Posted on 03/04/2017 3:41:45 AM PST by navysealdad
Donald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump 5m5 minutes ago More Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!
(Excerpt) Read more at twitter.com ...
FISA warrants can be issued wrt “foreign agent” allegations, they are national security based not criminality based.
But there is supposed to be a serious level of “probable cause” and the information sought and how it can be used is strictly controlled (supposedly). So there are various ways that the Obozo team may have politically abused this process, and given today’s Trump tweets I think he must be very confidence that he’s caught Obozo & co. red handed.
Watch this Fox News video report from this morning: http://video.foxnews.com/v/5347683464001/?#sp=show-clips
They shouldn't be allowed to bury this!
It all may hinge on parsing the word “ordered” in the Obozo team denials. This may well prove to be a Clintonesque evasion, which we have seen for decades now.
Of course, the FISA process does not hinge upon an “order” from a White House official.... that does not mean hints, suggestions, requests, etc. were not made, especially via 3rd parties. When we think of Democrap “fixers” like Podesta, there are all kinds of slimeballs in the shadows any of whom might have been a go-between (both parties have fixers and backroom operatives, of course).
As we have seen with Holder and Lynch as AGs, and myriad other Democrap lackeys, there are a variety of ways the thing could have proceeded without the most direct fingerprints of an “order” from the Obama White House.
With President Trump making such a direct allegation personally against former Pres. Obama, we can expect that there is a solid trail of bread crumbs.... but that there is not something so simple as an “order” from the WH to any FBI or DOJ investigator etc.
Keeps the MSM in the dark about who he’s talking with....
Nice move, President Trump!
I love how he makes bombshell accusations and Twitter, with no evidence, and no follow up for the entire day.
This makes the other side go into denial, and make excuses before Trump releases whatever evidence he has to discredit them.
How would they be able to prove differently? For instance, would they be able to say ‘oh it was for legal concerns as an excuse to monitor, but with every intention to use the information politically?
There may be much more than a trail of breadcrumbs.
Puts them into panic mode if he is holding the deck of cards with the proof.
True, it needs to be some very substantial connection(s)..... but my point remains that it will not (most likely) be any written legal “order” from anyone in the WH, so the non-denial denials we are seeing today will be literally true but substantively misleading.
Very Clintonesque....
As I previously wrote - the information gathered must be relevant to the criminal investigation. Anything else is not subject to monitoring and certainly not dissemination among various political appointees in the machine. All he has to show is that no evidence was found or existed that Trump was engaged in criminal activity with Russia. If the contents of private conversations were disseminated outside of the “criminal investigation for which the FISA court order was issued” as was revealed on Jan 19th when they said some of the information from wire taps was provided to the Obama White House that is a crime. It is a crime to use the powers of the Federal government for political purposes.
This is out of bounds legally, morally, ethically, and it is essentially the electronic version of Watergate. If they transcribed conversations (as alleged) of the Trump campaign and/or the Trump transition team and there is NOTHING in the transcript regarding Russia or nefarious links to Russia (the basis for the wiretaps) they broke the law.
Our laws prevent the party in power from using the state to target the opposition party - it is a wall that separates our nation from third world banana republics. I would never approve of such actions by any administration no matter what my level of support was for them. This is criminal.
Consider - despite all the hype and hysteria there has not been a SINGLE FACT that has come out that indicates any kind of ongoing relationship with Russia, let alone any collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, to defeat Clinton. Nothing. We already know based on the limited coverage that the FISA court was used to obtain surveillance on the basis of alleged criminal contacts between the Trump organization and Russia. As suspicious as I am of that allegation, Brennan, Clapper, and Comey have all said NO EVIDENCE WAS FOUND. Therefore, what was this information used for and how was it shared (it is not supposed to be shared)?
Trump has something or he would never have said that. I have been very cautious about my enthusiasm for his tweeting, but you don’t drop a bombshell like that without a plan to reveal additional information at a future date. Trump put an accusation out for the whole world to see against the former President that he is clearly confident in and the left and media (one and the same) will probably step all over it this weekend.
If Trump was just spouting off on twitter with nothing to back it up we will all have to admit that he is not as smart as we thought he was.
I won’t bet against Trump at this point - he has been pretty masterful at guiding the conversation and he just used his limited characters via tweets to level felony charges against a whole host of people. That is pretty shocking isn’t it?
