To put the following Fox News segment into context, it was published on March 4, 2017, as were the tweets saved in screen shots shown above, the same day that President Trump went on a tweet firestorm about Obama tapping his communications, so the follow up information that came out over the weekend is not addressed.
While much of the discussion below is short on the details, the important portion is that the journalist did speak to former White House insiders, from the Obama administration, that confirmed without a doubt that the administration was aware of the electronic surveillance on the Trump campaign.
TRUMP CALLS THE DEEP STATE'S BLUFF - DEMS, MEDIA BACKPEDAL
For months Democratic politicians and the MSM have consistently "implied" that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election, despite the fact that they have provided no evidence of collusion. They breathlessly reported Flynn spoke to the Russians, yet not one accusation of criminality was leveled against him. Then came Sessions, "he spoke to Russian envoys," as he did with envoys from dozens of countries, but the "implication" continued to be hammered relentlessly throughout the MSM, once again, with no evidence of any wrong doing, just "leaked" information that the meetings occurred.
With a series of tweets about the Obama administration tapping Trump's communications, the dominoes have all started to fall, as the media and Obama lackies rushed to protect and defend Obama, they have now admitted publicly that there is "no evidence" of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, the exact opposite of what they have been reporting and asserting since the election.
Further confirmation that there is no evidence showing any collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the election, Fox News' Chris Wallace hits Democratic Senator Chris Coons hard with the accusation that their continued insistence of collusion was being done with "no hard evidence," is nothing more than an attempt to hinder Trump's presidency and agenda. Wallace plays back Coon's prior assertions that the intelligence community had transcripts of conversations between Russia and the Trump campaign and "After initially defending his comments as an attempt to encourage the Senate Intelligence Committee to be given access to the raw intelligence, Coons admitted there is no “hard evidence of collusion,” and apologized." (Source)
In his attempt to backpedal his own prior statements and assertions, he has admitted their are transcripts, and while they provide no evidence of collusion, this further confirms Trump's assertions that his campaigns communications were, in fact, monitored.
It isn't only Obama era officials that are rushing to backpedal the Russia/Trump "collusion" narrative they have been relentlessly hammering for months, but the media itself is not only backpedaling, they are trashing their own prior reporting on the Obama administration wire-tapping the Trump campaign.
Breitbart News quotes a NYT article which stated "After Mr. Trump’s demand for a congressional investigation appears to be based, at least in part, on unproved claims by Breitbart News and conservative talk radio hosts that secret warrants were issued authorizing the tapping of the phones of Mr. Trump and his aides at Trump Tower in New York."
Then Breitbart points out the following, to which the NYT neglected to mention and didn't link to the original Breitbart piece, because it would have called to the readers' attention that the Breitbart article in question was citing the NYT itself:
The Breitbart article in question (which Schmidt and Shear do not link to) cites the Times’ own reporting on the intelligence community. Their January 19th article, "Intercepted Russian Communications Part of Inquiry Into Trump Associates," also bore Schmidt’s byline.
An editorial note at this link reveals that the print version of this article was headlined: "Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides."
It quotes an anonymous source who says that "wiretapped communications had been provided to the White House" as part of an investigation into “the business dealings that some of the president-elect’s past and present advisers have had with Russia.”
Until now, Democrats and their media have been pleased to create the impression that all kinds of wiretapping operations were conducted against the Trump campaign, uncovering many scandalous, possibly illegal connections. Only by reading those articles carefully does one discover the sources are highly speculative and the evidence is thin at best.
The much-discussed New York Times piece from January 19 is a perfect example of this. It begins by matter-of-factly confirming the existence of the wiretaps everyone in Obamaworld is now swearing are a figment of Donald Trump’s imagination. Mountains of innuendo about connections between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence have been spun out of what these abruptly non-existent intercepts contained, according to the anonymous leakers who currently drive almost 100 percent of mainstream media coverage.
Read the entire piece, it is important because as they clearly show, Trump has basically put Democrats and the mainstream media in a position where they have to "put up or shut up." They either have to produce evidence of wrong-doing on the part of his campaign, to which we heard Clapper and Coons admit in the videos above, there is no evidence of, or they have to admit their "anonymous sources" they have been quoting for the last months were lying, or the MSM has been lying.
The media has spent the better part of the weekend claiming Trump accused the Obama administration of wire-tapping his campaign with "no evidence," yet the evidence is all over the Internet, with prior reports from the same media now making those claims, saying their are transcripts, which could only be obtained by surveillance on the Trump campaign members.
While trial attorney Robert Barnes over at Law Newz, makes a very good case as to how Obama and/or his officials could be held legally repsonsible for misleading the FISA court in order to obtain permission to electronically spy on the Trump campaign, FISA law pertaining to the applications, does not require the president's signature, only the Attorney General, which would have been Loretta Lynch.
Unless Obama was crazy or stupid enough to put his name on a written order, which it extremely unlikely, Obama cannot be linked directly to the electronic surveillance of Trump campaign members or Trump himself.
If Bongino is correct and ObamaGate is going to blow wide-open, whether this week or next, or even next month, there is not a single doubt that Barack Obama will be able to hide behind Lynch's skirts, leaving her or members of the intelligence community to take the public fall-out.
Whether the general public holds him responsible or not, will be a story for historians to tell after we see how many dominoes fall in the coming weeks regarding this story.
BOTTOM LINE
It is public knowledge, as laid out from media reports over the last months in the last video seen below, that the Obama administration, did indeed, perform electronic surveillance on the Trump campaign, and by calling out the deep state's campaign to "imply" collusion between Trump's campaign and Russia, President Trump has now forced Democrats, the media and former intel officials to admit there was no evidence at all of collusion, while at the same time highlighting how the Obama administration once again abused the power of government agencies to go after an opposing party's candidate before the election.
It wasn't Russia that tried to "influence" the 2016 election, it was the Obama administration.
Below:: Sunday on Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends,” while discussing President Donald Trump’s tweets accusing the former Obama administration of wiretapping Trump Tower before the election, conservative radio talk show host Mark Levin broke down the wiretapping reporting.
