Remaining Defenders Of Trump Wiretap Claim Find Themselves Out On Limb
By ALLEGRA KIRKLAND Published MARCH 17, 2017, 6:00 AM EDT
At this point, the leaders of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, the U.S. attorney general, and the speaker of the House have all said they've seen no evidence to support President Donald Trump’s claim that his predecessor wiretapped Trump Tower during the presidential election. The FBI director even reportedly asked the Justice Department to refute that accusation earlier this month.
Trump himself now allows that former President Barack Obama may not have personally ordered a tap on the phones at Trump's Manhattan campaign headquarters, though he continues to allege that someone, somewhere was surveilling him.
Determining a culprit is an increasingly lonely effort. Initially, a number of Republican lawmakers went out on a limb to defend Trump, saying his wiretapping allegations may well have merit. But after congressional intelligence committees investigating the matter came up empty-handed, Trump's allies went silent or walked their remarks back, leaving senior White House staffers and diehard pro-Trump pundits hanging.
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer spent much of his Thursday briefing filibustering reporters who tried to get him to reconcile Trump's wild allegations with congressional leaders' insistence that they'd seen no evidence to support them. For about seven minutes, Spicer read directly from media reports that he said supported the President’s claims, concluding that “putting the published accounts and common sense together, this leads to a lot.”
more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/lawmakers-pundits-out-on-limb-defending-trump-wiretap-allegations
= new reply since forum marked as read
He tried, unsuccessfully, to go on the offense instead of passively waiting for the indictments.
Is/was there surveillance of the Trump team? I still strongly suspect, yes (NOT at the direction of Obama), and the rationale for NOT exposing this investigation is because surveillance of foreign agents in collusion with US nationals can be classified as top secret, and as such, public denials may be appropriate. Normally, a non-committal statement might be within the range of responses for information ("We can neither confirm nor deny..."
, but since this investigation is far more emotionally and politically sensitive and explosive, a (false) denial may have been the only avenue available to continue gathering information under cover.
Trumpy tried to pull the "offensive" maneuver to get out ahead of the coming political firestorm and maintain a degree of control over the narrative. Because no one is leaking any information about this (presumed) ongoing investigation leaves Trumpy hanging by himself on a limb. So, he knows something's afoot, but can't gain control of information that he can twist to his own advantage.