Accuracy in Media

[AIM CIJ Director’s Note:

UPDATE: Former NSA/CIA contractor Dennis Montgomery has told Accuracy in Media through his attorney Larry Klayman that it is entirely possible that the British Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) was used as a back channel to collect and pass information—based on electronic surveillance of Trump associates and Donald J. Trump personally—to officials in the Obama administration. Montgomery said the procedure known as shell-game eavesdropping, in which the NSA can deny they are wiretapping, and the GCHQ can also deny that they are wiretapping, could have been used in this case. In other words, the NSA, CIA or FBI would ask the British to conduct the surveillance on behalf of the U.S. government so that U.S. officials could deny their own involvement.

Montgomery said that he has provided extensive evidence of illegal wiretapping by U.S. intelligence agencies to the FBI, but that the Bureau has failed to act on the evidence since he provided it almost two years ago.

Judge Andrew Napolitano of Fox News had said, “The NSA has given GCHQ full 24/7 access to its computers, so GCHQ — a foreign intelligence agency that, like the NSA, operates outside our constitutional norms — has the digital versions of all electronic communications made in America in 2016, including Trump’s.” However, it may be difficult to find Obama’s personal “fingerprints” on what happened, Napolitano warned. Under these circumstances, the House Intelligence Committee should ask FBI Director James Comey about Montgomery’s evidence of illegal wiretapping and then call in Montgomery for his own personal testimony. Klayman says Montgomery can shed important light on how Trump and many other innocent people can be targeted.

  • Please call the office of Rep. Devin Nunes at 202-225-4121 and urge that Congress question FBI Director Comey about the Dennis Montgomery case.]

A special report from the Accuracy in Media Center for Investigative Journalism; Cliff Kincaid, Director.

(Editor’s Note: Public hearings on this controversy are scheduled for March 20 and 28 by the House Intelligence Committee.)

Senate Intelligence Committee leaders from both parties, Senators Richard Burr (R-NC) and Mark Warner (D-VA), have issued a disingenuous statement that “no element of the United States government” surveilled “Trump Tower.” They dishonestly evade the fact that media reporting two days earlier had said that British intelligence operating at U.S. behest had likely been implicated in wiretapping Trump and Trump associates, all at the instigation of the U.S. government.

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said on March 16 that Fox News sources have reported through retired Judge Andrew Napolitano that then-President Obama had used two officials to arrange with the British NSA, called GCHQ or Government Communications Headquarters, to carry out the wiretapping of both Trump and Trump associates. (See this AIM guest column.) The British now dispute this claim.

This evasive use of British spying is done in order to leave no American “fingerprints” on the highly illegal operation, as the White House quoted Judge Napolitano. It is a long-standing practice under treaty-like intelligence agreements that British intelligence can use NSA facilities, and vice versa, for shell-game eavesdropping.

The trick is for the two agencies to swap places so that the NSA can deny they are wiretapping, and the GCHQ can deny that they are wiretapping. The Brits are trying to escape in between these moves of what a key expert has called the US-UK “wiretapping shell game.”

This is the first time that news sources have explicitly stated that Obama personally ordered the wiretapping of Trump himself, through Obama officials going to the British, though it has been implied in the past by the suspicious lack of any circumspect denials, even when The New York Times said on January 19 and 20 that “wiretapped communications” went to the Obama White House. No one in the article said “Obama White House—but not Obama personally.”

Consider how one important person—President Trump—got the clear media message that he was indeed the target of the spying: President Trump told Fox News’s Tucker Carlson that he read this New York Times story of January 20 before he tweeted about Obama “wiretapping” him. White House spokesman Spicer quoted from this article.

President Trump told Carlson on Fox on March 15 why he tweeted what he did: “Well, I’ve been reading…I think it was January 20…New York Times article where they were talking about wiretapping….I think they used that exact term.”

NEW YORK TIMES (print edition) Jan. 20, 2017, Headline:

Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides”

“found no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing … [but]

“… Wiretapped communications had been provided to the [Obama] White House.”  [Emphasis added; bracketed [ ] text added.]

