That statement followed a similar denial by an unnamed former senior official in the Obama administration. Posted on 03/04/2017 3:17:08 PM PST by mandaladon
A spokesman for former President Obama issued a statement denying the former president or his White House ordered a wiretap of Trump Tower during the election.
The statement came from the former president’s current spokesman Kevin Lewis on Saturday afternoon, after President Donald Trump made the accusation in a tweetstorm that shifted the focus of the news day.
That statement followed a similar denial by an unnamed former senior official in the Obama administration.
Former aide to President Obama, Valerie Jarrett emphatically tweeted that Lewis’ statement was “enough said” but was it?
There are still questions such as, why didn’t the 44th president issue the statement himself but rather opted to have it done through a spokesman who signed his name to it?
And, was it actually a denial?
Jon Favreau, a speechwriter who worked for former President Obama during his administration, warned the media, and fellow liberals, not to paint the statement as a denial that Trump Tower was wiretapped.
I'd be careful about reporting that Obama said there was no wiretapping. Statement just said that neither he nor the WH ordered it.
He is correct. Nowhere in the “denial” is any denial that the wiretap occurred or that the Obama administration knew of it.
(Excerpt) Read more at bizpacreview.com ...
Have any elected Republicans had the courage to speak out against Trump's deeply, deranged tweets this morning?
Of course it is. Obama cannot answer because it isn’t available, much like Benghazi.
The DOJ of the Obama’s regime was all over the place.
Hell, Even little ole me got a visit from Homeland on a thread we had years ago. The subject matter was irrelevant.
They left and I never heard from them again.
Obama is an evil man. Do not be discouraged. Trump will end it.
Left-wingers often accuse their enemies of what they themselves are in the process of doing, or have done.
Obama hired people who had the talent of knowing exactly what needed to be done without being told to do it.
If a spokesman does all the denying then Hussein thinks he stays out of a perjury rap. The spokesmen stay out of it, too because they are passing on someone else’s information as mouthpieces who obviously don’t know whether it is true or not.
Plausible deniability invoked.
It may be difficult for Trump’s people to get the records. A large part of the agency is obfuscating and slow-walking and deleting.
Why would you have to have such a “cardinal rule” when it should be obvious for any official to begin with?
50 U.S.C. WAR AND NATIONAL DEFENSE
CHAPTER 36 - FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE
SUBCHAPTER I - ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE Sec. 1802 - Electronic surveillance authorization without court order; certification by Attorney General; reports to Congressional committees; transmittal under seal; duties and compensation of communication common carrier; applications; jurisdiction of court
(a)(1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that—
Agreed. I would expect them to obstruct justice. Pretty serious stuff.
interesting
Richard from IL wrote:
“Note the word ordered in the non denial denial. All he had to do was to suggest it, and it would have been done.”
Dong, ding, ding!
Winner, winner, chicken dinner!
Good parse!
Who thought this was an “independent” investigation?
It does leave a paper trail a mile long. See 50 for the hyperlink, which I missed the first time.
“independent investigation”
It is EXACTLY what they DID say - but not what you THOUGHT they said.
My reply earlier on another thread.
What if this were changed just a bit?
...neither President Obama nor any White House official ever requested surveillance on any U.S. citizen.
***
Using 50 USC 1802 would require the Attorney General to certify certain things in writing, under oath. If this is how the wiretapping was authorized then there is a definite paper trail.
Lynch may be in deep chit due to “B” which clearly states that “there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party; and......
I think it was authorized via FISA.
See 55.
Considering what the CIA does as a normal thing, I worry about them obstructing breathing.
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.
