[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"There’s a Word for the West’s Appeasement of Militant Islam"

"The Bondi Beach Jihad: Sharia Supremacism and Jew Hatred, Again"

"This Is How We Win a New Cold War With China"

"How Europe Fell Behind"

"The Epstein Conspiracy in Plain Sight"

Saint Nicholas The Real St. Nick

Will Atheists in China Starve Due to No Fish to Eat?

A Thirteen State Solution for the Holy Land?

US Sends new Missle to a Pacific ally, angering China and Russia Moscow and Peoking

DeaTh noTice ... Freerepublic --- lasT Monday JR died

"‘We Are Not the Crazy Ones’: AOC Protests Too Much"

"Rep. Comer to Newsmax: No Evidence Biden Approved Autopen Use"

"Donald Trump Has Broken the Progressive Ratchet"

"America Must Slash Red Tape to Make Nuclear Power Great Again!!"

"Why the DemocRATZ Activist Class Couldn’t Celebrate the Cease-Fire They Demanded"

Antifa Calls for CIVIL WAR!

British Police Make an Arrest...of a White Child Fishing in the Thames

"Sanctuary" Horde ASSAULTS Chicago... ELITE Marines SMASH Illegals Without Mercy

Trump hosts roundtable on ANTIFA

What's happening in Britain. Is happening in Ireland. The whole of Western Europe.

"The One About the Illegal Immigrant School Superintendent"

CouldnÂ’t believe he let me pet him at the end (Rhino)

Cops Go HANDS ON For Speaking At Meeting!

POWERFUL: Charlie Kirk's final speech delivered in South Korea 9/6/25

2026 in Bible Prophecy

2.4 Billion exposed to excessive heat

🔴 LIVE CHICAGO PORTLAND ICE IMMIGRATION DETENTION CENTER 24/7 PROTEST 9/28/2025

Young Conservative Proves Leftist Protesters Wrong

England is on the Brink of Civil War!

Charlie Kirk Shocks Florida State University With The TRUTH

IRL Confronting Protesters Outside UN Trump Meeting

The UK Revolution Has Started... Brit's Want Their Country Back

Inside Paris Dangerous ANTIFA Riots

Rioters STORM Chicago ICE HQ... "Deportation Unit" SCRAPES Invaders Off The Sidewalk

She Decoded A Specific Part In The Bible

Muslim College Student DUMBFOUNDED as Charlie Kirk Lists The Facts About Hamas

Charlie Kirk EVISCERATES Black Students After They OPENLY Support “Anti-White Racism” HEATED DEBATE

"Trump Rips U.N. as Useless During General Assembly Address: ‘Empty Words’"

Charlie Kirk VS the Wokies at University of Tennessee

Charlie Kirk Takes on 3 Professors & a Teacher

British leftist student tells Charlie Kirk facts are unfair

The 2 Billion View Video: Charlie Kirk's Most Viewed Clips of 2024

Antifa is now officially a terrorist organization.

The Greatness of Charlie Kirk: An Eyewitness Account of His Life and Martyrdom

Charlie Kirk Takes on Army of Libs at California's UCR

DR. ALVEDA KING: REST IN PEACE CHARLIE KIRK

Steven Bonnell wants to murder Americans he disagrees with

What the fagots LGBTQ really means

I watched Charlie Kirk get assassinated. This is my experience.

Elon Musk Delivers Stunning Remarks At Historic UK March (Tommy Robinson)


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Rand Paul: We Know For Sure Obama Administration Spied On Mike Flynn
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi ... ation_spied_on_mike_flynn.html
Published: Mar 20, 2017
Author: Tim Hains
Post Date: 2017-03-20 20:42:13 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 4617
Comments: 32

On this week's edition of 'This Week With George Stephanopoulos,' Sen. Rand Paul discussed the president's accusation that his campaign was spied on by the Obama administration:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Finally, sir, you're also a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. WE see the president standing by that claim about President Obama. It's caused a rift now with British intelligence over the weekend. How big a problem is this for the president's credibility? How does he fix it?

PAUL: I think that we know one thing for sure, that the Obama administration did spy on Flynn. Now, whether it was direct or indirect, somebody was reading and taking -- a transcript of his phone calls and then they released it.

It is very, very important that whoever released that go to jail, because you cannot have members of the intelligence community listening to the most private and highly classified information and then releasing that to The New York Times.

There can only be a certain handful of people who did that. I would bring them all in. They would have to take lie detector tests. And I would say, including the political people, because some political people knew about this as well.

But we need to get to the bottom of who is releasing these highly classified conversations. And if the president was surveilled, he probably wasn't the target. I don't know that he was or wasn't. But if he was, they probably targeted someone in a foreign government, but then they listened to the conversation with Americans.

But our government's talking to foreigners all the time. We can't allow people in the intelligence committee to release the contents of that informing to the media.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But you don't believe...

PAUL: You will get a deep state. You will have an intelligence community that has enormous power if that happens.

STEPHANOPOULOS; You don't believe President Obama ordered an illegal wiretap of President Trump?

PAUL: Well, what happens is it's different than that. We target foreigners all the time, but they talk to Americans. They talk to the president. They talk to the national security advisers. And they're supposed to be masked.

But there was something alarming the other day. General Hayden admitted that people all the way down to some of the lowest analysts can unmask who the American is. So, someone unmasked General Flynn and they're a low-level analyst, we need to be looking at their computer and find out if they unmasked that conversation and if they spoke with The New York Times you have got to put those people in jail, because you cannot allow this to happen, or we will have presidents being blackmailed or national security advisers being blackmailed.