The key to understanding this is to know the law on wiretapping. You can only listen to conversations that are relevant to what you are investigating. Period. You cannot listen to or transcribe calls that are not evidence of the crime the court (FISA in this case) granted permission to gather.
If any person or entity (NSA, CIA, FBI, or NSC) listened to any call not pertaining to Russia they violated the law. If they provided details of conversations having nothing to do with links to Russia to any person outside the investigation - they violated the law.
There are only two types of captured audio on a wire tap - relevant and non-relevant. In order to be relevant it would have to show evidence of a criminal act with Russian interests. Clapper, Brennan, and Comey have already come out and said no such evidence exists! If that is the case, what happened to those recordings and who was able to listen to them and what did they do with the information? How long did the activity go on in the absence of evidence?
All Trump has to prove is that conversations among his team were captured that have no mention of Russia - that is it. Those conversations would have been obtained in violation of the FISA court order.
He was on a mission (organ chord). A diplomatic mission (EEEEEK!).
We will see. I believe more will come if this as all of the accusations against Trump are most likely to build their (without evidence) case to defend these actions. I don’t think Trump is going to sit back and take this illegal and fake news drama of interference which is now coming to a head.
Looking forward to Justice being served and especially so Trump can govern without this incredible interference.
Thete is zero credibility to the assertion or notion of plausible deniability by the former idiot in chief. Prosecution time!
The Obama administration ordered the wiretap because thy thought they could get away with it. Hillary would get in and then bury the evidence along with burying, literally, the low-level operatives who placed the taps.
The Obama administration never considered Trump might win. Now he’s on the inside with access to everything and these low-level operatives might be getting nervous about doing serious jail time if they’re caught. Better to make a plea deal and finger the people up the food chain in exchange for leniency.
debunked in an article, and extensively discussed in a comments section, here:
trump server communicating with russia story gets debunked
http://www.[censored_on_fr].com/trump-server-communicating-with-russia-story-gets-debunked/
the DNS (domain name server) “expert” paul vixie seems politically motivated to me, no matter what his technical credentials are (recall zuckerberg, schmidt, etc. pro-obama, pro-hillary biases). (someone could in theory do some background research on his politics as it such research commonly turns up something indicating political activity such as donating to certain political campaigns, etc.) he perhaps crossed the line the moment he started claiming that a certain pattern of dns activity is strongly associated with criminal activity, since the only qualified background promoted by the article is computer science (internet design) and not criminology. the article itself seems to cross the line the moment it begins to discuss strange “pinging” or whatever. what they actually seem to mean (judging by context, and this is jmho) is probably dns request protocol packets, not ping request protocol packets, which are different (icmp protocol versus dns protocol). these are analogous to apples and oranges in the internet packet world. the writer imho seemingly missed the ambiguity, but perhaps could not help wanting to sound technically savvy, so he/she proceeded anyway, and conflated the two terms. the remainder of the article is trash. in one of the [censored by fr] article’s comments, it is noted that anyone who really wants to and who really knows how to (junior high level stuff here, folks) can avoid using dns servers altogether by reverting to hardwired IP addresses. Duh! This is well known in the internet community by all oldtimers who had to learn to live in a world without DNS servers, that is, after the internet was invented, but before DNS (and the DNS protocol) was added to the internet. For informational purposes, this was IIRC about 1982-1983 or so (depending on where one’s research lab was located physically, and what type of operating system one was using at the time on the nodes communicating over the Arpanet (now Internet), beginning with concepts and protocols described in standards: IETF RFC 830 (Z Su, 1982) and IETF RFC 870 (PV Mockapetris, 1983). This proposed DNS system replaced the prior static name service per-node host configuration files containing hostname to ip address associations, which needed to be updated and kept in sync by manual methods on each computer node that wished to communicate over the internet. all such communicating nodes in addition were required to maintain synchronization with a centralized registration authority (and this is still true today).
side note- i’m only paying attention to this in a very casual way. my responses are likewise somewhat casual. i may miss something here or there. but all this drama is getting a bit unexciting to me. i have a life outside of politics. I like other stuff too. can someone bring on some dancing squirrels? please?? :-P
Didn’t Obama tap Angela Merkel’s cell phone? Didn’t Obama tap FOX reporter James Rosen’ phone and e-mails, also James Rose’s mothers phone and e-mails?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.