What We Know About the Obama Administration Wiretapping – Update


The first video is an important update to the article and for that reason, we are putting it up front. The White House and the FBI did discuss the wiretapping according to a liberal journalist’s source. The President HAD TO KNOW.

~ ~ ~

Last Friday, talk show host Mark Levin quoted former U.S. attorney Andy McCarthy about the Obama administration wiretapping Trump Tower based on no evidence. Breitbart followed up with a thesis compiling facts and theories saying the Obama administration wiretapped then-President elect Trump to undermine him. We also know Obama has placed his operatives in key positions throughout the government agencies.

The argument mostly centers around two FISA requests to tap Trump Tower, the first was denied and the second was approved.

The biggest problem with President Trump’s twitter storm this morning blaming Obama directly is that it wasn’t Obama who directly ordered the wiretap, it appears it was the DoJ and the FBI who applied for the FISA warrants. That’s the process.

The FBI applied for a Foreign Intelligence Service Act (FISA) warrant last summer to monitor members of the Trump campaign, but it was denied in its initial attempt.

Last November, former British MP and Trump-hating journalist Louise Mensch of HeatSt reported that the FBI had succeeded in its second request for a FISA warrant, and that fact was later confirmed by the BBC.

Mensch was trying to make him look bad with the revelations – like someone who is being investigated by the FBI for Russia ties. It fit the narrative.

The Guardian also corroborated her report that the FBI had sought a FISA warrant last June, but it claimed that the warrant targeted “four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials,” with no mention of Trump himself.

The BBC reported that while neither Mr. Trump nor his associates are named in the FISA order, three of Trump’s associates were the targets of the investigation.

Mensch alone insisted that Trump himself was named in the initial FISA application.

Andy McCarthy reported: In June, an initial FISA affidavit (obviously prepared by the FBI and the Justice Department’s National Security Division) was submitted to the FISA court. It is said to have “named Trump” — but we don’t know whether that means (a) his name merely came up somewhere in the text of the affidavit or (b) he was an actual target whom the government wanted to investigate under FISA (meaning eavesdrop, read e-mail, and the like).

Such a warrant would only have been granted if the FBI was able to somehow convince a judge that the Trump campaign had credible links to a foreign power, though in the end it turned up nothing.

This was an FBI investigation, not an order from the White House itself. However, this is Obama’s administration over which he exercised dictator-like control at times. Did Obama wink at the DoJ, outwardly push them into filing the warrants? Did anything by the DoJ under Loretta Lynch go without Obama’s approval? Was the warrant based on lies?

FBI Director James Comey downplayed the existence of such an investigation at the time, which is probably why Trump just learned about it.

The roots of the FISA warrant were themselves very peculiar. According to both Mensch and the BBC, they centered on a server in Trump Tower found last Spring to have been communicating with Russia’s Alfa Bank, itself reportedly with strong ties to Vladimir Putin.

Everything in Russia that makes money is tied to Putin and many American businessmen do business with Russia.

The FBI reportedly came to conclude that the communications were innocuous.  Andy McCarthy reported that the Justice Department and FBI, however, continued to pursue it as a national security investigation without basis. That’s outrageous.

The NYT reported in January that Paul Manafort, Carter Page, and Roger Stone were all “under scrutiny” by the U.S. intelligence for their links, which may or may not mean that they’re the “Trump associates” targeted by the FISA warrant per the Guardian and BBC reports. Manafort worked out of Trump Tower as Trump’s campaign manager for a time and lived there before Trump hired him.

When Trump said Obama was tapping “his” phones, he probably meant phones in Trump Tower (Manafort’s), not his own personal phones.

An Obama spokesman told the New York Times that “no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice.”

The media is railing about Trump having no evidence. That doesn’t stop them from any anti-Trump reporting.

Trump has never been cautious in his use of words and it sometimes gets him in trouble. Isn’t it odd though how this all comes out after the President gives one of the best speeches heard in Congress?

Some will say the wiretapping and all of the accusations are part of a legitimate investigation into foreign influence and others will see it as McCarthyism.

We all know that Obama is conducting a covert operation to take down the Trump presidency. We need more information but will we ever get the truth?

If nothing else, we should be concerned about how these FISA courts operate because this warrant does not appear to have been based on evidence of shady dealings, it was possibly an illegal fishing expedition which appears to have turned up no evidence and yet the wiretapping continued.

