RUSH: Samantha Power has been unmasking Americans in the last year of the Obama Regime at the rate of one American every working day. Two-hundred-and-sixty different Americans unmasked by someone not even in the intelligence community. She was a U.N. ambassador. It would be the equivalent of Nikki Haley today unmasking a bunch of people that she thought not — Now, I don’t know that too many people know much about Samantha Power.
Do you remember my in-depth explanation of the Washington establishment yesterday? She is it. She is a superiorist. She is a supremacist. She is a DNA socialist. She is arrogant and condescending. She is constantly suffering and in pain, a facial expression that makes it appear she’s constantly in pain. When she’s in Obama’s presence, the facial expression is as though she’s in the presence of God. She is married to a fellow traveler named Cass Sunstein. You may have heard that name mentioned here before. He is a classmate of Bill Clinton’s going way back, and for all I know a classmate of Obama’s.
But it is Cass Sunstein who is responsible on the left for the view that the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. He may not be the originator of that take or belief, but he was, in the modern era, the man who popularized it in a scholarly way. And what that basically means is that people like Sunstein and his wife, Samantha Power, and all those people — Obama even talked about this — they look at Bill of Rights as a negative.
What is the Constitution? And now given the way college students are being taught and what they think, I am confident that a wide percentage of college students does not know what the Constitution is. They do not know its history and they do not know its premise. The Constitution’s premise is to limit government. That is its brilliance, and that is its uniqueness.
Never before in human history has a group of people — Americans, a population, a country — never before has a founding group of people arranged the affairs of state in such a way that the state is limited in exchange for open freedom and liberty of the population at large. Another example of American exceptionalism, if you will.
Well, leftists who believe in government being at the center of everyone’s lives don’t like the Bill of Rights when you get right down to it. It’s not just amendment number two. They don’t like the entire Constitution, particularly the Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments, because they specifically limit government. They specifically spell out what government cannot do.
And that’s why they call it a charter of negative liberties, because to them government’s the center of the universe. The Constitution is negative toward government. That’s why we applaud it. That’s why we love it. That’s why we defend it. That’s why we protect it. That’s why we swear oaths to it. It is to limit an encroaching government to prevent the slow creep of tyranny and authoritarianism. That is its basic premise and the left is offended by that.
And that’s why from FDR on they have proposed a second Bill of Rights, which does the exact opposite of the Bill of Rights, and that is 10 amendments which would spell out what government can do. Now, they would say “for you,” but what it really means in their heart of hearts is what government can do to you, what governments can do for itself.
Anyway, Samantha Power is one of those. And she is appropriately, as a leftist, living in constant fear of the right, constant fear of conservatism, constant fear that the left is going to lose. She thus believes that everybody on the right is corrupt by virtue of what they think, by virtue of what they believe. Their very existence is corrupt and poses a threat to the left’s view of the proper way of life. And so she was acting rogue. I guess she was rogue. I haven’t delved into it enough to know if she was under orders to do this. But I would think she wouldn’t need to be, like Lois Lerner didn’t need to be told to shaft conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status to the IRS.
Obama didn’t need to send her a memo. The fact that she was working for Obama was all anybody needed to know. She doesn’t need to be told that conservatives are to be discriminated against. She doesn’t need to be told that conservatives are corrupt. She doesn’t need to be told to believe that conservatives pose a threat and therefore they should be penalized, limited, or what have you. She’ll just do it. As Samantha Power would clearly, if she believes that, for example, opponents of Obama, be they in the Trump campaign or anywhere, just the very fact that they are opponents makes them suspects, the very fact that they oppose Obama.
It’s like a banana republic kind of thing. The very fact that there is opposition to Obama is a political crime. And the people practicing this crime need to be exposed, and that’s what Samantha Power is doing and that’s her mind-set. I’ve never met her, I’ve never talked to her, but I can tell you 99% that I’m right, because I know these people, I know who they are, I know how they think. I’ve heard her speak. This is their life every waking moment.
They don’t have fun at backyard barbecues. If they do backyard barbecues, it is to plot, strategize, discuss. They never just take it easy and relax and have a beer, watch a football game. No, no, no. Every waking moment is devoted to the cause. Do not doubt me. They rely on the fact that most people are not that way.
They rely on the fact that most people are not nearly as involved and therefore not nearly as suspicious, and therefore they are free and able to operate above the line and above the radar. They’re able to operate in plain view. Nobody’s gonna care, except the opponents, and they don’t think we can do anything to stop them. The average, ordinary American, if this is learned, like it has been, the answer will be, “We didn’t know she was doing it. I don’t recall. But so what. So what. If she was exposing people, if she was unmasking, they deserved it.” That would be the reaction.
