[Cboldt]

-- Remember the matter of the FISA warrants is still in process and there were clear violations of the law involved. --

50 USC 1809 - FISA Criminal Penalties

(b) Defense

It is a defense to a prosecution under subsection (a) that the defendant was a law enforcement or investigative officer engaged in the course of his official duties and the electronic surveillance was authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order of a court of competent jurisdiction.

[jjotto]

Yep. The whole point of FISA courts is that they don’t have to meet the same standard of ‘reasonable suspicion’ of regular courts. If there was reasonable suspicion of a crime, it would be handled in regular courts.

[old curmudgeon]

The problem for Comey is that this defense will not be available to him.

In his case, the question is not whether he acted in enforcing a warrant issued by the court. Comey’s problem is that he was instrumental in fabrication of facts presented to the court.

So that leaves two questions to be answered.

#1. Was Comey instrumental to the extent that he can be prosecuted?

#2. Are the penalties severe enough that he can be imprisoned, or are the penalties no more than a slap on the rist and being branded “bad boy”?