Trump Accuses Obama of Wire-Tapping Him Before the Election

President Barack Obama and President-elect Donald Trump shake hands following their meeting in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, Thursday, Nov. 10, 2016. On Saturday, Trump accused Obama of wire-tapping him during the campaign.

By Al Perrotta Published on March 4, 2017

In a series of stunning tweets early Saturday morning, President Donald Trump accused his predecessor Barack Obama of orchestrating the wire-tapping of Trump Tower in the days before the 2016 election. Through a spokesman, Obama denies he ever “ordered” any surveillance against a U.S. citizen.

Trump’s public targeting of Obama would appear to be triggered by two reports: First, on Thursday night, conservative talk show host and lawyer Mark Levin outlined the known steps Obama and his operatives have taken to undermine the President. Then on Friday, Breitbart expanded on Levin’s case. Of note:

June 2016: FISA request. The Obama administration files a request with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) to monitor communications involving Donald Trump and several advisers. The request, uncharacteristically, is denied.

October 2016: FISA request. The Obama administration submits a new, narrow request to the FISA court, now focused on a computer server in Trump Tower suspected of links to Russian banks. No evidence is found — but the wiretaps continue, ostensibly for national security reasons, Andrew McCarthy at National Review later notes.

The New York Times broke the story in February alleging that wire-taps and phone records indicated regular contact between the Trump campaign and other associates and Russian intelligence officials in the year leading up to the election. The Times also revealed this Wednesday that Obama administration figures spread the intelligence about those alleged contacts across the government. The goal, notes The Daily Caller News Foundation, was to leave a trail of evidence for government investigators to follow.

The Last Resort blog also reported last night on a curious coincidence that suggests the internal intelligence war over Trump goes even deeper. They observe that National Security Agency Director Admiral Mike Rogers traveled, without permission of administration higher ups, to New York on November 17 to meet with the President-elect at Trump Tower. The very next day, the Washington Post ran an article detailing how the Obama administration was upset at the visit.

In fact, the Post reports, the administration had been looking only weeks earlier into dumping Admiral Rogers. The Last Resort suggests that Rogers disapproved of the operation against Trump, and had run afoul of Obama loyalists CIA Director John Brennan and Director of National Intelligence John Clapper.

Obama Reaction

In response to Trump’s allegation, a spokesman for former President Obama denied Obama “nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false.”

What must be noted is that Obama’s spokesperson is not denying that wire-tapping of Donald Trump took place. Only that Obama did not “order” it, nor did anyone within the office of the White House. They are not denying Donald Trump was targeted by the Obama Administration; in fact, they seem to suggest such targeting was done by an “independent investigation led by the DOJ.”

This would be the same Department of Justice headed by Obama appointee Loretta Lynch, who within weeks of the first FISA request in June 2016 requesting surveillance on Trump and his associates was secretly meeting with the husband of Trump’s campaign opponent.

 

This story will be updated.

 

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Autrey Windle

    This all has the common denominator of a former president who now occupies a mansion in Washington as a place to conduct his business of taking down the current President with his head adviser walking the halls since she now lives there. PUT NOTHING PAST OBAMA AND HIS “ORGANIZERS”. Ignore the walking and quacking like a duck at your own risk, America…

    • Linda

      Oh yes. And there’s no reason whatsoever to suspect any wrongdoing involving Russia and Trump…none of the many, many allegations are true. His tax returns might help answer a few questions, if there’s nothing to hide that is.

    • anne55

      This is ridiculous. Obama is a man of high integrity. Trump, I fear, is not.

      • GPS Daddy

        Hmm, you mean the President that increased the national debt more than any other President in the history of the US? Or are you talking about the President that proudly tried to put teenage boys in girls lock rooms and showers in high school and middle schools across the US? Or maybe your talking about the President who wrongly thought that American was the cause of strife in the Middle East and so pulled American out of Iraq leaving it wide open for ISIS to rise and slaughter untold numbers of people…

        Yep, a man of real integrity…

        • anne55

          “Every president inherits a debt from the previous one, making it virtually certain that the pile of debt is going to grow. So raw numbers don’t tell you much; what’s important is the percentage change in the time period being measured….So under Obama, the debt has increased 70 percent after nearly six years. But let’s look at what happened under Republican hero Ronald Reagan, using the fiscal year numbers in the White House’s historical budget tables.

          Size of national debt when Reagan took office: $1 trillion
          Size after six years: $2.3 trillion (130 percent increase)
          Size at the end of his presidency: $2.9 trillion (190 percent increase)

          In other words, when the numbers are placed in context, the national debt grew faster under Reagan than it has under Obama. But even he was a piker compared with wartime presidents such as Franklin D. Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.

          As Roosevelt battled the Great Depression and World War II, the debt soared from $23 billion in 1933 to $266 billion in 1945, or more than a 1,000 percent increase. Wilson, meanwhile, boosted the national debt from $3 billion in 1913 to $24 billion in 1921, for an increase of more than 700 percent. In fact, it was during Wilson’s presidency — and World War I – that the national debt limit was first established….

