The major story of the morning is that Susan Rice, Obama’s former national security adviser was behind the “unmasking”, or revealing the identities of Trump associates who were identified in incidental intelligence gathering operations.
What’s important to note is that Rice didn’t break the law unless she also leaked any information. That hasn’t been shown and likely won’t be. What is more significant is that this offers further insight into the Obama Administration performing surveillance of the Trump campaign and transition team.
Now you may suggest, as many on the Left already are, that the fact that the Obama Administration felt compelled to investigate Trump’s Russia ties was because it learned of possible illegal activity in the course of analyzing foreign intercepts. “Ha, ha,” they say. “This proves that something is there!”
Well, what exactly? If Adam Housely is correct, the surveillance started before Trump was even the GOP nominee. This means that it started well before the DNC or Podesta hacks and subsequent Wikileaks releases. What were the intelligence agencies looking at? It had nothing to do with colluding with Russia to plant #fakenews stories or hack machines or release Podesta’s thoughts on space aliens to the world, did it?
The Russiagate narrative has been crumbling since Trump’s tweet in which he accused Obama of wiretapping him. Even though I don’t believe Obama ordered it, it is becoming more and more obvious that one or more senior officials within his White House were absolutely digging for intelligence against Team Trump, making identities discovered within incidental collection widely available within the intelligence community, and then waiting for the information to be leaked in hopes that it would damage the incoming Trump Administration.
Here’s the biggest problem the Russiagate proponents have: Obama’s people in his former staff and within the intelligence community have had months to gather, share, and leak any information they have that proves collusion. They’ve turned up nothing. The best they have gotten for all of it is Flynn’s resignation, but it still isn’t clear that he committed any sort of crime.
Sure, you have Rachel Maddow showing you all the dots and frantically trying to connect them each night, but remember that every week that goes by that Democrats fail to provide any proof of collusion with Russia or a crime on Trump’s part is just another nail in the coffin for the story.
On the other hand, Obamagate is much easier. Crimes have been committed. The leaks are the crime. The fact that specific intelligence information was made available and used criminally, apparently with the political motive of damaging an incoming administration, guarantees that the scandal will to continue gaining strength as Russiagate crumbles for lack of proof. With Russiagate, you need to work pretty hard to demonstrate what wrongdoing was in place. Obamagate is much more straightforward.
Please, by all means, let’s continue investigating Trump’s connections to Russia. I maintain that if anything was there, it would have turned up by now. In the meantime, let’s also get Rice and some more officials up to testify and explain why they were unmasking political opponents and allowing that information to be leaked.
I’d love for this information to come out during the investigation. Let’s find out once and for all what the Obama Administration was looking for, why it was looking for it, and what it found. It won’t be good for Democrats.