Did Obama spy on Trump? Glenn Reynolds

[Highmark]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/03/06/obama-spying-trump-fisa-tapping-glenn-reynolds-column/98779170/

It isn't out of the question. The former president's administration wiretapped journalists and spied on Congress.

(Photo: Michael Reynolds, epa)

 13126CONNECTTWEET 1LINKEDIN 291COMMENTEMAILMORE

 

So President Trump set off a firestorm over the weekend with a series of tweets alleging that Obama had tapped Trump Tower. But getting hung up on imprecise language in the president's tweets isn't the right way to look at things. What seems to be at true is that the Obama administration spied on some of Trump's associates and we don't know exactly how much information was collected under what authority and who was targeted.

As former prosecutor Andrew McCarthy summarizes in National Review, the Obama Justice Department considered a criminal investigation aimed at a number of Trump’s associates. When they didn’t find anything criminal, they converted the investigation into an intelligence probe under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Elements of that story have been confirmed by The New York Times, the BBC and McClatchy newspapers.

FISA surveillance has to be approved by a special court, which almost always allows the government to spy on people when asked. But when the Justice Department asked to spy on several of Trump's associates, the court refused permission, according to the BBC. As McCarthy writes, this is notable because “the FISA court is notoriously solicitous of government requests to conduct national security surveillance.”

Not taking no for an answer, the Obama administration came back during the final weeks of the election with a narrower request that didn’t specifically mention Trump. That narrower request was granted by the court, but reports from the Guardian and the BBC don't mention the tapping of phones..

Former Obama officials issued denials that the former president had anything to do with it, which McCarthy calls “disingenuous on several levels.” Others have characterized them as a "non-denial denial.”

 

To the Obama camp’s claim that the president didn’t “order” surveillance of Trump, McCarthy writes:

 

First, as Obama officials well know, under the FISA process, it is technically the FISA court that ‘orders’ surveillance. And by statute, it is the Justice department, not the White House, that represents the government in proceedings before the FISA court. So, the issue is not whether Obama or some member of his White House staff “ordered” surveillance of Trump and his associates. The issues are (a) whether the Obama Justice Department sought such surveillance authorization from the FISA court, and (b) whether, if the Justice Department did that, the White House was aware of or complicit in the decision to do so. Personally, given the explosive and controversial nature of the surveillance request we are talking about — an application to wiretap the presidential candidate of the opposition party, and some of his associates, during the heat of the presidential campaign, based on the allegation that the candidate and his associates were acting as Russian agents — it seems to me that there is less than zero chance that could have happened without consultation between the Justice Department and the White House.

And as journalist Mickey Kaus commented on Twitter, there’s a reason why presidents name trusted allies as attorney general. As close as former attorney general Loretta Lynch was to Obama, and as supportive as she was of his political goals, it seems very unlikely that this was some sort of rogue operation.

It’s certainly not impossible to believe that the Obama administration spied on Trump. Obama wouldn’t be the first president to engage in illegal surveillance of opposition candidates, and his administration has been noted for its great enthusiasm for domestic spying. In an effort to plug embarrassing leaks, the Obama administration spied on Associated Press reporters and seized the phone records not only of a Fox News reporter but also of his parents. Obama’s political allies even alleged that his CIA spied on Congress.

Trump has called for a congressional investigation, but what this really needs is a special prosecutor, someone from outside the politically tainted Justice Department, to look into the political abuse of surveillance laws by the Obama administration. Maybe, upon investigation, it will turn out that nothing improper happened — that this is a lot of smoke, but that there’s no fire. But we can’t know without an investigation, and if there really were political abuses of the Justice Department and the intelligence surveillance process, those guilty should not simply be exposed but go to jail. Such abuse strikes at democracy itself.

Note that FISA surveillance is severely limited and requires information from surveillance to be kept very secret or, if not relevant, deleted. If those limits were exceeded, if Obama officials lied to the court, or if the information was — as it appears to have been — excessively shared within the government, or leaked to outsiders, those are all serious crimes, as First Amendment attorney Robert Barnes notes.

Watergate brought down a presidency, but if the worst suspicions here are borne out, we’re dealing with something worse. Hopefully not, but there’s no way to tell at this point. As The Washington Post has been saying lately, “Democracy dies in darkness.” Let’s shine some light on what the Obama administration was doing during this election.

Glenn Harlan Reynolds, a University of Tennessee law professor and the author of The New School: How the Information Age Will Save American Education from Itself, is a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors.

Edited March 7, 2017 by Highmark

[AKIQPilot]

And slinger still thinks Obama was a good president.  What a piece of shit.  

[ICEMAN!]

And comey and the former head of the NSA have both said it didn't happen, so that ends that.

Seriously guys 

[JEFF]

And that is how it's done, when a president wants to spy on someone. To the liberals who don't think a president can do that...