          Raw numbers, lacking context and not adjusted for inflation or the size of the economy, are inherently misleading. While there are ways to look at the increase in debt over time that might bolster Priebus’s point, that is not how he chose to defend it. Instead, he was relying on raw dollar figures, which really do not tell you much. And just because Obama used this method in a campaign setting, that’s not an excuse for Republicans to use it, too.

          Thus Priebus’s statement has elements of fact but lacks important context. He earns Two Pinocchios.”

          • GPS Daddy

            Our debt was a huge issues BEFORE Obama took office. That’s the point. So a man “of high integrity” does NOT increase it the way he did.

          • anne55

            The banks were failing. What would you have him do? And that problem did not start on his watch.

          • GPS Daddy

            You keep giving me points. Thanks. Racking up the debt is NOT what a person of “high integrity” does when we have failing banks. The reason the banks are is bad shape is because they are spread to think with loans. Having them make more loans, especially high risk loans, is NOT good fiscal policy. Obama did that is droves as President. But lets also take a look before he was President. Obama was a key player in making banks change their policy on whom they would give money too in a mortgage. The result was he helped to force banks to give money to people who did NOT qualify for a mortgage anyway, This resulted in the mortgage crisis we have a few years ago.

            A man of “high integrity” does not do those things.

          • GPS Daddy

            We also have the Middle East issues and the putting boys in girls bathrooms and lock rooms… (And these are the tip of the ice berg with him…)

            A man of “high integrity” does not do those things.

          • anne55

            I simply do not agree.

          • GPS Daddy

            So you don’t think that putting teen boys into teen girls showers and locker rooms is a bad idea? Hmm, well, that’s a really obvious one.

          • GPS Daddy

            On the Regan thing. You failed to account for one aspect. When Regan was President we were better able as a country to take on the debt. But several poor presidents later the US was NOT in the same place to handle a large increase in debt. Especially after eight years of war.

            A man of high integrity would have recognized this and not rack-up the debt…

        • anne55

          Yes, his views on same sex marriage did change, I think for the better.

          Quote…Obama replied “what you’re seeing is a profound recognition on the part of the American people that gays and lesbians and transgender persons are our brothers, our sisters, our children, our cousins, our friends, our co-workers, and that they’ve got to be treated like every other American. And I think that principle will win out.”

          He said that he as president “can’t dictate precisely how this process moves. But I think we’re moving in a direction of greater equality and I think that’s a good thing.” End quote.

          • GPS Daddy

            There is no such things as gay marriage. Marriage is the union of two different elements. You don’t marry aluminum to aluminum. The outcome is still aluminum. “Gay marriage” also ignores the rights of the child to be raised by their birth parents which is ALWAYS one father and one mother.

            But Obama clearly deceived the people when he campaigned as the President of traditional marriage. He clearly did not have a major paradigm shift while in office. Therefore he lied when he campaigned as the President of traditional marriage. This is not what a man of high integrity does.

          • anne55

            Trump lies all the time.

            And, last I heard, he claimed to support LGBTQ rights….although some of his actions and staff he has chosen belie that.

          • anne55

            Simply don’t agree. You marry because of love. And the outcome is love. Period.

          • GPS Daddy

            Marriage is the foundation of our society. Before the gay movement took off the traditional family was hurting already from a number of sources. The sexual revolution and the hookup culture along with pornography are elements that have taken a large toll on the family. So going into SSM the family is already in a beaten down state. SSM denies that a child has a RIGHT to their birth parents. The only thing that matters in the gay movement are gays.

      • Irene Neuner

        You must get your news from Newsweek? Time, the new truth standard? Maybe CNN Communist News Network? NPR, National Public Radio? They have a love affair with everything that deligitimizes tradional, Christian values.

        • anne55

          Yes, I trust them far, far more than Breitbart (which I don’t trust AT ALL). That doesn’t mean they never make mistakes, but – when they do – they retract and / or admit it.

          I’m glad to say Fox News has been a little more centrist lately, at least some of their correspondents have including those showing alarm over the Russian connection.

          • GPS Daddy

            “when they do – they retract and / or admit it” unless is service their political purpose then they do not no matter how wrong it is.. For proof of this just look through the various articles here on the stream. They give plenty of evidence for this.

          • anne55

            I am not following what you are saying.

          • GPS Daddy

            The liberal media does not retract their stories where they get it wrong IF the story supports the progressive liberal agenda.

  • Howard Rosenbaum

    An independent investigation by the DOJ under the Obama reign of tyranny is about as probable as a romance between Rosie & Milo. No self respecting CNN journalist would
    believe that for a moment – crazy but not as crazy as their self serving attempts to portray this as a legitimate national defense linked concern …

Inspiration
5 Immaterial Gifts With Eternal Value to Give Away This Christmas Season
Rita Dunaway
More from The Stream
Connect with Us