Obama Administration wiretapped Trump Tower
Breitbart reported yesterday that the Obama Administration wiretapped the Trump Presidential campaign and even after no evidence of impropriety was discovered maintained those wiretaps throughout the campaign period.
In summary: the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.
Needless to say, the president is pretty upset according to Fox News;
President Trump made a startling claim Saturday that former President Barack Obama had Trump Tower phones tapped in the weeks before the November 2016 election.
In early Saturday morning tweets that began at 6:35 a.m., the president said the alleged wiretapping was “McCarthyism” and “Nixon/Watergate.”
“Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism,” Trump wrote.
[…]
“How low has President Obama gone to tap (sic) my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!” Trump tweeted.
Category: Politics
President Trump’s predecessor had probably THE filthiest, sickest and most corrupt administration in likely at least the last 150 years of American History. I wonder if they won’t make the Clintons look tame and IMHO they make Richard Nixon look like an Altar Boy in comparison.
Richard Nixon had a sense of shame, which is why he resigned in disgrace. Yeah, he is starting to look virtuous in comparison. He went too far with election hijinks, but he sure as hell did not unleash violent rent-a-rioters on American voters, and he did not steal.
Exactly. It is clear that Obama has NONE
Prez, you don’t have to put up with that prick….he has a drawer full of illegal actions, half of which the phony bastard could be hung for, HANG HIM!
Who is going to hold him accountable? If the Trump administration pursues an investigation the press will spin it as (yet another) piece of evidence that some sort of “dark cloud of fascism” is descending on America. Even if a successful investigation led to charges and a conviction Obama would instantly become a martyr for approximately half the country. Obama used the freaking IRS to go after citizens who opposed him and nothing happened. Color me completely skeptical that anything will happen here.
Well, this isn’t a case of President Trump flying off the handle. This is an apparent case of abuse of power, domestic spying sans warrant, and an illicit, contemptible, despicable, Stalinist tactic that even I could not have guessed that POS who left our White House in January would employ. This helps explain the fixation of the Left on the Russian connection. It now appears to have been a pre-emptive strike in anticipation of this info finally making it to the light of day. It would have been much better, so their distorted thinking goes, if the spying had yielded evidence of some sort of guilt. No wonder the Left and its media minions have not, to date, let the silliness about Trump/Russian collusion die. No wonder.
Time will tell. The National Review article seems to indicate that the FISA warrant that was granted was solely for that odd computer in Trump Tower that was communicating with a Russian bank. That’s hardly the same as a wiretap on Trump Tower, and it’s also, as of yet, unconfirmed.
If Obama was listening in to the Trump campaign’s strategy and giving that information out to the Clinton team, this is absolutely unacceptable. If Trump is inventing serious scandals like this absent any real evidence,… then he’s flying off the handle again.
So, you’re OK with a sitting POTUS trying to intercept the communications of a presidential candidate of an opposing political party for what appears to be nothing more than lawful activity – just because he can? And using the FISA courts, which are somewhat problematic in and of themselves in terms of accountability, to authorize that surveillance?
You might be. Absent strong a priori evidence of wrongdoing, I’m not. That’s one of the things that justifiably got Nixon hammered flat during Watergate.
And I certainly don’t think any such surveillance should be continued once it’s clear that nothing unlawful is occurring.
No, of course not – there’d need to be considerable evidence of wrongdoing before I’d accept POTUS tapping an opposing party.
But there’s a pretty big ‘fog of war’ on this right now. There’s a huge difference between (to use unverified examples) getting a FISA-approved warrant to monitor network traffic between a computer in Trump Tower that nobody claims they know anything about but is periodically communicating with a Russian bank that’s suspected of being tied to shady things, and monitoring all conversations of the opposition party in a heated election. And there’s a million possibilities between those two options, too.
If POTUS was monitoring campaign stuff without any evidence of wrongdoing, that’s absolutely outrageous. If this is another ‘Trump’ thing like his claims that Obama created ISIS, or Clinton is getting indicted soon, or how he knows more about ISIS than the generals do,.. well, then this is the President being unnecessarily incendiary and foolish yet again.
Like I said, time will tell.
Ah, but you speak as if the Obama administration has any credibility (HINT: They don’t). And what is so outrageous about this? I just see the President taking the left’s own tactics and throwing it right back in their faces. And what’s more, this allegation Trump threw is pretty believable given Obama’s record. Why wouldn’t it be?
