[stylin19a]

Anyone who would reveal the existence of a wiretap would violate federal law,” he said. “It is against federal law to disclose the existence of a wiretap, whether that wiretap is for criminal purposes or intelligence purposes.”

Can it be mentioned without penalty after someone else mentions it first ?
Like assuming the NYTimes article of 1/19/2017 is true ?

[doug from upland]

It would be epic justice if an editor and writer at the SLIMES went to prison for this.

[silverleaf]

Hillary tweeted it on October 31 2016
By this logic she broke yet another law by disclosing the wiretapping on Trump and did so a week before the election in attempt to damage her opponent

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/03/hillary-tipped-off-trump-wiretap-tweeted-one-week-prior-election/

[rlmorel]

When I read the article, that very same statement jumped out at me:

"...“Anyone who would reveal the existence of a wiretap would violate federal law,” he said. “It is against federal law to disclose the existence of a wiretap, whether that wiretap is for criminal purposes or intelligence purposes...”

I am having trouble wrapping my brain around that.

[Lopeover]

Yes, Marc Levin Leif it all out on Fox, using the various media reports. It was very good. The surveillance was disclosed before Trump tweeted.