Posted on 03/11/2017 10:47:34 PM PST by Pinkbell
Edited on 03/12/2017 3:00:12 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
WASHINGTON
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
I disagreed with how he went about those Tweets. I think he would have been better off to look into the Breitbart article with his staff, and then if they decided as such, tweet it out and request an investigation.
Just asking Comey is not going to answer the question. The FBI is only responsible for wiretaps pertaining to a possible criminal case. There are other agencies- such as the NSA and CIA- that are not concerned with prosecution of a case, thus wouldn't need a warrant. Also, be sure to ask these agency heads not only did they do the "wiretapping", but did they get information from any foreign intelligence service ( such as GHCQ in Britain and the intel agency in Australia). That is a trick they use to bypass US law. They have agreements with both of those countries to do the spying for them and share the info - thus bypassing the restrictions placed on the CIA and NSA under US law.
They sure gave him an exceptionally short period of time to find any evidence. I doubt he will find anything that they consider “proof.”
Evidence? The NSA could tap a garden hose. Idiotic posturing...
The front page of the NYT 1/20/2017 before they altered it.
I’m sure someone in Trump’s orbit has a screen shot, at the very least.
(JIM0216 hat tip)......the issue isn't whether Trump was wiretapped (Obama admitted such and apparently, there was a FISA warrant issued for the wiretapping). The issue is whether there was probable cause to issue a warrant. Probable cause is defined as the reasonable likelihood that a crime is or has been committed by the person or at the place designated........
===============================================
(REAGANGENERATION2 HAT TIP)---Trump should be able to review all 2 or 3 FISA requests (if he hasn’t already), and then let Congress determine if the requesters lied about the probable cause justifying them......then (1) you’d prove perjury, and, even worse, (2) the intent was to abuse executive power.
===========================================
A good beginning....and then it gets downright lethal for the Obama gang:
Via Breitbart, JOHN HAYWARD observed that the FISA court may have approved a warrant submitted without Trump’s name but “which Obama then misused to spy on Trump and many connected to Trump.”
Ergo the most serious legal jeopardy that might be faced would be (a) perjury for lying to the FISA court, and, (b) the dissemination of collected intelligence that should have been kept tightly classified.
===========================================
It is also entirely possible that Obama and his legal team may have perjured themselves before the FISA court by willfully withholding material information in order to manipulate the FISA court’s willingness to permit the government surveillance.
FALSIFYING GOVT DOCUMENTS would fall under the Crimes Act of 1958. Moreover, falsifying official documents is the criminal MO to hide larger crimes.
EXCERPT A person falsifying documents can be held criminally liable if they are deliberately acting with the intention of deceiving or defrauding another party.
Falsifying documents is a very serious offense and is generally classified as a felony. This means that a person charged with falsifying documents may be subject to the following legal penalties:
◾Having to pay a monetary fine
◾Incarceration in a prison facility
Depending on the gravity of the offense, as well as individual state laws, falsifying documents can result in a prison sentence of 5-10 years.
And if official government documents or govt authorities were involved, the legal penalties may be more severe. Legal penalties may increase with repeat offenses.
Many different types of acts can be considered as falsifying a document, including:
◾Altering or misrepresenting fact-based information
◾Stating false information when requested to provide truthful statements
◾Forging a signature
◾Using official letterheads without authorization
◾Knowingly using or distributing a fake document
The penalty for falsifying government documents is outlined in the Crimes Act of 1958.
Send the memo to the NY Times.
They’re being cute with words “wiretap” and “phone.” They need to ask if he was under “surveillance.” They all know that’s what Trump was referring to.
The problem is Trump specifically used the word “phone” and “phones” in his Tweets. I just checked. Therefore, they will request about the phones.
Sure, because the tweet only turned the dialogue completely around to put Obama on the defensive. He should have done it more like Romney and GW.
Let's get this straight.
The President of the United States, requests that a standing Congressional Committee, examine whether or not his phones/computers were under surveillance, and their supposed response is, "You prove it!"
Looks and smells like Bullshit.
thank you for this useful summary
Highlighted and defined....it’s quite a long list of possible crimes.
That tweet took Jeff Sessions right off the front page of the Washington Post and the NY Times. The left was going after Session with everything they had. Thanks to Trumps’ Tweet Sessions is still the AG.
Nonsense. Trump just hads the request to Sessions and McMaster & other heads who must turn it over. The tweets were 100% genius & killed the Rusdia crap in one weekend.
Maybe they need to subpoena the folks at the NYSlimes and WaaaaaPo.....
The administration now is in charge of the CIA and NSA. It won’t be hard to find the paper trail.
Could be more difficult than you imagine - huge entities with lots of folks on the wrong side - many experts at hiding trails.
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.