I don’t hold the Obama administration in contempt like most here do; I feel incredible claims require substantial evidence, and one’s opinion of the administration isn’t by itself enough of an indictment.
Let’s get evidence, then grab the pitchforks.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m pretty sure that warrants for any kind of electronic surveillance don’t allow the Feds to continue monitoring indefinitely if they don’t find anything. Seems to me we’d be running into some rather serious Constitutional problems there.
I think that’s reasonable – the problem is there’s tons we don’t know. If this was about that server in Trump Tower, I seem to recall that it suddenly stopped broadcasting once it became a news story anyway, so there’d be nothing left to monitor.
News ‘stories’ like this, that come with wild accusations but no real evidence, are a bit like stories of shootings. Early reports get lots wrong, such as second shooters when there weren’t any, or a motive that doesn’t apply, and it takes a little bit of time for the smoke to clear. Let’s see what happens before we start talking Watergate.
Here is another point of view:
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/03/04/jaws-drop-malcolm-nance-tells-joy-trump-acting-caught.html
MSNBC? Seriously?
Malcolm Nance? Seriously?
UPDATE: Source http://thetacticsofterror.org/aboutus/executive-director/
“I’ve been involved in a lot of very advanced collection of operations in my world.” Oooh. He collected operations! Dahell does that mean? He’s the clown who said that the Podesta emails were obvious forgeries. See, he’s trained to detect such things. To this day, even Podesta thinks that the emails were real. He also used to appear on Al Jazeera. He’s a nut, a kook.
I find PoliticusUSA to be basically a Breitbart for the Left. We can all find experts who’ll say any damn crazy thing, but I’ll await some reasonable evidence.
PoliticusUSA was quoting Nance–entirely–from his MSNBC statements.
Sure, and they present a very one-sided thing. Like I said, we can find experts who’ll attest to any damn thing – I trust experts less than I trust evidence and reason.
LC, i consider Malcolm Nance an expert in this field…
Since there is a lot of speculation going on with this thread, I would rather go with someone with experience in this field…His thoughts seen more plausible in regards to the subject.
POTUS is Assuming without any proof…I think there is a massive cover up going on…
First POTUS says he has met Putin then he hasn’t, he seperates himself from his staff in dealing with the Russians, he has Carter Page on his staff then he has never met or know him… Flynn and Sessions have a moment of clarity and recall after the fact…It’s all BS…
That’s fair – he clearly has considerable experience, but I’d say his experience is in SIGINT and dealing with terrorist threats, not dealing with billionaires with fragile egos and their eccentricities. He may know a lot about placing bugs, but I don’t think that experience carries over to such a different ‘target’ as Trump.
On the topic of behavioral analysis, I’ve seen people who are practicing psychologists ‘diagnose’ President Trump based off news clips, and other psychologists do the same but reach completely conflicting conclusions. The simple truth is behavioral analysis is inexact, takes considerable time, and a lot of random coverage of a person, not select clips of their actions.
Basically, I’d give Nance some credit if he was speaking solely of the operational methodologies involved in ‘bugging’ Trump, but the extrapolations based on behavior seem a bit out of his purview.
For now, I’m just going to go with Occam’s Razor and assume Trump is getting his news -and his outrage- from Breitbart and Fox, and not some more solid evidence.
But like I said above, we’re still in the ‘fog of war’ on this stuff – I’ll await what develops. That’s just my two cents, though.
Fair enough.
Wait out.
“I think there is a massive cover up going on…” Me too. I think that President Trump was in cahoots with Putin, sometimes directly but usually through intermediaries, to lay the groundwork for a new world order after, of course, the Russians fixed the elections to ensure Hillary Clinton’s loss. It’s all right there if you know what to look for. The best hiding places are usually in plain sight. I realize that what I’m writing is being read contemporaneously as I type it by the Russians and the NSA but sometimes a guy just has to take chances to help people see the truth. I’m willing to take that chance, so, if suddenly I am not heard from again, don’t wonder why.
And there are some people who consider Nickelback musical geniuses.
Doesn’t make it so.
Does PoliticusUSA pay money for that kind of stuff?
I could use the extra cash, and I love making shit up out of hot air, nose hairs and pocket lint.
PoliticsUSA?
GTFO with that weak shit!
I worked in the NSA world for 25 years. Even if the FISA warrant was just for the computer communicating with a Russian bank, it is UNFORGIVABLE, particularly since there was not one shred of evidence that something untoward was happening.
And just to be clear, this would be something that FBI would do, not NSA.
If there was a FISA warrant. Right now, I’m going to let things settle over the next few days and see.
That said, I think if the Trump campaign claimed the server as theirs, then making a case for a FISA warrant is more questionable than if, as I think happened, they disavowed any knowledge of it. If there’s a system known only by IP address located somewhere in Trump Tower and nobody claims it as their own, but it’s communicating with a Russian bank that’s viewed as a somewhat shady place, I think that’s arguably a fair thing to tap.
If there isn’t any known connection to a US citizen, why not? What if it had no connection to the Trump campaign but was monitoring it, providing intel to Russia? If there was a similar system in the DNC, that nobody there knew about, communicating with Russia or the Saudis, would you think it a fair target for counterintelligence operations?
Again, it’s a totally different story if it’s claimed as a part of the campaign as opposed to a mysterious, unconnected system.
I don’t know anything about the law, but that’s my take.
The tapping or eavesdropping of any US citizen without probable cause is the problem. Period.
That a president ran an administration built upon usurpation of liberties is a separate problem.
However, given the nature of the past regime, there is no way this did not happen.
Time will certainly tell, but the deeper story is that the regime that sold weapons to cartels in Mexico and to the Jihadis in Syria; droned US citizens around the world, and engaged in election rigging in the Ukraine would scoff at the notion that tapping a political opponent is wrong.
The real problem is the size and power of government. And that is our fault, unfortunately…
Again, there’s lots that’s not yet known – if it’s a computer server, not a person, and there’s no clear evidence of who it belongs to, is that the same as tapping a US citizen?
You and I disagree on the nature of the previous administration, so we naturally have different slants on this story. But let’s see what unfolds and deal with what the evidence points towards, not simply have our pre-existing bias weave a particular narrative.
“then he’s flying off the handle again”
When was the last? And the time before that. Do you keep a list?
My take is that he has a firm grip on the handle and is about to swing it.
Batter up!
I did list three examples above – how a Clinton indictment is coming soon, how he knows more about ISIS than the generals, and how Obama created ISIS. All of those were clearly wrong, and just examples of him ranting and raving. Or, flying off the handle.
Love him or hate him, it doesn’t change the fact that sometimes he goes off on unhelpful, inaccurate rants.
Sorry, LC, the Obama administration tried TWICE before they got a FISA warrant. And if you know anything about them, the bar to get one is incredibly low, almost laughably so.
Then couple that with the fact they maintained said tap after no evidence of wrongdoing was found, and you have a SERIOUSLY fucked up situation perpetuated by the highest levels of the Obama administration.
We’re there a Russian “connection”, it would have been exposed long before the election. Even in December, Obama himself said there was no evidence of any connection between Trump, his surrogates, and the Russians doing anything illegal.
The fact the Dems are still trying (and failing) to make such a connection is 1–purely a desperation move on their part to cover up their own malfeasance, and 2–an attempt to deligitomize the Trump presidency.
And yeah, to coin the phrase, you ain’t seen nothing yet.
Were, not we’re. Fucking phone.
I’ll keep an open mind, but here’s where my uncertainty rests: Sorry, LC, the Obama administration tried TWICE before they got a FISA warrant. And if you know anything about them, the bar to get one is incredibly low, almost laughably so. I know the bar is usually low, but I think a part of that is also because it’s usually targeting known foreign operatives or suspected terrorists. I imagine targeting .. well, we don’t know exactly what it was targeting, but let’s say something connected to the major opposition party is going to need a lot more evidence. The fact they didn’t greenlight the first one maybe means they were treading very carefully, with substantial evidence, not simply rubber-stamping things as part of a witch hunt. Then couple that with the fact they maintained said tap after no evidence of wrongdoing was found, and you have a SERIOUSLY fucked up situation perpetuated by the highest levels of the Obama administration. Breitbart claims they maintained the tap. I’m confused here because if the tap was on the server, as the National Review indicated, that server stopped transmitting once it became a headline. There’s been some analysis of the metadata of the traffic by tech people and they were pretty confused by it. I’d like to see a timeline, since maintaining a tap once a server is offline makes no sense whatsoever. Maintaining it as you’re trying to piece together what the hell it’s doing is understandable. This was a server, not a conversation. But again, a lot of this is speculation on what was recorded, when it was recorded, etc. I’d like to see some evidence beyond the articles, which seem to trace to a Heat St article, that lends credit to the accusations. The fact the Dems are still trying (and failing) to make such a connection is 1–purely a desperation move on their part to cover up their own malfeasance, and 2–an attempt to deligitomize the Trump presidency. I have no love for the Dems and I don’t think the Trump campaign was doing anything intentionally troublesome with… Read more »
“I don’t have much faith in any politicians and like a little more sunlight on their decision-making processes and deals.”
