We’re talking about the third plane being devoid of surveillance equipment... But what if the third plane would be chosen because it WAS bugged ?
What does court admissible evidence look like if you bug your own plane, versus bugging a third plane ?
If you’re going to go after the DOJ then the evidence you need may in fact be different than what you would need in a normal court.
Think of trying to get evidence on someone who “owns the judge” then remember that Loretta literally OWNS the judges.
If we’re going to think that the third plane was chosen because it wasn’t bugged, then we would need to see who could deliver a plane that would be neutral or otherwise guaranteed of it ? IS this why Hillary leases Dan Bilzerian’s jet ?
That would be an interesting twist.
Every commercial aircraft has a cockpit voice recorder and some even have cabin access.
It would be a shame if some SS agent ‘accidentally’ turned it on in the process of ‘sweeping’ it clean...........................
Arizona is a one-party consent state. Most states have 2 party consent laws which mean that to record a conversation all the parties have to consent to the recording. But some like Arizona have single party consent which means one person can record the conversation without the other party even knowing. There may be other federal laws that govern recording of officials, or because it took place at an airport. I am not sure about that end of it, but it does add a twist knowing that the law for one-party consent exists.