Drip Drip Drip Part Deux<\/p>\n
What an amazing weekend!!!
\nThis weekend we learned:
\n–\tthere were no \u201cwiretaps\u201d of Trump Tower (James Clapper, Meet the Press)
\n–\tthe President of the United States cannot \u201cwiretap\u201d people
\n–\tthe current President of the United States doesn\u2019t know that!!!!<\/p>\n
So where do things stand, and what does it mean?<\/p>\n
Donald Trump accused President Obama of \u201cwiretapping\u201d his campaign both before the election and after. Legally, the President of the United States hasn\u2019t been able to directly \u201cwiretap\u201d since the 1970\u2019s (that\u2019s Nixon\u2019s era.) The process requires a court order, either from a domestic court because of an ongoing criminal investigation, or through the courts set up by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) which involves a national security interest. Either court would require the agency requesting (FBI generally, but other agencies as well) to produce \u201cprobable cause\u201d evidence. Probable cause means that there is clear evidence (not necessarily proof) that a crime or national security violation is being committed, and that listening in to conversations is necessary to gather further evidence.<\/p>\n
So if in fact Trump Tower was \u201cwiretapped\u201d, then there was probable cause that the Trump campaign was coordinating in some way with Russian intelligence. By Trump suggesting that there was eavesdropping, then he\u2019s admitting to this probable cause. I don\u2019t think that is what he was doing, but it is an interesting side note.<\/p>\n
The agencies dealing with national security DO NOT need a warrant to listen in on foreign electronic communications. They DO need one if the foreigner is conversing with a US citizen. The process goes that a transcript of the conversation is made, and a FISA warrant requested. If the warrant is turned down, the transcript is destroyed. Keep in mind, the transcript or other evidence would have to create probable cause in order to get the warrant.<\/p>\n
Trump\u2019s tweets over the weekend were clearly to distract from the controversy itself: was there communication between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence. Trump decided to \u201ccall out\u201d the Obama Administration, and he got a clear answer from former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper \u2013 there were no wiretaps in Trump Tower.<\/p>\n
So what does that mean? It means there were no FISA warrants issued for Trump Tower, for the communications using the Trump Tower phones or other devices. That\u2019s really pretty limited, as most modern communication is done through cell phones, and it would seem reasonable that if a Trump operative was talking to either Russian intelligence or someone in between the two, they would not use an office phone.<\/p>\n
It means that Trump is trying to change the subject again, to focus on the \u201cObama Plot\u201d to get Trump, or as Breitbart now categorizes it, \u201cDEEPSTATEGATE.\u201d It\u2019s all a liberal plot to overthrow the Trump Presidency, so focus on that, not where the actual facts lead. As Obi Wan Kenobi would say, \u201cthere are no droids here.\u201d<\/p>\n
So are there \u201cdroids\u201d here? We don\u2019t know. The information isn\u2019t out there. As many commentators stated over the weekend, there is so much smoke, it\u2019s hard to believe there isn\u2019t a fire. And the Trump group is making even more smoke. <\/p>\n
Steve Bannon believes that the \u201cDeep State,\u201d the long time civil government employees who make up the core of the agencies involved, are working against Trump. He believes that they are still following the orders of President Obama. He may not be completely wrong.<\/p>\n
There are long time government civil servants who have sworn an oath:<\/p>\n