# Trump accuses Obama of wiretapping him **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 4, 2017, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384 "2017-03-04T15:07:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 22
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/421 "2017-03-21T17:23:34Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > Came here to say this. Trump was in violation of the Emoluments Clause at the moment he swore his oath of office. What case law construing the Emoluments Clause are you relying upon in reaching this legal conclusion? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/422 "2017-03-21T17:35:35Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > What had Bill Clinton done? Under oath in a criminal grand jury proceeding, Clinton spoke as follows concerning the definition of “sexual relations” presented at his deposition in the Jones case, which was: “A person engages in ‘sexual relations’ when the person knowingly engages in or causes contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.” > [@](#): > > Q.: “And you testified [previously, in the Jones deposition] that you didn’t have sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky in the Jones deposition, under that definition, correct?” > > A.: “That’s correct, Sir.” > > Q.: "If the person being deposed touched the genitalia of another person, would that be – and with the intent to arouse the sexual desire, arouse or gratify, as defined in definition (1), would that be, under your understanding then and now – " > > A.: “Yes, Sir.” > > Q.: " – sexual relations." > > A.: “Yes, Sir.” > > Q.: “Yes it would?” > > A.: “Yes it would. If you had a direct contact with any of these places in the body, if you had direct contact with intent to arouse or gratify, that would fall within the definition.” > > Q.: "So you didn’t do any of those three things – " > > A.: "You – " > > Q.: " – with Monica Lewinsky." > > A.: “You are free to infer that my testimony is that I did not have sexual relations, as I understood this term to be defined.” > > Q.:“Including touching her breast, kissing her breast, touching her genitalia?” > > A.: “That’s correct. . . .” That testimony was determined to be false. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/423 "2017-03-21T18:13:18Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That testimony was determined to be false. Sessions’s testimony was shown to be false as well, wasn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![ThisIsTheEnd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thisistheend/32/4713_2.png) [@ThisIsTheEnd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThisIsTheEnd)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/424 "2017-03-21T18:20:40Z")
The only ways to get him out are: [ul] [li]Death[/li][li]25th Amendment[/li][li]Half the country stops going to work until he quits[/li][li]Not reelected[/li] [/ul] He’ll never be impeached and convicted. He could be indicted, tried and convicted of a crime and Repubs won’t even blink. Four years is a long time for people to be laughing at you though. Bannon’s gonna have to gin something up major pretty soon to get that to stop. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/425 "2017-03-21T18:25:48Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What case law construing the Emoluments Clause are you relying upon in reaching this legal conclusion? Where did you get the idea I was making a legal argument? As I have often pointed out, IANAL. I am not making a legal argument. Not submitting a brief, don’t have time to head to the law library to research case law for you. But from me as a layperson and as you know, the Emoluments Clause appears in Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution. It bars any “person holding any office of profit or trust under” the United States from accepting any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign state” “without the consent of the Congress.” It obviously applies to a President, the precedent being that it has most recently been applied to President Obama and his acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize. (In a 13-page opinion, President Obama was found to be not in violation of the Clause.) In short, Trump is very likely in violation of the Constitution. Personally, I don’t think this is even in question. If the Emoluments Clause can be so narrowly construed as to apply to Obama’s acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize, then certainly it ought to apply to Trump’s wide and far-reaching international investments. Trump has only divested the _management function_ of his businesses to his sons – not the ownership. He has not put his business into a blind trust. He continues to profit from those businesses and the extensive contact he and his family members have had with foreign governments. The examples are myriad: [A summary](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/trumps-ethics-train-wreck/513446/). https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/22/us/politics/trump-foreign-payments-constitution-lawsuit.html?\_r=0"]Payments made to Trump from foreign governments expressly violate the Emoluments Clause. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/china-grants-trump-38-trademarks-reopening-debate-about-conflicts-of-interest/2017/03/08/3b2e8434-0414-11e7-a391-651727e77fc0\_story.html?utm\_term=.75bd2255e3c1"]38 trademarks granted by China. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-13/kushners-set-to-get-400-million-from-chinese-on-marquee-tower"]Kuschner family to receive 400 million from China for the Marquee Tower. [Obviously there are different opinions on the matter and reluctance on the part of Republicans to try this issue](https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2017/01/26/what-emoluments-clause-and-could-damage-donald-trump-presidency/kq54NgWXoI1lqvuo5yBAwN/story.html). But do you honestly believe there is not a strong argument to be made that he is in violation? Do you imagine he has no communication with his family members about the status of the family business? Does benefiting family members not also benefit Trump? His son-in-law and daughter work with him within the White House, FFS. These people appear to spend 24/7 with each other. From a layperson, for what it’s worth. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/426 "2017-03-21T18:30:32Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > Sessions’s testimony was shown to be false as well, wasn’t it? Republican. Different rules. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/427 "2017-03-21T19:06:18Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > The tipping point has yet to be determined. Once reached, resignation/impeachment is inevitable. Would it be finding out that the campaign colluded with Russia? I think so. Proof that Trump colluded with Russia to influence the election may indeed sway opinion against him enough to lead to impeachment. But what would constitute proof; photos of Trump meeting with known Russian agents, documents showing the Trump campaign knew about the DNC hacking before it happened, traceable payment from Russia to Trump’s personal accounts, sworn testimony from a Russian agent who participated? I think we could have video footage on the evening news of Trump ordering the whole thing and his supporters would still dismiss it, because liberal media, and it’s just talk, and everyone is against him, and it didn’t really sway the election, and what about those millions of illegal Democratic votes anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/428 "2017-03-21T19:10:29Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > Proof that Trump colluded with Russia to influence the election may indeed sway opinion against him enough to lead to impeachment. > > But what would constitute proof; photos of Trump meeting with known Russian agents, documents showing the Trump campaign knew about the DNC hacking before it happened, traceable payment from Russia to Trump’s personal accounts, sworn testimony from a Russian agent who participated? I think we could have video footage on the evening news of Trump ordering the whole thing and his supporters would still dismiss it, because liberal media, and it’s just talk, and everyone is against him, and it didn’t really sway the election, and what about those millions of illegal Democratic votes anyway. Republican. Different reality. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/429 "2017-03-21T19:12:20Z")
I wish they really were in a different reality. I’m tired of sharing mine with such vile specimens of the race. ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/430 "2017-03-21T20:23:47Z")
Nothing will make Trump resign. Or make his tax returns public. Nothing. And no one can make him. Short of a SWAT team storming the oval office and physically carrying him off to maximum security solitary confinement without his phone. Sad. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/431 "2017-03-21T20:48:42Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > Proof that Trump colluded with Russia to influence the election may indeed sway opinion against him enough to lead to impeachment. > > But what would constitute proof; photos of Trump meeting with known Russian agents, documents showing the Trump campaign knew about the DNC hacking before it happened, traceable payment from Russia to Trump’s personal accounts, sworn testimony from a Russian agent who participated? I think we could have video footage on the evening news of Trump ordering the whole thing and his supporters would still dismiss it, because liberal media, and it’s just talk, and everyone is against him, and it didn’t really sway the election, and what about those millions of illegal Democratic votes anyway. I believe attention is being paid to the change\* in the GOP platform (last July). The fact that it was so clearly and unambiguously a change made to please the Kremlin, combined with the pattern of meetings and contacts between the Trump campaign and known Russian actors/agents prior to the change, may make it possible to prove an unmistakable quid pro quo (or as near as these things ever get). - A short excerpt from a good account: > [@](#): > > … When Republican Party leaders drafted the platform prior to their convention in Cleveland last month, they had relatively little input from the campaign of then-presumptive nominee Donald Trump on most issues — except when it came to a future Republican administration’s stance on Ukraine. > > It started when platform committee member Diana Denman tried to insert language calling for the U.S. to provide lethal defensive weapons to the Ukrainian government, which is fighting a separatist insurrection backed by Russia. Denman says she had no idea she was “going into a fire fight,” calling it “an interesting exchange, to say the least.” > > Denman is a long time GOP activist from Texas. When she presented her proposal during a platform subcommittee meeting last month, “two gentleman,” whom Denman said were part of the Trump campaign, came over, looked at the language, and asked that it be set aside for further review. … [Donald Trump's Campaign Tweaked The GOP Platform On Ukraine In Putin's Favor : NPR](http://www.npr.org/2016/08/06/488876597/how-the-trump-campaign-weakened-the-republican-platform-on-aid-to-ukraine) ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/432 "2017-03-21T21:39:53Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > I believe attention is being paid to the change\* in the GOP platform (last July). The fact that it was so clearly and unambiguously a change made to please the Kremlin, combined with the pattern of meetings and contacts between the Trump campaign and known Russian actors/agents prior to the change, may make it possible to prove an unmistakable quid pro quo (or as near as these things ever get). It stinks to high heaven, sure, but it’s not proof, especially to people with their fingers in their ears. ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/433 "2017-03-21T23:16:42Z")
