# Post ts_114922713750383186

- Post ID: `ts_114922713750383186`
- Platform: Truth Social
- Posted: 2025-07-27T01:57:27.685Z (UTC)
- Deleted: no
- Repost: no
- Canonical URL: https://trump.fm/post/ts_114922713750383186
- Analysis page: https://trump.fm/post/ts_114922713750383186/analysis
- Audio narration: https://static.trump.fm/audio/ts_114922713750383186.mp3 (a synthesized voice reading the post text, not a recording)

## Post text

> A must watch! “Mark Levin flashes back to the first time he exposed Obama in 2017” https://www.foxnews.com/video/6376183818112

## What the media says

**Video transcript** (12:01), transcribed automatically, so names and numbers may be wrong. Speakers aren't identified, so a voice in it may not be his:

> over eight years ago, when I was doing my radio show on that Thursday night, as I was preparing, I started to pull news articles together, website reports together, and I started to see a pattern. A pattern that there was an effort by the Obama regime during the Trump campaign in 2016 and subsequently during the Trump transition and during his early presidency to interfere with the campaign and then to destroy his presidency. I broke it first on radio, then with Pete Hegseth the following Sunday, I guess that's March 5th or 6th, 2017, and it was a big story. The media attacked me, the media denied it all, but I used all their reports, all their reports, and so I want to give you the context of this this evening as we get into it and what Tulsi Gabbard has done, which is very, very important, and you're hearing people say, "Well, we already knew all this. We didn't know all of it." Or they're out there saying, "What's the big deal? There's not a crime. We have immunity." They're not exactly right about that. So stick with us. It's a full program. We're going to take it from beginning to end. Check it out again. This is March 5th, I believe it is, on Fox & Friends Sunday morning with Pete Hegseth eight and a half years ago. Go. On your Thursday evening radio broadcast, you laid out a devastating case about executive overreach of the Obama administration, which many believe have metamorphosized itself to tweets that President Trump sent out on Saturday morning accusing potential wiretapping in Trump Tower. We want to give you a case here this morning to lay out what you know, what you know about it, the evidence you have for the potential executive overreach of the Obama administration. Well, pleasure to be here. The evidence is overwhelming. This is not about President Trump's tweeting. This is about the Obama administration's spying. And the question isn't whether it's spied. We know they went to the FISA court twice. The question is, who did they spy on, the extent of the spying? That is the Trump campaign, the Trump transition, Trump surrogates. And I want to walk you through this. The American people exhibit one. All right, let's stop right there for a moment. Now, America, keep in mind, this is the first time anybody ever pulled all this together. I didn't have access to classified information. I can't issue subpoenas. I was doing my radio show prepping and I said, wait a minute, something's going on here. I saw a pattern that went over the course of months as a former Chief of Staff to Attorney General. I could tell there had been leaks out of the DOJ and the FBI and the intelligence agencies. This is literally the first time on television anywhere that this was pulled together and explained the first time it was exposed. Go. Head Street, two separate sources with links to the counterintelligence community have confirmed that the FBI sought and was granted a foreign intelligence surveillance act court. This is spying in October, giving counterintelligence permission to examine the activity of, quote, U.S. persons in Donald Trump's campaign with ties to Russia. Let me go on. Since it me, they say the first FISA request, sources say named Trump, was denied back in June, denied by the court. But the second was drawn more narrowly and was granted in October after evidence was presented of a server possibly related to the Trump campaign and its alleged links to two banks. Now, sources suggest that a FISA warrant was granted to look at the full content of emails and other related documents that may concern U.S. persons. Now, I know people are hung up with Trump's word wiretapping. Well, how did they get access to this server information? Does it really matter if it was wiretapping, electronic surveillance or whatever it was? Exhibit two, The Guardian, a well-known right wing British paper. Here it is, quote, The Guardian has learned the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. Keep in mind this is during a presidential election. The sitting president, the incumbent party is now investigating the presidential candidate of the Republican Party and his campaign. To some extent, the FISA court turned down the application asking FBI counterintelligence investigators to narrow its focus. According to one report, the FBI was finally granted a warrant in October. Exhibit three, McClatchy, another well-known right wing newspaper. Here they have the agency's headline. FBI, five other agencies, five other Obama administration agencies, pro possible covert Kremlin aid to Trump. The FBI and five other law enforcement intelligence agencies have collaborated for months in an investigation into Russian attempts to influence the November election, including whether money from Kremlin covertly aided presidential elect Donald Trump. Two people familiar with the matter said the agencies involved in the inquiry are the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, the Justice Department, the Treasury Department's financial crimes enforcement network and representatives of the director of the national intelligence. Are you telling me Barack Obama didn't know it was going on in the six agencies? As you go on, hold on, hold on. Okay, keep going. I'm not done. I need to make the case because the media seems to be confused about their own reporting. New York Times, another well-known liberal outlet, intercepted Russian communications, part of inquiry into Trump associates January 19. The FBI is leading the investigations aided by the NSA, the CIA, Treasury Department's financial crimes unit. The investigators have accelerated their efforts in recent weeks, but have found no exclusive conclusive evidence or wrong to listen to this. One official said intelligence reports based on some of the wiretap communications had been provided to the White House. This is the New York Times. Another right wing