Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, June 13, 2017

Sources with links to the Justice Department confirm that U.S. intelligence has legal copies of all Donald Trump's "tapes" of his meetings with Director Comey – and that Comey had his own phone legally hacked in order to record suspects, including Trump, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr, for over a year. On June 9th, in the United States District Court of the Eastern District of New York, Judge Orenstein slapped down Jeff Sessions as he attempted to force the service provider on James Comey's phone to assist Sessions with continuing an SS7 exploit placed there by the consent of James Comey, and lawfully, in order to help Comey in his criminal investigation of Donald Trump and Russia.

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

As part of an investigation into suspected criminal activity, the government has secured the agreement of the Witness to engage in monitored communications with subjects of the investigation. Beginning over a year ago, agents provided the Subject Telephone to the Witness, who in turn provided written consent to the interception and recording of all calls made and received over that device.
Separate sources with links to the intelligence and justice communities are clear that the ‘witness' in this case is James Comey, the ‘software solution' is the SS7 exploit used on his phone by consent, and that his phone was recording, again, by consent, and as part of a lawful criminal investigation that included Donald Trump, all his conversations for well over a year. This would mean that the FBI had essentially used Director Comey's cell phone to monitor suspects in the Trump Russia case since before the beginning of June, 2016.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Wow, wow, wow, wow, wow! Wow.... Comey was laying in the weeds doing his job as this nation's highest law enforcement official investigating the possible criminal activity of our current POTUS even before he was elected. It's in the court record, not just some unnamed source's allegations. And Comey interviewed the Trump kids as well regarding the servers in Trump Tower that were in contact with the Russians.

In the dry language of the ruling, judge Orenstein told Sessions that Comey was using this exploit to investigate a crime and that hacking his phone without consent was completely unnecessary. He told Sessions to go and boil his head.
Wonder if this comes up today in Sessions' testimony since the court record is already public and obviously not classified?

#1 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-06-13 09:50 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

I'd say that this is another shoe, dropping. Donald Trump lives in a shoe store.

#2 | Posted by Zed at 2017-06-13 10:18 AM | Reply

I wonder if his phone recorded Obama and Lynch instructing him "to find something; anything"?

#3 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2017-06-13 10:31 AM | Reply

Where are the tapes?

#4 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-06-13 10:31 AM | Reply

I'll wait until this is more widely reported to think too much about it.

#5 | Posted by jpw at 2017-06-13 11:06 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

This sounds fake.

#6 | Posted by bored at 2017-06-13 11:10 AM | Reply

Likely the sketchiest link on the entire website...
Patriobiotics.blog? Lol

#7 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2017-06-13 11:21 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

This looks like another false Mensch claim. Comey was asked under oath whether he taped conversations with Trump and he said no.

#8 | Posted by rcade at 2017-06-13 03:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Isn't this the source you used a few weeks ago to claim that warrants had been issued and arrests were imminent in this Russia investigation?

Why, yes it is. www.drudge.com

How are those arrests coming? Any day now?

You're like Bush the Lesser. www.youtube.com

#9 | Posted by et_al at 2017-06-13 11:10 PM | Reply

#9

Agreed.

Tony, you aren't helping the cause, pretty much everyone realizes that Louise Mensch is a psycho.

#10 | Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2017-06-14 01:09 AM | Reply

Dan Rather involved?

#11 | Posted by Greatamerican at 2017-06-14 01:17 AM | Reply

Tony,

Please consider manning-up. You've been called out.

#12 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-06-14 02:12 AM | Reply

Tony,

Please consider manning-up. You've been called out.

Posted by JeffJ at 2017-06-14 02:12 AM | Reply

Thank God I don't have to worry about THAT anymore.

#13 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-06-14 02:16 AM | Reply

I've always appreciated your sense of humor, Laura.

I hope it blossoms as you complete your physical transition to womanhood. "Stay gold" and all that. :-)

#14 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-06-14 02:21 AM | Reply

Did anyone bother to read the court document before attacking me and Ms. Mensch?

