PUBLISHED: 9:51 PM 6 Apr 2017

Fox Host Hannity Vows To Sue If Report Of What Obama Did Is Confirmed True

16491175200_393576c2b9_z_480

Sean Hannity has pledged to sue Obama if the unmasking claims prove to be true.

“Fair, balanced…furious.” Perhaps that should be the new slogan for Fox News. If this sounds like an attack, it isn’t. If a news agency the size of Fox is not outraged by the incredible lack of respect for the Constitution of the United States of which their existence stems, then they may as well be CNN. If this all sounds a bit too dramatic for many of those who are hearing it, it certainly does not to Fox’s Sean Hannity. He has made a vow to sue Obama if reports that he was spied upon by his administration’s CIA prove to be factual.

Truthfeed News is reporting that Obama and his administration seems to “have weaponized their security departments” and engaged in spying on a number of American citizens who were supporters of President Donald Trump. It was GotNews who first suggested that Hannity could be one of the people who was spied upon. Considering that the media on both sides have been wrong about things like Russia-gate, basing too much on one claim can be dangerous. That said, Hannity has good reason to fear that the report is true considering the facts that have been thus far obtained regarding the Obama Administration.

Screen-Shot-2017-04-06-at-3.45.19-AM-768x326

Sean Hannity is ready to go to court over the assault upon his rights.

According to GotNews, Barack Obama‘s CIA Director John O. Brennan zeroed in on Trump supporters for what is being cited as “enhanced surveillance,” i.e. spying. It as if the lessons learned from Edward Snowden were ignored by everyone and our Fourth Amendment sits in an even more tattered state than we had feared. This information is said to have come from “intelligence sources,” though no further information is known regarding their identities. The offense is said to have taken place between November the 8th and the day of Trump’s Inauguration in January.

The main focal point of the surveillance was General Mike Flynn (who may have been exposed illegally, which ruined him), a fellow billionaire by the name of Erik Prince, “and Fox News host Sean Hannity.” It is that last quote that may land Obama in court and sued from the radio and TV host. It is believed that he was chosen for such spying due to his alleged ties with Wikileaks founder and truth icon, Julian Assange. It is even said that it was none other than Hannity himself who was one of the people unmasked by Susan Rice, the then-Natioanl Security Advisor for President Obama.

fasdfd

With all of the backroom deals and illegal activity, the fact that Trump STILL won shows how much America really believes in him.

Erik Prince is the founder of Blackwater, and he had been a C.I.A. asset in the past, so while not justified, spying on him at least makes a modicum of sense. What makes it suspicious is that not only is he now a citizen and protected by the Constitution from such assaults on his liberty, but also due to the fact that it amounts to targeting someone just because they spoke badly about an agency. In this case, he is reported to be one who condemns the “bloat and incompetence” of the C.I.A. He feels that Brennan was a disaster for the agency and that more could have been done to save innocent lives in Afghanistan. He was made a target likely for this very reason, and that is illegal.

We know also that Prince was mentioned (along with anyone sporting a “TRUMP” bumper sticker) as having “Russian ties” from the Washington Post. No proof of that exists, however, only mounting evidence against the Democrats. What Trump and those close to him faced was rightfully called by its actual name by Judge Napolitano. He called the actions of Susan Rice, “espionage.” As more and more of the facts flood in, there is no other word that can be applied to this action or series of actions. How is Prince condemning mass death from the C.I.A. a matter of national security worthy of unmasking? If it was done over Russian ties, imagined or real, who authorized Rice to know about it? She is only to be seeing such data as a staffer, not procuring it.

asdfasdf

Hannity has a particular interest in getting to the bottom of “Rice-gate” since he may have been unmasked.

As for Hannity, his plight is even more frightening. To the best of anyone’s knowledge, the radio host is not about to be exposed as a real life Jason Bourne anytime in the near future. He is not involved with the C.I.A. and has never been thought to be tied to anything nor anyone that would warrant such an unmasking. While he is a Republican (almost to a fault), he is certainly not someone who the left has any legal authority to investigate or snoop on. He is an American journalist, radio host, and news analyst. It does not matter if every member of Congress drifts off to sleep each night cursing his name, he has rights. These rights can not be taken away just because Susan Rice or anyone else decides that they should be gone.

Those on the far side of the conspiracy realm may suggest that Hannity likely knows a great number of things that he should not, given his status, and therefore he needed to be monitored. Pretending that such ill logic is sane, that is why we have warrants. If something dangerous or otherwise related to national security should be suspected, there are legal means to get a warrant and to have him investigated for any such conspiracy. Not only has nothing like that been so much as hinted towards, but no warrant has been produced to show its legality, even if such were the case.

asdfsdf

Democrats are hoping CNN can help them “ignore” the Rice scandal. This is actually what they said to do…”ignore” it.

It all boils down to the Fourth Amendment right to be left alone and the First Amendment right to free speech. If Sean Hannity can be spied upon for his views, how many others can be for theirs as well? Leftists who are laughing or joyous at the news, do not be, for it could easily be your candidate that this is done to in the future. For that matter, is this so very different from what destroyed the run of Bernie Sanders, the most popular politician (by numbers) in America? This is not a left vs. right argument, but rather a fight between those who want the government to obey the Constitution and those who just want to be spied on and/or blackmailed someday. There are not many people in that second camp, no matter what party they support.