outlet. Another right wing outlet. Let's continue. New York Times, again, NSA gets more latitude to share intercepted communications in the final days of the Obama administration. The administration has expanded the power of the NSA to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government, 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections. Now, why would they do this on the way out the door? Well, March 1, Exhibit 6, Obama administration rushed to preserve intelligence of Russian election hacking. In the Obama administration's last days, listen to this, some White House officials scrambled to spread information about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election and about possible contacts between associates of President-elect Trump and Russians across the government. I'm not done. Exhibit 7, New York Times. Flynn is said to have talked to Russians about sanctions. Trump took office. Well, where'd they get this information? Well, Mark, you know the FISA court. They're always monitoring the Russian ambassador and so on. How do we know that? Maybe they are, maybe they're not, but there's an awful lot of other activity. Sure. Here we have Washington Post. One more. Washington Post, March 2nd. U.S. investigators have examined contacts Attorney General Sessions had with Russian officials during the time he was advising Donald Trump's campaign. The focus of the U.S. counterintelligence investigation has been on communication between Trump campaign officials in Russia. Listen to this. The inquiry involving Sessions is examining his contacts while serving as Trump's foreign policy advisor in the spring and summer of 2016. This has been going on for a year now. As you do on your radio program, you lay out a devastating case based on public documents, as you point out, and not right-wing sources, but mainstream, left-stream sources. How confident are you that this new, this investigation, which was on Russian, so-called Russian hacking, but now the White House says this morning will be broadened to looking into executive overreach. How confident are you that they will find something there? I don't know, but they already found something. The issue isn't whether the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign, or transition, or certain of its surrogates. The issue is the extent of it. They went into court a second time. They were so aggressive. They waited four or five months. They go back in October, weeks before the general election. They narrow their request. All of a sudden, we have leaks coming out on Flynn. Then we have a horrible meeting that took place between Sessions and so forth. And I'm telling you, as a former chief of staff to an attorney general of the United States in the Reagan administration, these are police state tactics. Now, what did Barack Obama know? He knew everything I just read to you apart from one or two articles. You know how I know? It's in the newspapers. It's right there. So Barack Obama not only knew this, but he gets a daily intelligence briefing. And let me tell you something about daily intelligence briefings. If your attorney general and your FBI is going to the FISA court to get a warrant to investigate aspects of an opposition party in the middle of a general election campaign, how much do you want to bet the president of the United States knew that? I don't want to bet you on that. How does this play out in the media? How are they going to continue to cover this story? Let me first say this is the case made by the New York Times, The Washington Post, McClatchy, and the rest of them. I just put it together as a former Justice Department official. And Donald Trump here is being attacked for what he tweeted. Donald Trump is the victim. His campaign is the victim. His transition team is the victim. His surrogates are the victim. These are police state tactics. I am telling you this as a former chief of staff to an attorney general. If this had been done to Barack Obama, all hell would break loose. And it should. And Barack Obama's statement is pathetic. Let me just say this. Where does it go from here? They ought to release both FISA court applications where they sought the one, the one in the summer and the one in October. So we know exactly what they were doing. That's number one. Number two, Congress needs to see the daily presidential intelligence briefings over the past year or so. Those are the beginnings of a serious investigation. Number three, for the Republicans in Congress, you control the majority. If the Democrats do not want to assist and they won't, because I'm starting to think Chuck Schumer and the others are participating in all this cover up activity, then plow ahead without them. But this is important to the country. We cannot have a sitting presidential administration unleashing six federal agencies, intelligence and law enforcement. I don't mean the president personally sitting there and saying, you know what, Valerie, let's go get them. Obviously the attorney general and the FBI were involved in this. This is how you get a FISA court application prepared and submitted. Do you think former President Obama was involved in this? And if so, how much was he involved? I'm not Nostradamus here. I just think that we ought to find out. But I will tell you this. He's more involved than he says. I mean, it's his executive branch. It's his justice department. Mine's for the IRS. All of a sudden, the IRS is targeting American citizens. I don't know anything about it. We have reporters, including James Rose and the AP, where the Obama administration did more investigations of reporters than any administration in American history. They're quite capable of these things, but it doesn't matter. We want to know what took place. And there ought to be public hearings on this stuff too. I agree with the Democrats. Let's get to the bottom of this. So join me.

## Media

- video: https://static-assets-1.truthsocial.com/tmtg:prime-ts-assets/media_attachments/files/114/922/710/516/098/661/original/d152cd292739391d.mp4

## Engagement

- Likes: 6,014
- Reposts: 1,947
- Replies: 612
- Views: unknown
- Metrics collected: 2026-02-01T01:19:51.301Z (UTC)

# Analysis

_Machine-generated by trump.fm on 2026-03-22T03:02:28.626Z (UTC): a model's reading of this post, not his words. Its psychological terms describe the language, not a clinical assessment of him._

## Analysis: Truth Social Post ts_114922713750383186

### Content Summary
Trump shares a Fox News video of Mark Levin "flashing back to the first time he exposed Obama in 2017," with brief endorsement ("A must watch!").

