It’s Sedition!…But That’s Not a Worthy Story for the Media?

Webster’s dictionary defines sedition as “incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.”  Subversion is “an attempt to transform the established social order and its structures of power, authority and hierarchy.”

There’s lots of evidence that the Democrats, including the former Obama administration, have been guilty of these two offenses, both of which are illegal.  Of course, the Democrats and their communication wing, the Mainstream Media, would say there’s some other reason for the flurry of Obama’s executive branch appointments during the final weeks of his administration, and his order (just 8 days before the end of his term) that allowed the sharing of intelligence information among more than a dozen agencies, overturning decades of intelligence policy.

When President Trump accused former President Obama of wiretapping his campaign headquarters, the media responded as if he’d lost his mind.  But various left- to mainstream-media outlets (e.g., Washington Post, NY Times, et al) wrote last year about the Obama administration’s two requests to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court, which must approve such surveillance when American citizens are involved.  The first was rejected as “too broad,” but the subsequent re-written request was approved in October, ostensibly aimed at Russian communications with Republican campaign officials.  Now we’re hearing from a former CIA officer that the surveillance goes way beyond simple wiretaps and that it is “worse than Watergate.”

Now, finally, we discover that it was Susan Rice, Obama’s National Security Advisor, who ordered “detailed spreadsheets” on intercepted conversations of Trump campaign officials, and it was Rice who ordered the “unmasking” of those names (i.e., the revealing of the names of American citizens “incidentally” involved in wiretap operations).  As various intelligence officials have stated, no illegal activity was revealed by Trump officials or the people with whom they spoke.  So where’s the “national security” implications to justify intercepting communications of American citizens?

There aren’t any; it was a purely political power play by a rogue administration hell-bent on garnering information to be used against Trump in case he got elected…and it’s worked very well so far.  But now the plot is coming unraveled.

FISA says, “the President may authorize, through the Attorney General, electronic surveillance without a court order for the period of one year, provided that it is only to acquire foreign intelligence information, that it is solely directed at communications or property controlled exclusively by foreign powers, that there is no substantial likelihood that it will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party…”   Susan Rice, as National Security Advisor, ordered the collection and later dissemination of this information, including the unmasking of the identifies of United States citizens, under the authority of President Obama.  Should she…and he…not be held responsible for that?

Apparently the press, which took such pride in “bringing down a president” by leaving no stone unturned in the Watergate conspiracy, doesn’t think so, for they’re busy trying to cover up or laugh off these revelations as meaningless and insignificant.

OK, but let me ask this: If the press had discovered that the outgoing Bush administration had done exactly the same things that Obama and his operatives did in his last weeks and months in office, would the media be taking that same approach?  Or would we be inundated 24/7 with stories about “SpyGate” and the unconstitutional abuse of power by a former president and his operatives?  Would former Bush officials be dragged before Congress and asked, “What did the (former) president know and when did he know it?”

It’s no longer a revelation that the mainstream media in this country are political hacks, merely the communication branch of the Democrat Party.  That’s to their shame, and the reason that fewer and fewer Americans believe anything they report.

Americans need to know, however, that what Obama and the Democrats did (in our name, mind you!..) is not only illegal but treasonous, and those responsible need to be prosecuted for their actions.  It would be just as true if the Republicans and former President Bush did it…but they didn’t.

One thing that stands out in all this, though, is that Susan Rice ordered the collection of this intercepted communication of Trump officials almost a year before the 2016 election, when Trump was considered a joke and not even a longshot to be the nominee.  Were similar collections not made of Jeb Bush campaign officials?  Chris Christie?  Ted Cruz, et al?  It strains credulity that they collected such information on the Trump campaign but ignored the front-running candidates.

But where are the “intrepid journalists” who’ll ferret out that information?  Where are the Woodwards and Bernsteins of this generation of journalists?  Oh, that’s right…they don’t want such information to be revealed, for it wouldn’t be flattering to the cause and policies they support (95% of journalists are registered Democrats).

If those who possess the vast power of the federal government and bureaucracy – regardless of their political party! — can use that power to violate the rights and privacy of its own citizens, then disseminate the information gained in order to incite “resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority,” and not be held accountable for their actions, then the rule of law no longer exists in this nation, and we’re no more a free people, anymore than citizens of Venezuela or any other Third World banana republic.

The press, the vaunted Fourth Estate so necessary for the maintenance of freedom against an all-powerful government, shames themselves even more every hour they cover this up and refuse to seek the truth, wherever it leads.

1 Comment

  1. Thisoldspouse says:

    Obama will never be held to account for any of his crimes which come to light; by Democrats, who approve of his crimes, or Republicans, who are so cowed by political correctness that they fear supremely being labeled “bigots” for daring to lay a hand on the “first black president.”