daytime hours). The elderly are easily duped and easily worked up into a frenzy to the point they open their checkbooks. One of the sins of this generation will be held to account for in heaven is the manipulation and fleecing of the greatest generation for their political donations, outright scamming them, etc. They “can afford it” is part of the sick justification. When they can’t afford it that’s is worse because oft-times they will keep on donating.

        Sorry, again, someone touched a nerve. Also if you have an elderly relative go visit them and make sure their toilets are flushing and then shutting off (water co’s are ruthless and the aged can’t hear or don’t know how to deal with running toilets).

        That is all, as you were. Thanks for listening – and caring for your elderly loved ones.

        Liked by 1 person

      • nimrodman says:

        Donald, go here and click the “Contribute” button

        I asked around with your same question last time I wanted to contribute and this was the answer I got from several people.

        Pretty sure donations here go to PresTrump and him only.


    • dayallaxeded says:

      Stop thinking in terms of Rethugnican v. Demonrat–they are a Uniparty and merely a wing of a globalist Uniparty, same bunch that run EU through puppet bureaucrats and phony, put-up elected officials who just keep playing the same divisive games to keep the majority of responsible, working citizens from uniting against them. Yes, vote for MAGA and KAG candidates, for now, ones who endorse and are endorsed by PDJT. But most of all, make sure those you vote for are Constitutionalists and Nationalists.


      • Dutchman says:

        YES too this. Glad to see we are “woke” to the Uniparty, and particularly the Decepticon Republicon ‘face’, as in stealth mode, it is the real strength of the Uniparty.
        However, once exposed, the whole uniparty scam collapses.

        The Dems are the guy/gal standing in an deserted parking lot, engaging you in conversation
        The Reps is the Dems robber partner, sneeking up behind you, to hit you upside the head with a brick.
        They BOTH want to ROB you, and are,working together. All thats different is the role they play, in the deception.
        Become AWARE of the guy behind you, and their plan is thwarted.

        Amasing how many still aren’t aware of this con, or how long its been going on.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Papoose says:

    How appropriate that barky brought up the image of “firing squad” when he was in Germany colluding with the Eurocrats when Barr’s memo came out.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. mtk says:

    Clipped from Andrew McCarthy’s article…

    So . . . what did the dossier say? The lion’s share of it alleged that the Trump campaign was conspiring with the Kremlin to corrupt the election, including by hacking and publicizing Democratic Party e-mails. This allegation was based on unidentified Russian sources whom the FBI could not corroborate; then-director Comey told Senate leaders that the FBI used the information because the bureau judged former British spy Christopher Steele to be credible, even though (a) Steele did not make any of the observations the court was being asked to rely on, and (b) Steele had misled the FBI about his contacts with the media — with whom Steele and his Clinton campaign allies were sharing the same information he was giving the bureau.

    Wait just one second… Did Andrew McCarthy, just write…
    Not only was the basis of the the FISC warrent entirely based on the Steele Dossier, but the underlying evidence within Dossier that the Court’s was having to consider WAS NOT part of the dossier. That is, “The evidence was being attributed to the dossier.”

    Read “…even though (a)…” in context to the above clip from the article.

    So the FBI has this dossier, a dubious document written and paid for as opposition research. A document that the FBI states was unverified, yet when it comes to the Court, the FBI hides the attempts to verify the allegations within dossier as part of the dossier, when in fact the source was unidentified Russian sources.

    Lets put aside for moment the obviousness of, “Just who was colluding with the Russian’s, and how that turns on its head the very nature collusion of the past twenty months.”

    I say put it aside because I believe the foil of attributing statements to unidentified sources has worn quite thin.

    The real shock is the whole moral high ground crumbles when it is paraphrased along aside this observation:

    “Mr FBI to Mr unnamed source” – We suspect you guys are messing with our election and we have this proof. Are you guys interfering? Is this dossier truthful?
    “Mr. Boris to Mr. G-man” – No and Yes.

    There you have it folks – the tail wagging the dog.

    Liked by 2 people

    • I won't back down says:

      FYI Bongino calls this “the golden file.”


    • GB Bari says:

      I believe the foil of attributing statements to unidentified sources has worn quite thin.

      That foil comes off of an endless roll. The tactic of using statements or information from “unidentified sources” to smear someone’s character has been going on for decades. I don’t see any end to it unless a law is passed that can somehow avoid stepping on the First Amendment.

      The answer is to convince the public at large to ignore any such trick in any news reporting and go tell the editor of such garbage to either identify the source or lose a reader. Or for the target of the anonymously-sourced allegation to sue the news outlet for libel/ slander/ defamation and make them prove their story is true or else fully retract it with possible monetary damages.

