The British Helped Obama with Spying on Trump: If a tree falls in the forest and nobody hears it–it still fell

Of course the NSA and the British Intelligence are going to deny publicly that they can spy on individuals at the provocation of the President. That’s supposed to be a secret that gives them an advantage over the “bad guys” as they see it.  Most of the testimony that FBI Director Comey gave regarding the Trump wiretap at Trump Tower before the election of 2016 was old language within the intelligence community and the kind of rules that held presidents accountable to the public.  The surveillance done today which Donald Trump phrased as “wiretapping” is much more sophisticated than the type that was commonplace during the 80s and 90s.   These days, as Judge Napolitano explains below, a president has a number of resources to draw from to spy on a rival, or anybody really, and the web of international connectivity among spy agencies is just complicated enough to hide their malice.  So when President Trump accused Obama of spying on him—that is what he was talking about.

However, for that little video Judge Napolitano was suspended from Fox News because likely the good Judge was flying too close to the sun.   The big connection between Fox News and English spies is the news organization Sky News which are both owned by Rupert Murdoch.  Murdoch also has a long history of backing moderates in the Labour Party like Tony Blair, and don’t forget Murdoch was caught up in a major controversy in England over the phone tapping scandal that severely damaged him and his family because they were complicit.  When you play the game at that level and get caught, you have to make deals, which is likely what is behind the suspension of Napolitano for pointing out that British Intelligence likely did Obama a favor and spied on Donald Trump so that the trail would not lead directly to the White House.

Constantly James Comey during his testimony on March 20th 2017 made mention that “there was no evidence that anybody spied on Donald Trump as a candidate in Trump Tower.”  However, and this is very important because Wikileaks has given us the truth—the Democrats from Obama to Hillary Clinton all the way down to the heads of the DNC were actively in the business of destroying evidence.  So if evidence is destroyed or if the crime is done in such a way to cover up a crime as its being committed, like Hillary and her personal server and Obama using British Intelligence to cover the surveillance of a rival candidate—then the law is still being broken.  The age-old question of whether “a tree falls down in a forest but nobody hears it—did it really fall,” dictates that we apply the same logic to this surveillance question.  Yes, if a tree falls, it fell whether or not people hear it.  Taking away the ability of people to hear the tree fall does not stop the tree from falling.  Taking away the ability of the FBI, the CIA, or the NSA from reporting that a crime is committed in spying on a future president does not mean a crime wasn’t committed.  It was, only the facts of the matter have been hidden in plain sight through chaos and political activism for which James Comey is clearly guilty.

Remember this is the same James Comey who played games with the wording of the San Bernardino terrorist attack, by the request of the White House indicating that the terrorism was not an act of a “larger” terrorist cell and that the participants acted alone—even though we know now and then that wasn’t true. This is also the same James Comey who released the crime scene of the terrorist’s apartment to reporters which destroyed countless bits of evidence linking those terrorists to a greater threat.  Then he complained that he couldn’t unlock the iPhone left by the terrorists which as we learned from Wikileaks was another lie—because the technology to unlock the phone had been there all along—they just wanted to act as an activist in forcing the hand of the Apple Company to get on board with data collection on their users.  So we are not talking about a good ol’ Boy Scout in Director James Comey.  The man is highly political.  He fumbled the Hillary Clinton email case and looks to have wanted to hand her the election by calling off the investigation into her days before the election. Then he provided testimony against Trump in front of congress that was obviously biased.  For instance, how could he know the thoughts of the Russians when he said there was no evidence connecting them to the Trump campaign then said they wanted Trump to win and Hillary to lose?  And this is just over the last few years, from December of 2015 to March of 2017.  If there was any justice in the world, Comey would be fired.  I thought he might be a good cop when he investigated Hillary Clinton in July of 2016 but when he kicked the case off to the side in the first weekend of November, he was playing the odds in favor of Hillary Clinton and was using the law to pick winners and losers.

So what can you do when you can’t trust the cops, and the legal system behind them? Well, you vote for a new president and you clean house in government positions—like Comey’s.  You also pick media sources to get your information from those who have a track record of honesty in the face of fire, not those who are part of a wide net of corruption as Deep State contributors—like CNN, ABC News and the terrible NBC—people like Judge Napolitano.  When these vile political insurgents destroy evidence so that we can never trace back the intentions of the perpetrators you can tell who is telling the truth by the actions of others when they get caught taking action against someone, such as the suspension of Judge Napolitano for connecting the dots between the White House of Obama, the British spies and Trump which forced Fox News to take action against the one person who put all the dots together—because as a judge used to assembling the facts of a case to apply the scales of justice—the situation was obvious.  But that evidence needed to remain hidden, so punishment was administered and Murdoch agreed to it because of his past accusations by British authorities for wiretapping of his own—in the old-fashioned way.

Yet the media had a field day with the fake news that came from Comey’s mouth, about a Russian government who wanted to make it easy for Trump to win the presidency and declared that there was no evidence Obama ordered wiretapping in Trump Tower. For pointing out the injustice of it all, Trump was called a conspiracy theorist, just as they had called him back in 2012 over Obama’s birth certificate.  But Trump has been proven to be right much more often than the media will admit.  But that doesn’t matter, because Judge Napolitano has a very good record of telling the truth, and I’d be inclined to believe him over James Comey any day.  Because Comey doesn’t have a very good record. I imagine when the guards let the Trojan Horse into Troy one of the guards at the gate were probably like James Comey—sympathetic to the enemy and were admirers of the Horse’s construction.  So they let it in, and Troy fell in siege.  But what we have now that they didn’t have then was someone like Judge Napolitano willing to speak the truth even if it’s not popular and costs him at his job.

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.