Wouldn’t it be awesome if in order to impeach Trump (and Lock Him Up!), all you needed was the same level of proof that Trump uses to fuel his hallucinatory accusations? To be able to gather all of Congress up at one time, and say: “Many people are saying.” ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/434 "2017-03-21T23:41:24Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > It stinks to high heaven, sure, but it’s not proof, especially to people with their fingers in their ears. As the economy goes south, more and more will start pulling those fingers out of those ears. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/435 "2017-03-21T23:45:13Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > It stinks to high heaven, sure, but it’s not proof, especially to people with their fingers in their ears. People smell through their ears? ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2017, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/436 "2017-03-21T23:50:51Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > As the economy goes south, more and more will start pulling those fingers out of those ears. Yeah, but they won’t blame Trump. They’ll say he inherited a bad situation from Obama. Wait–Trump and his cronies are saying that already. The man is untouchable until his cronies grow some gonads. That’s not likely to happen. I hope I’m proved wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2017, 10:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/437 "2017-03-22T10:41:19Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Under oath in a criminal grand jury proceeding, Clinton spoke as follows concerning the definition of “sexual relations” presented at his deposition in the Jones case, which was: “A person engages in ‘sexual relations’ when the person knowingly engages in or causes contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.” > > That testimony was determined to be false. Let me clarify the point of the question in the context of **WordMan** ’s post. I am aware that Clinton lied under oath, but by then the investigation was well advanced. _At the point the investigation started_ - which is where we are now with Trump - Clinton had done nothing wrong (well, nothing legally wrong - infidelity is a separate issue). **WordMan** asked what Trump had done that “could lead to legal or congressional action”. Clinton hadn’t done anything at this stage and yet there was deemed sufficient evidence to start a long, expensive and very broadly scoped investigation. There’s more than enough evidence to initiate a similar investigation into Trump. I suspect the level of proof required will be much, much higher because Trump has a sympathetic Congress, but nonetheless they could certainly start the ball rolling whenever they like. ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2017, 11:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/438 "2017-03-22T11:22:34Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Let me clarify the point of the question in the context of **WordMan** ’s post. I am aware that Clinton lied under oath, but by then the investigation was well advanced. _At the point the investigation started_ - which is where we are now with Trump - Clinton had done nothing wrong (well, nothing legally wrong - infidelity is a separate issue). > > **WordMan** asked what Trump had done that “could lead to legal or congressional action”. Clinton hadn’t done anything at this stage and yet there was deemed sufficient evidence to start a long, expensive and very broadly scoped investigation. There’s more than enough evidence to initiate a similar investigation into Trump. I suspect the level of proof required will be much, much higher because Trump has a sympathetic Congress, but nonetheless they could certainly start the ball rolling whenever they like. Thanks. That speaks to how I have been trying to think about things. While an explicit law may not have been crossed (yet) by Trump’s tweets, taken as a whole, there is enough evidence to warrant special investigation, should Congress be so inclined. As others have said, I suspect they _won’t_ be so inclined unless / until a complaint against Trump crosses a line, e.g. A result from the FBI investigators, or movement on a case regarding emoluments, nepotism, unfair advantage, etc. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2017, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/439 "2017-03-22T16:50:10Z")
I am seeing a little light in a number of things: The town halls that have become chants of “DO your job!!!”; The media getting more of a handle on how to cover lying; The natural progress of investigations; the lawsuits that are being filed against don the con by organizations with resources. There will be public pressures that are not being accounted for now, because we have been traumatized lately as a country, and are basically punch drunk. ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2017, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384/440 "2017-03-22T17:46:10Z")
> **[Nunes claims some Trump transition messages were intercepted](https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/devin-nunes-donald-trump-surveillance-obama-236366)** > > The move gave cover to the White House but was rebuked by top Democrats. "Members of the Donald Trump transition team, possibly including Trump himself, were under surveillance during the Obama administration following November’s election, House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes told reporters Wednesday. Nunes said the surveillance appears to have been legal, incidental collection and that it does not appear to have been related to concerns over collusion with Russia." The "incidental"ness of the collection did not prevent Flynn’s conversations to be published in the press, did it? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384.md?page=21) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-accuses-obama-of-wiretapping-him/781384.md?page=23)