Agreed.
“the fact Kislyav attended the GOP convention but not the DNC one, and the various meetings people have had with him that they keep forgetting about, I don’t mind a little investigation.”
I imagine you are talking about Schumer, Pelosi, McCaskill….
Interestingly, the Rooosky was surrounded by Democrats at Trump’s recent speech.
“This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.”
why waste time trying to befriend people who are already in your pocket?
It is more than “unacceptable,” progtard. It is every bit as bad as the Nixon gang’s Watergate bugging, if not worse. The Watergate bug was placed in a secretary’s office and could only overhear conversations there. But I guess you can’t get excited because the culprits all have a (D) after their names.
I’d also classify Nixon’s escapades as ‘unacceptable’ – maybe that word means something different to you? Here, I’ll even give you a link:
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/unacceptable
And no, I have no love for the Dems either, I just refuse to get all hot and bothered about yet another twitter rant by President Trump sans any real evidence to back up his claims.
What “odd computer communicating with a Russian Bank”? First I’ve heard of that.
Back at the end of October, Slate (yes, I know) ran a pretty explosive piece whereby a number of computer experts thought a server registered to the Trump campaign was communicating with Alfa Bank, a Russian bank allegedly connected to the FSB. The configuration seemed odd, and frankly, it seemed worth an investigation – here’s that article:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/10/was_a_server_registered_to_the_trump_organization_communicating_with_russia.html
Here’s a tech site that references the article (and thus has a similar bent) but isn’t quite as forceful as Slate:
https://www.engadget.com/2016/10/31/trump-russia-servers-alfa-bank-report/
Now, here’s another computer expert debunking all of this:
http://blog.erratasec.com/2016/11/debunking-trumps-secret-server.html
At the end of the day, it seems like it’s just coincidental naming and people jumping on a conspiracy before looking for opposing, simpler explanations, but when you have numerous cyber experts expressing concern, including one who has received FBI awards for excellence, it’s definitely worth a look – maybe, even, a tap on that server.
Getting keg of beer and dump truck of popcorn ready….
“Getting keg of beer and dump truck of popcorn ready….”
I expect an invitation!
Correction: “This helps explain the fixation of the Left on the Russian connection.” This explains the fixation….
For some reason, the term “Watergate” comes to mind.
But don’t expect similar press outrage – or investigation. Watergate was done on behalf of someone the press hated.
I hope POTUS has a Deep Throat to back up his claims. I am not seeing any evidence or even reference to any evidence yet.
Shit storm brewing either way.
Hardly just the POTUSs claiming that this occurred, DH.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/443752/trump-kompromat-story-its-all-disturbing
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443768/obama-fisa-trump-wiretap
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/10/fbi-chief-given-dossier-by-john-mccain-alleging-secret-trump-russia-contacts
The previous Administration apparently first requested wiretapping last summer. The first request was denied; a later, narrower request was approved. That request was the one continued after zero evidence of any wrongdoing was found.
I agree…
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/02/politics/russia-donald-trump-meetings-ambassador/index.html
Fake News
Fake news? Which part, the part where the previous administration sought a warrant but it was denied for lack of valid grounds, or the part that the Tyrant’s administration persisted and, after succeeding, found squat? Or maybe you are referring to the silly concocted story that Russia and the Trump campaign colluded in some fashion to undermine the sanctity of our election system. I’m cooking chicken on the grille today. I’ll toss on some crow for you.
Khuyesos.
Allegedly there was a FISA-Court warrant. I haven’t seen any proof of that, but it should be easy enough for the administration to confirm.
Too bad FISA warrants are sealed and remain so.
Too bad, it would be interesting to see the name of the person who requested the warrant. And their statement of probably cause.
