Did the NYT really report that Trump’s aides were the target of wiretaps? Here's a likely scenario

Hotair ^ | 03/08/2017 | AllahPundit

[existentially_kuffer]

>>>he’s claiming that they were never the targets of FBI wiretaps

How would Rosenberg claim that, unless connected?

[areukiddingme1]

This feels like the Bill Clinton wagging his finger in our face “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” moment, when the lap dog media ran with it...Oooppppssss, only to discover that there was blue dress...hahahaha!

Yeah, it feels like that!

[Robert A Cook PE]

Gee. Obola, and Clinton, and Hillary, and Podesta are not guilty because of how you define the meaning of “is”, “sex”, and “alone” “ and “ordered” ....

But Trump IS guilty because of how you define “wiretapped” and “target” and “inside the Trump Tower” .....

[RedWulf]

Allah pundit, always towing then Democrat line.

[Helicondelta]

The headline says “inquiry of Trump aides, but the targets of the intercepts were the Russians?

lol

It’s just great to watch the dumbocrats falling into a trap.

[Sacajaweau]

I'm still confused by Flynn's resignation. We still don't know the gist of the real allegations against him. BUT I do believe it has to do with this "whole wiretapping of a presidential candidate"....looking for dirt....just like Watergate.

Someone should go to jail....Loretta Lynch is my first choice. Valerie Jarrett would be second. Comey my third.

The Russian Trump connection is as fictitious as the Benghazi "video".

[Stingray51]

” It would be ...highly shady if the feds wiretapped the Russians only because they were trying to gather info on Manafort et al., a practice known as “reverse targeting.” “

Because we should trust the Obama administration not to have done that?

Also, the import of the new Wikileaks data dump is that the CIA has constructed a parallel electronic collection structure of its own unconnected to the NSA. Not sure this CIA capability would have gone through FISA. Perhaps, it should have. But did it / would it have?

If the intercepts were reported to the WH, why does Trump not have them? Is he really using his full powers as head of the executive branch?

[StAntKnee]

The NYT did NOT split hairs to make fine distinctions in the Jan. 20 newspaper. It wanted us to believe Trump and staff had done something worthy of snooping.

The nice thing is they always give President TrumpTHEMSELVES the benefit of doubt at least.

Now, having caused all the confusion over an already complicated story, confusion that, rightly or wrongly, is fully demonstrated in the circled image of that front page and the one (Mar. 4) in reversing themselves, they are stuck in their own tarpit. Couldn't happen to a better bunch of slimes.

[doug from upland]

[Steve_Seattle]

"Mr. Manafort is among at least three Trump campaign advisers whose possible links to Russia are under scrutiny"

That certainly sounds as if they were targeted, and were not inadvertently identified via wiretaps of Russians.

[UCANSEE2]

They didn't 'wiretap' the Russian Ambassador. He willingly wore a 'wire'.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: I’m still confused by Flynn’s resignation. We still don’t know the gist of the real allegations against him

Here’s how I understand it:

1) Flynn spoke to the Russian Ambassador as a member of Trump’s team and as the likely ( no yet confirmed ) National Security Adviser.

2) The Ambassador brought up the sanctions that Obama was placing on Russia as a result of the suspected hacking during the elections. The discussion was tangential and Flynn probably said he will bring this up with Trump but made no promises.

3) The Ambassador’s conversation with Flynn was being tapped.

4) Someone illegally LEAKED to the press about the conversation. THAT someone still has to be identified.

5) Because of the above leak, there was a huge brouhaha regarding whether or not Flynn violated the Logan Act ( an over 200 year old law that was never seriously implemented ).

6) When VP Mike Pence asked Flynn whether or not sanctions with Russia were discussed, Flynn flatly denied having spoken to Kislyak in December 2016 about the sanctions placed on Russia by the Obama administration; however, the next day, U.S. intelligence officials shared an account indicating that such discussions did in fact take place.

The above constituted a misleading statement to the VP.

Following this revelation, Flynn’s spokesman released a statement that Flynn “indicated that while he had no recollection of discussing sanctions, he couldn’t be certain that the topic never came up”.

7) Now here’s where Trump could have steadfastly said publicly that he still stood by Flynn. He did not. There was a trust issue involved and he had to ask Flynn to resign.

So, THERE WAS INDEED SURVEILLANCE. The more disturbing issue is WHO LEAKED THE CONTENTS OF THE SURVEILLANCE TO THE PRESS?

[Grampa Dave]

[Steve_Seattle]

However they are trying to parse it now, any reasonable person - based on the exact language of the story - would assume that the Trump associates were themselves wiretapped, and that is probably the impression the Times was trying to create. The article emphatically did NOT say, “Wiretaps of Russian diplomats have uncovered contacts with Trump campaign officials.”

[tirednvirginia]

Trump tweeted om March 4 that he just found out about the wiretap. However the ny times article was dated jan 20. Those two things dont jive. Trump was not going by the times article but must have other info.

[Rockitz]

Actually, I think General Flynn will come back at some point and was possibly used to flush out intelligence personnel who are the leakers.

[Grampa Dave]

Thanks, this will be used as another hammer against the NY Slimes.

[bigbob]

There is a way all the puzzle pieces fit together and a clue comes in the precise words that are being used by everyone except Trump.

For example,this explanation perfectly explains Comey’s request of the DOJ.

[areukiddingme1]

Excellent summary!!!