This is a huge, huge problem, bigger than anything else that's being discussed is the fact that private conversations from the intelligence community's perspective are being leaked to the press. That's not like a leak that says, oh, the president watches TV in his bathrobe, this is important to national security, you can't let it happen.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 24.

#1. To: A K A Stone (#0)

Rand is going well out of his way to defend Trump and give him cover in the media.

I think he's trying to stay in Trump's good graces even if Rand is leading the opposition to RyanCare which Trump is backing (so far).

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-03-20   21:42:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Tooconservative (#1)

"even if Rand is leading the opposition to RyanCare"

The House will be voting on Part I, and I've heard that Trump has already made some changes to it.

What in Part I does Rand oppose?

misterwhite  posted on  2017-03-21   12:37:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: misterwhite, Gatlin (#10)

What in Part I does Rand oppose?

Well, among other things I expect Rand objects to the whole idea of a Part I and II and III. It sounds like some ring cycle opera and you know those never have a happy ending.

Tom Cotton says the same thing, there will never be a Part II or Part III to TrumpCare. This alone spells its defeat or major modification in the Senate because Cotton/Lee/Cruz/Paul leaves you with a max of 48 votes in the Senate.

Rand is from KY, one of five states where the impact of TrumpCare will hit hardest, especially among those aged 55-65. So you can't expect Rand to take one for the team if he knows his older voters will get the shaft if Part I is the only part of TrumpCare that ever gets passed.

Beyond that, Rand was just re-elected to a 6-year term. So he can play hard to get. Rand has no great confidence that TrumpCare will turn out well and he does know that Trump only has until 2020 to get re-elected and Rand has until 2022. Politics.

Cruz, OTOH, faces the Texas voters in 2018 and has to live down his semi-non-endorsement of Trump at the 2016 GOP convention. Cruz is far more vulnerable, far more likely to cave.

Lee won't be up until 2020, I think. And Cotton just got elected and has, like Rand, until 2022.

And this is before you get to fair-weather GOP senators like Murkowski and Snowe.

I think Trump will get his bill through the House. I'm trying to see how he gets it through the Senate and it looks very very dicey to me.

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-03-21   13:20:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Tooconservative (#13)

"where the impact of TrumpCare will hit hardest, especially among those aged 55-65."

If those aged 55-65 are forced to buy standard Obamacare-type health insurance and don't have other choices, yeah, they will be hit hardest.

But Part III offers them those choices -- Medical Savings Accounts, buying across state lines, customized plans, group insurance, etc.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-03-21   14:43:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: misterwhite (#15)

Even passing Part I will be extremely difficult and will end up as convoluted as how the Dems passed ObamaCare.

The idea that any Part II or Part III will surface at the end of this year before we enter the 2018 election cycle seems like a daydream, something that will never happen. I think Cotton and the others are right.

Closing the bill to any further amendments in the House but leaving the bill wide-open for the Senate to make a lot of amendments (like increasing subsidy ammounts for the 55-65 age group, extending the Medicaid expansion into 2020 or beyond) doesn't help them much. By the time you do that, you're getting very close to re-enacting ObamaCare itself.

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-03-21   14:49:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Tooconservative (#16)

"Even passing Part I will be extremely difficult ..."

If you believe that, then I hope you weren't one of those calling for an immediate repeal and replace, forcing the need for 60 votes from the get-go.

"like increasing subsidy amounts for the 55-65 age group"

And what kind of subsidy was a middle-class individual, 55-65, going to get under Obamacare? Zero. Obama's subsidies were based on income, not age.

"extending the Medicaid expansion into 2020 or beyond"

Spoken like someone who ignores the fact that we're $20 trillion in debt. Let the states expand Medicaid and pay the additional money.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-03-21   17:17:48 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: misterwhite (#17) (Edited)

If you believe that, then I hope you weren't one of those calling for an immediate repeal and replace, forcing the need for 60 votes from the get-go.

I recall 6 years of constant "repeal" talk and a 2016 campaign by the GOP and by Trump where you heard "repeal" 90% of the time, and "repeal and replace" maybe 10% of the time. It was only after the election was over and Trump won that we heard a constant daily-talking-points adherence to the phrase "repeal and replace".

It surprises me that people never seem to notice the magical mutations that happen in policy in every administration. The campaign pledges suddenly become something else entirely.

And what kind of subsidy was a middle-class individual, 55-65, going to get under Obamacare? Zero. Obama's subsidies were based on income, not age.

You're kind of missing the point. ObamaCare was intended mostly to provide medical care for an older sicker population at the expense of a younger healthier population. That has been its prime failing in fact.

Spoken like someone who ignores the fact that we're $20 trillion in debt. Let the states expand Medicaid and pay the additional money.

I agree. But it looks like that's what they're shaping up with using amendments in the Senate version. That big Medicaid expansion was due to sunset this year. Now they're talking about yet another 3 years of federal subsidy of the Medicaid expansion. It is completely irresponsible, given the liabilities for entitlement spending they've already incurred.

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-03-21   17:30:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: Tooconservative (#18)

"Now they're talking about yet another 3 years of federal subsidy of the Medicaid expansion."

To his credit, Paul Ryan wants to end that immediately. I have no idea how many additional people that would mean.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-03-21   17:55:24 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 24.

        There are no replies to Comment # 24.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 24.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com