[C210N]

Further, did any such surveillance activities continue beyond the inauguration, and in the event they did, were those activities subject to proper predication?

I was curious about post-inauguration activities as well. Before that (and after the election), it's apparently par for the course. But, it steps into the precarious afterwards.

Curious what you mean by "predication". Is the intended meaning to question if it was lone wolves acting versus direction from the powers higher up?

[Steely Tom]

"Predication" meaning "was a predicate established."

In other words, was there some legitimate reason for the FBI to be spying on — and trying to entrap — members of the Trump campaign.

We all know the answer to that question was "no," but it must be asked anyway, in order to establish a legal case against the players.

The Attorney General talked about this in his testimony before the House on 9 April, in which he said that he was making an effort to discover if there was a "predicate" for the actions of the FBI and others.

That's Washington-speak for "was there a legal reason for investigating the political opposition, or was one party using the intelligence assets of the United States to do opposition research against the opposing party?"