When adults are having a serious discussion one of the issues is to see how someone will respond when confronted with "evidence" and to watch the responses. An interested reader can also learn something by reading both sides. Either you are blessed with omniscience or you're just a disrupter. If it's the former, then be quiet while us lesser beings learn. If its the latter and you don't understand what was going on, then have fun with your cats and lightening bolts.
You can do better than that.
The unfortunate thing is I believe there is a lot of selective reading of the law here. Some are making the point that if a member is a United States citizen, but is also a member of an association, then then part of the law prohibiting wiretapping without a warrant if there is reason to believe a U.S. citizen may be a party, is negated. No where in the law does it provide for subclause B to stop being operative. The circumstance has to meat all criteria, not just some, for it to be legal.
But that's just my opinion. Thank you again for your respectful disagreement.