And since the “wiretapped communications” had been given to the Obama “White House,” according to The New York Times, it naturally leads to the inference that Obama himself knew and approved of the “wiretapping” of the Trump team. Otherwise, the question would indeed be Watergate déjà vu: What did Obama know and when did he know it?

Remember, this is the same New York Times, along with other hostile media, that is attacking President Trump for making what it calls “baseless” and “unsubstantiated” claims of Obama administration wiretapping of Trump. It is its own reporting that President Trump was referring to.

The Times hypocritically suppresses its own front-page headline stories about “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides” which claimed that these “wiretapped communications” reports went to the Obama White House (New York Times, Jan. 20, 2017).

White House spokesman Spicer forcefully made this point to the press, which viciously dodged his points to continue insisting that “there’s no evidence of this” at all, repeatedly and rudely interrupting Spicer in an acrimonious confrontation.

Again, the question is: What did Obama know and when did he know it?

How the “Wiretap Shell Game” Works

Some reports claim that the Obama administration sought and/or obtained FISA Court warrants to tap phone calls and hack emails in Trump Tower.

But FISA warrants are routinely avoided by a little-known intelligence trick of using U.S.-British intelligence “reciprocity agreements” to dodge U.S. laws and vice versa. There are now direct reports of this Obama-orchestrated British wiretapping of Trump, cited by the White House to back up President Trump’s statements and tweets.

The British are issuing denials. But it is well-known that U.S. intelligence agencies can routinely arrange for British intelligence officers to use NSA facilities to spy on Americans, so that the U.S. agencies can claim that “they” (the U.S.) did no wiretapping or surveillance of Americans. It is a type of “plausible denial” government lie (see more on this in the appendix to this article).

The strange involvement of an “ex” British MI6 agent, Christopher Steele, in conducting “opposition research” during a U.S. election has raised no questions in the left-wing media. It bears consideration, as it could represent in reality a British “reciprocity” covert operation on behalf of Obama’s CIA, one to fabricate discrediting disinformation about Trump, not a mere intelligence-gathering or wiretapping operation.

The exact means and exact agency by which this wiretapping, or much of it, has been done had been left unclear until now, when the claimed British connection surfaced. These types of British surveillance wiretaps are known as operations under “UKUSA” and “BRUSA” intelligence “reciprocity” agreements, which are the functional equivalent of formal treaties in the spy world.

Such “reciprocity” operations are designed to evade the laws of each country, the U.S. and the UK, by having the British spy on Americans who the Americans want spied on, and having the Americans spy on the British who the Brits want spied on. Each side then exchanges the wiretap and other data the other side wants, thus without directly incriminating themselves. UKUSA reciprocity treaty “requests” have the force of direct orders to the other country’s intelligence agencies.

The wiretap data is exchanged under bogus traditional claims of the “extreme sensitivity” of “foreign liaison” intelligence, in order to obstruct outside oversight and thus in reality conceal surveillance of questionable legality. The UKUSA arrangements go beyond mere data searches and exchanges, by having, for example, British agents use NSA equipment and facilities on a rental lease basis to spy on the Americans that U.S. agencies want surveilled (and vice versa) so that the best equipment in the best position of access is used.

Former Justice Department Nazi-hunter John Loftus has documented how this British-U.S. “wiretap shell game” works, and pointed out how it is used to spy on political candidates in elections, and is covered up from Congress. Loftus reported:

“Over the years the British back-channel inside the NSA was used for a variety of political dirty tricks. A large number of American candidates for public office have been placed under electronic surveillance by British intelligence officers sitting at their ‘temporary listening post’ at [NSA] Fort Meade.” [Loftus, Secret War Against the Jews, 1997, p. 195]

The media have been saying that their government sources report that the CIA-NSA-FBI intercept targeting of Russians shifted to the targeting of the Trump team by September, 2016—possibly as early as June, 2016. There are reports of rejected FISA court applications in June and July of 2016 which would indicate that change of focus. (Incidentally, rejections by the FISA court are normally almost unheard-of.)

The BBC’s twist on the third alleged try at a FISA warrant, allegedly granted on October 15, was that it was narrowly drawn against only two Russian banks. But the BBC was at pains to assure us that they had an unnamed source who said that “three of Mr. Trump’s associates were the subject of the inquiry.”

