Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Scott from the Left Coast

0 went way beyond what was allowed.

First, he asked to ‘look’ at a wide range of things & got denied.

Then later, he got the OK to ‘look’ at just one, a bank.

But he ‘looked’ at President Trump’s —phones— anyway.


222 posted on 03/04/2017 8:51:01 AM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57, returning after lurking since 2000)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies ]


To: WildHighlander57

Thanks, this what I am seeing now on other threads...as yet unconfirmed but this does create significant, even tremendous, legal jeopardy for Obama and team if this is borne out. There would be no escape from that situation for them.


244 posted on 03/04/2017 9:12:16 AM PST by Scott from the Left Coast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies ]

To: WildHighlander57

do you have evidence that he was denied wiretapping ‘right’ by the judge? If he was, then he clearly broke hte law- but is there evidence he was denied?


267 posted on 03/04/2017 9:42:38 AM PST by Bob434
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies ]

To: WildHighlander57
First, he asked to ‘look’ at a wide range of things & got denied.

Once they tap they get everything, what is seen cannot be unseen. They may not be able to use what they saw but it will lead them to some other source they can use.

377 posted on 03/04/2017 12:41:35 PM PST by itsahoot (Return the power to the people, and Mexico will pay for the wall, 100%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson