The New York Times followed up the Washington Post’s report with some additional details about the FISA warrant for Carter Page. The Post’s story presented a fair amount of evidence that seemed to contradict Obama officials’ statements and in response their defenders rushed to the Times. In particular, James Clapper stated on NBC that there was no ‘wiretapping activity mounted against the president-elect at this time, or as a candidate, or his campaign staff.’ An ordered wiretap on a campaign member would seem to directly contradict his statement. The Times defends it, claiming their source, ‘was not aware of any instances in which an active member of Mr. Trump’s campaign was directly surveilled by American law-enforcement or spy agencies.’ Rather, they claim the FISA warrant was only sought ‘after investigators determined that Mr. Page was no longer part of the Trump campaign.’ Seems clear cut, no? Well, not exactly. While the campaign began distancing itself from him when Kellyanne Conway came on as campaign manager in August, he only officially announced he was stepping down in late September. It seems then that the determination of his was involvement was unilaterally decided by the investigators, since the warrant was requested in the summer, prior to his official statement.

The Times article clearly looks like it was written with an agenda. Beyond elastic interpretations in defense of Obama officials, it also adds in a fair amount of justification for the DOJ’s actions. Their source opines that ‘the Justice Department considered direct surveillance of anyone tied to a political campaign as a line it did not want to cross.’ Unless multiple reports about denied FISA warrants are false, this is not true. The DOJ sought FISA warrants of people tied to Trump’s campaign in June and July. Rather than a line ‘they did not want to cross,’ it looks more like a line they were not allowed to cross. The veracity of those reports is surprisingly strengthened by the New York Times when it goes on to cite HeatSt’s report of a denied warrant, though they never claim their source confirmed it. No matter how convincing the defenses are, Obama’s DOJ sought and received a FISA warrant on a Trump campaign member, albeit a minor one.

No matter what comes from the probe of Carter Page’s activities, it would be very surprising if a major revelation involving Trump were found. Even assuming there is solid evidence to launch the probe, Page was an insignificant presence with no authority in the campaign. Story after story after story, outlined a lack of any importance and his very minimal contributions to the campaign. He never had any influence, nor was he a principal adviser in any capacity. There could well be a case against him, but this could just as easily be a politicized attempt to smear him if the investigation turned up nothing. The paper makes a one point to call him ‘an idiot,’ so this looks like a reasonable interpretation. Regardless, it confirms that the Obama administration was closely monitoring Trump’s campaign. Investigators were able to determine a member had pulled away from the campaign prior to public statements and then quickly ordered a warrant to surveil his communications. Not just an ordinary warrant, but one that is ‘often thicker’ than the FBI Director’s wrists and requires extensive input to represent ‘all the work Justice Department attorneys and FBI agents have to do to convince a judge that such surveillance is appropriate.’ At the first opportunity allowed by the courts, the Obama admin jumped at the chance to surveil a member of Trump’s campaign.