[Highmark]

Just now, ICEMAN! said:

And comey and the former head of the NSA have both said it didn't happen, so that ends that.

Seriously guys 

They also said there is no connection to Trump and the Russians during the campaign.   You good with that?  

Edited March 7, 2017 by Highmark

[AKIQPilot]

2 minutes ago, ICEMAN! said:

And comey and the former head of the NSA have both said it didn't happen, so that ends that.

Seriously guys 

That's not what they said at all.  

[JEFF]

1 minute ago, ICEMAN! said:

And comey and the former head of the NSA have both said it didn't happen, so that ends that.

Seriously guys 

So today you trust Comey? And the NSA has never lied? Jesus you're numb.

[Highmark]

Just now, JEFF said:

So today you trust Comey? And the NSA has never lied? Jesus you're numb.

Clapper is the same guy who lied to congress about spying on American's, got caught in an interview not knowing about a major bombing plot in London just to name a few.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/12/21/how-did-james-clapper-obamas-intel-chief-not-know-about-a-major-bomb-plot.html

James Clapper's Intel Slip

Obama’s top intelligence officer admitted to Diane Sawyer he did not know about a major bomb plot busted in the U.K. this week. Howard Kurtz on the administration’s baffling spin.

HOWARD KURTZ

12.21.10 1:59 PM ET

The White House is engaged in some awkward damage control today after its director of national intelligence had to learn about the London terror arrests from Diane Sawyer.

Cable television has jumped on the embarrassing episode, reported by The Daily Beast Tuesday night, and the administration’s spin has been somewhat contradictory.

After a long pause, a puzzled-looking Clapper said: “London?”

In the ABC interview with Sawyer—taped Monday at 4 p.m., hours after news of the arrests was all over television and the Web—James Clapper appeared unfamiliar with the arrests. The interview was shown Tuesday tonight onWorld News. 

"First of all, London," Sawyer said. "How serious is it? Any implication that it was coming here?... Director Clapper?" 

After a long pause, a puzzled-looking Clapper said: "London?" Chief counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, who was part of the interview along with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, had to jump in and explain the arrests.

Sawyer gave Clapper another chance later in the interview.

"I was a little surprised you didn't know about London," she said. 

"Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't," Clapper said. 

How to dig out of that hole? First Clapper’s office issued this statement: “The question about this specific news development was ambiguous. The DNI's knowledge of the threat streams in Europe is profound and multidimensional, and any suggestion otherwise is inaccurate.” 

The only thing that’s ambiguous is why the administration is denying the obvious. This morning, Obama’s chief counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, told reporters that Clapper was, ah, busy. 

[Mileage Psycho]

3 minutes ago, ICEMAN! said:

And comey and the former head of the NSA have both said it didn't happen, so that ends that.

Seriously guys 

Good post.

2 minutes ago, Highmark said:

They also said there is no connection to Trump and the Russians during the campaign.   You good with that?  

Absolutely, of course unlike many here I have never been a believer of conspiracy and the evil that lurks in the shadows.

[Cold War]

9 minutes ago, JEFF said:

And that is how it's done, when a president wants to spy on someone. To the liberals who don't think a president can do that...

Not Obama though..............He is a lawyer and knows it would be unlawful!     

 

[Highmark]

Clappers exact words.  Doesn't mean he was lying but sure gives him an out. 

"For the part of the national security apparatus that I oversaw as DNI, there was no such wiretap activity mounted against the President-elect at the time, or as a candidate, or against his campaign," Clapper said Sunday morning on NBC's "Meet the Press."

[ICEMAN!]

19 minutes ago, Highmark said:

They also said there is no connection to Trump and the Russians during the campaign.   You good with that?  

They said there was no collusion, not connection.  There is a difference and that also means that it's possible that evidence of collusion has since been uncovered.   Unfortunately for you, there's about a ZERO percent chance that Comey or anyone else will suddenly remember that they actually did in fact illegally wiretap Trump.

 

You guys and your conspiracy theories.  You should know better by now than to believe anything Trump says.  90% of what he Tweets and says is complete and total bullshit.

"Obama wiretapped me!!! It's true and all our intelligence agencies are liars!!!  Believe me!!!  Oh and Arnold sux on the Apprentice"

Edited March 7, 2017 by ICEMAN!

[Highmark]

15 minutes ago, ICEMAN! said:

They said there was no collusion, not connection.  There is a difference and that also means that it's possible that evidence of collusion has since been uncovered.   Unfortunately for you, there's about a ZERO percent chance that Comey or anyone else will suddenly remember that they actually did in fact illegally wiretap Trump.

 

You guys and your conspiracy theories.  You should know better by now than to believe anything Trump says.  90% of what he Tweets and says is complete and total bullshit.

