The media is going wild over this. I can't believe anyone except, perhaps, the most extreme of people actually interpreted Trump's "tweet" as actually meaning Obama, himself personally, did any type of "wiretapping" of anybody. Of course he could have ordered it done; but, that would have been "not wise" as things like that are traceable.
Before proceeding further, at this point in time (03.15.2017) there is no evidence that Obama or his administration did or did not conduct any form of wiretapping on Trump or his campaign - NONE!
Trump would have been better to offer, "..someone in the Obama administration, ...", or something like that. And, in fact, the White House has seen the need to offer a clarification specifically to this point.
But, on to the subject of this article.
What prompted me to write this was a statement by Sen. Lindsey Graham during an interview with Bill O'Reilly. You can see the short video clip Here.
Graham basically implied that if no legal warrant for wiretapping exists, then no wiretapping happened. Now, either Graham was being disingenuous or woefully ignorant. From Graham's record I believe it was both.
But, as Carl Sagan once quipped, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence!" Even if such a warrant can never be found, that does NOT imply that "wiretapping" of some form did NOT happen.
Always keep Sagan's sage advice handy.
The word "wiretapping" has a specific meaning in legal terms: "Connecting a concealed listening or recording device connected to a communications circuit".
There is always the possibility, especially with the media and politicians, to use strictly legal definitions to skirt the truth. Could some form of surveillance have been used to "tap" conversations other than a strict adherence to the legal definition of "wiretapping"? Of course! One could use a transmitting microphone, a laser listening device, or any number of other surveillance devices not connected to communications circuit.
Legal terms, and even proper names of products, can creep into the lexicon of daily use. For examples:
Saying "I would like to xerox this." does not imply, in general use, that I want to actually use a Xerox machine to make a photocopy. It means any device to make such a copy. Needing some kleenex does not necessarily mean I want tissue of the "Kleenex" brand. In some parts of the South asking for a "coke" does not necessarily mean a "Coca Cola"; it means a soda.
Did the Obama administration "tap" into the Trump campaign, et. al.? No one knows at this point. However, with the prior examples of the IRS Scandal against conservative groups, the alleged monitoring of politicians, and the like, it is not too far a leap of credibility to believe some form of information gathering of illegal conduct could have occurred.
Therefore, as we listen/watch/read the news these days, we ALL should make certain that the information we are given is truly without a propaganda bias. AND, THESE DAYS THAT IS HARD TO DO!