By Gabrielle Seunagal
Recent news of Obama’s invasive and deliberate spying on President Trump demands a serious investigation. How was Obama able to spy on the soon-to-be President during his campaign and what were his motives? The FBI, House of Representatives, and the Senate have each launched investigations to uncover more details and unknown variables, but some truths which may come as a shock to the American people.
Despite common beliefs, at no time was Obama required to obtain a warrant to spy on Mr. Trump. As Commander in Chief, Obama was well within his legal rights to merely order the NSA to provide a copy of Mr. Trump’s phone call records and transcripts. He was under no obligations to provide any reasons, warrants, or documents for the request. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) was established in the 1970s, as a means of national security purposes and has granted Presidents with the power to monitor those who are perceived as potentially threatening to the country. It is worth noting that many Presidents used this act to do what some might consider as ‘overstepping their bounds,’ only in this scenario, it is perfectly legal. The ease in which the government spies on Americans is alarming.
However, communications director leader Sean Spicer appears to have reason to believe that Obama used different, if not multiple, avenues of spying on the President during the 2016 campaign. It appears as though the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) was involved in surveillance strategies to “avoid American fingerprints,” although Home Office officials swiftly denied the claims, labeling them as “totally untrue and quite frankly absurd.” As of now, that remains to be seen.
The President’s critics are now demanding for him to release solid, concrete proof to validate allegations of him being spied on. Spicer and Judge Napolitano both asserted that Obama left the chain of command as means to spy on Mr. Trump throughout the duration of his campaign. President Trump has since slammed Obama for the surveillance, noting its parallels to the Nixon/Watergate scandal.
Updates will be made as more news is revealed.
By Gabrielle Seunagal