Probable, fucking auto-correct.
You had to wonder when the various entities started all this nonsense about Russia if they really wanted to open that can of worms. You just knew that eventually it would boomerang on them – making the rest of the discoveries look worse than what they were originally alleging. And it will. Maybe not this week, but sooner than I had expected.
At the very least, this will give them an excuse to reopen discussion of the Clinton server debacle. They will likely have no choice now. Oops. Just another case of the left hoisting itself on its own petard. Oh, my.
“You just knew that eventually it would boomerang on them ….” — This is the part that has me baffled. There have been so many things in this election that have backfired, and the blowback changed the result.
They acted in such an extreme manner as to drive the voters away.
It may well be that so many lefties now believe their own propaganda that they simply forgot that it is a tactic they use, not reality. When they come to believe in their own lies to this extent it does not bode well for them, as we are seeing.
Maybe that is why so many of them are having what we used to call nervous break-downs in public? They certainly cannot accept our version of reality as being real, but there is less and less to support their make believe world. Must be a rather painful experience for them.
Shades of the 1970s!!! It is TOTALLY Nixonian! TOTALLY!! If your phone was tapped because you were protesting the War in the Viet of the Nam, you’d hear a faint clicking in the background.
(Please excuse the caps abuse. Just doing my version of a hyper-excited response.)
Well, if there IS real evidence, produce it! Otherwise, call Obama’s buttbuddy and personal pig-eyed puppetmaster Jarrett, and when she answers the phone, say ‘You’re an asshole!’ and hang up.
I can half believe this. I wouldn’t put anything past bodaprez or shrillary, but that’s just me. I used call a friend up for a chat, and end it with ‘(whoever was prezzie) is an asshole!’, just to ensure that if I was being wiretapped, I’d get the point across. Unfortunately, I did not attract the attention of the guys with little plastic ID cards, and I don’t have a landline any more, so it’s gone by the wayside.
Hey, I could call one of you guys up and say the same things, couldn’t I?
Sure. Want my number?
Did you ever read that ‘anger management’ story? It’s where I got the idea.
If this was done in accordance with a FISA court warrant, it was lawful. Now, if the scope of the warrant was exceeded, that might be another matter…but I’m going to have to see more before I consider getting bent out of shape over this.
Like everything else, evidently it’s perfectly okay when their side does it.
“Most transparent administration” my Black Irish ass.
The JEF was worried from his first day in office about his “legacy” and how the history books will look at him and his administration. This, plus Fast and Furious, Iran, Obamacare and others are probably the tip of the proverbial iceberg. When everything comes out about this and other “questionable” activities, he may make Nixon look like a choirboy.
Just remember, Senior Chief: Only Nixon can go to China.
We may find out soon enough that the JEF was BOUGHT by China…
China may want its money back, then.
I communicate with a Russian speaking server all the time. Sometimes she even communicates back. I try to tap it as much as possible but I generally use leather and rope as opposed to wire.
Other people try to tap my server all the time. If you have a server that looks like his…its just something you get used to.
I might get pissed too if I found out it was a Libtard trying to insert a floopy disk where it didn’t belong. Then again…mine comes with some awesome looking Firmware, so I can’t blame people.
Doesn’t the ex-Soviet (congrats again, by the way) have built-in security?
LOL, yes the formerly cold hearted Soviet does have her own built in security.
She is fond of some guy named Makarov for security. I have tried several times to introduce her to other protection specialists but to no avail.
Nice little piece. Uh, the handgun, I mean. (Cowers in fear, expecting a severe beating which he so richly deserves for the untoward comment.)
No worries bro, anything to bring a bit of levity to the situation is good by me.
Thanks, Dave. Props and my Russian sends her regards to your Soviet.
Makarov? I’m given to understand that Ol’ Man Tokarev does a better job overall. That is, if the ex-Soviet insists on Russian security.
There is scant info available regarding the secret ct created under FISA, but scant isn’t none. Below is a link that I used to look at the number of electronic surveillance submitted to the court and to learn how many were denied. In calendar years 2015, 2014, and 2013, there were, respectively, 1457, 1379, and 1588 requests. The total number of requests denied, in whole or part, for all of those years was zero. That’s right. None. And, yet, a request was reportedly denied by the t in 2016, a year for which no report is yet available through the link. Inter-freakin’-esting.
https://it.ojp.gov/PrivacyLiberty/authorities/statutes/1286
The last link on that page is FISA-related resources. That’s the one.
