Undisputed And Clear: Obama Administration Sought To Wiretap Trump!



As we said before even if Obama did not actually wiretap Trump he applied to do so. And doesn’t that have a lot to say about how much he cherishes American Tradition, our time-honored Republic and the Rule of Law? Unprecedented!

If the two videos above are viewed there really is no need for the words below. They are frosting on the cake.

Rush reports:

The New York Times Told Us Trump Was Wiretapped in January

RUSH: Before proceeding here on the investigatory efforts of the Obama Regime against Trump, I want to take just a brief diversion back to the New York Times story on January 20th, 2017. Remember, this is the story — and we could get the actual cutout of the front page that day and put it at RushLimbaugh.com. But the headline: “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides.”

Folks, I mean, the idea that Trump’s allegation here is absurd, I’m telling you, there is far, far more substance to what Trump is alleging than the entire thing that the Democrats and the media are alleging. There is no evidence that the Russians had anything to do with the outcome of our election, none, and there won’t be any, because the Russians didn’t.

But there’s all kinds of evidence, circumstantial and suspicious and common sense that this is what the Obama administration did. We’ve got countless examples of them wiretapping. We’ve got their “house organ” admitting that wiretap data was used in the inquiry of Trump aides. But one of the names on this story, one of the reporters is named Michael S. Schmidt.

Now, I want to share something with you about the actual story accompanying this headline, “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides.” And this comes from a blog called Yid With Lid. “In January Michael S. Schmidt perpetuated the rumor that Team Trump had Russian connections, and to support his point he said that Trump’s people were wiretapped –” Michael S. Schmidt in the New York Times perpetuating the rumor that Trump had Russian connections and maybe affected the election, “and to support his point he said that Trump’s people were wiretapped.”

Well, how does he know? Somebody in the Regime, in the outgoing Regime, somebody had to share with him the data on the wiretaps, somebody had to tell him there were wiretaps, somebody had to tell him what the wiretaps had produced, ’cause he’s writing about it in the New York Times. But yet when Trump over the weekend claims they were wiretapped, this same guy, Michael S. Schmidt who wrote the piece in January, said there was no evidence that Trump had been wiretapped.

Now, folks, January 20th, New York Times, Michael Schmidt wrote that Team Trump had Russia connections, and to support his point, said that Trump’s people were wiretapped, and that’s in the New York Times in January. So Trump tweets over the weekend that Obama’s wiretapping him, and how low that is and what Trump thinks of it and so forth. This same reporter comes back and says there’s no evidence of that. Trump’s a lunatic. There’s no evidence that. Trump’s insane.

Well, now how can this be? The New York Times has the word “wiretapped” in a headline. The writer, one of three on the piece, claims that Trump had Russian connections and to support the point, he said that Trump’s people were wiretapped. So Trump comes along, “Yeah, I was wiretapped.” Same reporter: “There’s no evidence of that.” Now, what’s going on at the New York Times? How in the world — do they know what they’re doing or did they just forget what they did? Are they so obsessed with hatred — and that’s what the Democrat Party and the left has become, folks.

If you’ve ever wondered what hate in politics looks like, if you’ve ever wondered what a hate group is, don’t listen to that Looney Toon at the Southern Poverty Law Center. Just listen to the people on the left, because this is pure, undiluted, raw hatred, and it is for Donald Trump and everybody who voted for him. Raw hatred does not build a movement. Raw hatred does not build success. Raw hatred destroys. Raw hatred is destructive.

These people at the New York Times write in January that Trump was wiretapped and that’s why we know he was working with the Russians. A month and a half later, Trump claims Obama wiretapped him, and the New York Times writer says, “There’s no evidence of that.” Well, was there no evidence when you wrote about it in January or did you forget what you wrote in January? Is it your raw hatred for Trump, your raw resentment at having lost, is that what’s causing you to lose every ounce of credibility, morality, authority, and credibility that you’ve got?

It’s not Trump who has some explaining to do. It’s not you who voted for Trump who have some explaining to do. You don’t need to justify yourselves, nor does Trump. But the people running this silent coup, the people in the media trying to unseat, trying to damage, trying to sabotage Trump, they have a lot of explaining to do.

And it’s only going to get worse because it is obvious that there’s nothing factual or very little that’s factual that is backing up everything these people are using to try to destroy Trump. It’s nothing but pure, raw hatred, and it’s on display for everybody to see.

Rush reports again:

This goes back to October of 2014, so roughly 2-1/2 years ago. “A former CBS News reporter who quit the network over claims that it kills stories that put Obama in a bad light says that she was spied on by a government-related entity that planted classified documents on her computer. In her new memoir, Sharyl Attkisson says a source who arranged to have her laptop checked for spyware in 2013 was shocked and flabbergasted as what the analysts revealed.”

