Associated Press [AP] fact-checking proves that it’s a politically biased process with no objective journalistic standards, only biased reporters giving their opinions on the facts. AP was especially irked by Trump calling recent revelations about egregious FBI misconduct in Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn’s investigation “Obamagate.” But recently declassified documents show that former President Barack Obama held a meeting with his Cabinet, close advisers and federal law enforcement Jan. 5, 2017 to discuss Flynn’s case. At that time, Flynn was under investigation during the transition period for meddling in U.S. foreign policy. Only a week earlier Dec. 31, 2016, Obama kicked out 35 Russian diplomats for alleged meddling in the 2016 presidential election. Obama’s former National Security Adviser Susan Rice admitted Sept. 18, 2017 she “unmasked” Flynn’s calls with former Russian Amb. Sergey Kislyak.
AP in their fact-checking defends Obama and Rice’s decision to listen in on Flynn’s conversations with Kislyak, justifying it because they suspected Flynn violated the 1799 Logan Act, barring civilians from conducting U.S. foreign policy. AP mentions nothing about the fact the Flynn said nothing unusual, controversial or improper in his “unmaked” conversations with Kislyak. AP says it’s routine for U.S. law enforcement under the Patriot Act to wiretap foreign officials and unmask conversations of U.S. citizens. “There is nothing illegal about unsmasking,” says AP. Unmasking unless there’s “probable cause” or a warrant from a federal judge is highly illegal. AP doesn’t question the practice, only says its “National Security Agency’s ‘standard practice.’” AP’s biased interpretation of legal issues is astonishing, clearly showing they’re defending former President Barack Obama.
To unmask any U.S. citizens there must be probable cause or as the Department of Justice [DOJ] says a “predicate.” AP doesn’t clarify the probable cause because it goes to the heart of why the Obama White House overstepped its bounds, violated the Patriot Act or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act [FISA] rules for obtaining warrants to wiretap U.S. citizens. AP knows that former FBI Director James Comey used former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s paid opposition research AKA the “Steele Dossier,” to predicate their investigation into Trump and campaign associates like Flynn. When Trump talks about “Obamagate,” he’s talking about an illegal investigation into his 2016 campaign predicated on Hillary fraudulent dossier filled with lies and Russian disinformation. AP doesn’t talk about the fact that Obama’s investigation into Trump and Flynn was predicated on Hillary’s fake dossier.
Atty. Gen. Bill Barr and U.S. Atty. John Durham are investigating with a grand jury former FBI Director James Comey’s illegal counterintelligence investigation into the 2016 Trump campaign. Contrary to AP fact checking, it’s not “standard process” to unmask confidential phone conversations of U.S. citizens, nor can the FBI arbitrarily open up a counterintelligence investigation into a presidential candidate without proper predicate or probable cause. It’s not probable cause to use a rival’s opposition research AKA the “Steele Dossier” filled with utter political rubbish to seek warrants from the FISA Court. AP completely misinterprets the discretion federal law enforcement has to “unmask” wiretapped conversations with foreign officials or to get FISA Court warrants to wiretap political rivals. Comey did not have the appropriate “predicate” or probable cause using Hillary fake dossier.
AP explains the “unmasking” process like it’s entirely routine, usual-and-customary law enforcement activity. Where’s the objectivity in reporting on fact-checking for the AP, when its reporters express personal opinions, not the law, about what’s “routine” practices for U.S. law enforcement? “U.S. officials can ask the agency that collected the intelligence to unmask the name if they think it is vital to understanding intelligence,” AP asserts. Actually, there are real legal standards that must be met to “unmask” U.S. citizens’ private conversations. Obama didn’t like the fact that Trump asked Flynn to mend fences with Russia a week after Obama kicked out 35 Russian Russian diplomats, pushing U.S.-Russian relations to 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis lows. Obama lashed out at Russia only three weeks before leaving office. He should have consulted with the incoming administration before acting recklessly.
AP asserts that “there is nothing from newly released material that suggests the unmasking required were rooted in politics rather that national security,” telling the most egregious lie of all. What other motive could there be other than politics when Hillary’s dossier was a political document designed to undermine Trump’s 2016 campaign? Only politics was involved in unmasking Flynn’s conversations because Obama was embarrassed that Trump wanted to clean up his mess before he left office. When an FBI counterintelligence investigation then a Special Counsel Investigation is predicated on Hillary’s campaign rubbish there’s nothing other than politics at play. When the AP says it’s only “standard process” for law enforcement to violate the First Amendment, it sinks journalism to new lows. There’s no “standard process” using Hillary’s dirty dossier to violate civil liberties.
