Obamagate

[Yttrium]

...The New York Times itself which explicitly reported that Trump's communications were "wiretapped" by the Obama administration.

What in that story implies that Trump was wiretapped rather than the Russians?

[Sparko]

What in that story implies that Trump was wiretapped rather than the Russians?

Because the FBI can't tap a foreign country.

[Mountain Man]

What in that story implies that Trump was wiretapped rather than the Russians?

When all else fails, just be deliberately obtuse, right?

[shunyadragon]

Are you illiterate? Breitbart's report simply quotes a number of stories from other sources, including The New York Times itself which explicitly reported that Trump's communications were "wiretapped" by the Obama administration. Of course after Breitbart diligently connected the dots, the Times suddenly called its own story into question, so either The New York Times was lying then, or they're lying now. Which one are you going with?

The NY Times did not report this. Please cite the reference where the Trump Towers were wire tapped by the order of Obama or even a court or on the direction of the FBI.

[Yttrium]

When all else fails, just be deliberately obtuse, right?

We've been intercepting Russian communications for decades. It's routine. American law enforcement can wiretap Russians who are staying in the US, and other intelligence agencies can monitor communications from outside the US.

[Sparko]

We've been intercepting Russian communications for decades. It's routine. American law enforcement can wiretap Russians who are staying in the US, and other intelligence agencies can monitor communications from outside the US.

They can only do so with a FISA warrant, and only when they are using US communication lines (i.e. cell towers). Any actual tapping of a foreign government would be the bailiwick of the CIA or NSA, not the FBI.

The FBI would only be able to tap US phone lines and American citizens (with a warrant) and therefore if they were tapping anyone, it would have been Trump personnel, listening for Russian communications to them or such.

[Yttrium]

They can only do so with a FISA warrant, and only when they are using US communication lines (i.e. cell towers). Any actual tapping of a foreign government would be the bailiwick of the CIA or NSA, not the FBI.

The FBI would only be able to tap US phone lines and American citizens (with a warrant) and therefore if they were tapping anyone, it would have been Trump personnel, listening for Russian communications to them or such.

We're talking about the New York Times article, which refers to "American law enforcement and intelligence agencies". If Russians are in town and using US phone lines, they can be tapped by the FBI. Intelligence agencies include, as you note, the CIA and NSA. I don't see why this isn't intuitively obvious.

I'm all for nailing Obama to the wall if he did any misdeeds. I'm just trying to figure out how people are seeing any real evidence here. I note that I'm missing the next page of the New York Times article, though.

[Sparko]

We're talking about the New York Times article, which refers to "American law enforcement and intelligence agencies". If Russians are in town and using US phone lines, they can be tapped by the FBI. Intelligence agencies include, as you note, the CIA and NSA. I don't see why this isn't intuitively obvious.

I'm all for nailing Obama to the wall if he did any misdeeds. I'm just trying to figure out how people are seeing any real evidence here. I note that I'm missing the next page of the New York Times article, though.

because the news also talks about the FBI getting a FISA warrant to tap Trump's people (not mentioning the whole tower)

And any Russian using unsecured US phone lines/cell towers would not be stupid enough to say anything incriminating.

The intuitively obvious answer is the FBI was tapping Trump's key people, IF the story is true at all.

[Yttrium]

because the news also talks about the FBI getting a FISA warrant to tap Trump's people (not mentioning the whole tower)

The New York Times article doesn't mention a FISA warrant at all, unless it's on the next page. Again, I'm specifically referring to the New York times article.

And any Russian using unsecured US phone lines/cell towers would not be stupid enough to say anything incriminating.

It's not necessarily incriminating to them...

The intuitively obvious answer is the FBI was tapping Trump's key people, IF the story is true at all.

No, it really isn't. You're operating with a pretty big bias there. I'm all for the congressional investigation. It'll be fun.

[Sparko]

The New York Times article doesn't mention a FISA warrant at all, unless it's on the next page. Again, I'm specifically referring to the New York times article.



It's not necessarily incriminating to them...



No, it really isn't. You're operating with a pretty big bias there. I'm all for the congressional investigation. It'll be fun.

sorry but everything I have heard has only mentioned the FBI and not the CIA or any other agency in regards to the wiretapping. It COULD be another agency, but not as far as the news has reported so far. And if it IS the FBI, they can only tap citizens because by law they can only operate in the USA or in approved jurisdictions (like helping US nationals in other countries but with permission of the host country) - they are a federal police force. They can't do "spy" stuff on other countries directly.