This is outrageous, it’s worse than anything Nixon ever did. “‘I wouldn’t have believed something like this could happen in the United States of America,’ Attkisson quotes the source saying, who looked at her computer. She speculates the motive was to lay the groundwork for possible charges against her or her sources. Now, she says that “the source, who’s connected to government three-letter agencies,” and there are any number of those: FBI, CIA, DOJ, “told her that her computer was hacked into by a sophisticated entity that used commercial, nonattributable spyware that is proprietary to a government agency.

“Either the CIA, the FBI, the DIA, or the National Security Agency.” You remember this? She went and she wrote a book about it. She went on a tour to promote the book. Now, we know that Obama weaponized the IRS. Folks, this is all predicated… I began the program today by asking: Is it unreasonable to believe that Barack Obama and his administration would wiretap or surveil Donald Trump while he was a candidate for the presidency? Is it unreasonable or reasonable to suspect this, based on what we know? And my point, it is not unreasonable at all to suspect this.

You cannot just reject this out of hand like the media is trying to do, because of things like this. (interruption) Well, I’m not linking Obama to it. I’m asking if it’s reasonable or unreasonable to think he could have been. I haven’t linked Obama to anything. Trump is. I’m simply asking, do you think it’s reasonable or unreasonable, Trump’s charge? And I think, if you’re answering honestly, you have to say it’s reasonable to think this. Trump has every reason in the world. It’s not just this.

Look at the efforts that have been ongoing since November to undermine his transition, undermine his presidency, undermine the election victory, to sabotage his administration. There’s no question that the deep state has been working leaking in felonious fashion all kinds of private data that they are intercepting from Trump’s phone calls. I mean, he calls the president of Mexico, he calls the president of Australia. A couple days later, there are news stories of what the call contained, what the presidents of Mexico and Japan and Australia said and what Trump said. And they lied.

In one of these stories they said that Trump hung up on one of these presidents. And it didn’t happen. When the president, I think it was Australia, when he read that, he called a news conference or put a story out: This was a pleasant conversation. Nobody hung up on anybody.

But somebody had the transcript of the call, and they leaked it. Somebody had to be able to get it. How’d they get the transcript of the call? How does that happen? President Trump has one of the most secure phone systems in the world in the White House. Even he marveled at it when he said he first saw it. Could not believe it.

Well, how does a phone call he makes, how does a transcript end up in the media? Somebody listened to it. Maybe somebody in the room listening on Trump’s side reported that. Maybe Trump’s got problems on his staff. I doubt that, but I mean, somebody leaked this, and somebody had access to both sides of these conversations.

And these are just three examples. There are many more. Well, if you have that, it’s like the old question from Pascal: Is it tougher to believe that something that’s never happened will happen or that something that has happened will happen again? Well, we’ve got something here that’s happened. We have leaks of private phone conversations of President Trump or President-Elect Trump. Okay, it’s happened.

The New York Times in January 20th, headline: “Wiretap Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides.” A timeline has been put together of all of these things that have happened, including the access of the request for FISA warrants. It’s clear the Obama Department of Justice wanted to investigate Trump and did. Found nothing on the criminal side, then asked for a FISA national security warrant for Trump’s aides. There’s no question this has been happening.

So is it unreasonable to think that people loyal to Barack Obama are in charge of this deep state effort to unseat or undermine? It’s not unreasonable at all. Now you add this Sharyl Attkisson story. You have Obama weaponizing the IRS and using it against every day Americans. That be Catherine Engelbrecht of True the Vote. Now, he didn’t wiretap James Rosen. It’s easily understood this error.

James Rosen’s the Fox News reporter. He was not wiretapped. His emails were surveilled and requested, his Gmail account. Not technically a phone tap. They got them, don’t know how. I don’t know if he was ordered to turn them over or what, I don’t remember that, but I just remember it wasn’t his phone calls they were tapping.

They lied about Obamacare. They lied about Fast and Furious. They have lied about knowing whether or not Hillary was using that illegal email server. They have lied about so many things, it’s just simply far more reasonable to accept that this happened than it is unreasonable, is all I’m saying.

RUSH: The Gateway Pundit put together a list of more than a dozen proven victims of Obama Regime wiretaps. You want to hear some of ’em? Okay. “WikiLeaks released the following list on February 23rd of Obama administration wire taps: The U.S. National Security Agency bugged a private climate change strategy meeting between U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon and German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin…” Don’t forget, there have been wiretaps of Angela Merkel’s phone calls, and she was livid when she found out about it.

“Obama bugged Chief of Staff of U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) for long-term interception targeting his Swiss phone. Obama singled out the Director of the Rules Division of the World Trade Organization (WTO), Johann Human, and targeted his Swiss phone for long term interception. Obama stole sensitive Italian diplomatic cables detailing how Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu implored Italy’s Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi to help patch up his relationship with U.S. President Barack Obama, who was refusing to talk to Netanyahu.