On a side note: 36″ of dirt will give your shelter 10 halving thicknesses for gamma radiation. Assuming you can survive the blast(s) you may need this Protection Factor during the resulting fallout.
For your homework, get familiar with the 7:10 rule.
This has been Safety First Saturday with Roh-Dog.
Half value layers/value and inverse square law. Very familiar with it.
That’s less important than knowing whether or not Snickers bars and corn meal will be substituted for money.
Good question. A few years ago on this site, I brought up a book that dealt with the aftermath of a nuclear war and what would be of value. Gas and tires were the new gold. Gold, silver, etc. were worthless. Food with a long shelf life such as canned food was particularly of value. Honey, tobacco, common medicines were very valuable. The book is Alas, Babylon by Pat Frank, written, I think, late 50s. Snickers bar was the number one ‘must have’ item.
Obama admin did the same with some journalists. Obama admin were a bunch of criminals.
No president can order a wiretap. That’s true. No president can order a burglary either. Nevertheless…
Those pts aside, a president can make his desires known to those who have the lawful authority to conduct investigations into matters of interest to him and, in the course of that investigation, submit an affidavit in support of a warrant to wiretap and search. The assholishness continues on the part of What’sHisName’s bootlickers.
“… a president can make his desires known to those who have the lawful authority to conduct investigations into matters of interest to him…”
Yes. Otherwise known as Plausible Deniability.
“… a president can make his desires known to those who have the lawful authority to conduct investigations into matters of interest to him…”
My first thought is of the IRS and how they screwed conservative groups hoping for tax exemption.
Fucking bastards. “We did no wrong and will never do it again.”
FOX News? Whats next, Drudge Report? How about someone less bias like NPR?
Daily Kos, fuck it, go all in.
Or even the Huffy-puff post.
How’s this? From the New York Times on January 19th, 2017;
That one is much better. Objective and non-partisan in their reporting. They even correctly predicted Trump had an 87% probability of becoming POTUS.
I’d keep my powder dry until this is confirmed. It is so outrageous as to plow new ground in dirty campaign tactics and potentially unlawful political activity.
That said, even if this is confirmed and verified that it went beyond any legal confines of a FISA warrant, the Fake Stream Media and the Democrat Party (repeating myself again) will pull out all the stops to spin this against Trump and Republicans. There doesn’t appear to be any sense of shame on the left side of the aisle these days. If true, it was undoubtedly meant to aid in the election of Hillary.
I have been unable to detect any shame in the Left for a while now.
IMHO they have about as much shame as they do morals or scruples.
And he still won.
Personally, i think the russians backed the corrupt, bribable, lousy-negotiator Clinton.
They -like- predictable, corrupt, and controllable.
I think they were as surprised by Trump as everyone else.
It’s remarkable how willing the news media still is to bend over and grease up for Barack Obama. Here’s a headline from the Washington Post this morning:
Trump, citing no evidence, accuses Obama of ‘Nixon/Watergate’ plot to wiretap Trump Tower
The inference being that because Trump didn’t specifically cite the FISA Court warrants in his goofy 140-character tweets that therefore it must not be true.
Or sort of like Al Capone telling Elliot Ness: “You can’t pin it on me, copper. You can’t prove I was anywhere near the scene of the heist, and my boys will back me up on it.”
Gotcha Perry! Shall I point it out or is it enough that I mentioned it? (Lars probably thought I was replying to him. You can exhale now, Lars. I don’t give a shit what you write. Still hoping for that bus.)
Or as Martin Lomasney, memorable Boston ward boss and hack politician, was wont to say:
“Never write if you can speak; never speak if you can nod; never nod if you can wink.”
This story was first reported by The Intercept back in October. Of course they didn’t have the same spin and Breitbart.
And it was reported by several agencies back in January and mid-February.
I find it interesting that Breitbart reports on it and suddenly it is a”thing” to be outraged about.
This story has no more substantiation than it did when other sources reported it. And in fact the Breitbart reporting is dizzyingly spun.
I believe it happened but it ONLY happens due to Trump contacts with foreign agents or threats. That is what triggers these intelligence actions.
I think our surveillance state has become an issue. But why were none of you whining about it when it was targeting other people who are not Trump?
The triggering event to monitor Trump is the same threat threshold that is used to monitor other citizens.
