Donald Trump, arguably the most polarizing president of our time, has sparked controversy for his claims that Obama spied on him and in his doing so, tampered with the election process.
Many in the media have brazenly denied Obama’s involvement in any of this, all the while chalking Trump’s tweets up to claims of ‘paranoia’.
Ironically enough, it seems that the papers who have so integrally engaged in slanderous name-calling are unaware of previous articles which indeed indicate that steps were taken to spy on his campaign.
No doubt, spying on a presidential candidate days, weeks or even months before an election can have an undeniable effect on the process itself.
Moreover, NSA leaks have revealed the amount of power NSA analysts have; in which a rogue NSA worker possesses the capabilities to indeed spy on Donald Trump.
Just by scratching the surface of the leaks, you can see the NSA has the capabilities to record an entire country’s phone calls and store them for extended periods of time – all the while having analysis tools to sift through the flotsam. Furthermore, according to whistle-blower William Binney, 80% of all the US’s phone calls are recorded and stored indefinitely. What’s troubling about this is that the NSA, in a secret briefing to Congress, revealed that a FISA warrant is not needed to listen to domestic phone calls.
The NSA also has the ability to hijack a phone or computer’s mic or camera to actively listen in and record conversations being had within the proximity. Indeed, Edward Snowden once remarked that (without a warrant) from his desk he could “wiretap anybody from a federal judge to even the president.”
In regards to wiretapping the Trump Tower, interestingly enough, the NSA has a department called the Special Collection Service (SCS), in which they install “sophisticated listening devices allowing them to intercept virtually every popular method of communication: cellular signals, wireless networks and satellite communication.”
There are many tools in the intelligence community’s disposal if they were to engage in eavesdropping. It has been done many times before.
Ironically, Obama relaxed NSA rules right before Trump’s inauguration, which loosened regulations of NSA documents to be shared with other members of the intelligence community.
Right after this provision was passed, leaks were made to the media by the intelligence community which allegedly contained former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s phone-calls.
All this being said, it’s clear the intelligence community does have a bone to pick with Trump as he has threatened to overhaul and make radical changes in the system.
Furthermore, Obama openly called for the electorate to vote for Clinton, has disparaged the president in the past and is actively funding and administrating left-wing, anti-Trump protests across the nation.
Trump has also inferred that he will repeal a large part of Obama’s legacy and has openly said he is going to take down the elites who have been exploiting the country for their own gain.
Certainly, Obama and many in power have interests to protect. Many of those so called elites had hoped Clinton would win as she would continue furthering Obama’s policies rather than completely reversing them in Trump.
By spying on Trump, it is likely these opposing powers hoped they would find something incriminating enough to sabotage Trump’s campaign.
With everything said, there have yet to be any government documents released which outline the procedures used and the extent Obama, or anyone in his cabinet went through to spy on Trump.
There are articles however (from the left-wing media no less), which indeed allege Trump was spied on. Tie that in with the NSA’s proclivity for surrepetitiousness, along with powerful people who have interests in sabotaging the Trump campaign, Trump is certainly not unwarranted to hold beliefs that he and his campaign were spied on.
Simply said, the media is quick to excoriate Trump for his arguably tentative claims, yet have no problem accusing and slandering him with accusations of dealing with Putin when proof of his doing so has yet to be provided.