“Obama intercepted top E.U. and Japanese trade ministers discussing their secret strategy and red lines to stop the U.S. ‘extort[ing]’ them at the WTO Doha arounds. [sic] Obama explicitly targeted five other top E.U. economic officials for long term interception, including their French, Austrian and Belgium phone numbers…” Now, you might ask, “Obama did all this?” Well, the administration did. But these are the kinds of things… Folks, it’s like Lois Lerner. I keep going back to this, but it’s such a great example.

When Lois Lerner was acting as a rogue IRS agent denying tax-exempt status to only conservative applicants, people on our side said, “We gotta find a smoking gun.” I said, “What do you mean?” “Well, we gotta find a memo! We gotta find direction. We gotta find Obama ordering her.” “You’re never gonna find that. It doesn’t exist.” “What do you mean, it huh?” I said, “Lois Lerner is there precisely because she knows what to do without being told. You don’t understand liberalism if you don’t understand that. These people are like-minded.

“They don’t have to be told to be liberal. They don’t have to be told what liberalism is and how it operates.” Eric Holder did not have to get a phone call from Barack Obama to understand that they weren’t gonna prosecute the New Black Panthers for vote fraud in the Philadelphia polling places. Barack Obama did not have to call Eric Holder to tell him to take over all those domestic police departments on charges they were racist. It’s just what liberals do. Liberals and big-government advocates do this. They surveil citizens. They surveil enemies of the state.

They surveil allies.

This kind of stuff happens.

This is my point about reasonable and unreasonable. I mean, this list goes on: “Obama explicitly targeted the phones of Italy’s ambassador to NATO and other top Italian officials for long term interception; and Obama intercepted details of a critical private meeting between then French president Nicolas Sarkozy, Merkel and Berluscon [sic], where the latter was told the Italian banking system was ready to ‘pop like a cork.’” These are just some examples; then they showed up on WikiLeaks.

“[I]n 2013 the … Washington Post expressed outrage after the revelation that the [Obama] Justice Department had investigated the newsgathering activities of a Fox News reporter as a potential crime in a probe of classified leaks. The reporter, Fox News’ James Rosen and his family, were part of an investigation into government officials anonymously leaking information to journalists. Rosen was not charged but his movements and actions were tracked,” and his email was hacked if you will. He was not phone-tapped, Rosen wasn’t. “Also in 2013…”

See if you remember this. “Also in 2013, members of the Associated Press were also a target of the surveillance.” They were okay with it since Obama was the one doing it. I’m not kidding. The AP was a target of surveillance. All of this was Obama trying to track down who was leaking things out of his Regime. The New Yorker, a liberal rag in Manhattan, “even noted that ‘In moderate and liberal circles, at least, the phone-records scandal, partly because it involves the dear old AP and partly because it raises anew the specter of Big Brother, may well present the most serious threat to Obama’s reputation.’”

Do you remember…? What was her name? Jill what’s-her-face of the New York Times, Jill… She used to be the editor over there until they moved her out. She charged sexism or whatever. What’s her name? She said — and she is as leftist as you can get, and I say that without exaggeration. She said the Obama administration was the most inaccessible, was the most un-transparent administration she had ever dealt with. (interruption) Jill Abramson! That’s right. Jill Abramson. You know, she wrote the book with Jane Mayer, trying to destroy Clarence Thomas. But, yeah, she was the editor at the New York Times.

They finally moved her out of there. I think it was… She charged sexism, ageism, some such thing. But she was been on record a couple or three times talking about how the administration had all the media fooled. The media think they loved them when Obama secretly despised them, spied on them and all these other things. Which is exactly what people like that do. You know, folks, it stands to reason. People that love Big Government, why do they love Big Government? And don’t give me ’cause they love doing things for people. That’s not it.

They love power, and they want to know who opposes them.

They want to know what their opponents are doing and saying. You know, you need to get a movie. You need to rent a movie sometime. I’ve recommended this once before. Lives of Others. Did you go out and get that? (interruption) Yes. It’s about life in East Germany in the 1970s. Not that far ago. East Germany was part of a Soviet Bloc, and it was all about how the East German government spies on citizens. It was truthful, historically accurate, and it was sobering. It’s the kind of thing that young people today cannot even imagine.

I mean, they have these holier-than-thou images of Obama, and if they ever actually learned, it would shock them to the point that they would not want to believe. This list of… Here’s the Sharyl Attkisson hack of her personal computer in 2014, her CBS laptop. Now you’ve got Nicholas Kristof at the New York Times today asking the IRS to leak Trump’s tax return to him. He says, “If you’re an IRS agent and have a certain president’s tax return that you’d like to leak, my address,” and he gives the New York Times address.

Now, this is a crime, and they’re happily — happily — pursuing what is felonious criminal behavior here, and they’re encouraging it in others. They want somebody at the IRS to commit a felony and leak Trump’s tax returns to ’em.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s