That is the part we should be concerned about and if Obama didn’t directly order it, because we know he likes to keep his hands clean, someone continued it illegally according to Andy McCarthy.

Andy McCarthy explains that a FISA wiretap requires no showing of a crime, just evidence amounting to probable cause that the target of the wiretap is an agent of a foreign power. (A foreign power can be another country or a foreign terrorist organization.)

This Administration would never listen in on conversations of opponents, would they?



After publication, we added a few lines of conjecture so there is no doubt about where we stand.



  1. I suspect this will undoubtedly get the attention of Congress. Considering there were reports of the architect of the dossier to testify in a Congressional hearing and members seemingly wanting to confine it to Trump and “his” ties to the Russians, these tweets may have been written so as to cause such an uproar that the hearings would expand. Presumably this should cause such an investigation to expand to ALL the parties involved from the very beginning. Heretofore all the reports have tried to confine it to Trump AND the Russians so maybe now all the parties will be under scrutiny. Since this dossier was the impetus to all that followed those players should be scrutinized.

      • He’ll have to be smart about his choices. Those leading the departments must be willing to end or greatly reduce the bureaucracy.

        End and or drastically reduce funding and they can no longer feed. They’ll be like rats abandoning a sinking ship. This requires a cadre of like-minded folks and I doubt that Trump has that capacity or desire himself to end governmental programs.

        There are things he rightly wants to end, but Trump has always sought government help to get things done. He is not a champion of our Founding principles. I look forward to a veto that happens because Trump finds the legislation un-Constitutional. I doubt we’ll ever see it. I hope I am incorrect.

        That said, yes, he is a better choice than Ms. Rodham. Ms. Rodham would have brought an enormous amount of statist’s stuff and staff to the Presidency. Trump just brings a moderate amount of statist to the Presidency.

        It has taken 121 years of judicial activism, Congressional and Extra extra- and un-constitutional gimmikry to get us to this point. Our ancestors who voted for the 16th and 17th amendments also led the way to this swamp. Repeal those two amendments and it proves our citizens are willing to secure liberty and not this false ideal that gets thrown out there called ‘democracy’.

        Keep you pen sharpened and your powder dry.

  2. To suggest that Obama wasn’t involved in this is laughable.

    AND McCarthy targeted COMMUNISTS like the Obama administration.
    McCarthy may have made mistakes but he was right about there being communists in America. Today they’re better known as Progressives.

    • Sara it seems you expended a lot of effort in the article to distance Obama from the 2 FISA requests.
      Of course, during the Obama years, a massive expansion of surveillance occurred. Obama is a surveillance zealot.

      One of the things discovered by McCarty and the other committee were state department people with allegiance to Russia sending Russia intelligence.

      • That certainly wasn’t my intent. He’s likely behind it. I don’t have the evidence but I did say this:This was an FBI investigation, not an order from the White House itself. However, this is Obama’s administration over which he exercised dictator-like control at times.

        We all know he is behind all of this.

        I added two other lines so there is no doubt where I stand but this article was meant to be less op-ed and more factual. I wish the President had said “Obama administration” instead of “Obama” but only because of what the corrupt media and Democrats will do with ti.

  3. Just proves that there is nothing to this garbage narrative the Democrats and Lamestream Media are dumping into the news stream. It’s nothing more than feeding the massive low information types and attempting to get some ignorant thugs to continue their violent protests.

    Does anyone actually believe that if the “intelligence community” with the these billions of dollars they spend surveilling all of us that the Obama administration wouldn’t have broken the actual stuff immediately?

    Call them what you like “Deep State”, “Administrative State”, “Black Ops”, “Police State”, bureauRats, etc., there are good folks in there and there bad folks in there. The bigger you allow it to become the more bad folks aka “termites in the walls” there will be.

  4. Do they really think that we are ignorant enough not to know that a ”Wink & Nod” to underlings is not just as effective as a direct order and is done to absolve them from guilt?

  5. Sara, I don’t doubt for a second that Obama was involved in this from the beginning, the question is what he knew and when did he know about it, all he has to say is this was ongoing DOJ and FBI investigation into the Russians,Wilkileaks and the election, the wiretapping continued right up to the elections and maybe beyond, the left was and is still trying everything to sink the election of Trump, will anything become of this, I doubt it!

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.