Hillary Clinton has her own private NSA.

American Bridge PAC spent last week spying on the private conversations of attendees at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).

The group also plans to spy on the private lives of GOP delegates to the 2016 Republican National Convention wherever the convention is located, but Politico reports ABPAC has issued the following threat if the GOP selects Las Vegas as its host city. American Bridge has set up this website at “SinCityGOP” and announces (bold print supplied):

While the Republican Party debates where to hold the Republican National Convention in 2016, American Bridge is preparing our team of researchers and trackers to capture the action no matter what city they choose.

In making their selection, Republicans would do well to remember that Las Vegas is already the city with the most cameras per capita of anywhere on the planet. What’s another two or three dozen American Bridge trackers added to the mix?

And if the RNC does choose Las Vegas, this is the site for all the action. What happens in Vegas… will go right here.

American Bridge was founded by Clinton ally David Brock and is funded by longtime Clinton supporter and billionaire George Soros. American Bridge PAC president Brad Woodhouse boasted that the group’s “trackers” at CPAC had been “in the hallways capturing conversations and that kind of thing.” Meaning? Meaning Hillary’s American Bridge is about invading privacy. CPAC’s today, someone else’s tomorrow. Yours.

The news of “capturing” private conversations at CPAC follows on the heels of multiple congressional investigations into the Obama-run IRS, which has been using the government to ask Tea Party groups about the contents of their members’ prayers, what books they read, and the contents of private phone calls and media interviews. A second controversy has erupted over the NSA collection of “metadata”—including the phone numbers of all Americans.

The news of Clinton’s high tech spies peering into private conversations at CPAC and set to peer into the private lives of GOP delegates comes as the privacy of American citizens has erupted as a major political issue in both the 2014 and 2016 campaigns.

Recently Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky announced the filing of a class-action suit over NSA surveillance. Last week Paul, one of the nation’s most passionate defenders of the Fourth Amendment, told the attendees of CPAC that “what you do on your cell phone is none of their damn business.” Paul was greeted with a roar of approval from the youthful audience, later winning the CPAC presidential straw poll. Ironically, even as Paul was speaking at CPAC, Clinton literally had spies in CPAC’s midst eavesdropping on private conversations.

Reports Politico of Brock, Soros, Hillary and company, with bold print supplied:

EXCLUSIVE: Las Vegas is one of the RNC’s finalists for the 2016 convention, and plenty of Republicans are calling it the favorite, based on the hope that casino magnate Sheldon Adelson would contribute generously, obviating the financial worries that plague most host committees. But Playbook has learned that American Bridge, the Democratic tracking and opposition research outfit founded by David Brock and run by Brad Woodhouse, plans to devote up to three dozen trackers with video cameras to Sin City if the GOP picks it. American Bridge has committed to deploy what a source called a “tracking operation on steroids” to cover the plethora of venues sure to attract Republican politicians and operatives.

Per a Democratic source: “American Bridge’s plans would scatter trackers with video cameras from one end of the Strip to the other and would include a rapid response war room in the city to turn the footage into instant products — even potentially television ads — exposing whatever activities and hypocricies (sic) they catch on film. … American Bridge’s efforts … would be looking to capture everything from the late night carousing of politicians to simply filming candidates who claim to be the bastion of family values entering and exiting bars and casinos.”

Catch that? Any “late night carousing” of those “entering and exiting bars and casinos” will have their privacy targeted by Clinton’s group.

Clinton’s American Bridge PAC, operated by ally David Brock, has been funded by Soros, as reported here:

American Bridge received $1 million from the Soros Fund Management firm during the 2012 election cycle and funding from individual donors and labor unions.

The group has been transformed from an ordinary political action committee into the political version of the NSA, its staffers working out of a room littered with computer monitors that will flash the latest privacy invasion for dissemination.

All of this in the name of electing Hillary Clinton president—where Clinton would be in charge of the IRS, the NSA, the FBI, and the CIA.

Match this intention of Hillary’s allies spying on GOP delegates at a presumed Las Vegas GOP convention with the revelations of NSA spying on foreign leaders while she was secretary of state, as discussed here by ex-Clinton aide Dick Morris, bold print supplied:

We … know this about Clinton: the record shows that she’s been interested in personal information about foreign leaders in the past.

The 2010 WikiLeaks included a cable sent to our embassy in Buenos Aires seeking highly personal details about Argentine President Christina Fernández, including questions about her medications, her daily time with her husband, her method of dealing with stress and, specifically, “how do [her] emotions affect her decision-making and how does she calm down when distressed?” …

This kind of intrusive tactic is nothing new for Clinton. Remember that during the 1992 presidential campaign, she approved hiring private detectives (paid with campaign funds) to amass compromising information on women who claimed to have been sexually involved with her husband.

Suddenly, reports surfaced of abortions, bankruptcies, messy divorces and high school and college misconduct in the lives of women who got in her husband’s way. The detectives she hired — who we’ve called the “secret police” — were doing their work. And the women went away.

In view of Clinton’s historical affinity for personal surveillance and the evidence that it continues, we’re entitled to answers about how this possible future president of the United States was involved in the decision to compromise our relations with some of our most important allies.

Perhaps carelessly, ABC News was invited into American Bridge headquarters where Hillary’s spies openly bragged about what they were doing. The headline?

Scenes From a War Room: Spying on GOP With Top Oppo Hitmen

It is no coincidence that David Brock is involved in this high-tech KGB-style operation. And speaking of the KGB, the Economist reports that Ukrainian “officers (have been) blackmailed with threats” if they don’t cooperate with Vladimir Putin.