### Authorship
Post at 01:57 UTC on July 27. Trump is in Scotland (Turnberry) during this period, which is BST (UTC+1), making local time ~2:57 AM. Late-night posting in local timezone. The post is brief, uses exclamation mark, and shares media content — consistent with authentic late-night media consumption and sharing behavior.

### Psychological Analysis
This is a low-intensity maintenance/supply post. Trump shares content that validates his longstanding grievance narrative against Obama. The selection of a 2017 flashback clip suggests perseverative focus on Obama as a contrasting other — a pattern well-documented across years of posts.

The post fits within the broader pattern visible in surrounding posts: media attacks (NBC, ABC), Democrat spending criticism, and now Obama via proxy (Levin). The thread across these posts is consistent grievance-cycling against perceived political enemies.

### Rhetorical Techniques
- Appeal to authority (Levin as validator)
- "Must watch" as directive framing
- "Exposed" implies hidden wrongdoing — presupposes guilt

### Context
This appears during a period where Trump's approval is at a second-term low (37%). Sharing content attacking Obama may serve as displacement or comfort-seeking through familiar grievance narratives during a period of declining support.

## Fact Verification

| Claim | Verdict | Evidence |
|-------|---------|----------|
| "Mark Levin exposed Obama in 2017" | **Unverifiable** | Levin made various claims about Obama-era surveillance in 2017; 'exposed' is subjective framing |

Overall Veracity: 50%

## Authorship Analysis

**Self-Written** (score: 75%)

### Indicators

- 2:57 AM local time (Scotland BST)
- Brief exclamatory style
- Simple share with minimal commentary
- Late-night media consumption pattern

## Psychological Profile

### State

**Grandiose State**

**Trigger:** Maintenance (Fox News content consumption)

Sentiment: -0.30

### Clinical

**Malignant Narcissism:**
- Narcissistic: 30%
- Antisocial: 10%
- Paranoid: 20%
- Sadism: 10%

**Defense Mechanisms:**
- displacement (neurotic)

**Cognitive Complexity:**
- Complexity: 15%

**Parasocial Techniques:**
- directive engagement ('must watch')

## Fact Checks (1)

_The model's verdicts from 2026-03-22._

> Mark Levin exposed Obama in 2017

**UNVERIFIABLE**

Levin made various claims about Obama-era surveillance in 2017; 'exposed' is subjective framing

Overall Veracity: 50%

## Tags

- media-share (90%)
- obama-grievance (70%)
- fox-news (80%)
- maintenance (80%)

## That day

_From trump.fm's machine-generated digest of the day, not his words._

**Late-Night Media Threats from Scotland Give Way to EU Trade Deal Victory Lap**

Trump posted from his Turnberry golf resort in Scotland in a day split between late-night grievance and afternoon triumph. He opened with attacks on NBC and ABC, threatening to revoke broadcast licenses over perceived political bias, then amplified conservative media clips targeting Obama. The tone shifted dramatically by evening with the announcement of a landmark EU trade deal featuring 15% tariffs and billions in European investment commitments. A low-volume day overall, with brief flashes of anger that quickly gave way to self-congratulation.

Full digest for 2025-07-27: https://trump.fm/date/2025-07-27/analysis

## Citation

- APA: Trump, D. J. (2025, July 27). A must watch! “Mark Levin flashes back to the... [Social media post]. Truth Social. trump.fm. https://trump.fm/post/ts_114922713750383186
- MLA: Trump, Donald J. "A must watch! “Mark Levin flashes back to the first time..." Truth Social, 27 Jul. 2025. trump.fm, https://trump.fm/post/ts_114922713750383186. Accessed 9 Oct. 2026.
- Chicago: Donald J. Trump, "A must watch! “Mark Levin flashes back to the first time...," Truth Social, July 27, 2025, archived at trump.fm, https://trump.fm/post/ts_114922713750383186.

## For agents

- Site overview: https://trump.fm/llms.txt
- API specification: https://trump.fm/openapi.json
- MCP server: https://trump.fm/mcp (search and fetch tools, no auth)
- This post as JSON: https://trump.fm/api/posts/ts_114922713750383186
- Analysis as JSON: https://trump.fm/api/analysis/ts_114922713750383186
- All citation formats: https://trump.fm/api/cite/ts_114922713750383186
- Same day: https://trump.fm/date/2025-07-27
- The record alone, without the analysis: https://trump.fm/post/ts_114922713750383186.md?analysis=false

_Markdown view of a trump.fm page. Post, analysis, date, feed, contradictions, search and about pages answer in markdown at their URL with `.md` appended (`/index.md` for the home page), or when sent `Accept: text/markdown`._