Before he was selected to be prez of the USSA, the NSA had all the dirt they neede to blackmail him.
From Russ Tice, former intelligence analyst with 20 years of experience at NSA, the US Air Force, the Office of Naval Intelligence, and the Defense Intelligence Agency, in a June 2013 interview with Boiling Frogs:
“They [NSA] went after [spied on] – and I know this because I had my hands literally on the paperwork for these sort of things – they went after high-ranking military officers; they went after members of Congress, both Senate and the House, especially on the intelligence committees and on the armed services committees and some of the – and judicial…
“They went after lawyers and law firms. All kinds of – heaps of lawyers and law firms. They went after judges. One of the judges is now sitting on the Supreme Court that I had his wiretap information in my hand. Two are former FISA court judges. They went after State Department officials. They went after people in the executive service that were part of the White House – their own people.
“Here’s the big one… this was in summer of 2004, one of the papers that I held in my hand was to wiretap a bunch of numbers associated with a 40-something-year-old wannabe senator for Illinois. You wouldn’t happen to know where that guy lives right now would you? It’s a big white house in Washington, D.C. That’s who they went after, and that’s the president of the United States now.”
Oh for fuck's sake OP, where's the link?
R2- just putting the first sentence into Google search reveals the origin.
Since R2 is too ignorant to search google here is the link.
This Libertarian Idiot Alert(TM) brought to you by Goldline. Send us all your gold! Right now! If you don't have any gold, empty out your savings account, spend it all on gold and then sell it back to us! Don't ask why! Just fucking [bold]DO IT[/bold]!
Anyone who has followed the NSA scandal knows they have serious shit to hold over Obama.
I want to bear your children, R5.
OP/R3/R4/R6, the dull and defensive troll who put up this thread and who petulantly complains when people note her lack of sources ("Look it up yourself! Do it yourself! Boo hoo hoo!"), seems to think that logic demands turning an imaginary dotted line into steel cable.
[quote][R2]- just putting the first sentence into Google search reveals the origin.
"JUST" pasting the source link in the URL box does too, you ass.
You have a nerve calling others "ignorant" for not doing what OP was too ignorant to do in the first place. I guess that reveals the mindset of the kind of person who would start this thread.
Direct your anger at Obama, not me!
It's Obama's fault you're a moron, R10? Wow, I had no idea!
"Anyone who has followed the NSA scandal knows they have serious shit to hold over Obama."
He has been written about and investigated by everyone - including the very ruthless McCain and Clinton camps. If there was anything there it would have come out. He obviously has no "serious shit" in his background.
R12, they have his *real* birth certificate showing him to be a Muslim from Kenya!
OP is right, although Obama wasn't the only one NSA spied on. The article notes other senators including McCain and Feinstein. It was like Hoover spying on powerful politicians to get dirt to manipulate them.
Yes, R14, and they are holding Ms Lindsay Graham by the balls so he votes the way they want.
If not, those bareback sessions with an underage man might get released.
Does NSA and the CIA have files on Obama and all the major players? Probably. If they had the capability why wouldn't they use it? They do collect it and use it.
Does that mean those agencies control the government? Not exactly. It's more that they can shape its policies in certain ways and make sure the leaders don't take it off into solutions for domestic and foreign problems the agencies don't appreciate.
These agencies have their own agendas which don't always correspond to the agendas of the three branches. They see themselves as the real patriots who were here before the other leaders and will be here after they are gone. It is the agencies duty to protect themselves and the U.S. when other leaders go off course.
Before the Kennedy administration, the CIA was almost entirely concerned with foreign activity although they did some domestic work when possible, such as sabotage the labor movement. Domestic work was the FBI's area.
The CIA and Kennedy had a major falling out over the Bay of Pigs when dozens of agents died, with the CIA blaming the administration for failing to provide support for the invasion. The CIA distrusted Kennedy and had the sense that Kennedy sought rapprochement with the Soviet Union which the CIA opposed. Kennedy wistfully considered disbanding it.
The CIA changed its approach. Before, as in subversion of the labor movement, they would recruit or blackmail people on the domestic front, people already in place to do their dirty work, see Operation Mockingbird,
After Kennedy they started recruiting young people and putting then under deep cover in all branches of government from college onward. The old-school-tie network assured the next generation of agents ascension into areas where they could help the intelligence community
That is a real problem if any administration wants to go off course as to what the CIA wants to get done. Who knows what advisor, from Wall Street, or Harvard Law, or wherever, hasn't been cooperating with intelligence agencies from college on? These people are not working for the president or the speaker of the house exclusively but also reporting to the intelligence community. The thought of Dallas is always there also.
A more insidious form of control is self-imposed. Someone like Obama who gets to the top has always been surrounded by and admired the "smartest men in the room."
What defines success for those at the top? -- money and power. That's what gets things done so those who have it are those Obama and the rest bring around. Our leaders mix with them and adapt their ideas and programs. Those programs help, guess who the rich and the powerful.
Then there is self-interest. If our leaders go with the flow, after they are out of office, something always on their minds, they can benefit from those they have worked with through book deals, endowed chairs, public acclaim, etc.
Good lord, and I thought I was paranoid.
It's not paranoia - it's reality.
Remember Dwight Eisenhower's warning about the military-industrial complex?
How do you interpret what Eisenhower meant?
He was addressing the people of the United States about a problem with who has social and political power. He had tried to rein in military spending but couldn't do it.
These were his words just before the famous cite:
"The conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government."
He knew there was an ongoing threat to democracy at the time he made the speech. He knew unless something was done it would get worse. It has.
Um...I'm kind of thinking there wasn't much dirt. Besides if Repugs don't have dirt, they make it up.
Eisenhower was pressured to change his speech. It initially referred to the "Military -Congressional - Industrial Complex".
He knew giving too much power to the government would corrupt the system. He was right.
Let's face it, average citizens in America are fucked and corporations are fucking workers all over the world.
If we wanted a workers revolution, we wouldn't even know where to begin. Most of us might as well be slaves and we can SEE, that things will only get worse. Everything for the wealthy...nothing left over for the middle class. In 50 years, we probably won't even have a middle class that is worth mentioning.
President Obama has his hands tied by the wealthy military corporations...no one will ever represent the majority. And the majority are so ignorant, they have no idea who their enemies are.
I am endlessly amused by the Libertarian Idiot Troll's attempts to rewrite reality, e.g. R22.
"Geoffrey Perret, in his biography of Eisenhower, claims that, in one draft of the speech, the phrase was "military-industrial-congressional complex", indicating the essential role that the United States Congress plays in the propagation of the military industry, but the word "congressional" was dropped from the final version to appease the then-currently elected officials."
The arguments about this phrase on Wiki are worse than any datalounge cat fight- it goes on for dozens of pages, with historians arguing with hagiographers about the excision.
If R24 had any brains she would know that, but instead she swallows the shit she learned in grade school.