Obama uses the NSA to spy on Congress
This WSJ article is getting a lot of attention, although I wonder how many people on the Democratic/liberal/leftist side are the least bit concerned by it.
The gist of what the piece reveals is that the NSA continued to spy on Israel even after it had stopped spying on other “friendly” heads of state, this spying on Israel included conversations with members of Congress, and the information contained therein was reported to the Obama administration.
At least Nixon used his own team to spy on the Democrats, and he wasn’t very effective at it either. I often think that what people thought Nixon was, Obama really is, on steroids—only with more charm, a compliant party, and a sycophantic rather than hostile press. Plus, although Nixon was a very political animal, he appears to have been motivated by sincere love of country.
Fred Fleitz (formerly of the CIA) analyzes the WSJ report in a National Review piece:
According to the Journal story, President Obama did not halt NSA spying against Netanyahu. This is not a surprise, given the president’s chilly relations with the Israeli leader and Israel’s aggressive spying against the United States. It’s also not a surprise that the Obama administration sought intelligence on Netanyahu’s efforts to undermine the nuclear deal.
But it is stunning to learn that NSA sent the White House intelligence on private discussions with U.S. congressmen on a major policy dispute between the White House and Congress. According to the Journal article, to avoid a paper trail that would show that they wanted the NSA to report on Netanyahu’s interactions with Congress, Obama officials decided to let the agency decide how much of this intelligence to provide and what to withhold. The article cited an unnamed U.S. official who explained, “We didn’t say, ”˜Do it.’ We didn’t say, ”˜Don’t do it.’”
This suggests major misconduct by the NSA and the White House of a sort not seen since Watergate. First, intercepts of congressmen’s communications regarding a dispute between Congress and the White House should have been destroyed and never left the NSA building. The Journal article said a 2011 NSA directive requires direct communications between foreign intelligence targets and members of Congress to be destroyed, but gives the NSA director the authority to waive this requirement if he determines the communications contain “significant foreign intelligence.”
Netanyahu’s discussions with members of Congress on a policy dispute between Congress and the president do not qualify as foreign intelligence. Destroying this kind of information should not have been a close call for NSA. Congress should immediately ask NSA director Michael Rogers and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to verify the Journal story and explain why intercepts of private discussions of members of Congress were provided to the White House. If this did happen, both officials should resign. Second, the White House bears significant responsibility for this scandal. By encouraging and accepting this intelligence, the White House used the NSA as an illegitimate means to undermine its legislative opponents.
Please read the whole thing.
I would add that I disagree with Fleitz on one thing: it is not “stunning” to learn this. I wish it were, but it’s not. It is exactly and precisely what I would expect from this administration and this president. Obama and his administration have had no hesitation to use government agencies against those he regards as his domestic enemies, as the administration’s use of the IRS to hamstring the Tea Party prior to the 2012 election has proven. Outrage against such excesses has been both one-sided and ineffective, unlike during the Watergate era, when Nixon’s own party—the Republican Party—turned on him, which was his undoing. No such luck with Obama and the Democrats.
And I would so dearly love to be wrong with that last sentence.
I know it has become a cliché, but imagine the outcry if Nixon did this. Boxer would meltdown on the Senate floor.
I think this spying explains a lot about this president. It is the Chicago way. Our president is dishonest and a proven liar.
Neo: agreed, both that this behavior is in character for President Obama, and that it suits his known biases (e.g. his profound dislike for Israel in general and for Netanyahu in particular).
The deniability factor is also very much in character — get it done, but set it up so that it can be denied that he ever gave the order. We’ve seen a lot of that sort of thing from this President.
It has been said that man is the animal which wishes to have his cake and eat it, i.e. not suffer injustice (being spied upon) while causing injustice to others (spying upon everyone else). Nations — as creatures of man — likewise. Or in ClownCatastrophe’s rendition to a Hispanic audience, do harm to our enemies and good to our friends. It’s a pity his enemies must be his fellow citizens.
Off shore spying on friend and foe alike is justified IMO. The executive branch spying on the legislative or judicial branches is totally unacceptable. But nothing will be done to rein in a lawless POTUS.
Still wondering how much more it will take to get Republicans to impeach Obama.
This is outrageous. I have some familiarity with the NSA. Spying on American citizens by the NSA, much less Congress, is illegal. Period. If there were any reports with important foreign intelligence, the congressman’s words and name should NOT have appeared on any reports.
Wow. This is disturbing. And the fact that it is not even a blip in the news is even worse.
When you do not prosecute or punish consistently according to the laws of the country, this is what happens.
K-E:
As I’ve written many times, what it would take is Democrats turning on Obama.
That will never happen, and without that, impeachment would basically be similar to what happened to Clinton (impeachment without conviction), which ended up causing a sympathy backlash.
It would be even more so with Obama.
Now, you might answer that it should be done anyway, even if it’s just a statement of principle. But in terms of effect, I am convinced it would backfire, and I am convinced that that is the calculation of the Republicans in Congress.
I suppose you are right, but this particular incident is so egregious that even without support of Democrats, I think it must be punished in some way. Otherwise, what keeps the next president from doing the same? Congress should be terrified that the president would turn our own spying abilities against them.
If not impeachment, then actual, real change at the highest levels of the NSA. If the Democrats are too scared to get involved in that, I am worried for the future of our country. What could be MORE distressing than the president spying on elected officials?
K-E:
I agree. I have been very worried about the future of the country for a long time.
It’s not just what Obama has done. It’s the lack of response to it, and in particular (more than just Congress) the lack of response to it, or even the defense of it, by Democrats in general. My impression is that most Democrats just shrug at it or justify it, and I also think that if it were done by someone like Trump, most Trump supporters would just shrug at it or justify it, as well.
