NSA Says It Has No Interest In Jimmy Carter's Emails

by JASmius

And if I believed that the Obama NSA was concerned with protecting U.S. national security, I might be concerned about that:

Jimmy Carter apparently can rest easy: the National Security Agency says it is not monitoring his emails.

During a wide-ranging interview with NBC's Andrea Mitchell that aired during Sunday's "Meet the Press," the former president said he does not send emails to world leaders.

"I have felt that my own communications were probably monitored," Carter said. "When I want to communicate with a foreign leader privately, I type or write the letter myself, put it in the mailbox and mail it . . . I believe if I send an email it will be monitored."

Like the feds don't monitor snailmail as well?  Shinola, is there no end to this man's naivete?

Of course, there's no limit to Mr. Peanut's delusional arrogance, either.  Yes, he's an incorrigible transgressor of the Logan Act and would have been in the slammer for life decades ago if he'd ever been prosecuted for it, but....he's never been prosecuted for it.  By upwards of three Republican administrations, plus Bill Clinton's, who almost had his Haitian aggression unwound by the Squire of Plains' insane pacifist buttinskyism.  Yes, Jimmy Carter is a national security risk - most especially, when he was POTUS - but if he never had the book thrown at him before, why in the name of all that's racist would the Obama NSA be watching him like a hawk?  Has he secretly become a Tea Partier?

The Regime was eager to confirm that freshly-scrubbed denial:

General Keith Alexander, the outgoing NSA director, replied to the accusation in an interview with Bret Baier of Fox News.

"We're not [monitoring the emails]," Alexander said. "So, he can now go back to writing emails. The reality is, we don't do that. And if we did, it would be illegal and we'd be . . .  held accountable and responsible."

Alexander said a review that included lawmakers and other government agencies revealed there were twelve cases in which the NSA had captured email communications. "And we had already reported those," he said.

And how many has your agency not reported, General?



Yeah, that's what we figured.

Meanwhile, the O-House was busy yesterday proving that it is only pro-Holocaust, not anti-Semitic:

The Saudi government is refusing to allow the Jerusalem Post’s Washington bureau chief to cover President Barack Obama's trip to the Arab kingdom.

In a move that the White House Correspondents Association called "outrageous," Michael Wilner is purportedly the only member of the Washington press corps who has been denied a visa for the trip.

Wow, that's....blatant.  Have the Saudis ever just up and denied a visa to a member of the White House press corps before, for any reason?  Much less specifically and avowedly because the denied "journalist" was Jewish?  I'm genuinely curious, because I don't remember any such instance, and I would think that this story would mention any such precedents.  I also don't note any blustering Saudi government claims that Wilner is a Mossad agent, which would be either awfully difficult or mean he has a pretty good cover since he doesn't even hold Israeli citizenship.  So it appears to be blatant discrimination on Riyadh's part, which is puzzling, since you can't convince me that Wilner is the only person of Hebrew extraction in the White House press gaggle.

But let's say Wilner is Jay Carney's "house kike" for the sake of argument.  Wouldn't you think that this administration, out of any in the history of the former Republic, would be the one to take a stand against such a flagrant act of prejudice against one of its constituent ethnic groups?  You would, wouldn't you?

Question is, why?:

The Post reported that the Saudis ignored "firmly worded requests" to grant the application, which were made by U.S. National Security Adviser Susan Rice and presidential assistant Tony Blinken to Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the United States, Adel bin Ahmed Al-Jubeir.

The newspaper added: “Rice and Blinken separately expressed extreme displeasure at the delay and the prospect of a denial.’’

The White House said it has complained about the denial.

"We are deeply disappointed that this credible journalist was denied a visa,” said Bernadette Meehan, a spokeswoman for the National Security Council. “We will continue to register our serious concerns about this unfortunate decision."

My, but that's....underwhelming.  Oh, the "firmly worded requests" and expressions of "extreme displeasure" and White House "complaints" and registries of "serious concerns" are nice and all, but is the Regime going to actually do anything about it?  Say, by canceling King Hussein's pilgrimage to Mecca?

Sorry, that was a rhetorical question:

Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes told reporters traveling with Obama en route to Belgium on Tuesday, however, that the Saudi Arabian trip would not be reconsidered.

"No," he said. "Look, we have disagreements with Saudi Arabia on a number of issues. We obviously have had disagreements in the past as it relates to some issues associated with Israel, some issues associated with human rights.

"But we also share a significant set of interests with Saudi Arabia. They’re a very important partner of ours in the Gulf, and we believe it's better to have the type of relationship where we can cooperate but also be clear and honest with one another where we have differences," Rhodes said.

Exit question #1: If the Saudis had denied visas to all the black members of the White House press corps, do you think the Regime's response just might have been a smidgen more....muscular?

Exit question #2: Might Jimmy Carter have contacted the Saudis about denying Wilner's visa?  I'd check his emails if I were them.