A Scent of Burning Flesh

Democrats Have Been Playing With Fire

Many of our readers will be aware that allegations have been made that the US government, under President Obama's watch, deliberately spied upon presidential candidate and his campaign personnel prior to the US election, and afterwards right up until the time Obama left office.  (It may still be going on.)  

This has led to speculation about the Deep State, where politicized US intelligence personnel have used their positions to engage in partisan political "warfare" against a US politician for no other reason than these bureaucrats and government employees did not like Trump's policies or positions.  It is certainly true that there have been numerous leaks to the media, ostensibly from Trump's staff, of conversations and communications.  We recall, for example, when Trump was "doing the rounds" calling the leaders of other nations for a chat, how intimate (first hand) details of their conversations were suddenly broadcast by the media.  The details of the phone conversation between Trump and the Australian Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull is one example.  How did the media get intimate details of that phone conversation so quickly as to emblazon it upon their mastheads within a few hours?


Needless to say, all of these internal surveillance activities, if they took place, are illegal--but not just illegal.  They would be crimes attracting the severest penalties the State is willing to hand down.  In other words, they are capital crimes.

As investigative reporters uncover more material, and as Trump appears to be gaining more and more experience in his role as President, and as his appointees are taking over senior roles in the government and bureaucracy, we expect that, if true, the next four years are going to see a scandal far bigger than Watergate unfold.

Andrew McCarthy, writing in National Review Online, tells us what the core issue is:

But still, the media and Democrats have always had a serious vulnerability here — one they’ve never acknowledged because they’ve been too swept away by the political success of the fantasy narrative. It is this: At a certain point, if compelling evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia to steal the election did not materialize, the much more interesting question becomes “How did the government obtain all this information that has been leaked to the media to prop up the story?”

The most plausible answer to that question: The Obama administration, through the Justice Department and the FBI, was investigating the associates of the opposition party’s presidential nominee, and perhaps even the nominee himself, during the campaign. Otherwise, what explanation can there be for all of the investigative information — much of it classified, and thus illegal to disclose — that has been funneled to the press?

In short, the media and Democrats have been playing with fire for months. The use of law-enforcement and national-security assets to investigate one’s political opponents during a heated election campaign has always been a potentially explosive story. Let’s not kid ourselves: If the roles were reversed, and a Republican administration had investigated officials tied to the campaign of the Democrats’ nominee, we would be drowning in a sea of Watergate 2.0 coverage.

For those readers who want a picture of the hounds scenting blood, this piece by ardent Trump supporter, Sean Hannity provides an illustration of what might well be coming down the pike.