Here’s Catherine Herridge. We may as well start at the top. Catherine Herridge at Fox News is the source authority for the realization that Samantha Power, Mrs. Cass Sunstein, has been unmasking Americans. It happened last night. Special Report with Bret Baier. She uncovered all this news during the day yesterday.
HERRIDGE: Fox News is learning new information about the rapid pace of unmasking in the final months of the Obama White House. Two sources not authorized to speak on the record said the requests from Samantha Power, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, exceeds 260, with one request coming in the days leading up to the inauguration.
RUSH: Now, for those again who might be thinking, “What’s the big deal here, what’s unmasking?” Unmasking is a crime, can be a crime. Michael Flynn — everybody knows that name now — Michael Flynn forced to resign from the Trump administration, he was unmasked.
The way it happens is the intelligence community, the DIA, the CIA, the NSA, the whoever-A, the FBI, conducting wiretap or other kinds of surveillance on known foreign agents. For example, the Russian ambassador, whoever he is, is gonna be surveilled. The North Korean ambassador is gonna be surveilled, wiretapped. They know it. We know it. And so the Russian ambassador, the guy goes to lunch all the time, Kislyak, was under surveillance. And he talked to Flynn one day. Well, the intelligence people hear this. In this case it was Obama intel people. It was before Trump was inaugurated, and they hear Flynn, they hear the conversation.
Flynn’s not supposed to be made public. His side of the conversation’s not supposed to go made public ’cause he’s not the target of the wiretap. But if somebody comes along and unmasks him, which happened, then of course it ends up in the newspaper, like it did, and Michael Flynn is destroyed. He’s considered to be an agent for a foreign government. He’s talking to the foreign ambassador, the media deep state sources can run stories in the newspaper, Washington Post, New York Times, CNN, put it on TV, and Flynn after a few weeks is destroyed.
All of that is not legal. You have to get permission and there has to be a legitimate reason. The unmasking happens within the intelligence agency so they’re never supposed to be public with this because these people are not the target. Unmasked names are people who were not targets. But Samantha Power thought everybody needed to know what they’re saying and doing. And why? Because they’re conservatives or because they’re Republicans and because they’re not Obamaites. And simply because of that they deserve to be unmasked. That alone will be enough for her.
She’s no different than the snowflakes on college campus that will engage in riots if somebody shows up and says anything that’s unapproved. She’s no different, that mind-set. And she’s not alone.
So 260 names. And of course Manafort we now learn was surveilled. That means Trump had to have been overheard talking to Manafort. Manafort was being wiretapped, he is talking about Trump. It is a foregone conclusion, it’s inarguable that Trump was overheard and whatever.
Now, Trump found out about it and claims that his wires were tapped at Trump Tower. Everybody laughed and mocked and said he didn’t even know how to say it. Your taps don’t get wired. Your wires don’t get tapped. Trump doesn’t even know what he’s talking about. But he always does. He always ends up being, to one degree or another, right.
Now, people said, “No, no, no. No, no, no, no, no. Trump was not targeted.” Exactly. That’s the easiest way out. Trump was not targeted. Manafort was. Well, Trump is still not wrong. It’s a little overlap here. They might be able to credibly say that they didn’t target Trump, that there were no wiretaps targeting Trump, but at the same time they would know they didn’t have to target Trump in order to monitor what he was saying to certain people. You target those people. You get a FISA warrant to wiretap or surveil somebody, people you know Trump’s gonna be talking to, and bammo.
And since no negative reaction occurred, no penalties, no problems, no charges, nothing happened to any of these people that were leaking, say, and unmasking Flynn and others, then there’s no reason to not unmask and release whatever you’ve overheard Trump saying to people, or anybody else.
So let’s go to the audio sound bites here. This was March 5th on Meet the Press, Chuck Todd speaking with James Clapper, an elderly version of Mr. Clean, if you add some earrings in there. He was the Director of National Intelligence for Obama. Chuck Todd says, “If the FBI, for instance, has a FISA court order of some sort for surveillance, would that be information you would know?”
TODD: You would be told this?
CLAPPER: I would know that.
TODD: If there was a FISA court order —
TODD: — on something like this?
CLAPPER: Something like this, absolutely.
TODD: And at this point you can’t confirm or deny whether that exists?
CLAPPER: I can deny it.
TODD: There is no FISA court order?
CLAPPER: Not to my knowledge.
TODD: Of anything at Trump Tower?
RUSH: Well, there was. That’s the problem. There was. There was a FISA court order to wiretap Manafort. Manafort had an apartment at Trump Tower. But you heard Clapper, “No. No. Not to my knowledge.” So did he lie? Did he not know? He said he would know. At the beginning of the bite, yes, he would be told, “I would know this.”
