Mark Levin Provides The Timeline And Proof Of The Obama Administration Using Police Tactics Against Trump [VIDEO]

Spread the love

Loading

TMH:

Mark Levin is on a tear and it is a wonder to behold. I just watched him provide solid proof on Fox News on how all these police tactics against President Trump did indeed occur. The media provided most of the proof themselves that the two FISA requests were sought by Obama… the first one in June of last year, which mentioned Trump directly and was denied, and a second that occurred in October last year and was narrowed in scope, then was approved. It looks like it may have been targeting a server in the White House that was emailing Russian banks supposedly. No wrongdoing was found, unless of course you count what Obama did.

Levin has laid out exactly how this should be investigated and he has the full attention of the White House. His findings and recommendations have been circulated to several White House staffers, according to Washington Post reporter Robert Costa. The FISA orders and transcripts should now be made public and hearings should begin over all this. The media is still insisting there is no proof, when they provided said proof. This is insane.

From Conservative Review:

Mark Levin, Conservative Review’s editor-in-chief, recommends the Trump administration open an investigation into Barack Obama. Levin states the former president’s team used police-state tactics against then-candidate Trump during the 2016 election.

“The gravity of this is unparalleled. It appears that during the course of a presidential election, the Obama administration used both intelligence and law enforcement agencies to investigate the Republican nominee’s campaign and certain surrogates,” Levin tells Conservative Review.

Levin – who served as chief of staff for President Reagan’s Attorney General Ed Meese – explained the potential scandal on his Thursday evening radio show:

“We have a prior administration – Barack Obama and his surrogates – who are supporting Hillary Clinton and her party, the Democratic Party. Who were using the … intelligence activities to surveil members of the Trump campaign, and to put that information out in the public.”

“The question is: Was Obama surveilling top Trump campaign officials during the election?” Levin asked on “The Mark Levin Show.”

Mark Levin is calling this a silent coup. And he is correct. I’ve looked right at this evidence for months and I never connected the dots. I’m so glad Levin did. It is obvious to me that Barack Obama did know about all this and had Lynch at the DOJ once again do his dirty work. There was and is an orchestrated plan to sabotage the Trump presidency and not only stop him from getting his appointees approved, but stop him from accomplishing anything of merit or that would hurt the Obama legacy.

A myriad of things now look very connected. The protests and riots, Valerie Jarrett moving into Obama’s mansion, Jarrett’s daughter being hired by CNN to cover the DOJ and Jeff Sessions when she’s not even a journalist,

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

6 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The poor FISA judge.
He turned down a FISA request that named Trump.
But the ”more focused” FISA request that he did approve did NOT name Trump, Trump Tower or any of Trump’s political associates.
It was very narrowly written to fool no one but the judge.
And it worked.

The desperation of the self-impressed political class is palpable in the skullduggery going on. The left (and certain GOPe turds) are pulling out all the stops as they make up laughable allegations – with no evidence whatsoever – concerning Trump colluding with the Russians to “steal” the last election, while scrambling stereotypically like the cockroaches they are committing egregiously illegal acts of politically based espionage, while concurrently trumpeting false propaganda against Trump that would make Goebbels and Stalin green with envy.

Drain the f@#!$ing swamp.

Better yet, nuke it from orbit…it’s the only way to be sure….

One only has to remember how Democrats turned a blind eye to the most corrupt and scandal-ridden administration the United States has ever seen to realize this is a gigantic set-up to try and wrest power by coup when they can’t gain it Constitutionally.

