The question is why they got the warrants. They weren’t trying to spy on Page. They were trying to spy on the people they hoped would call Page. I’m a lawyer so I am aware that there is a rule of law that says if you have a warrant to tap the phone of the person who owns the phone then you don’t need a warrant against the person who calls him in order to get the wiretap admitted as evidence. They were covering their bases so that if someone called Page then the evidence would be admissible. And that might also be the reason they were not concerned about whether the evidence they presented to the court was sufficient to support the warrant. They knew Page was not going to complain because he was one of them. It’s interesting that Page has not been particularly upset that they wiretapped him. I would have a high power lawyer threatening to sue them.
The only point we agree on is that they were not interested in what Page said.
You seem to be unaware of the “two hop rule”.
The warrant permitted them to spy on (1 hop) anyone that spoke to Page and (2 hops) anyone that spoke to them. That was a huge net that included Trump, his organization, the entire RNC, etc.
Page HAS complained, many times and publicly. He has a lawsuit which has been put on hold (not by him). He continues to pursue it.
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/carter-page-keeps-filing-stuff-in-a-lawsuit-he-already-lost/