Spicer On Trump Surveillance Claim: Farkas' Admissions Alone Are "Devastating"

White House press secretary Sean Spicer on <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/03/30/priebus_wh_will_respond_to_evelyn_farkas_story_incredible_raises_many_questions.html">Evelyn Farkas' controversial remarks on surveillance of the Trump campaign</a>. Farkas left government service in 2015, but expressed her concern to Obama admin officials during the election because she knew how the Russians worked. <blockquote>JOHN ROBERTS, FOX NEWS: Sean, couple of questions, if I could, about Chairman Nunes' visit to the White House. Fox News has been told by intelligence officials that Chairman Nunes is aware of who did the unmasking of certain individuals in the transition and may be aware of who ordered the unmasking of those individuals. Is the White House aware of that information? SPICER: I -- I don't know what he knows, in -- in the sense that that's -- that's -- and again, I've tried to make it a comment (sic) not to -- to get into the specifics of that report. I will not -- I think it's -- it's not in our interest to talk about the process. What occurred between Chairman Nunes in coming here was both routine and proper. Chairman Nunes and Ranking Member Schiff, who I understand is expected here later today, both possess the appropriate credentials and clearances. We've invited Democrats here and I've been told that material they will see will shed light on the investigation. I know a lot of folks want to talk about the process and not the surveillance and the underlying issue. The substance, the unmasking and the leaks, is what we should all be concerned about. It affects all Americans, our liberties, our freedom, our civil liberties. So let's -- let's talk about some of the substance. And I know that's not -- but on March 2, day before the president's tweet, comments by a senior administration official foreign policy expert, Dr. Evelyn Farkas, together with previous reports that have been out, raised serious concerns on whether or not there was an organized and widespread effort by the Obama administration to use and leak highly sensitive intelligence information for political purposes. She admitted this on television by saying, "I was urging my former colleagues, frankly speaking, the people on the Hill. I was telling people on the Hill, 'Get as much information as you can. Get as much intelligence as you can.' I had a fear that they were essentially watching the Trump staff and he was worried about the Trump administration." That's what's out there. And I know NBC News has just reported something very similar about information that was used by the Obama White House to spread this information and -- this politically sensitive information. Dr. Farkas' admissions alone are devastating. On March 4th, the president, as you all know, raised serious questions about surveillance practices by the Obama administration, including whether or not the president-elect or the transition team members were being improperly monitored for political purposes under the Obama administration. Later in March, in the ordinary course of their work, NSC -- National Security Council staff discovered information that may support the questions raised by the president and Dr. Farkas' claim. These are serious issues. They raise serious concerns. And if true, the issues would be devastating. We're committed to working with the House and Senate committees, as we've said multiple times, to get to the bottom of what happened here, why it happened, and who was involved. For this reason, we're in the process of ensuring that the reports that the NSC staff discovered in the normal course of business are made available to those committees investigating, to ensure that all of the facts come to light. And if everyone was treating the president and the administration fairly, you'd ask a series of much different questions about the substance and the materials.</blockquote>