The liberal media wants to embarrass Trump for “Tweeting” words to the effect “Obama” (his administration) was “low” to “tapp my phones”. It was a largely political tweet, typical of Trump and not intended as a lawyerly exposition. It was based on his reading of the liberal media’s own news reports, although those reports didn’t specify Obama himself physically tapping “Trump’s” personal phones. The necessity of Obama’s personal involvement is a silly formulation by the pharisee media in order for them to denigrate the tweet as untrue. They are the ones being ridiculously obtuse when it comes to presidential power and responsibility.
But their problem with Trump’s tweet is not that it sort circuits some precise specification in order to make a generic point, the media does it all the time. It is that people get the political point being made about the dark state being allowed to operate under “constitutional lawyer” Obama. The liberal media didn’t like the dark Nixonian implication about their guy Barack, so they turn to picayune ways to denigrate criticism.
The media parses Trump’s words to make him out to be a liar when they know what he meant and their own responsibility. A member of their club, the New York Times, which they are content to feed off, was responsible for putting out such implications in order to cast a pall over Trump’s candidacy, election, inauguration and administration. The liberal media’s is up to its eye-balls in reporting “Trump being investigated”. And who would be doing it before the election than Obama’s intelligence and law enforcement agencies. It is not a contrivance to refer to such a high profile matter as “Obama’s” call as he would certainly be made aware of the juicy tidbits. The media’s connivance in all this is recounted in Jeffrey Lord’s excellent “suggested” cross-examination of Obama. The article appears in the American Spectator:
Ten Questions that ask: What did the President know and when did he know it?
Also at American Spectator, George Neumayer excoriates the Republican interlocutors on this and related matters for their effectiveness today at getting at key matters during the testimony of NSA head Admiral Rogers and FBI Director Comey. Neumayer’s article will disappoint you about Republican effectiveness once again. We are disappointed but maybe not to the same degree. Trump defenders have some ammunition to fire back with.
There are some more “bottom lines” to this, (if only they would be reported by dominant media). “Obama” tried to get a FISA warrant naming Trump but failed. His people no doubt had electronic intel “wiretapping” at the time of the request. And as far as “getting to the bottom” of Russia’s involvement in our election — fine — but any sincere objectivity is not to be assumed because Russia has been trying to influence our elections since 1917. Furthermore “Obama” eavesdropped on other countries (it is what the CIA and the NSA do) and tried to influence elections in other countries. Those are true statements at the very least because he was aware of such activities and could have stopped them.
R Mall