“But it’s clear this is about Trump,” the source told the BBC.

New York Times Lies About Its Own Reporting

Meanwhile The New York Times is doubling down on its lies, pretending it never reported that Trump or his aides had been wiretapped, and with supreme chutzpah claims, “It is not clear why Mr. Trump thought he was wiretapped or what led him to make the claim.” Again, look at the front-page New York Times headline.

The New York Times has been forced by confused readers to grudgingly admit that President Trump’s tweets on Obama’s wiretapping actually do “echo certain aspects of The New York Times’s reporting from recent weeks.” But they try to offer up sorry excuses to explain away the glaring contradiction in their own reporting of Obama administration wiretapping of Trump and/or Trump people—and then their denials of it. The New York Times claims that what they originally said was that Obama officials merely investigated past wiretap data in archives of “routine” surveillance already done, but did not wiretap into future data.

But the New York Times stated in January that after past recordings of phone calls of Trump people had been checked, that the FBI “asked” the NSA to continue to “collect as much information as possible”—evidently without restraint or limitations—in what were clearly all future wiretapped calls between Russians and Trump people. It’s known as an intelligence “collection requirement.” (New York Times on January 20 and February 14;  see also the BBC on January 12.)

White House spokesman Spicer, days before the Times’ excuse-making, clearly explained that President Trump’s tweets on March 4 were based on open-source news media reporting of the wiretaps—thus including The New York Times—over the last few months.

In fact, the news media have been reporting since at least September 23, 2016, that U.S. intelligence has been “actively monitoring” the “talks” (conversations), “wiretapping” the phone “calls,” and intercepting other communications of Trump aides or Trump himself—communications allegedly made with the Russians.

“Active monitoring” means wiretapping and surveillance of future phone calls, emails, texts, and other communications on an ongoing basis.

Not a shred of any New York Times or other reporting since September, 2016 on the “wiretapping” of Trump and/or his aides has demonstrated any concern whatsoever for Trump’s civil rights or the sanctity of the election process. No concern was expressed by the CIA, FBI, NSA or other agencies, or by the Obama White House—or by the media doing the reporting. In fact, they have been quite excited and eager about the prospect of illegal snooping on Trump.

As White House spokesman Spicer pointed out, efforts were made by Obama officials during their last days in office to lessen the protections of wiretap data in order to spread more widely any highly-sensitive wiretap data on Trump. The New York Times reported on March 1 that the Obama administration’s lowering of “classification levels” of NSA data was done to “spread” the Trump wiretaps around various agencies and even foreign governments (see Obama DNI James Clapper’s orders lowering security protections of raw NSA intercept data, December. 15, 2016).

The New York Times had originally reported on January 12 that this massive lowering of NSA wiretap data security was in contrast to Obama’s previous tightening of regulations in 2014, after the Snowden mass leak, to give “privacy protections to foreigners,” like they were Americans. But not for Trump.

The New York Times headline story on March 1 that said Obama officials had “Rushed to Preserve Intelligence of Russian Election Hacking” also admitted that officials say that alleged Trump collusion with Russia “has not been confirmed” in any of that intelligence wiretap data.

So what were they “rushing” to “preserve?” It is the purported Trump “conspiracy” with Russia that is utterly unsubstantiated and baseless. Wiretapping one’s political opponents in an election, as Obama or his minions have done, is a classic Watergate-style threat to the democratic process.

The Fake “Trump Dossier”

“As part of the inquiry,” wrote The New York Times, this “wiretapping” was done by the CIA, FBI and/or NSA to try to “investigate” the alleged Trump-Russian connections claimed in what is known as the (fake) “Trump dossier”—within a broader investigation of alleged Russian hacking and other supposed election interference (NY Times, January 20, February 14, 2017).

This “Trump dossier” is the controversial document composed by ex-British agent Christopher Steele, who had been paid by Hillary Clinton’s still unidentified backers to do election “opposition research” against then-candidate Trump. It is riddled with absurd self-contradictions and vile allegations against President Trump.

