Either: the president used thinly sourced media reports to float a conspiracy theory about his predecessor and he was wrong; or,citing thinly sourced media reports, he overstated the details of an actual investigation into his activities or the activities of those around him, alleging presidential involvement without evidence; or, citing thinly sourced media reports, he accurately accused the former president of doing something highly illegal and accidentally uncovered what would surely be one of the biggest scandals in U.S. history. Whatever the case, the events of the last two days will undoubtedly have lasting effects.
One of the more rational things you've said. Or maybe it's Trump's way of floating out a dead fish to line it side by side up against Obama's intelligence to show the hypocrisy. If there is no evidence for Trump then why can't we investigate Obama for nine months and dominate the headlines? Maybe he's setting the media up here? There is more to this than him just tweeting at night.
Let’s be perfectly clear here: The scenario painted by President Trump of his predecessor tasking the IC with wiretapping Trump Tower simply could not have happened without a far-reaching and highly illegal conspiracy involving the White House and several of our spy agencies, above all the National Security Agency. My friends still at NSA, where I served as the technical director of the Agency’s biggest operational division, have told me without exception that Trump’s accusation is wholly false, a kooky fantasy.
In the first place, the White House doesn’t ask for such wiretaps, ever; such requests come directly from NSA, the FBI, or the Justice Department. Involvement of any White House in such highly classified requests would immediately set off enormous red flags in the IC and DoJ due to their glaringly political—and therefore illegal—aim.
There’s a special top secret Federal court that handles such sensitive warrant requests, which are issued under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, which allows for intelligence gathering against foreign spies and terrorists. They key words in FISA are the first two: foreign intelligence. Warrants are only issued against foreign targets which are deemed to be plausibly involved in espionage or terrorism against the United States.
However, Americans who call or email those suspicious foreigners may appear in signals intelligence collection, although under FISA their identities are concealed in SIGINT reports in a process the IC terms “minimization.” In other words, your civil liberties as an American do notinclude the right to communicate with foreign bad guys without possible monitoring. Keep in mind, though, that under FISA the people being targeted are foreign spies and terrorists, not Americans.
Having worked with a lot of FISA collection during my time in the spy business, I can state without reservation that President Trump’s accusations are so inherently implausible as to render them an absurdity. He needs to offer hard evidence for such incendiary claims or back down publicly, preferably with an apology to his predecessor, whom he has maligned without cause.
That said, given the now-known contacts between Team Trump and high-ranking Russians last year, it’s very plausible that NSA and other spy agencies intercepted Kremlin communications which might have incidentally involved associates of our current president. But neither Donald Trump nor his surrogates were being spied on as themselves. If they didn’t realize their shady Russian friends might be considered foreign intelligence targets by NSA and other Western intelligence services, that’s on them.
Where, then, did President Trump get the far-fetched, conspiracy-driven idea that Obama was “wiretapping” him? Like so many other “facts” he cites when they are convenient for him, Trump seems to have picked it up in the far-right echo chamber of Breitbart and related alt-right websites where evidence isn’t required to substantiate claims, no matter how absurd they appear to anybody who understands how our Intelligence Community actually works.
http://observer.com/2017/03/kremlingate-donald-trump-russia-white-house-bugged/
There were three separate inquiries to have Trump and or his people spied on basically. That was months and months ago. What is the evidence? All we know is they talked or what have you. There is no proof of any wrong doing. So why would Trump need proof of wrong doing either? Also, what changed when the evidence was presented o FISA? If it was denied was it just evidence that was real or not? The media is biting his back on Russia even despite the fact that the Clapper and Obama said the Russians didnt alter the actual voting process ie the voting machines. If the media can continuously beat Trump with this dead fish that is Russia why cant the sitting POTUS do the same to Obama? Its a great plan if you can get coverage thats balanced. I mean the Lynch/Clinton meeting wasnt curious? Come on
I'm still wondering what happened to all those health insurance plans that people can keep
Do you know when Obama's stimulus plan is going to kick in?
Did you know? cutting the deficit in half in his first term actually meant doubling it?
instead of multiplying by .5, they divided by .5. What do democrats have against telling the truth and / or simple math?
Small minority and most of those don't bother to vote anyway.
More repubs are white......which means they get a better opportunity than those of color in this country. Cry race card or whatever you want.....but as a white guy.....I know I have a better chance at jobs than any other race
And you insult millions of Dems who work every day of their lives. Just because some don't make as much....doesn't mean their vote should count less or they are poor Dems. Red states and white women gobble up lots of welfare funds.
Ps.....if you take away all welfare voters or those living in poverty......obama still wins both terms. So that "poor people got obama elected" is total nonsense
Has Washington outlined a timeline as to when they will provide evidence of the President's serious accusation of the previous administration's illegal wiretapping ?
if not , does anyone know if his twitter addiction will be somewhat controlled so as not to embarrass ? Or is it used as a means to strategically deflect ?
if not , does anyone know if his twitter addiction will be somewhat controlled so as not to embarrass ? Or is it used as a means to strategically deflect ?
