So Obama did it...but it's legal?
It would be “legal”, but it would be really dirty. It would mean that the outgoing President spied directly on the incoming administration and was part of the attempt to hamstring his successor and participate in the soft coup.
However, the media and the left will spin it to death, justify it with Russia, Russia, Russia, and probably ignore much of the story. While it will change a few open minds about Obama and Spygate, it won’t move the needle more than a few points.
I am not trying to be negative and I want to know what happened, but I am already outraged about it!
Legal only if they were surveilling a foreigner. Hard normally to prove they were targeting a citizen, but timing of events is strange (the odd expulsion of Russians over... what? and during the short time Flynn was offshore?), followed by the bizarre entrapment over something petty (discussed expulsions with Russian ambassador who called Flynn, vs discussed sanctions). They tried really hard to nail him for something, culminating in a strange guilty plea later revealed to be result of duress.
It’s all just too odd to be legal - and evidence is mounting it wasn’t. Flynn wasn’t a legal subject for the surveillance.
Apparently it is legal, a warrantless surveillance, but Obama did it as a reverse targeting of Flynn. Ostensibly, Obama did it to listen in on Kislyak, but Flynn was his real target.
And I think THAT is illegal.
I’m more inclined to think the transcript came from a Five Eyes partner, except not via the channel defined by the Five Eyes treaty. Change my mind.
The treaty forbids exchanging intelligence via a back channel. Violating the provisions of a US treaty is a Federal crime, AFAIK. No doubt it’s also a serious crime at the other end as well.
The question is, at what level did the back channel function? CIA Director Brennan and his foreign equivalent? AG Lynch and her counterpart? Head of state?