“But why were none of you whining about it when it was targeting other people who are not Trump?” You mean like James Rosen and his parents? You are, as usual, not only wrong, but alarmingly, blindingly wrong, Poodle.
Don’t forget Sheryl Attkinson – she and CBS news claimed that her computer was illegally accessed over a two year period. She has an ongoing lawsuit against Holder and a few others for illegal surveillance.
She was one of the first to ID “Fast and Furious” and gunwalking by the DOJ under Holder.
“I think our surveillance state has become an issue. But why were none of you whining about it when it was targeting other people who are not Trump?”
Squirrel!
The ACLU is out in force demanding that Obama’s surveillance state Executive Orders…., oh wait, never mind.
“This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.”
Babbles McButthead, it was people like YOU that sneered at the Lewinsky scandal dismissing it as political vendetta while ignoring the manifold abuses of power that “Blowjob Willie” was indeed guilty of. What about the abuses of power in the previous administration, huh?
I believe Trump should have waited while others ran with the story. It was re-released so it had some legs. Man, if this proves to be false, Trump isn’t coming out of it looking good. He’ll get absolutely no breaks from the left wing media and liberals.
I’ve heard that quite a few times over the last couple years of campaigning.
Though, I don’t recall when the left wing and MSM has given him a break on anything?
Even when he was considering giving Schumer a White House job democrats were railing on him about that and Schumer as well I recall. But that was just rumor and they still went apeshit.
Trump could feed every child in America out of his own pocket, send them to school with his own money all the way through college, and abolish homelessness and poverty, but the left-wing media would still not give him a break. They’d throw out that he’s doing it for tax breaks and lied about his campaign promises and even find that one last person who’s still homeless because he was overlooked just to show how he’s not following through.
Because he ran as a Republican.
President Trump could invent a cure for cancer and the leftist media would scream that he was doing it JUST to profit while putting Cancer Treatment Centers out of business while cheating the Grim Reaper and contributing to world overpopulation.
If what proves to be false? Under his predecessor’s admin, a warrant was sought and denied. The request was retooled and granted. Thereafter, he and his were subject to a fishing expedition that came up empty. That his predecessor didn’t personally request a warrant or authorize one is neither here nor there. His surrogates did.
If they had found something, Obama would’ve been the first to know, then Hillary’s campaign, then the left wing media so they could all rally up their stories to hit correctly.
Absolutely. There would have been more “undisclosed sources” quoted that Caters has liver pills. We would have been buried in the story of the Russian connection to the exclusion of all other news for days on end. But they got nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch. So what does the Left and their media minions do? They create the false impression that some people, including two commenters in this thread, lap up like there’s no tomorrow.
What’s in an n? A whole different word is all. “than Caters has liver pills.”
I give up. Freaking r. Hate that letter. It always runs away when I need it most.
Indefinite pronouns will be the death of me.
Did Donald Trump’s accusations of Barack Obama ‘wiretapping’ stem from news report by Louise Mensch?
https://www.yahoo.com/newsroom/postid/v-88cfc604-82db-3595-984d-76ff5706bcff_c-e7c9e7dc-9969-3b20-bcbf-1d63f53706a7_a-e7c9e7dc-9969-3b20-bcbf-1d63f53706a7
You had better answer that yourself, You are the only one with the requisite Yahoo app to access the piece.
Early on Saturday morning President Donald Trump launched a Twitter tirade against his predecessor Barack Obama, accusing him of having ordered wire tapping at Trump Tower in New York. Amid speculation over the origin of the allegations it emerged that they may stem back to an exclusive report by the British independent journalist, novelist, and former Conservative MP for Corby, Louise Mensch, an opponent of Mr Trump. On Nov 7, Mrs Mensch, who now lives in New York, published an article on the libertarian website Heat Street. Citing two counter-intelligence sources it suggested a warrant had been issued to the FBI by a secret court to investigate whether there had been communications between a computer server at Trump Tower and two Russian banks. The warrant was said to have been granted under the Foreign intelligence Surveillance Act, which allows a clandestine court to authorise electronic surveillance in cases involving agents of foreign powers. On Friday, months later, her report was cited at the start of a lengthy article on Breitbart News, the right-wing website of which White House chief strategist Steve Bannon used to be executive chairman. The Breitbart article also gave a detailed rundown of an argument made on Thursday night by Mark Levin, one of the leading conservative talk radio hosts in America. In his lengthy analysis the influential Levin told his seven million listeners: “The question is – was Obama surveilling top Trump campaign officials during the election? “We absolutely know this is true. The FBI did a preliminary criminal investigation based on a potential connection between a server in Trump Tower and a couple of Russian banks. “That turned out to be a dry hole, but one of the most outrageous things I’ve ever seen…totally uncovered by the media.” According to the Washington Post the Breitbart News article, referencing the work of Mrs Mensch and Levin, was circulating among White House aides on Friday. Last month Mr Trump referred in a speech to “what’s happening last night in Sweden”. He later clarified that he was making reference to a story broadcast the previous night on Fox… Read more »
You need to be more specific – what is the issue there? What in that is supposed to trigger my “give a shit” metre?