“So no wiretapping at Trump Tower?”
“Not to my knowledge.” So Clapper goes out, this is when the media starts laughing at Trump, what a buffoon, what an idiot, shouldn’t use Twitter, he’s lying and doing all that. So yesterday, last night CNN, Don Lemon goes and gets Clapper, brings him back, says, “CNN has some exclusive reporting involving Manafort, specifically investigators got a FISA warrant to wiretap Manafort before and after the election. You said that you would know that and that you didn’t know it, so it didn’t happen. What’s your reaction to it now?”
CLAPPER: I can’t comment on a specific FISA order.
CLAPPER: I said some things about this on Meet the Press on the 5th of March, and —
CLAPPER: — I stand on, uh, that statement. Uh, I can’t, uh, I can’t confirm or deny it. I cannot comment on the media reporting which is all we have about a FISA warrant allegedly launched against Mr. Manafort. I can’t comment on that. I will simply reiterate what I said in March, uh, and I stand on that.
RUSH: What a dodge. What a dodge. I can’t comment on it. What do you mean, you can’t comment? You’ve been commenting on it every time anybody asks you until — this guy sounded like Gergen yesterday, or two days ago, when he found this all — (stuttering) The court of approval. Anyway, so they’re chasing their tails now. They’re lying either now or then about this. And they have been caught. But they are also confident nothing’s gonna happen to them because even though Lemon uncovered it here, it’s gonna die there, or will. They will not pursue it.
RUSH: Go back to the Don Lemon show and one more sound bite from Clapper. It was kind of the explanation point on the whole thing. After Clapper’s first answer, “I can’t comment. I don’t remember. I stand by what I said way back then. I don’t know. I can’t comment. Uh.” And Lemon says, “So did you know about a FISA warrant against Manafort at the time?”
CLAPPER: I did not. And again I have to say that what we have is media reporting only, and actually, uh, commenting on FISAs are classified, and so, uh, even if I knew something about it I couldn’t, and I don’t. And, and I, again, I will just conclude by saying I stand on what, uh, I said on the 5th of March.
LEMON: Is it possible the president was picked up in a conversation with Paul Manafort?
CLAPPER: It’s certainly conceivable. Yeah, that’s —
LEMON: Is it likely?
CLAPPER: Uh, I can’t say. I wouldn’t want to go there, but it – I will say it’s – it’s possible.
RUSH: Well, obviously. Obviously he was. They had a FISA warrant on Manafort, if we are to believe the media. And who’s the source for the media? The people that did it. Yeah, they are supposed to be classified. But 95% of the crap that’s been in the newspapers about this for the last nine months has been classified, and it’s leaked anyway.
So a long way of getting there, but Clapper says (imitating Clapper), “Well, it’s certainly conceivable, yes, that President Trump was picked up in a, uh, certainly conceivable. I don’t know, uhhh. And I stand by –” These people are caught. Samantha Power is caught. Clapper and Brennan and all of these people are caught. They have been exposed here. And so now the effort to make it appear like there’s no big deal and that nobody really knows is what’s underway.
RUSH: You might be say, “Why can’t we see the FISA warrant, Rush? Why don’t they make these public?” Well, it’s a foreign court. It’s what Gergen meant when he was talking about the court of approval, secret court. FISA is a secret court. We’re not supposed to know. That stuff is indeed classified.
But the reason I believe — I mean, everything leaks. And there were actually a couple of stories about FISA warrants that turned out to not be true. There’s Louise Mensch, this anti-Trumpist from one of the U.K. papers, a couple others, way, way back almost a year ago now in December and January had written that there were FISA warrants twice on Trump and nobody can find any evidence of it. And certainly nobody wanted to produce it.
But I think one of the reasons, in addition to whatever legal reasons, I think there’s another reason why the details in some of these FISA warrants will never be leaked or made public, and that’s because I suspect — of course, we’ll never be able to prove this — but I suspect it’s because we would find out, we would see that a lot of these FISA requests were based on the phony Trump dossier, which was the first place collusion was claimed. Remember that dossier, this is the golden showers dossier, nothing in it is true.
Just to relive some recent history. A year ago, like 15, 16 months ago, this dossier had been floating around Washington and everybody there knew about it. But everybody also knew that none of it could be verified. And so nobody in the Drive-Bys published it, but they wanted to. Especially after the election, they wanted this stuff out there so bad, because they wanted to do anything to hurt Trump. They wanted to do anything.
And this dossier was assembled with the assistance of Russian intelligence, paid for with money and operatives from a Democrat support group named Fusion GPS, not to be confused with Fareed Zakaria GPS. And the whole thing contained just bogus, ridiculous, silly, obscene allegations, such as the one that Trump in a visit to Moscow stayed in the same suite that Barack and Michelle Obama had stayed in and hired some prostitutes to come over and urinate on the bed, i.e., the golden showers.
