Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Cboldt

So if they were trying to get Trump on criminal charges why would they use an intelligence warrant?

What am I missing here?


1,905 posted on 05/10/2018 11:21:49 PM PDT by No_Doll_i
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1900 | View Replies ]


To: No_Doll_i
-- What am I missing here? --

You assume they are planning to use the normal criminal process. A huge amount of warrantless surveillance goes on. These people "break the law" as a matter of routine. The law means nothing to them, it is all about infomraiton and leverage, not legal process. They are above legal process. The intellignece services snoop across country lines, no warrant needed for that. It is wholesale/blanket surveillance, limited only by technology and money.

1,907 posted on 05/10/2018 11:25:46 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1905 | View Replies ]

To: No_Doll_i
-- What am I missing here? --

Think of it this way. It is supposedly unconstitutional for the US to tap your phone line. Okay., So the US authorities bring in somebody from the UK to do the dirty work. Legal problem solved. Information still gathered. And we do the same for them, against their people.

1,908 posted on 05/10/2018 11:27:33 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1905 | View Replies ]

To: No_Doll_i
I don't agree with what Sundance assigns as "insurance policy," but that is just a label with no real importance.

I think the "insurance policy" was the FISA warrant. Strxok knew the FBI had been conducting illegal surveillance. A FISA warrant provides a legal defense.

1,912 posted on 05/10/2018 11:34:08 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1905 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson