The simple question I’d ask would be this: The administration has apparently reviewed wire tap requests for Trump Tower and the president’s residence prior to the election; has the administration reviewed to see if similar measures were taken at Hillary Clinton’s residence and campaign headquarters?
Was there also a wiretap, or did Democrats only wiretap the Republican campaign?
Have documents been requested or reviewed to see if any of those wiretap recordings or records were ever shared with any Democrat in a campaign position or a donor to the Hillary campaign or the DNC or state organizations?
Which judge signed off on a surveillance request of an opposing party campaign?
While it is really late to get into the popcorn futures, I wonder if it is not too late to start reserving lawyers to scalp to Democrats who might very quickly need these lawyers?
You are asking exactly the right questions. And I think you can see where this is heading.
It think it likely that the justification for the wiretap warrant was the pee-gate document—the document that was so obviously fake that it fell apart the moment it hit public scrutiny (because, if they had anything else, it would be out by now).
If that’s the case, it raises questions about the judgement of the govt and the judge.
Of course, I believe that after they got turned down the first time, the govt went judge shopping till they found one that would issue the FISA warrant.