National Security & Defense

Trump’s Wiretap Allegation

(Reuters photo: Jonathan Ernst)
The Nunes revelations indicate that an investigation is necessary.

Earlier this month, President Trump accused his predecessor of ordering the “wiretapping” of Trump Tower in the final weeks of the presidential campaign. Last week, Richard Burr (R., N.C.) and Mark Warner (D., Va.), respectively the leading Republican and Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, together announced that there were “no indications that Trump Tower was the subject of surveillance by any element of the United States government either before or after Election Day 2016.” That conclusion was echoed this week by FBI director James Comey during testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, and by committee chairman Devin Nunes (R., Calif.).

This comes as little surprise. Rather than looking into the reports that exercised him, Donald Trump chose to air his outrage on Twitter, and throw his administration into chaos. The damage to the White House’s credibility that has resulted is entirely self-inflicted.

But a further twist in the saga came Wednesday. At a press conference, Nunes provided an update that suggests that further serious investigation is in order:

First, I recently confirmed that on numerous occasions, the intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition. Second, details about U.S. persons associated with the incoming administration, details with little or no apparent foreign-intelligence value, were widely disseminated in intelligence-community reporting. Third, I have confirmed that additional names of Trump transition-team members were unmasked. Fourth and finally, I want to be clear, none of this surveillance was related to Russia or the investigation of Russian activities or of the Trump team.

Trump and his allies in the media have interpreted Nunes’s comments as confirmation of his accusation. They obviously aren’t. It appears that the communications of Trump associates, and possibly Trump himself, were swept up as part of legitimate intelligence efforts.

However, Nunes’s other points, if true, are deeply troubling. The intelligence community has a responsibility to “minimize” the identifying information of U.S. citizens whose communications are incidentally collected. Likewise, “unmasking” is only sometimes appropriate, and the power to do so is generally restricted to a small number of officials. Nunes seems to be suggesting that Obama-administration officials flouted those protocols. His fourth point — that none of this surveillance was related to Russia — raises the question of how the intelligence in question was collected, and whether the results were classified. Leaking classified information is, of course, a crime.

This information would likely be getting a fairer hearing had Nunes not chosen to disclose it to the White House before he informed the other members of the House Intelligence Committee — a lapse in judgment he has since acknowledged. Of course, the committee’s ranking member, California Democrat Adam Schiff, has shown interest primarily in making political hay of the whole inquiry; over the weekend, he declared that Russia “hacked the election” — a claim for which there is precisely no evidence.

We have repeatedly encouraged the Senate and House intelligence committees to conduct a thorough and, to the extent possible, transparent investigation of the various allegations tying the Trump campaign to Russia, and into the leaks that have fueled those allegations. At this point, it seems that the Senate’s committee may be better suited to conducting this probe than the House’s. If it is not up to the task, Congress ought to form a Select Committee.

Late on Thursday, Fox News’s James Rosen reported that investigators have recently become aware of “smoking gun” evidence that “is said to leave no doubt the Obama administration, in its closing days, was using the cover of legitimate surveillance on foreign targets to spy on President-elect Trump.” The president’s reckless accusation may have been discredited, but important questions clearly remain. There’s no excuse for not getting to the bottom of them.

The Editors — The Editors comprise the senior editorial staff of the National Review magazine and website.

Most Popular

White House

The Problem Isn’t Just the GOP, Mr. Comey

During a CNN town hall on Wednesday night, James Comey alleged that the Republican party allows President Trump to get away with making inappropriate statements without holding him accountable. “If the Republicans, if they just close their eyes and imagine Barack Obama waking up in the morning saying someone ... Read More
Law & the Courts

‘Judges for the #Resistance’

At Politico, I wrote today about the judiciary’s activism against Trump on immigration: There is a lawlessness rampant in the land, but it isn’t emanating from the Trump administration. The source is the federal judges who are making a mockery of their profession by twisting the law to block the Trump ... Read More
White House

Trump’s Friendships Are America’s Asset

The stale, clichéd conceptions of Donald Trump held by both Left and Right — a man either utterly useless or only rigidly, transactionally tolerable — conceal the fact that the president does possess redeeming talents that are uniquely his, and deserve praise on their own merit. One is personal friendliness ... Read More

Columbia 1968: Another Untold Story

Fifty years ago this week, Columbia students riding the combined wave of the civil-rights and anti-war movements went on strike, occupied buildings across campus, and shut the university down. As you revisit that episode of the larger drama that was the annus horribilis 1968, bear in mind that the past isn’t ... Read More

Only the Strident Survive

‘I am not prone to anxiety,” historian Niall Ferguson wrote in the Times of London on April 22. “Last week, however, for the first time since I went through the emotional trauma of divorce, I experienced an uncontrollable panic attack.” The cause? “A few intemperate emails, inadvertently forwarded ... Read More