"Obama wiretapped me!!! It's true and all our intelligence agencies are liars!!!  Believe me!!!  Oh and Arnold sux on the Apprentice"

   Keep dreaming.   

I love that you waste you time reading my posts regarding American politics.   

Edited March 7, 2017 by Highmark

[ICEMAN!]

3 minutes ago, Highmark said:

   Keep dreaming.   

I love that you waste you time reading my posts regarding American politics.   

Meh, I'm sick in bed and you amuse me

[Snoslinger]

the fox news reporter was "spied" on for an incident in north korea regarding classified information, and done legally, through the channels. I have to admit I'm surprised tom sops this shit up like it's homemade gravy.

 

 

[Highmark]

46 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

the fox news reporter was "spied" on for an incident in north korea regarding classified information, and done legally, through the channels. I have to admit I'm surprised tom sops this shit up like it's homemade gravy.

 

 

What about the AP reporters?  Nobody was claiming it wasn't legal, just unusual.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Department_of_Justice_investigations_of_reporters

On May 13, 2013, the Associated Press announced telephone records for 20 of their reporters during a two-month period in 2012 had been subpoenaed by the Justice Department. AP reported the Justice Department would not say why it sought the records, but news sources noted the US Attorney's office for the District of Columbia was conducting a criminal investigation into a May 7, 2012 Associated Press story about a CIA operation which prevented the Yemeni terrorist Fahd al-Quso's plot to detonate an explosive device on a commercial flight.^[1] The DOJ did not direct subpoenas to the Associated Press; instead, the subpoenas were issued to their telephone providers, including Verizon Wireless.^[2]

The AP claimed these acts were a "massive and unprecedented intrusion" into news-gathering operations.^[3][4] Gary Pruitt, CEO of the Associated Press stated: "These records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all of the newsgathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two-month period, provide a road map to AP's newsgathering operations and disclose information about AP's activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know."^[5][6]

The US Attorney's office in Washington responded that federal investigators seek records from news outlets only after making "every reasonable effort to obtain information through alternative means."^[5] Verizon neither challenged the subpoena nor did it try to alert the journalists whose records were being requested. Debra Lewis, Verizon Wireless spokeswoman, said the company "complies with legal processes for requests for information by law enforcement."^[7]

Edited March 7, 2017 by Highmark

[AKIQPilot]

57 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

the fox news reporter was "spied" on for an incident in north korea regarding classified information, and done legally, through the channels. I have to admit I'm surprised tom sops this shit up like it's homemade gravy.

 

 

Speaking of sopping up shit.  You swallow the shit spewed by the MSM every single day.   I'm surprised you haven't choked to death from all the BS you swallow.  

[Rw06GT]

1 hour ago, ICEMAN! said:

And comey and the former head of the NSA have both said it didn't happen, so that ends that.

Seriously guys 

You poor dumb bastard.

[Anler]

So far there has been zero evidence of this. It's not like Trump hasn't made absurd claims before that were made up.

[spin_dry]

where were all these "experts" on this matter before trump's tweet? me thinks highmark is getting bamboozled here. trying to fit facts to match the tweets from his master. what a task. 

[revkevsdi]

3 hours ago, ICEMAN! said:

They said there was no collusion, not connection.  There is a difference and that also means that it's possible that evidence of collusion has since been uncovered.   Unfortunately for you, there's about a ZERO percent chance that Comey or anyone else will suddenly remember that they actually did in fact illegally wiretap Trump.

 

You guys and your conspiracy theories.  You should know better by now than to believe anything Trump says.  90% of what he Tweets and says is complete and total bullshit.

"Obama wiretapped me!!! It's true and all our intelligence agencies are liars!!!  Believe me!!!  Oh and Arnold sux on the Apprentice"

If Trump was on Freedom Sledder, he'd have the same respect as Momo. 

 

 

[Rod]

What's great about this is snot is the first to believe any 7 degrees connection of trump and the Russians. But obama spying on someone, which they do a lot, is completely unbelievable  

[jtssrx]

6 hours ago, Highmark said:

They also said there is no connection to Trump and the Russians during the campaign.   You good with that?  

No he picks and chooses what fits his narrative

Edited March 8, 2017 by jtssrx

[spin_dry]

5 minutes ago, jtssrx said:

No he picks and chooses what fits his narrative

ummm...the only person picking the narrative is trump with his tweets. and you guys are chasing it right off a cliff.  

[ICEMAN!]

5 hours ago, Rw06GT said:

You poor dumb bastard.

hahahaha yea cuz I'm the one swallowing all of Donald's lies one after the next, after the next after the next after the next after the next....

https://www.google.ca/amp/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58ac7a0fe4b02a1e7dac3ca6/amp

 

hint - it's probably just best to assume Trump is lying from here on out.  You'll have better odds