FISA Is Not Law-Enforcement – It’s Not Interference with Justice Department Independence for White House to Ask for FISA Information

In my earlier post, I explained that the Obama camp is disingenuously responding to revelations that, during the presidential campaign, the Obama administration conducted an investigation, including wiretapping, against Trump associates and perhaps Donald Trump himself. As I elaborated, one avenue of response is to conflate the Justice Department’s two missions – law-enforcement and national security. We can see this strategy playing out in the New York Times coverage of the controversy. According to today’s Times report, a Trump official said that White House counsel Donald F. McGahn II is “working to secure access” to what is believed to be “an order issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court authorizing some form of surveillance related to Mr. Trump and his associates.” Presumably, this means the Trump White House is seeking to review the Justice Department’s applications for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) surveillance of Trump associates, and perhaps Trump himself, from June and October 2016, including any orders issued by the FISA court – as my post explains, it has been reported that the Obama Justice Department’s June application was denied, but its October application (which apparently did not name Trump) was granted. The Times report continues (the italics are mine): It would be a highly unusual breach of the Justice Department’s traditional independence on law enforcement matters for the White House to order it to turn over such an investigative document. Any request for information from a top White House official about a continuing investigation would be a stunning departure from protocols intended to insulate the F.B.I. from political pressure. It would be even more surprising for the White House to seek information about a case directly involving the president or his advisers, as does the case involving the Russia contacts. After the White House received heavy criticism for the suggestion that Mr. McGahn would breach Justice Department independence, a different administration official said that the earlier statements about his efforts had been overstated. The official said the counsel’s office was looking at whether there was any legal possibility of gleaning information without impeding or interfering with an investigation. The counsel’s office does not know whether an investigation exists, the official said. To re-emphasize what I explained earlier: a FISA investigation is not a “law-enforcement matter” or “case.” A law-enforcement matter is a criminal prosecution. That is the mission in which there should never be any political interference because it involves the strictly legal matter of whether there is evidence that penal statutes have been violated. In such a situation, White House intrusion would be political interference in a proceeding that is essentially judicial in nature, involving the potential removal of liberty from a citizen. National security surveillance is not a judicial proceeding by nature. The point is not to remove a person’s liberty – the focus is not the citizen and his rights at all. National security surveillance is about the political responsibility (i.e., the duty assigned to the political branches in our constitutional system) to protect the national security of the United States against threats from foreign powers. This function is not judicial in nature. There was no judicial role in it at all until 1978 when Congress, in the post-Watergate era, enacted the constitutionally dubious FISA law. Let’s assume that, after nearly 40 years, FISA is irrevocably part of our system. It did not turn a presidential national security duty into a judicial proceeding. It imposed on the exercise of the president’s national security power a layer of judicial oversight, in order to ensure that Americans were not subjected to electronic surveillance and other searches in the absence of probable cause. Significantly, underscoring the fact that we are talking about national security and not law-enforcement, in FISA the probable cause showing is proof that the target is acting as an agent of a foreign power, not proof that a crime has been committed. Again, not only was there no judicial role in national-security surveillance until 1978; even after FISA was enacted, administrations of both parties insisted that the president maintained constitutional authority under Article II to direct surveillance without judicial authorization. The FISA Court of Review (the appellate court in the FISA system) appeared to endorse this proposition in a 2002 opinion (“The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information.[Footnote omitted.] … We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President’s constitutional power.”) I point this out not to wade into the constitutional argument over the president’s authority to conduct surveillance without judicial warrant. I am simply emphasizing that national security surveillance is a presidential function, not a judicial proceeding. The point of conducting FISA surveillance is not to build criminal cases; it is to enable the president to carry out his personal executive duty to protect the United States against foreign threats. Consequently, it is specious to claim that, if the White House asks to see FISA court applications and orders, this would be a form of political interference in the law-enforcement mission of the FBI and Justice Department.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/445506/fisa-not-law-enforcement-not-interference-independence-white-house-ask-fisa-info

Wikileaks Destroys Obama – Reveals His History Of Wiretapping Friends and Rivals

Obamagate is gaining traction. Wikileaks revealed documents proving that Obama has a history of wiretapping and hacking friends and foes. In one particular Wikileaks document, Obama bugged a meeting between UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon and German Chancellor, Angela Merkel. Obama also intercepted a call between then French president, Sarkozy and Merkel.

(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com …

I hope you are all listening to Marks show tonight its a hoot, he just won the war on fake news for Trump, Outing their agenda driven lies. They ask him for proof and call him a conspiracy theorist when he was quoting their reporting, that lil bald bastid is a genius!