The “dossier” cannot even make up its mind, so to speak, as to whether the Russians did spend “years” passing political dirt on Hillary Clinton to Trump to help “cultivate” relationship with him—or did not in fact ever pass such info to Trump (Steele report, June 20, 2016). There are at least eight different origins of the hacked or leaked DNC emails claimed in the “dossier,” including that Trump hacked them, not the Russians, or that they were all just “created” or “made up.”

The one-party opposition media have managed to ignore the ridiculous contents of the bogus “Trump dossier” with its raving lunatic absurdities.

For example, thousands of Russian retirement “pensioners,” according to the “dossier,” did the hacking of the DNC emails and passed them on to Russian officials, apparently in secret meetings at (we infer) park benches and shuffleboard affairs in Miami and elsewhere (Steele reports 095 and 111 and Newsweek, November 4, 2016).

These Russian retirement pensioners living in the U.S. are “hacking…cyberoperatives” according to Newsweek, in its pre-election article heavily based on Steele’s “Trump dossier,” oblivious to the patent absurdity of the claim.

You will not hear about that from the anti-Trump media, which so desperately wants the “Trump dossier” to be believed, regardless of whether any of it is true.


Former Justice Department Nazi-hunter, John Loftus, has explained how this US-British reciprocity scheme—or “wiretap shell game,” as he calls it—works. Loftus’ evidence of the top secret trick of US-British, NSA-GCHQ wiretapping of Americans is based on numerous NSA sources and others from many agencies stretching back decades, including censorship of this information from his and another expert’s early book manuscripts because of “classification” (Loftus, Secret War Against the Jews, 1997, pp. 188-195, 548-9).

According to Loftus this is how the illegal wiretapping “game” is played:

“… the NSA headquarters [at Fort Meade, Md.] is also the chief British espionage base in the United States. The presence of British wiretappers at the keyboards of American eavesdropping computers is a closely guarded secret….”

“The NSA is a giant vacuum cleaner. It sucks in every form of electronic information, from telephone calls to telegrams, across the United States. The presence of British personnel is essential for the American wiretappers to claim plausible deniability.

“Here’s how the game is played. The British liaison officer at [NSA Hq] Fort Meade types the [NSA-supplied] target list of ‘suspects’ into the American computer. The NSA computer sorts through its wiretaps and gives the British officer the recording of any American citizen he wants.

“Since it is technically a British target of surveillance, no American search warrant is necessary. [Loftus’ italics] The British officer then simply hands the results over to his American liaison officer. Of course, the Americans provide the same service to the British in return….”

“According to our sources, this duplicitous, reciprocal arrangement disguises the most massive, and illegal, domestic espionage apparatus in the world….

“Through this charade, the intelligence services of each country can claim that they are not targeting their own citizens. The targeting is done by an authorized foreign agent, the intelligence liaison resident in Britain or the United States” [Loftus, pp. 189-190; endnotes omitted].

Loftus describes how the courts tried to shut down some of the domestic wiretapping abuses, and how the FBI succeeded in evading the judiciary. Then the Bureau got its dream come true with the FISA law, which only applied to U.S. agencies, not the British:

“In 1978 Congress finally passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FIS) Act [or FISA], a feeble attempt to stamp out some of the worst excesses of domestic espionage…. [But FISA] was restricted only to targeting by American agencies, leaving the British liaison officer with a major loophole. The restrictive language added to the FIS Act [FISA] left unchanged the arrangement under which the British wiretapped American suspects and then passed on the information to the NSA.”

“To this day Congress does not realize that the British liaison officers at the NSA are still free to use American equipment to spy on American citizens. And, in fact, they are doing just that. Congress has been kept in the dark deliberately” [Loftus, pp. 191-2].

Naturally, such dirty-trick U.S.-British spying schemes have led to political abuses. In a comment of eerie timeliness today, with the claims of Obama directing the wiretapping of candidate Trump through British intelligence, Loftus states that:

“Over the years the British back-channel inside the NSA was used for a variety of political dirty tricks. A large number of American candidates for public office have been placed under electronic surveillance by British intelligence officers sitting at their ‘temporary listening post’ at [NSA] Fort Meade.” [Loftus, p. 195]

Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.