So they can't tap a Russian land line. The embassy is foreign territory. They can MAYBE intercept cell calls of Russian visitors who are in the country and they can listen in on Russians talking to Americans by tapping the American's lines. I think that is what they would have been doing. The FBI could have been listening in on Trump's calls to see what his people and the Russians were doing. It would make the most sense anyway because it would be Trump's people they would be interested in. How would they know which Russian phones to even tap? They would not know who he was dealing with, even if he was doing something wrong. They would have to tap Trump's end of the calls to make sure they got all of them.

[rogue06]

It's probably due to the presidency of Bill Clinton where "it depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is" but after looking carefully at what I've heard several pundits declare is an uncategorical denial issued by an Obama spokesman, it really is worthless.

A cardinal rule of the Obama Administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice. As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false.

Valerie Jarrett, who was an Obama Senior Adviser as well as Assistant to the President for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs -- and has actually moved in with Barack and Michelle since they left the White House (creepy level 100 ) -- pronounced it "Enough said" in a tweet following the statement's release.

The claim that the Obama Administration didn't order surveillance of Trump seems like duplicitous word play since technically it wouldn't be the Administration that orders surveillance but rather the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court which does it. The pertinent question therefore is whether the Obama Administration (including their Department of Justice) requested a warrant for such surveillance from the FISA court.

And it seems that Obama's "Director of Speechwriting" Jon Favreau disagrees with Jarett's "Enough said" assessment tweeting "I'd be careful about reporting that Obama said there was no wiretapping. Statement just said that neither he nor the WH ordered it." As we've seen the White House can't technically order such surveillance but they sure could request it.

And speaking of "simply false," that is obviously what the claim that the Obama Administration never "ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen." Of course they did. The Obama Administration ordered drone strikes against U.S. citizens overseas thought to be terrorists. Does anyone seriously think that these U.S. citizens weren't under surveillance before the strikes?

[rogue06]

That's the same claim made by NBC. It is very reminiscent of Edwin Meese's notorious line from a few decades back, "If a person is innocent of a crime, then he is not a suspect" (which often gets misquoted as "the police don't suspect innocent people"). I mean, why even bother with a trial

What they leave out is how multiple federal prosecutors say is just how easy it is to get a FISA warrant (about as easy as getting a grand jury indictment^[1]) and the fact that it took them two tries to get one is extremely telling.

Further, what is also getting left out of most coverage is that prior to June 2016, the Obama Department of Justice had contemplated conducting a criminal investigation of some of Trump's associates, and maybe even Trump himself, based on concerns about connections to Russian financial institutions. The preliminary examination revealed nothing criminal was going on which would almost always result in the case being shut down for lack of evidence. But instead of doing that Obama's Department of Justice decided to go on a fishing expedition and transformed it into a national-security investigation under FISA.

All indications are that they still found nothing untoward and with all the leaking going on we would know if they had found anything.










1. Bringing to mind the famous phrase coined by Sol Wachtler, chief judge of the New York State Court of Appeals as reported in the New York Daily News':

Wachtler, who became the state's top judge earlier this month, said district attorneys now have so much influence on grand juries that "by and large" they could get them to "indict a ham sandwich."

According to ABC News:

Source: Everything you need to know about FISA wiretaps

More than a thousand applications for electronic surveillance, all signed by the attorney general, are submitted each year, and the vast majority are approved.

From 2009 to 2015, for example, more than 10,700 applications for electronic surveillance were submitted, and only one was denied in its entirety, according to annual reports sent to Congress. Another one was denied in part, and 17 were withdrawn by the government.



Source

© Copyright Original Source

So only 2 out of 10,700 requests for electronic surveillance made to the FISA court during Obama's presidency were turned down (something like 0.02%) and one of them was the first request made to monitor Trump. Moreover, the statement "all signed by the attorney general" means that Loretta Lynch was personally involved in the effort.

[Tassman]

The intuitively obvious answer is the FBI was tapping Trump's key people, IF the story is true at all.

No, the

[Roy]

So they can't tap a Russian land line. The embassy is foreign territory.

Two points:
1) the phone lines exit the embassy somewhere.
2) when did embassies being nominally foreign territory ever stop US agencies from bugging them?

[Sparko]

No, the

Read my post Tassy. I said "If the story is true at all" - and no Trump is not lying. He is simply stating what he believes. If his information is from a fake new story, then it is the newspaper that is lying. Not Trump. He would just be gullible. Like you are most of the time when you repeat fake news. That is certainly embarrassing for you, but luckily your intelligence is low enough that you don't seem to notice.