      Newspapers have been exaggerating, distorting, and lying to their readers since newspapers have been in existence. Only the willing gullibility of their readers makes their continued existence possible.

      But, as P.T. Barnum is often quoted as saying, “There’s a sucker born every minute.”


  4. JoAnn Leichliter says:

    Of course, the Obama administration, the FBI, etc. all knew the premise was false. The investigation was purely political and, frankly, the greatest danger to the Republic in my lifetime (I am 75). The infiltration by Communists of our government in the 30s, 40s and into the early 1950s was the greatest previously, but this tops it, because the communists this time needed no direction from a foreign entity. The corruption was purely from within. I am not sure yet that the nation can survive with the rags of its freedom still wrapped around it.

    Liked by 5 people

    • The Phantom Stranger says:

      I would have to concur because of America’s rapidly changing demographics. By the time people wake up to these dangers, it may be too late to effectively fix things. We are headed down the same sad path that Europe has already went down.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. youme says:

    The left has plans to instantly frame the narrative regarding the redacted Muller report….

    “Former Obama White House speechwriter David Litt will have Twitter open while he’s making his way through the report, watching in particular for posts from several of the more prominent legal and analytical voices who have narrated the story’s plot twists as it evolved: Ken White (@popehat), Mimi Rocah (@Mimirocah1), Renato Mariotti (@Renato_Mariotti), Marcy Wheeler (@emptywheel), Neal Katyal (@neal_katyal) “for the definitive word on special-counsel regs” and Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight “to think through the political implications.”

    Liked by 1 person

  6. TheLastDemocrat says:

    There are a lot of “conspiracy” websites with timelines of events in the “Trump-Russia Collusion” theory.

    As the Mueller Report comes out, some of that information, along with what has been revealed here, may help fill in some dots.


  7. Skippy says:

    Big new AG Barr ruling-check Presidential thread. It’s complicated but AG Barr is using his DOJ power to assist in reigning in the border mess

    NEW: AG Barr decides that asylum seekers at the border who pass “credible fear” interviews and are transferred to a full deportation hearing are INELIGIBLE for release on bond.
    Only DHS may decide to release them. Ruling is effective in 90 days.

    Liked by 2 people

    • I won't back down says:

      Barr = good guy (not just cuz he’s my boss). I want to believe! The immigration thing is gonna piss off the dims like nothing you’ve ever seen. In my book that makes him a GREAT good guy.

      Bongino had some interesting postulating on Dana Boente today. So is Boente = good guy too.

      Fought with a guy on twitter today who said Mueller = good guy. I refuse to believe RR is a good guy.

      Things I know bad guys = Jim Comey, John Brennan, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok. Everyone else is just a guess.


  8. coltlending says:

    I hate the word “Predicate” in all this.

    It replaces, what underlying evidence was there to go to court, any court, and spy on a US citizen, presidential candidate or president elect.

    I get the sense lawyers started using the word predicate to make something simple complicated to understand.

    I’m just a mere citizen but it appears to me the seditionists couldn’t as for surveillance in a criminal court like is done to execute surveillance on the mob or other criminals because it may have leaked and or it did not afford them the two hop scope of survailance.

    Also in a criminal court it was probably harder to submit such unverified and bullshit evidence.

    No doubt the degree of protection for the accused was woefully in adequate in a FISA court.

    The Deep State and Deep Juduciary are using “exactitudes” in our laws to cover their crimes and the crimes of facilitators in our government.

    When it’s we the lowly citizenry, they find “exactitudes” in the law to tax us or criminalize us for any number of violations of the law.

    Liked by 1 person

    • mtk says:

      I predicate that Mr. Barr’s predicate is the following because that predicate is nothing more than, “That there was a predicate needed to establish the validating predicate of the FISA warrant.”
      It’s a predicate based on a predicate that the Mueller’s investigation failed to establish.

      So predicate this, “How can a disproven predicate now become the predicate to saying, ‘Well maybe, due diligence is a better part discretion’.”

      Here is a the predicate to predicate, “She lost the election!!!”
      So the predicate now becomes the predicate…
      “That it was not that she was outted for breaking laws and all her aligned interests within the govt decided to predicate that PDJT colluded with foreign interests to predicate away what easily to predicate, “HRC is a compulsive lier.”

      Go ahead Mr. Barr predicate away.

      Liked by 1 person

  9. Concernedcitizen says:

    Correction, Mr. McCarthy, to your last paragraph: The Obama Administration knew that Trump collusion with Russia was a false premise, but it was attempting to destroy Trump by any means necessary.

    Liked by 5 people

  10. CountryDoc says:

    McCarthy is trying to appear smart, and on top of things, but he has probably known as much has Obama knew in from the beginning. He is taking care of himself.

