I cannot find a single pundit that is getting this right.
Most of them talk about how the Obama administration used flimsy evidence to spy on the Trump campaign and then set up Donald Trump for an investigation in order to end his Presidency.
They call it a "soft coup" to take out a sitting president for phony crimes.
What they are missing is that this is an act of desperation. The Obama administration (and its adherents in the bureaucracy) used the flimsy evidence to spy on Donald Trump because they expected to find evidence of OTHER wrongdoing.
That was the whole point of this affair. To their minds, Trump is both an idiot AND a shady character in New York real estate. OF COURSE he's doing something illegal. We just need a pretext to find it.
But they didn't. (Aside: That's also the point of the Democrats clambering for his tax returns and the like. They're looking for some other crime to attack him with.)
And when the didn't find anything AND THEN LOST they needed plausible deniability for why they were spying. So the entire investigation has been to protect the previous administration (and their lackeys in the bureaucracy) from charges that that they spied on a political opponent using the resources of the FBI and CIA
Which, to me, means that it is very likely Trump isn't the only one who was spied on. They didn't expect him to win. Romney was a much more plausible threat to them. So, who else were they spying on and haven't been exposed yet?