At this point in time, the public does not yet know the contents of the documents delivered by President Trump’s DOJ to the House Intelligence Committee regarding the wiretapping incident, but presumably since the documents were sent by Trump’s team, it stands to reason that whatever was delivered to the House Intelligence Committee was in favor of Trump’s claims, not the other way around.
Throughout his time in office, Barack Obama associated with many political operatives who were real lowlifes, and who often walked a tightrope between the world of what was considered legal behavior (however, unethical), and what was considered criminal behavior. There’s an old saying I’m sure you’re familiar with that goes:
‘If you hang around the barbershop long enough, you’re going to get a haircut…’
Are we about to learn next week that Obama got a haircut, and we’re all going to find out?
In the video below, Right Wing News breaks down the recent report from Young Conservatives, and compares it with an earlier report from Doug Hagmann of the Canada Free Press. Did Obama finally go to far this time? Let’s hope so. It’s long overdue!
Last week, the House Intelligence Committee asked the Justice Department to submit any evidence it had pertaining to President Donald Trump’s claims of surveillance by the Obama administration.
The plot thickens, as on Friday, the DOJ made its submission to the committee.
From The Hill:
The Department of Justice (DOJ) sent documents to the House Intelligence Committee on Friday in response to a request for evidence backing up President Trump’s claim that former President Obama wiretapped Trump Tower.
The committee is currently reviewing the documents, an aide confirmed to The Hill.
It’s unclear what’s in the documents, which CNN reported separately had also been delivered to the Senate Intelligence Committee, though that report could not be immediately confirmed.
White House spokesperson Sean Spicer clarified Trump’s original wording, saying that when he used the term “wiretapping” in quotation marks in his tweet, he was referring to surveillance in a broader sense.
Trump also didn’t back off the claim of surveillance, even joking about it with Angela Merkel who was spied on by the Obama administration.
The House Intelligence Committee will hold an open meeting on Monday discussing Russian interference and the claims of Obama administration surveillance.
MEET TEAM OBAMA WITH THE AMNESIA
While some have disputed the claims of surveillance, if there was no surveillance, how then were Trump’s conversations with the Presidents of Mexico and Australia picked up and the transcripts later leaked specifically to undermine him?
The media appears to have completely suffered amnesia about those reports.
It will be fascinating to see what evidence, if anything, the DOJ submitted…
Recall the following from a post last Friday titled: Obama Wiretapping Bombshell Drops; This is as Serious as it Gets (Video):
In that article, Douglas J. Hagmann reported that President Trump had in his possession evidence of the paper trail leading to a FISA court that substantiates his assertions that Obama, obtained authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign under the pretense of a national security investigation. For anyone not familiar with Douglas J. Hagmann, he has been a licensed investigator in the private sector for the last 30 years, where he’s worked on well over 5,000 cases, and he’s considered a surveillance specialist within his industry.
Often, his vast expertise has been sought out as either an informational or operational asset on various federal and state law enforcement agencies. In addition to his investigating duties, Hagmann is also an author, runs four websites, and has a successful talk radio show. Bottom line: If law enforcement agencies trust Hagmann’s investigative abilities, then I’m certainly going to trust them long before I believe a mainstream media that suffers from amnesia about the very stories THEY reported on previously.
There is a large storm brewing over Washington, DC right now – a storm that could dwarf anything ever seen in recent times. It is growing stronger by the hour as new information is being disclosed that strongly suggests that it is possible, even likely, that Obama and his Department of Justice maliciously and criminally misused the FISA process to collect intelligence on Presidential candidate Donald J. Trump. Additionally, Obama personally relaxed the limitations on how such information collected could be disseminated in the weeks before leaving office.
The political ramifications from this, if proved correct, could be unprecedented in scope. Once fully exposed, it would explain the curious actions of Obama as he prepared to vacate the White House. It would also explain, in context, the actions and statements of not only Barack Hussein Obama, but others in key positions of power including Loretta Lynch, Sally Yates, John Brennan, and others within the media.
At issue is Obama’s insistence to secure a federal wiretap warrant of Donald J. Trump, the candidate, using the federal court system as the mechanism to do so. The ostensible probable cause was alleged ties between Donald J. Trump and/or his associates with Russia.
The first warrant application was made in June 2016, according to reports published by The New York Times and elsewhere, but was rejected due to the lack of probable cause of criminal activity.
RECALL THAT THE FIRST ATTEMPT AT THE FISA COURTS…
WAS JUST DAYS AFTER THE INFAMOUS MEETING ON THE TARMAC!
When the request was denied in regular federal court, Obama and his Justice Department attempted an “end around” by citing the existence of a “foreign actor” and made a similar surveillance warrant application through the more specialized Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court in October of 2016. According to published reports, that warrant application was rejected as well, a rare occurrence in the FISA venue, which strengthens claims that no evidence of any foreign involvement ever existed. It has been reported that the initial warrant application to the FISA court specifically named Donald J. Trump.
It is also relevant to note here that this is the type of activity that led to the creation of the infamous “Wall” that was referenced after the 9/11 attacks. Its relevance to this specific instance is explained well by former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy an article linked here.
Article posted with permission from The Last Great Stand. Article by Michael DePinto.