Bottom line: The main purpose was to dig for any “evidence” of collusion between Trump’s campaign and the Russians. Obama used wiretaps for that purpose. They found no wrong doing, and won’t admit to the wiretaps or the lack of evidence.
Over eight years of his regime, Obama was pretty prolific with the wiretaps.
James Comey got grilled in front of Congress over the entire Russian/wiretap disaster, and did a dance that put Fred Astaire to shame.
From The Washington Times
FBI Director James Comey declined to say Monday whether his team has launched an investigation into the leaks that led to former White House national security advisor Mike Flynn’s ouster.
Comey was pressed by Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., to say whether he could confirm such an investigation is taking place, but Comey said he could not because it might confirm that classified information was leaked.
“I can’t, but I hope people watching know how seriously we take leaks of classified information,” he said during Monday’s hearing on Russia’s influence on the election. “But I don’t want to confirm it by saying that we’re investigating it.”
Flynn was fired following leaks of intercepted phone calls with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The leaks showed that Flynn had discussed the sanctions imposed on Russia by then-President Barack Obama in retaliation for Russia’s cyberattacks during the 2016 election — a revelation contrary to Flynn’s public statements and his statements to Vice President Mike Pence.
……Gowdy, a former federal prosecutor, pushed for information about who might have known about Flynn’s conversations with the Russian ambassador. Comey refused to say if he briefed Obama on the phone calls, although he confirmed that former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former acting Attorney General Sally Yates — whom Trump fired for refusing to enforce his immigration executive order — would have had access to the information.
Comey was asked by House Armed Services committee member, Congressman Mike Turner (R-OH) if Obama was briefed on spying done against Mike Flynn or anyone else in the Trump campaign during the 2016 election, the scandal known as Obamagate.
Rep. Mike Turner: “Did [former Obama national intelligence director James Clapper] director Clapper ever brief the President of the United States — then President Obama — concerning the possible inadvertent or incidental collection or interception by the US intelligence community of any communication of members of the incoming Trump administration?”
FBI director James Comey: “That’s not something I can comment on.”
Mike Turner: “And then why not, Mr. Comey?”
James Comey: “For a couple of reasons. It might involve classified information or might involve communications with the President of the United States. On both of those grounds, I can’t talk about it here.”
Turner: “Mr. Comey, have you previously discussed your conversations with President Obama with this committee?”
Comey: “I don’t remember. I may have with the chair in ranking — I don’t remember with the full committee.”
Turner: “We’ll have to refresh your memory on those conversations then, Mr. Comey.”
Trey Gowdy pressed Comey to come clean:
Rep. Trey Gowdy, questioning James Comey during a House Intelligence Committee hearing on Monday, appeared to name former President Barack Obama and six of his administration’s top staffers as the source of leaks regarding former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s alleged collusion with the Russian government during the 2016 election.
Gowdy asked if those 6 people – DNI James Clapper, CIA Director James Brennan, former National Security Advisor Susan Rice, former White House advisor Ben Rhodes, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former acting Attorney General Sally Yates – “knew the name of the U.S. citizen that appeared in The New York Times and Washington Post? Would he [she] have access to an unmasked name?”
His point was that only a limited number of people would have the information that was leaked to the media.
So the question is which of those limited number of people did it?
Gowdy also asked Comey if he had briefed President Obama on any calls involving Michael Flynn.
Comey refused to answer the question, saying, “I’m not going to go get into either that case or any conversations I had with the president,” Comey answered.
Why not? The President is not supposed to be inserting himself in any criminal investigation, that would be considered improper.
This is the same douche who covered Hillary’s ass, and said she should not be prosecuted despite the fact that she used an illegal, unsecure computer to store and transmit highly classified information, and actually gave them to her aides, who had no security clearances. Comey is as crooked as a dog’s hind leg. His attitude reflects the approach of an out of control federal government. He needs to be kicked out.
By the way, after the Dems made the accusation of Russian hacking, they refused to let the FBI look into their servers:
Trump also tweeted in January about the DNC not allowing the FBI access to its computers after complaining that they were hacked by Russia.
“The Democratic National Committee would not allow the FBI to study or see its computer info after it was supposedly hacked by Russia,” Trump said. “So how and why are they so sure about hacking if they never even requested an examination of the computer servers? What is going on?”
The FBI confirmed Trump’s claim in January, according to the Star Tribune.
“The FBI repeatedly stressed to DNC officials the necessity of obtaining direct access to servers and data, only to be rebuffed until well after the initial compromise had been mitigated,” the agency said. “This left the FBI no choice but to rely upon a third party for information. These actions caused significant delays and inhibited the FBI from addressing the intrusion earlier.”
“I mean, if you look at the Obama administration and the Clintons’ involvement with Russia in terms of donations the Clintons received from Russia and entities, the idea that they sold off a tremendous amount of the uranium to the Russian government, and yet where was the concern for that? What are we doing to look into that?” Spicer said Monday.
“It was the Obama administration in 2009 that talked about a reset with Russia and a desire to reset relationships. It was Hillary Clinton who signed off on the deal that gave a Russian company one-fifth of the U.S. uranium supply. Where is the questioning about that? What did they get?” he asked.
”There was discussion the other day about a Russian official noting that both campaigns they sought to do it — where is the concern about their efforts on the Hillary Clinton thing? The Democrats and the Democratic Party, and a lot of those individuals are quick to point fingers, and yet when it comes to discussing their own collusion or questions involving their involvement with Russian officials or buy-offs to the Russians, there’s no discussion there. So you’ve got to wonder, on both sides, where’s the parity when it comes to these kinds of investigations?” Spicer asked.
The Dems have a lot of explaining to do.
From Angelo M. Codevilla, who was on the staff of the Senate Intelligence Committee as FISA was being written:
Fast-forward 44 years. In October, as opposition presidential candidate Donald Trump was surging in the polls, U.S. intelligence officials broke into his communications. But this time they had warrants. Approval, if not instigation, for seeking them had to come from the highest levels of the administration. One seems to have been obtained on the basis of a specious claim that the real targets were Russians, not Americans. But the other apparently aimed squarely at alleged contacts between Mr. Trump’s electronic communications system and Russians. It is difficult to imagine what threats to national security, supported by “probable cause,” these warrant requests might have alleged that could have outweighed the obvious fact that preventing the opposition candidate’s election was the point of the penetration. By legalizing precisely the same thing that the Watergate burglars had done — a political crime of the highest order — these warrants changed American politics.
Meantime, the MSM actually stands by its reporting of Obama’s wiretaps and surveillance:
Oddly enough, the very same national media that is now accusing Trump of making “unsubstantiated claims” about the Obama administration spying on him is still standing by their mountain of evidence that shows the Obama administration spied on him.
Out of the half-dozen or so media outlets, all of which are openly hostile to Trump, not a single one has retracted their contemporaneous reports that show the Obama administration investigated and spied on Trump and his team.
All of the journalism that uncovered this now-inconvenient fact that Obama’s Department of Justice sought and obtained a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant, and the news that the Obama White House was looking at intelligence based on actual wiretaps, still stands!
In fact, at the time, the very same media that is now vehemently protecting Obama and his administration from Trump’s claims, seemed thrilled with the news that the Obama administration was investigating and spying on Team Trump.