A civilization-warping crisis of public trust
Trump’s frothing at the mouth claims this morning don’t seem to be going over all that well so far.
The president, who regularly has access to classified information and intelligence briefings, relied on Breitbart News for his information about the alleged wiretap, according to the person.
Breitbart, the media outlet previously run by White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon, published a story Friday outlining actions supposedly taken by the Obama administration to monitor Trump Tower in New York during the campaign. The story, which claimed the moves were aimed at undermining Trump’s candidacy, referenced commentary on Thursday by radio host Mark Levin that made similar claims.
Neither Breitbart News nor Levin cited independent reporting to back up the assertions.
But Mark Levin said it. Isn’t that all that’s required? Somebody else saying it?
“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,” Kevin Lewis, a spokesman for Obama, said in an emailed statement on Saturday. “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.”
Ben Rhodes, Obama’s former deputy national security adviser, also denied Trump’s claims on Saturday. “No President can order a wiretap,” Rhodes wrote on Twitter in a response back to Trump. “Those restrictions were put in place to protect citizens from people like you.”
I would like more protection from people like Trump, and most especially from Trump.
Trump’s flurry of tweets sparked further concern by some in Congress, who called on the president to be more forthcoming about his wiretapping accusations.
Senator Ben Sasse, a Nebraska Republican who has been a Trump critic, said Saturday that Trump’s allegations suggest that even if Obama wasn’t involved, a court may have seen sufficient evidence to authorize a wiretap — a potentially groundbreaking development.
Ah. That would be interesting. President Bonehead lets us all know that Intelligence people may have evidence he’s been up to no good.
Any legal wiretapping would have been initiated by intelligence agencies, with court approval required under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. According to federal law, a FISA court approving a wiretap of Trump’s home or offices would have had to find probable cause that the facility was being used on behalf of a foreign power, or that Trump’s associates were involved in espionage.
Such a wiretap could have been obtained without Obama’s involvement, if intelligence agencies determined — and got a court to agree — that Trump or his associates were acting on behalf of a foreign government. Trump has denied colluding with Russia, saying he has no links to the country.
“If it was with a legal FISA court order, then an application for surveillance exists that the court found credible,” Sasse said in a statement. “The president should ask that this full application regarding surveillance of foreign operatives be made available.”
The U.S. is “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,” Sasse said.
Representative Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence committee, said Trump had “no evidence” to support his “spectacularly reckless” claims.
“No matter how much we hope and pray that this President will grow into one who respects and understands the Constitution, separation of powers, role of a free press, responsibilities as the leader of the free world, or demonstrates even the most basic regard for the truth, we must now accept that President Trump will never become that man,” Schiff said in a statement.
He seems to be heading very determinedly in the opposite direction.
https://www.facebook.com/144310995587370/photos/a.271728576178944.71555.144310995587370/1460689197282870/?type=3&theater
~”Let’s open up the libel laws so we can sue them and make lots of money!”~
Dunno how that works exactly, but accusing the (former) President of wiretapping you might be in that vein…
BKiSA, interesting thing about defamation in the US. For Obama to win a defamation case he would have to prove three things as I understand it.
1. That the statement was untrue.
2. That he suffered actual harm or loss.
3. That since he is a public figure, the statement was made with actual malice, not just carelessness or with some other target primarily in mind.
I’m certainly prepared to assume the statement was untrue, unless someone comes up with information a whole lot more definitive than we have so far. Could Trump actually damage Obamas mana and legacy with anyone other than a breitbart subscriber? Trump does pretty much everything with malice, but I think it’s the general and garden variety malice. I suspect even his salad o der is delivered with malice and loathing.
““No matter how much we hope and pray that this President will grow into one who respects and understands the Constitution, separation of powers, role of a free press, responsibilities as the leader of the free world, or demonstrates even the most basic regard for the truth, we must now accept that President Trump will never become that man,” Schiff said in a statement.”
If this came to pass I would have to consider seriously belief in the existence of a god and the efficacy of prayer…
Stewart’s link emphasizes an excellent point. If Trump’s charge were to turn out to be true, Trump could PUT OBAMA IN JAIL! He would just love to be able to do that. It would be sweet revenge for his humiliation by Obama at the White House Correspondents Dinner. What wouldn’t he do to achieve that, if it were actually, legally possible? And, as an added bonus, If there were the slightest, smallest possible link to Hilary, HE COULD PUT CLINTON IN JAIL! He should get his Attorney General looking into this, right away, as it would constitute a gross violation of Presidential power on Obama’s part. So, if he doesn’t actually take any action in this regard, then it would mean he does not actually believe this claim, however loudly he tweets about it. But we’ve been down this road already: the whole massive voter fraud thing would be be the target of a huge investigation. Is anyone really, seriously looking into this? No. Even most Republicans don’t believe it. These claims are for his low information base. Even if he gets his followers to believe the wiretapping charge, Trump has to simultaneously hold the position that his administration somehow does not have the power to initiate any proceedings against Obama. He’s no longer just a plucky outsider, he’s the president. Obama is now just a private citizen, without the resources, power or intelligence connections that were once his as occupant of the Oval Office. Legally, he’d be toast. And disgraced. I know that many Trump supporters are not going to have the nimbleness of mind to connect these two opposing ideas and realize that one of them must be false, but there must be some who will put the pieces together. Or at least one would hope.
https://www.facebook.com/144310995587370/photos/a.271728576178944.71555.144310995587370/1461132253905231/?type=3&theater
I didn’t vote for Ben Sasse, and wasn’t thrilled when he won the election, but I have to admit, during this Trump thing, there have been many opportunities to be proud of our junior Senator (our senior senator, on the other hand – disgusting. She’s so far into Trump’s camp she has no morals left – and she had few enough to begin with, at least not morals that we would recognize).
I’m running a sweepstake on exactly when Obama will stop laughing. My money’s on 23rd April 2031.
He’s not laughing.
I was referring only to this particular story; I’m sure he’s as horrified as anybody about Trump in general.