Note that in this same KGB style, it was reported awhile back in the Daily Caller that an internal memo from Brock’s Media Matters called for the hiring of private investigators to “look into the personal lives of Fox employees.” The memo from one Karl Frisch read in part:

We should hire private investigators to look into the personal lives of Fox News anchors, hosts, reporters, prominent contributors, senior network and corporate staff.

This is, of course, the 21^st-century high-tech version of the Clinton strategy that was followed back in 1992. As described by former Newsweek reporter Michael Isikoff in his 1999 book on the Clinton scandals, Uncovering Clinton: A Reporter’s Story, the Clinton campaign used private investigator Jack Palladino, whose task in spying on various Bill Clinton paramours was “gathering information that would raise questions about their credibility or mental stability.” Precisely the self-promoted task of American Bridge.

Wrote Isikoff of the Clinton investigations of women:

The payments to Palladino came from campaign funds, which were federally subsidized. Equally important, they were being laundered: the initial payments, totaling $28,000, were made to a Denver law firm, which in turn passed the money to Palladino’s agency in San Francisco….The total Clinton campaign funds disbursed to Palladino had exceeded $100,000.

Now? This newest high-tech group of Hillary’s spies has been funded by George Soros.

There has been an attempt to dismiss the old stories swirling around the Clintons as irrelevant to Mrs. Clinton’s presumed 2016 presidential campaign. Not long ago, after Senator Paul raised the issue of Bill Clinton’s conduct, former governor Mitt Romney was on television saying that Bill’s past behavior was not all that important. Others joined the chorus. In reply, The American Spectator’s own R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. wrote the following:

My answer to Mr. Romney’s advice offered on “Meet the Press” Sunday is that everyone running for high office has a past that is relevant to the present. Hillary’s past is, if the press does its job, inescapable.

Bob Tyrrell, whose experience with the shadowy machinations of the Clintons is legendary, has gotten this right.

On top of Hillary’s past, there is something distinctly new on the political scene. That would be the advent of spying on private citizens—using the IRS and the NSA—as a serious political issue. Whatever one thinks of Edward Snowden, it is indisputable that Snowden’s actions in revealing the actions of the NSA launched a firestorm over the issue of privacy.

And one of the main groups affected by all this politically is Millennials, or Generation Y.

Which is why Mrs. Clinton delivered a speech a few days back that specifically targeted Generation Y. Said Clinton, in part, as headlined and written in National Journal:

Hillary Clinton’s Love Letter to Millennials

We need you. We need your energy. We need your talents. We need your commitment to participation,” Clinton continued. “We cannot let the millennial generation become a lost generation.”

The former first lady will need young people, too, if she runs for president in 2016. The demographic helped Barack Obama upset Clinton in 2008, and then propel him to the White House twice. In Iowa, young caucus-goers liked Obama over the next-closest competitor by a margin of more than 4-to-1, according to one survey. The margin was smaller in other states, but still significant.

That “closest competitor” of Obama’s in those 2008 Iowa caucuses? Hillary Clinton. Writes Ben Smith over at Buzzfeed: “The new dagger at Clinton’s heart is generational.”

And what is it that Millennials care about? That would be….privacy.

Writing in Townhall the other day, nineteen-year-old Charlie Kirk of Turning Point USA (a group of college students focused on fiscal conservatism) wrote the following in a piece titled “The NSA and Millennials”: 

It had been assumed that this particular generational group so accustomed to having their personal information posted on the internet through Facebook and other social media platforms would be, at the very worst, indifferent to the monitoring of their information by the government. Inductive reasoning is so perilous. Polling of this group actually suggests they are more sensitive to the loss of their privacy under the auspice of security concerns than are people over the age of 50.

In the landmark Supreme Court case Griswold v. Connecticut argued in 1965 the Court found that there was a right to privacy imbedded in the Constitution. That case, involving the banning of contraceptives, left us the axiom that what happens between consenting adults in the privacy of their bedroom is their business. Overlaying the NSA surveillance protocols on top of the Griswold decision a young person might be led to conclude it is ok to privately have sex, but certainly not to talk about having sex on their iPhone.

The backlash to the NSA revelations from Millennials is real, it is deep and it is wide. President Obama’s poll numbers have plummeted within this group since the secrets leaked and they are not rebounding. It seems that the generation that places everything on the internet wants only what’s public at their discretion to become public. They have an expectation for their privacy for anything other than that. Where could they have gotten such a notion? See Griswold reference above.

This fear of young people regarding the government’s blatant violation of their privacy creates a wide opening through which conservative political figures can drive a voter-filled bus.

Match up Kirk’s point to the activities of Hillary’s American Bridge and the bridge has been crossed to an entirely new privacy issue that simply didn’t exist when the targets were a handful of women who were claiming an affair with Bill Clinton.

Now, thanks to 21^st-century technology, the old news of a Clinton willingness to investigate the private lives of others has mushroomed to a new story altogether. A room filled with Hillary allies, computer monitors, and “trackers” spying on the private lives of everybody from CPAC attendees to the as-yet-unselected delegates to the 2016 Republican National Convention in an as-yet-unselected city.

With the privacy issue such a huge issue for Generation Y, the news that operatives for a candidate whose supporters are already openly spying and threatening to spy on the private lives of American citizens attending a political convention becomes a major issue. Not to mention when that candidate not only has a past record of having “tracked” the private lives of others—from the abortions of private citizens to the medications and “daily time with her husband” of a foreign leader—but is now asking to be placed in charge of not only the NSA but the FBI, CIA, and IRS as well.

Mrs. Clinton’s past is irrelevant? Hardly.

American Bridge—aka Hillary’s NSA—is gambling that spying on the private lives of others in pursuit of Hillary’s campaign is no big deal.

Mistake.

Big mistake.