    Dutch is right. Timing is important to save this country. We must not forget, we are a republic and the people have the power.
    – NOT the Executive branch (they are elected by us, and have to follow law),
    – NOT the Judicial Branch(they can only interpret law, and require other branches to execute.,
    – NOT the Legislative Branch (they are elected) and have to represent us and follow the constitution.,
    – NOT the media (all they can do is make words, pictures, and movies),
    – NOT the Deep state (they can only require processing, paperwork, slow things down)

    Therefore, we are not safe from this attack from within, until a critical mass of the voting populace (made ONLY of legal citizens) can accurately see what we have as a sacred, God inspired national constitution, founded on the principles of our Creator; AND that terrible injustice has been going on for decades.

    Only then will we be safe and able to work together again.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. mtk says:

    On my drive home was listening to Hannity interview of Andrew McCarthy.

    Mr. McCarthy, I beg to differ…
    Technically you’re correct.
    There is now another reason besides the given assertion of “What is the function of counterintelligence?”

    Since it is becoming increasingly evident… The other function of counterintelligence is now, “To validate and carry forward political opposition against the Consituitional foundation of an election.”

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Johnny says:

    Anyone heard anything on this?

    Apparently Rhee is leaving Mueller’s office.

    Darren Samuelsohn Verified account
    Follow Follow @dsamuelsohn

    NEW: Mueller prosecutor Jeannie Rhee just filed notice in federal court she’s withdrawing as an attorney of record from the Concord/IRA case.

    Darren Samuelsohn on Twitter —


  13. Johnny says:

    Anyone else hearing this?

    Rhee has also filed notices on Tuesday withdrawing as an attorney of record from the Roger Stone and mystery grand jury subpoena cases.

    Darren Samuelsohn on Twitter — 


    • CopperTop says:

      THIS would be news. Her speciality in cyber security is what RR was referring to when he said the probe was all about cyber security. She was specifically designing the prosecution of Stone to link the probe to the early days of 2015 to put Obama WH in clear (while still leaving Comey leaker, McCabe liar and Brennan snake dangling for prosecution as consolation prize


    • Skippy says:

      Ha, you think Rhee’s found her conscience?


      • CopperTop says:

        Is it too much too hope that she was told ‘No, your role does not retroactively provide the predicate to the FISA on Carter Page…GO HOME and get yourself into a box and stay there.’ ???


  14. L4grasshopper says:

    FYI — McCarthy is going to be on Hannity in a few minutes.

    If Hannity allows him to speak, it might be enlightening.

    What I want to hear from McCarthy is the one thing he has not yet done [to my knowledge] — directly accuse some of his former pals like Comey and McCabe and Baker as being intentionally corrupt. He’s walked right up to that line….but to date has not yet called a spade a spade 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

    • GB Bari says:

      If Hannity allows him to speak, it might be enlightening.

      ROTFLMAO! “IF” is correct. And that’s a YUUUGE “if”.


  15. I won't back down says:

    Um, this is weird . . . Chelsea Manning (used to be Pvt. Manning) has some filings in a court case that talk about the FISA court and FBI zeroing in on him/her while she was chilling in Leavenworth. But that detail was pulled off of her to go spy on Huma Abedin. the detail was pulled off on 10/26 or 10/27 of 2016. Something funky is happening and I am wondering what this has to do with Assange.

    As an aside I got into it big time with a guy on twitter today who thinks that Dan Bongino (and others) are wrong about Mueller being a bad guy.

    Thursday is going to be a very interesting day if we all read Mueller wrong.


  16. cthulhu says:

    The fundamental issue is, when a President knows there is absolutely nothing there, there is objectively nothing there, and there is a special counsel investigating whether there is something there, and the President (who is supposed to ensure that government moneys are spent wisely) publicly says, “this is a waste of f*cking time and money, assess that there is nothing there and begone” — is this a reasonable exercise of management or criminal obstruction of justice?

    That we were even discussing this in the first place is a farce. That we are discussing it after two years and $40M is an obscenity. That this is still the great white whale of the Demoncraps is sedition.


    • CHenie says:

      yeah-well that’s all part of the plan. There have been enough crimes committed by the Clinton’s (with evidence to support indictments) to have them both jailed and/or hung for treason.

      WHAT are they waiting on? Nothing-that’s what-because nothing is ever going to happen to them.

      The sooner people, who are still in their right mind, see that the only way justice is ever going to be served will be by the We the People, than the sooner it can happen .

      Can you just picture Putin laughing and offering a toast of vodka to a portrait of Marx and then commending Khrushchev by saying “you were right comrade, we never even had to fire a shot.”


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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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