In a motion submitted earlier today, the government seeks an order pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C § 1651(a) (the "AWA"), requiring a provider of electronic communications services (the "Provider") to furnish certain technical assistance to law enforcement agents in the interception of the communications of a specific cellular telephone (the "Subject Telephone"). See Application at 1; [Proposed] Sealed Order of Authorization at 1-2; [Proposed] Sealed Order to Service Provider at 1.1 The government has provided the Subject Telephone to a person (the "Witness") who is willing to use it to engage in communications relevant to the government's investigation, and who has consented to have the government monitor all of the Witness's communications (relevant and otherwise) made using that device.

As part of an investigation into suspected criminal activity, the government has secured the agreement of the Witness to engage in monitored communications with subjects of the investigation. Beginning over a year ago, agents provided the Subject Telephone to the Witness, who in turn provided written consent to the interception and recording of all calls made and received over that device>/b>. The Witness further agreed in writing not to "permit any third person to use the SUBJECT TELEPHONE to make or receive telephone calls or to participate in telephone calls to which [the Witness was] not a party." Application at 6-7. The Witness again provided written consent to the monitoring of the Subject Telephone several months later, and then did so a third time two days ago; in this most recent writing, according to the government, the Witness again committed "not [to] allow third parties to use the telephone." Id. at 7 & Ex. A.3

Until recently, the agents consensually monitored the Subject Telephone's communications and location by using "a software-based solution" that did not require the Provider's participation. Id. at 7 n.6. The government reports that the latter product was recently "discontinued" without explaining how that discontinuance renders the product it was already using ineffective (although I assume that it must be so). Id.

Comey was asked under oath whether he taped conversations with Trump and he said no.

Did you understand the very first sentence?

Sources with links to the Justice Department confirm that U.S. intelligence has legal copies of all Donald Trump's "tapes" of his meetings with Director Comey – and that Comey had his own phone legally hacked in order to record suspects, including Trump, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr, for over a year.
Comey doesn't have any recordings, the people (IC?) who supplied the technology and/or the FBI have any recordings of conversations that Comey had with those "suspected of criminal activity." And it does not say that Comey recorded Trump in their meetings, it says the IC have "Trump's tapes" of their meetings, which of course is as yet unproven assertion that such recordings indeed exist.

Now stop and ask yourself exactly what federal agent would be expecting phone calls from possible criminal suspects on his work phone, what would cause the open, reiterated consent to be "turned off" (if not Comey's firing and withdrawal of consent) and cause the federal government (DOJ) to ask a judge for permission to turn the tap back on only to be rebuked and told that they need a court order to do so?

Call me out all you want but the lot of you need to improve your reading comprehension. The article stands to be proven correct or incorrect, but all your criticisms are nothing but weak opinions that fails to account for the factual information present in the court document along with misinterpreting what Mensch actually reports from her sources.

#15 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-06-14 04:33 PM | Reply

Did anyone bother to read the court document before attacking me and Ms. Mensch?

Yeah, I did. There is not one word connecting that order to Comey, the Russia investigation or any other person or organization. None.

It is pure unadulterated speculation for anyone to make that connection.

Sources with links to the Justice Department confirm that U.S. intelligence has legal copies of all Donald Trump's "tapes" of his meetings with Director Comey – and that Comey had his own phone legally hacked in order to record suspects, including Trump, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr, for over a year.

Sources? Like those that claimed arrests were imminent? So far proven to be absolute bulls**t.

#16 | Posted by et_al at 2017-06-14 04:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It is pure unadulterated speculation for anyone to make that connection.

Exactly.

The article stands to be proven correct or incorrect,....

Tell us something I didn't already say. You and I both know that this is far from over. I'm not dancing in the end zone and the lack of current proof is not evidence of the future.

Of course the entire enterprise is speculative until the moment it isn't.

#17 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-06-14 05:11 PM | Reply

I'm not dancing in the end zone ...

Yeah right. That's why you wrote #1 as if the connection is fact rather than pure unadulterated speculation.

Keep crawfishing.

#18 | Posted by et_al at 2017-06-14 06:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Keep crawfishing.

Hooked you -------....

#19 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-06-14 08:48 PM | Reply

?IF? The article is correct...

1. Trump is vindicated in his claim of being wire tapped

2. Come committed perjury

#20 | Posted by jamesgelliott at 2017-06-15 06:58 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2017 World Readable

Drudge Retort