Well, anyway, this was shown to Brennan, who was the CIA director at the time, and he believed it. Then it was shown to Comey, and he believed it. They all believed this, or they said they did, because it was used as the basis for all of this. I firmly believe that phony stinking dossier is what these people used as their convenient excuse to open this entire investigation into Russian collusion. And I think a FISA warrant that exists on Manafort or anybody else will show this, that that silly, unverifiable, rogue dossier formed the basis of everything. If that were made public, it would be embarrassing, it would attack and diminish the professionalism and the intelligence of these people, because it’s so obviously fake.
In fact, it was shown to Trump, folks. The Trump dossier was shown to Trump as a demonstration. If you recall, Trump was publicly saying that he didn’t need an intelligence brief every day. This was before he was inaugurated. This was during the transition. And the intelligence community thought that was a big slap in the face. You know, they’re very important. And informing the president every day, the hot spots around the world, they think is the first thing that ought to happen in his business day. And Trump’s saying, “Look, I got a good memory, it can’t change that much every day, I don’t need a brief every day.”
So they grabbed that dossier during a meeting with Trump, said, “This is why you need to see us. This is the kind of stuff that can show up out there. This is the kind of stuff that we need to know about.” It was presented to him as a joke. It was presented to him as an outrageous example of why he should meet with them. It was never presented to him as factual. It was always presented as a class project. This is the kind of stuff that could be out there someday and that you need to know about and you won’t if you don’t talk to us every day.
And the fact that that dossier has been used as the foundation is one of the greatest miscarriages of whatever that I can recall because everybody involved knows that it’s bogus. The way it ended up in public is the great journalists at BuzzFeed — ahem — grew impatient and frustrated that it would not be published anywhere else, that it would not be alluded to. The reason is, they all wanted to do it, but none of it is true, none it could even be pretended to be close to truth.
So BuzzFeed ran it. They admitted that there’s nothing to it. They admitted that none of it could be confirmed. They admitted that none of it could be verified but that it was so important that you need to know about it. That bogus, phony intel document has formed the foundation, the basis for all of this against Manafort, against Trump, and they would have a tough time walking this back. I mean, they can’t come forth, say, “You know what? That dossier is fake and phony” because they based everything on it.
Now they’ve got carry out the Mueller investigation. They have to find something, folks. They have to find something, because look at all that they alleged, look at all those newspaper stories day after day after day with all the leaks from the intel people. None of it ever established as true, no evidence ever presented, nothing but leaks and allegations. But look at how much of it there was. So now they’ve gotta find something. And so Mueller is now looking 10 years back into Trump’s life. In fact, on that, I have a little story here from the New York Times.
“Mueller Seeks White House Documents Related to Trump’s Actions as President – Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, has asked the White House for documents about some of President Trump’s most scrutinized actions since taking office –” Do you know what they’ve also done? Snerdley, did you know this? Do you know that Mueller has interviewed Rosenstein?
Rosenstein is overseeing the investigation. Rosenstein is the boss of the investigation. He’s the acting attorney general since Sessions has recused himself. So on this thing, Rosenstein is the head honcho, and Mueller interviewed him! I mean, that’s like interviewing the judge in a trial! It wouldn’t be done.
Well, anyway, “The document requests provide –” this is key, now — “The document requests provide the most details to date about the breadth of Mr. Mueller’s investigation, and show that several aspects of his inquiry are focused squarely on Mr. Trump’s behavior in the White House.”
Now, I want to jump to the very end of this story. And I want to read to you a paragraph here at the end. “Based on the document request to the White House, there is no indication that Mr. Mueller is pressing to examine Mr. Trump’s personal finances or business dealings — areas the president has said should be off limits.”
Now, wait a minute. All week we have heard that Mueller is going back 10 years, that Mueller’s looking at Trump’s businesses and his finances and he’s trying to wipe him out and he’s trying to find tax violations and all this. And now the New York Times, with a little buried paragraph at the very end, “Based on the document request to the White House,” meaning based on what Mueller has asked for. He’s not asked for anything beyond the period of time Trump’s been president. So all these previous hysterical reports about this from the news media, including the Times, has just been bogus?
RUSH: Now, there’s just one little bit of news here on this whole Samantha Power business. You know, she’s unmasking 260 Americans, and we had audio sound bites from the former national director of intelligence for Obama, James Crapper… Clapper, Clapper. Why do I always want to say… I have to catch myself. I mean, when I look at name silently, I think of — and then didn’t a guy named Crapper invent the toilet? Have you heard that or is that an old wives’ tale?
No, by the way, I was not making it up.