I don’t think I’m living in a dream world to say that when I was growing up the response to something like this would be bipartisan outrage.
I’m curious as to whether anyone here entertains what they believe to be a reasonable hope that the palpable decline of this country, particularly in its actual embodiment of the ideals of republican self-government, can be reversed. Granted that I’m a pessimist by nature, but I just can’t see it.
I get the impression that most of the people who comment here are anywhere from late middle aged to old. We grew up when the dominant elements of society–including, for instance, high-school civics teachers–basically believed in the U.S.A. in what is now an old-fashioned way. I just don’t think most younger people even think in the same categories anymore. No need to beat on the old drums about the reasons for that.
And as for liberals/leftists of baby-boomer or older age: well, Neo sums it up pretty well: “most Democrats just shrug at it or justify it”. “It” can include not just egregious abuses like the one under discussion here, but a general decay of republican principles. For both them, and the younger people who have been raised and taught by them, the issue is a direct political combat between good and evil. They don’t necessarily think “the end justifies the means”, but they no longer think in terms of the rule of law, the proper functioning and preservation of republican institutions, etc. If something is right, the government should promote it. If it’s wrong, the government should suppress it. *That* is the substance of politics for them. They believe in procedures, yes. As has been often remarked, they thrive in the world of institutional manipulation. But it’s procedure without principle.
And that’s to say nothing of the general decline of character, of the family, etc etc etc. (Do you know what “grinding” is? If not, google “grinding dance”.)
I just can’t see a way back from this. I wish I could, but I just can’t.
I think the biggest way back from this is: prosecute for ALL crimes despite political party, wealth or any other ‘get out of jail free’ reason. If we go back to the days where ALL are treated the same under the law, we will be able to get back some of what we’ve lost.
That starts with the president and the attorney general s/he selects. And then it works down from there with management placed at CIA, NSA, FBI, IRS, etc.
So the best question is: who is the least likely candidate (on either side of the aisle) to reward political loyalty with these positions? And who is the most likely candidate (on either side of the aisle) to appoint the most qualified person for the job and ask that person to DO his job?
I am sure we all have our own ideas.
A purge of the DC bureaucracy is the starting point, and a POTUS (Cruz comes to mind) who is willing to prosecute people like Lois Lerner. Well, I can hope can’t I? ;-}
Lawlessness is Obama’s legacy and it will only get worse if Hillary wins.
Everything seems so chaotic. And unnecessarily so.
Neo:
“No such luck with Obama and the Democrats.
And I would so dearly love to be wrong with that last sentence.”
Because it’s not ‘… and the Democrats’ anymore in the sense of the two parties in Nixon’s day.
Today, it’s Obama and the Left, where the Democrats are effectively a subsidiary of the greater Left-activist movement.
Lacking a similar greater Right-activist movement, the GOP is like a mom-and-pop store competing against a corporate franchise that operates from a different perspective with different means, different incentives, and effectively, different rules.
Restoring the political devices in your post requires at least a Right-activist movement that’s sufficient to counter and neutralize the Left-activist movement.
Oops. I meant in your and K-E’s comments discussing you rpost.
parker: “A purge of the DC bureaucracy is the starting point”
Right activism is the starting point.
My activism is boots on the ground. City council, school board, county commissioner elections, and state elections. Currently, I am knocking on doors for Cruz.. I can not impact academia or the msm. Rot begins at the head of the fish. Nibbling at the tail does nothing to stop the rot. The head must be cut off and fed to the hogs.
The way things end is with the POCKET BOOK.
“The Big Short” is in theaters at this time.
While not perfect — it tackles at least some of the factors that imploded the mortgage market — to trigger this Greatest Depression.
( Which is still unfolding with no end in sight..
Absolute lunacy was permitted — by all and every.
It was not brought short by conservative activism.
The folly ended when the cash flow stopped flowing.
The current world scheme — bigger — then biggest — government — the “r selected” fantasy scape — will come to an end — when the finances implode.
The following nations are now zombies:
Japan
Venezuela
Nigeria
Iran
Turkey
Greece
Libya
Pakistan
Egypt
Tunisia
Spain
Portugal
South Africa
Only momentum is carrying them forward.
Australia
Canada
Brazil
All three are slow motion train wrecks — as their patron — Red China — enters the ‘Long Hangover.’
European and American steel industries found it brutal to shutter 20,000,000 tons per year in capacity.
Red China absolutely has to shutter 300,000,000 tons of basic steel capacity.
If Beijing were to write down assets to their market value — that nation would be deemed insolvent.
The dragon may dance – but it can’t turn corners — let alone turn around.
Islamic chaos will simply explode from this point forward — mostly in Europe.
It’s going to have a dramatic effect on our election.
HRC will be taken to the woodshed over her follies.
Up until 2015 European elites thought they had the Muslims all figured out.
Now, with a world flush with oil, look to see the Europeans kick the Muslims in the teeth.
For their Arab customers will no longer be able to afford European foodstuffs.
Like Russia, the European exporters will be shut out by financial diktat.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-12-31/now-comes-great-unwind-how-evaporating-commodity-wealth-will-slam-casino
Imagine that!
Just after posting immediately above — David Stockman’s piece is released — second hand — by ZeroHedge. ( The SVR asset. )
The market is FINALLY agreeing with my long old comment that OPEC lost its cartel power.
Cartels ALWAYS implode with a pin prick from the market.
The best policy for America is an oil tariff.
There is no way that ruining our oil patch makes any economic sense.
The second it is financially crippled — the Arabs will be back in full jihad mode.
As it stands, countless bribes to academe — by KSA — will dry up.
The Muslim economic ‘vote’ has just been zeroed out by President Zero.