Your link is for the Yahoo mobile application.
However, do you mean the gaffe queen?
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/11/louise-mensch-adds-another-twitter-gaffe-list/
An interesting take from Dan Abrams – he use to be a legal correspondent for MSPMSNBC years ago:
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/yes-obama-could-be-prosecuted-if-involved-with-illegal-surveillance/
This entire fiasco, if true, points less towards what Obama and his POS’s were doing than to the problems of the secret courts set up that are accountable to no-one.
Hmmm
#ObamaGate
#SandTrapGate
#BoomerangGate
#NyeKulturneGayte
Oooh … want to get a Russian’s attention pretty quickly? Accuse him of having “no culture.”
#NyeKultunrneGayte indeed!
When a law enforcement officer seeks an arrest or search warrant, he goes to a judge. The visit does not occur in open court. It is a secret proceeding. The target of the warrant request is not present. His attorney is not present. It’s a purely one-sided affair. In terms of fairness, perhaps nothing is more skewed and lopsided than grand jury proceedings where the gov’t prosecutor has free rein, with minimal constraints, to seek an indictment, using methods that the rules of evidence would regard as abominations. These proceedings are secret. A citizen is not permitted to sit-in on them. My point is that FISA is not special when it comes to closed sessions and secrecy. There are many legitimate concerns about the reach of the gov’t under FISA but I do not count secrecy among them.
A few observations about the reporting thus far:
1. There is a specific legal definition of “wiretapping.” Most of us just don’t care and see the word, as used by President Trump, to mean any kind of listening in on a third party without the knowledge of that third party.
2. Most of us are intelligent enough to see that folks are waffling over the use of the word “ordered.” Yes, we understand that only a judge can order wiretapping so when someone who is not a judge denies ordering something which he or she cannot legitimately order anyway it means nothing to us.
3. Much ado about nothing – except that the left is overreacting to a lie that they perpetuated. They articulated the lie, they repeated the lie, and they are now discovering that all of us are not willing to roll over and pretend that their various delusions, wishful thinking, and silly expectations are life altering for us.
Having discussions with several liberal “friends” of mine, and the best they can come up with is, “Well, it was Breitbart, so it’s fake news.”
These are the same people who would have dismissed Bill Clinton getting blown in the Oval Office because it was reported by Drudge and not the NYT.
Honest question – no ‘attitude’ intended: what would convince you that it’s a made-up story?
Today James Clapper denied that a warrant to wiretap Trump’s phones existed:
http://dailycaller.com/2017/03/05/obamas-intelligence-director-strongly-denies-any-secret-warrants-against-trump-or-campaign-video
That’s a pretty big statement to make, and he surely would’ve been in a position to know. That doesn’t prove it doesn’t exist, but without some strong evidence to the contrary, it seems less likely.
Has James Clapper been indicted for perjury yet?
The questions went to warrants directed at Trump personally and to his campaign whatever the hell that is understood to mean. Clapper’s answers were no, not to his knowledge. He was not asked whether a warrant was sought or executed for servers through which then-Candidate Trump’s electronic communications passed. Would his answer have been different? I don’t know but I have no doubt that “Donald J. Trump was not named in a warrant and I certainly don’t believe that “The Trump Campaign” was either. I had long ago had enough of ‘it all depends upon what is is’ stuff.
I just read a pretty sober analysis on the most significant published sources. BLUF: while there may be enough to warrant further inquiry, at this point Breitbart and Trump appear to be exaggerating matters.
https://www.justsecurity.org/38347/tapping-trump/