  • wfraser11

    This “article’ is garbage, fraudulent , inaccurate and intentionally meant to spread disinformation. Trash.

  • Colon Bowels

    I think that it is just some people reflexively respond to cognitive dissonance with hypocrisy. It is kind of funny for the rest of us to watch as I am pretty sure they are the only ones being fooled.

  • Tom

    “Accuracy in media” LOL. A bullshit site standing up for the REAL fake news purveyors…in the age of ignorance and Trump, it was only a matter of time. Thanks for allowing us to add another joke site to our block lists.

  • terry1956

    Is it possible theBritish &the nsa used a third or more parties to do their dirty work like the russian government does or like red China will do sometimes?

  • TED

    Amen, bro! You got that right!

  • TED

    Thsu far, this whole administration and everything about it seems like an SNL skit.

  • Mesa Mike

    Very good reporting. My concern is that Watergate makes too many people think “both sides do it” (and Democrats are the nice guys so we’ll keep supporting them). Democrats destroyed Nixon for his anti-Communist stands and for putting Soviet spy and CPUSA hero Alger Hiss in prison, albeit for perjury only.

    Democrats nearly destroyed the country’s socioeconomic system in the process; of course, to them, this was a bonus. Democrats then rigged a 100,000 votes to put Jimmy “Commie” Carter in the presidency, stealing the election from Ford.

    None of the mush melons who live in the fantasy world of political world of “both sides do it” neither know nor are led to care about any of this. They think Hiss is the sound a snake makes, which is in the ballpark, I suppose.

  • mioahu

    Peeping TOM and Lying TED, you guys are made for eachother. Stay in your little echo chambers crying for Obama, while Trump gives you a butt whip like little stupid children deserve. So sad there are still adults who
    don’t understand that leftism is the real danger for America, and Trump is doing a GREAT job dismantling all
    the leftists efforts, more than all the “republican” presidents before him. No wonder you throw tantrums ahahahah

  • NavajoKid

    We badly need an independent prosecutor to re-investigate Uranium 1 which involved the Clintons sending over 20% of our enriched uranium to Russia in exchange for a monetary payment to the Clintons in which Charles Schumer and Director Comey were allegedly heavily involved due to very reliable sources. We are also asking for an investigation into the foreign companies that made illegal contributions to the Clinton Crime Foundation of which Russia was one as well as China. In 2013, the same year that he was appointed the FBI Director, James Comey became a board member, a director, and a member of the Financial System Vulnerabilities Committee for the controversial London-based bank HSBC with close ties to the Clinton Crime Foundation and lists among its clients Frank Giustra, a Canadian mining magnate with ties to a Russian uranium deal approved under Clinton’s State Dept., and six other major foundation donors listed in a report by The Guardian. When Obama nominated Comey to become FBI director in 2013, Comey promised the United States Senate that he would recuse himself on all cases involving former employers.

    Which was a lie because Comey earned $6 million in one year alone from Lockheed Martin. Lockheed Martin also became a Clinton Crime Foundation donor that very year. If Comey Lies about the President the investigation will go much deeper and the findings will be sent to every news outlet in this country and Canada.The conservative publication StarNews also notes one further connection between James Comey and the Clinton Foundation, this time regarding his brother Peter Comey. As the publication was able to confirm, Peter Comey is the “Senior Director of Real Estate Operations for the Americas” for LAPiper. Interestingly, Peter Comey took out a mortgage on a home that is owned by James Comey. The $711,000 mortgage substantiates a financial relationship between James Comey and his brother and HSBC.DLA Piper is the number six campaign contributor to Hillary Clinton’s political campaigns since 1989 with over $939,101 in total contributions. It has also given between $50,000-$100,000 to the Clinton Foundation. If the name DLA Piper looks familiar, it was the firm tasked with auditing the Clinton Foundation.What a joke and Comey and his brother were up to their eyeballs in all of this.

