cw7goewxaaecrr9
Columns

Did Obama wiretap Trump Tower during the election?

(Image: CBC News)

On Saturday, President Donald Trump claimed on Twitter that Barack Obama tapped his phone line at Trump tower, while the former president was still occupying the White House.

“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!” Trump said. “How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!”

Immediately, following his series of Tweets, the mainstream media jumped into action. USA Today released a headline, “Trump, without evidence, accuses Obama of wiretapping him.” The Washington Post reported, “Trump, citing no evidence, accuses Obama of ‘Nixon/Watergate’ plot to wiretap Trump Tower.” The New York Times released an article titled, “Trump, Offering No Evidence, Says Obama Tapped His Phones.”

In Trump’s first tweet on this matter, he suggested that a lawyer could potentially be handling this case. Obviously, if this legitimately occurred, information on this case would not be immediately released to the public. A full investigation must be conducted, before any substantial evidence can be fully disclosed.

The media has engaged in a vivid double standard. When the Obama Administration and the Clinton campaign announced that there was “Russian involvement in changing results of the United States’ presidential election,” the media did not take issue with the lack of evidence being provided to support their claim. We were told to just “take their word for it.” The Obama White House never released any substantial information that could cause one to form an educated conclusion that Russia changed the results to favor Trump. Despite the extreme lack of evidence, the media and Democrats still use this claim.

When Trump does not immediately release his evidence, news reports are distributed suggesting that his claims are not substantial, due to the lack of evidence. By using innuendo in their headlines and articles, they insinuate that the President’s accusation is entirely false. Why is it permissible for Democrats to create claims that overwhelmingly lack evidence, but Republicans must immediately provide all their evidence before their claims can be believed? Either hold both parties accountable to providing substantial information, or treat both equally in reporting on their actual remarks (rather than inserting your own assessments).

If Obama made a claim (without immediately providing evidence) that Bush wiretapped his campaign back in 2009, the headlines would have read, “Obama accuses Bush of wiretapping his phones.” There would be no insertion of “offering no evidence.” This double standard reveals complete media bias.

Also, just because evidence was not instantly offered to the piranhas in the media, it does not conclude that such evidence is non-existent. While the existence of such information is likely, most mainstream media outlets have attempted at reaching the conclusion that Trump’s accusation is false.

Former Bush Attorney General Michael Mukasey expressed on ABC’s “This Week” that surveillance on Trump was likely.

“I think he’s right in that there was surveillance and that it was conducted at the behest of the attorney general — at the Justice Department,” Mukasey said.

He noted that the order would not have been made by Obama, but rather the Justice Department. In June, media outlets reported that Bill Clinton met with Attorney General Loretta Lynch in a bizarre encounter at an airport. The Attorney General’s Office was also part of the Obama Administration, which indicates that he could have played a role.

Is it unreasonable for Trump to conclude that he has been the victim of wiretapping? It has been confirmed that telephone conversations have been leaked of his remarks to leaders of other countries. Clearly, some type of surveillance is occurring.

It has also been confirmed that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (which was controlled by Obama’s AG) applied for a warrant to spy on the Trump team, and potentially obtained a warrant.

According to a January 2017 report by The Guardian newspaper, “The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court 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.”

This surveillance was taking place during a Presidential election by the opposing party, and they used “the Russians” as an excuse to spy on Trump and his team. We have trusted media reports that publicly revealed the Justice Department was potentially engaging in monitorization.

If it’s a Republican, the media tries to expose another Watergate. If it’s a Democrat, the media tries to prevent another Watergate. This behavior (taking place under the Obama administration) was shameful, scandalous and vividly highlights corruption. This makes Watergate look like child’s play.

Did Obama wiretap Trump Tower during the election?
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. M Jo

    March 16, 2017 11:47 am at 11:47 am

    Don’t make claims you can’t back up, it’s pretty simple

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

To Top