I stick to the facts TD, if we don't then - someone could just as easily claim Trump is ordering them to conduct illegal surveillance on his opponents as truth and not be required to provide any actual evidence.
This article lays it out pretty clearly:
Fact check: Examining Trump’s wiretap claim
You article says the following:
First, the
president has no role in the FBI’s decision to seek a warrant or the FISA court’s approval for one, as explained in a 2006 story by
The New York Times on
how the FISA application process works. The warrant application would be initiated by the FBI and presented to the FISA court by Justice Department attorneys.
Second, the
FBI must prove to the court that there is “probable cause” that the target of the warrant is “an agent of a foreign power” and engaged in criminal activity, as explained in a
joint statement last year to Congress by the intelligence community officials.
This is simply bullshit.
First, just because the President has no normal role in acquiring a FISA for surveilance does not mean that Obama knew nothing about it.
Secondly, simply because under the law as written the FBI normally have to prove probably cause does not mean that 1) probable cause was not given (most Trump haters think Trump is guilty of just about every crime in the book, including treason) 2) it does not mean that the NSA did not do it anyway, as it is a rogue agency these days.