  • Tom

    LOL, typical response from a Trumpista…lame name calling, childish threats and a Heil Donnie. Pathetic little boy, are you even American? If you are, then I’d suggest leaving because morons like you- are the danger…

  • TopAssistant

    The late Alabama governor George Wallace once said, “There’s not a dime’s worth of difference between Republicans and Democrats.” Both Republicans and Democrats agree on taking our money. Where they differ is what to spend it on.
    “IN AMERICA, WE have a two-party system,” a Republican congressional staffer is supposed to have told a visiting group of Russian legislators some years ago.
    “There is the stupid party. And there is the evil party. I am proud to be a member of the stupid party.”
    He added: “Periodically, the two parties get together and do something that is both stupid and evil. This is called—bipartisanship.” (Contra Costa Times Published Saturday, December 4, 1999)

    Those of us former Democrats found years ago the goal of the Democrat Party was to destroy America in every way possible thus we left the Party and went to the Republican Party where we thought they would uphold their Oath of Office/affirmation, our national security and our Constitution.
    I honestly thought politicians, from a mayor to president, would place our NATIONAL SECURITY as their top priority since it was the #1 priority in accordance with (IAW) our Constitution Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 “provide for common defense” of this nation. It is also repeated in the Preamble.
    In addition, our Constitution Article IV, Section 4 states: The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion.
    My dad only had an 8th grade education and he told me when I graduated: “If you have more money going out than you have coming in you have a problem!” America has a problem and it is BOTH the Democrat and RINO/GOP leadership/followers of the Republican Party’s fault.

    As of March 21, 2017 our federal debt is $19.849 trillion dollars
    We are now almost $20 trillion dollars in debt and if we could find enough politicians at all levels of government willing to place our national security as their top priority instead of Cultural Marxism i.e. political correctness, we could reverse our destruction.
    Here is a math question for your kids and grandkids. We are now $19 trillion dollars in debt and if we put $10 million dollars a day, 365 days annually, how many years will it take to pay it off? (not counting interest and additional borrowing)
    It will take approximately 5,500 years to do so. Think about it!
    The RINO/GOP leadership/followers of the soon to be defunct Republican Party are fully involved in our financial destruction thus they formed a “NEW” Treason Party and it will destroy us unless the citizens/voters get involved to stop them!

  • mioahu

    hahahha, said the guy who just name called everybody in hist first post. The inclusive retarded leftist who contradicts himself at every sentence… we are a nation of immigrants blah blah, until you disagree with them, and then they question if you are american. You are the Unamerican moron, the one who destroys the country from within, the one who teaches our children in schools and universities what a bad country the US is, who tries to undermine western culture by your stupid multiculturalism, who sides with islam which is the most oppressive ideology , who advocates killing babies and saving criminals, ,who stifles any speech they disagree with , banning conservative speakers and rioting, who praises leftist dictators around the world, who has no knowledge of history and no respect for the constitution, guess whos the little boy… Anybody whos a leftist by age 30 is just pathetic, but good thing you have the adults to take care of you, set you straight and whoop ur ass, AHAHAHAH

  • Tom

    Perhaps you should read my first post son…it was directed solely at this fake news site. Your lame ass started with the name calling. My bad, I assumed you could actually read. I truly feel sorry for pathetic little worms like you…must suck not having a life outside of your lame ass insults to random strangers on an anonymous message board. Back to your little fantasy world now, boyo…my time is too valuable to waste on the likes of an insignificant little turd like you

  • mioahu

    happy projecting Peeping Tom, I am sure what you just said perfectly describes you -) you and your stupid leftist kind are up for a serious butt whoop for the next 8 yaers, comrade

  • Anthony Duhe

    Whistleblower Tapes: Trump Wiretapped “A Zillion Times” By ‘The Hammer,’ Brennan’s and Clapper’s Secret Computer System – The American Report

    General Thomas McInernery discusses “THE HAMMER” the wiretapping of Donald Trump “A Zillion Times” by secret super computer of Brennan and Clapper – The American Report

  • Alan Stanwyck

    yeah just stick your head in the sand because government knows best. You dont find it odd/disturbing that conglomerate owned media has no interest in the notion of spying on political opponents? what if trump did it to your idiot liberal candidate in 2020?