Angry
Tweeter Expression
The Original Post follows
this short update: I think this very important – hope you agree:
Sen.
Ben Sasse (R-NE) demanded
in a statement on Saturday (March 4, 2017) that President Trump
further explain his allegations (listed in 4 tweets below) that former President Obama wiretapped Trump Tower
during the election campaign, saying in part: “The President today made some
very serious allegations, and the informed citizens that a republic requires
deserve more information.” He then continued with this startling statement: “We
are in the midst of a civilization-warping crisis of public trust, and the
President's allegations today demand the thorough and dispassionate attention
of serious patriots. A quest for the full truth, rather than knee-jerk
partisanship, must be our guide if we are going to rebuild civic trust and
health.”
(I
totally agree with Sen. Sasse and say “good for him for his stance.”)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE)
Trump
had fired off a series of early morning tweets (again listed below) alleging without evidence that Mr. Obama
had tapped his phones in Trump Tower during the election campaign and he then
called Obama “sick” while comparing him to former Richard Nixon and former disgraced
Sen. Joseph McCarthy (R-MN).
A
spokesman for Mr. Obama said later that same day that any allegations that Mr. Obama
had ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen was “[…] simply false.”
(I
tend to agree with that, too… it is up to Mr. Trump to convince the public
otherwise with positive proof and evidence and NOT more unfounded allegations.
This is very, very serious indeed).
ORIGINAL POST STARTS HERE:Background on recent flow of Trump tweets and his latest accusing Mr. Obama of wiretapping him and Trump Tower … the main sources are: (1) A Breitbart article about (2) a recent Mark Levin radio Talk Show rant (both pieces are here).
Now some truth to facts: Current and
former intelligence officials cast doubt on Trump's assertions, for example one
expert said: “It seems unthinkable. If that were the case by some chance, that
means that a federal judge would have found that there was either probable cause
that he had committed a crime or was an agent of a foreign power.”
Key Point: A wiretap cannot be directed at any U.S.
facility without finding probable cause that the phone lines or Internet
addresses were being used by agents of a foreign power — or by someone spying
for or acting on behalf of a foreign government.
Now
the Story and String of Trump Tweets: All sent from his Palm Beach, FL private
Mar-a-Lago estate. It has long been his practice to stir up new controversies
to deflect attention from a damaging news cycle – it seems this is the Sessions-Russian
Ambassador cycle.
Here
are Trump's tweets, in the order they were sent on this subject:
• Terrible! Just
found out that Obama had my “wires tapped” in Trump Tower just before the
victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017
• Is it legal for a
sitting President to be “wire tapping” a race for president prior to an
election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW! — Donald J. Trump
(@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017
• I'd bet a good
lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping
my phones in October, just prior to Election! — Donald J. Trump
(@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017
• How low has
President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process.
This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy! — Donald J. Trump
(@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017
Now a
series of legal facts from LawNewz to counter the wacky Trump (blame Obama) wiretap allegations:
The
best that we can tell, Trump is referring to a Breitbart article (cited above)
which was published that makes reference to attempts by U.S. intelligence
agencies to obtain a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Court (FISA) to monitor communications involving Donald Trump and
several advisers.
The interesting aspect
that this is not a new development. Several other outlets including Mother Jones, The Guardian, The
National Review, and Heat Street have been
reporting on this alleged activity over the last couple of months.
Here
is the best summary we could find of the Obama administration’s efforts to
wiretap Trump associates extracted from the January 11, 2017 Guardian article:
“The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied
for a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) over the
summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of
irregular contacts with Russian officials. The FISA court turned down the
application asking FBI counter-intelligence investigators to narrow its focus.
According to one report, the FBI was finally granted a warrant in October, but that has not been
confirmed, and it is not clear whether any warrant led to a full investigation.”
Trump
then questioned all that by asking if it were legal as he makes analogies
to Nixon-Watergate. So is it legal?
While
the analogies to Watergate are totally misplaced (as that involved an illegal break-in), the
underlying questions about the legality of these wiretaps are indeed
important ones. However, so far, there is no indication that the Obama
administration acted “illegally” if they did indeed intercept communications
from Trump Tower.
“The
problem with President Trump’s question is that the standards for FISA are so
low and easily satisfied (with little judicial review) that it is difficult to
establish any illegality under the law,” writes George Washington Law Professor Jonathan Turley.
Background: “The FISA procedures were put in place in the
aftermath of the Nixon-era scandals. To obtain a FISA
warrant, the government needs to demonstrate probable cause that the ‘target of the surveillance is a foreign power or agent of a
foreign power.’ On top of that, government agents must prove that the main purpose of the surveillance is to
obtain ‘foreign intelligence information’.”
“It
is true that, if the target is a U.S. person there must be probable cause to
believe that the person’s activities may involve espionage or other similar
conduct in violation of the criminal statutes of the United States. However,
citizens can be collateral to the primary target under FISA,” Turley explained.
So bottom line: If the Obama administration intelligence
agents followed the proper protocols, had evidence, got approved by DOJ,
presented to a FISA judge, and that was approved, it is likely that any
wiretapping was legal under U.S. law.
“Putting
aside that there is no indication Trump himself was the target of the FISA
warrant (it appears to have been aimed at only four of his associates), yes, it
CAN be legally done,” says Bradley
Moss, an attorney and national security expert explained to LawNewz.com.
So,
would President Obama have to sign off on this FISA warrant as Trump implies? No, not necessarily.
Under
the law, the warrant application needs to be signed off by the Attorney
General. So based on the timing of these applications and if the reports
are true, it is likely that former AG Loretta Lynch knew about them and
approved them.
“The
President (Obama in this case) can technically request the warrant but it still has to go through the process. Obama couldn’t authorize it on his own. The AG
still has to sign off and the FISA judge still has to authorize the warrant,” Moss explained.
Trump
is right that if the warrant involved four of his aides, some of his
communications may have been intercepted too, and perhaps what happened
warrants further investigation. For
example, “If somehow several people in DOJ all got together and were asked
to fabricate evidence to present to the FISA judge that would be illegal. But
so far that is not what we are hearing happened,” Moss explained.
Turley further added: “There are provisions stating that a U. S.
person cannot be surveilled solely upon the basis of
activities protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United
States. Thus, if Trump aides were
targeted for political reasons, the surveillance would be unlawful
even under the dubious protections of FISA.”
This matter probably deserves further
investigation, however, at this point, there is no indication of anything
illegal.
Based
on these latest (unproven) and alarming tweet allegations, it seems to me, and for many others,
that each passing day shows us that Donald J. Trump is not mentally fit to
be president. How that can be proven and adjudicated legally is the most-critical and
quite frankly pressing problem the country faces right now. This president and
his apparently unbalanced mental performance in office is both alarming and
dangerous.
Also, consider this other related article – same subject that is timely re: The impact of Trump tweets. The contents may be the
most-important right now, but time will tell.
Finally, added at the last moment on this same subject, but with a different twist: Could Obama be guilty and prosecuted about all this? A reasonable argument is seen here with one possible answer to that question: “Yes, Obama could be prosecuted if involved with illegal surveillance.”
For sure, stay tuned - this is apt to get very ugly very fast.
No comments:
Post a Comment