Did the Obama Admin use FISA to Spy on Trump?
This weekend, President Donald Trump claimed that the Obama Administration wiretapped Trump Tower during the election.
“This is McCarthyism!” he tweeted on Saturday, later comparing the alleged wiretapping to Nixon’s Watergate scandal.
There is little evidence to support Trump’s wiretapping claim, but there’s no shortage of evidence to prove that the Obama Administration tried to undermine Trump’s presidential campaign.
Radio host Mark Levin calls it “Obama’s silent coup” and has criticized lawmakers for focusing on Trump and Sessions when they should be concentrating on Obama.
Levin laid out a detailed timeline in describing the case against Obama. The timeline was later expanded by Breitbart and published on March 3rd:
June 2016: Obama Administration files a FISA request to monitor four Trump advisers for suspected connections with Russia. The request is denied.
July 2016: Trump makes an off-color joke about Russia that spurs Clinton and media to claim that he invited further hacking.
October 2016: WikiLeaks releases hacked John Podesta emails that mortally wound Clinton campaign. The Dems say Trump is working with Russia.
October 2016: Obama Administration obtains FISA warrant. As reported by Heat Street:
“The FBI’s counter-intelligence arm, resources say, re-drew an earlier FISA court request around possible financial and banking offenses related to the server … the second (request) was drawn more narrowly and was granted in October after evidence was presented of a server, possibly related to the Trump campaign, and its alleged links to two banks; SVB Bank and Russia’s Alfa Bank.”
The FBI finds no evidence of criminal behavior. “Rather than drop the matter for lack of evidence of criminal offenses, the Justice Department and FBI pursued it as a national-security investigation,” reports National Review.
As Breitbart points out, “The Obama Administration is now monitoring an opposing presidential campaign using the high-tech surveillance powers of the federal intelligence services.”
January 2017: A former British intel operative compiles an outlandish dossier full of unverifiable rumors about Trump and Russia. Buzzfeed publishes the entire document, admitting that it is “unverified and potentially unverifiable.”
January 2017: Obama Administration expands NSA sharing, making it far easier for intel on private citizens to be shared or leaked.
January 19th, 2017: As reported by the New York Times, the FBI, the NSA and CIA, and the Treasury Department are all spying on Trump associates in order to find Russian ties.
February 2017: Michael Flynn accused of discussing sanctions with Russian envoy Sergey Kislyak and of misleading VP Mike Pence. Flynn resigns.
February 2017: The NY Times insists Trump campaign had “repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials.” Trump denies these claims; the Times admits it has no real evidence.
March 2017: The Washington Post lambasts AG Jeff Sessions for speaking with Sergey during Trump campaign after previously saying he had no contact with the Russians.
This timeline suggests that the Obama Administration knowingly spied on the Trump campaign and continued to monitor it despite a lack of evidence of anything illegal. NSA rules were relaxed so that evidence (including conversations between private citizens) could be shared in such a way that the media would inevitably gain access to it.
Author’s Note: This entire situation is disturbing in the extreme.
Are there officials who dislike Trump so much that they are willing to spead a story that will lead to widespread public fear that the President of the United States is compromised by Russia. Yes. Are there officials who are so afriad of Trump’s potential connections to Russia that they are willing to risk a public firestorm just to get an invesitgation underway? Probably.
Does the media hate Trump so much that it is willing to print unverified claims just to mock him? Definitely.
Editor’s Note: If this had happened to Obama it would have been headlines for a year. But the liberal media is invested in long running stories with no proof behind them.