It turns out both Donald Trump and Judge Napolitano were correct, GCHQ – as well as others – were spying on the Trump team, as outlined in The Guardian. But before discussing that let’s reflect for a moment on the fact that despite having to run against the Democrats, half the Republicans and the Media, Trump also had to run against the FBI, NSA, GCHQ, Germany, Estonia, Poland, Australia, and possibly the Dutch and the French spy agencies. He was certainly right about being “wiretapped” - not only was he being spied on, he was being spied on BIGLY!
As John Hinderaker pointed out the most amazing thing is that he won anyway:
So just about every Western intelligence service was collaborating with the Obama administration in trying to elect Hillary Clinton. Yet, amazingly enough, they failed.
The blindingly obvious point that the Guardian tries to obscure is that the combined assets of all of these agencies failed to find any evidence of collaboration between the Trump campaign and Russia. We know this, because the Democrats have pulled out all the stops. Both before the election, and especially after the election, they have leaked furiously to try to discredit President Trump. If there were any evidence of collusion between Trump (or even obscure, minor “advisers” like Carter Page) and Russia, there would have been nothing else in the Washington Post or the New York Times for the past five months. But they have nothing.
What was really going on seems clear. Everyone involved in this story thought that Hillary Clinton was sure to win the election. Why? Because they read the Washington Post and the New York Times. Plus Real Clear Politics and 538. The suggestion that the Russian government tried to swing the election to Donald Trump is ridiculous. The Russians thought that Hillary was the certain winner, and if–a big if–they carried out a primitive phishing expedition into Debbie Wasserman-Schultz’s email account, and subsequently sent the DNC emails to Wikileaks, it was to cause trouble for Clinton after she became president.
Likewise, British intelligence and the other agencies mentioned by the Guardian thought there was no doubt but that Hillary would win. How could they curry favor with the new administration, expected to be Obama’s third term? By feeding negative information about the opponent who was sure to lose, even though there was no real significance to the intelligence provided.
That’s what happened. The fact that liberals still try to push the “Russia” story, even when it is obvious that they are out of ammo, is pathetic. – Powerline
Ironically this attack came from the President who lectured the world about Russia:
“This is a vision of the world in which might makes right–a world in which one nation’s borders can be redrawn by another, and civilized people are not allowed to recover the remains of their loved ones because of the truth that might be revealed…America stands for something different," said Obama. "We believe that right makes might–that bigger nations should not be able to bully smaller ones; that people should be able to choose their own future." – Washington Free Beacon
Fortunately we once again have a President who knows that right does make right, not the other way around no matter how much you like the sound of your own rhetoric.
And by the way Mr. Obama, I don’t think a leader should let his country’s borders be redrawn by ignoring existing Federal Laws restricting immigration either. As you said, “The people should be able to choose their own future,” which they did last November, no thanks to you and your “might makes right” brigade of spies. The outcome of that election – against all odds – is proof enough that there is a God.