So your claim is that incidental surveillance is not
Posted on: April 4, 2017 at 12:09:12 CT
DHighlander NWMSU
Posts:
47880
Member For:
16.13 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
surveillence?
The crime was not the actual surveillance, which could have been perfectly legal, the crime is what happened with the information after it was collected. American citizens are not supposed to be identifiable unless there is a warrant permitting it.
The Flynn case proves this was not the case. If his name were masked in any communications he had with Russian operatives how was it that a transcript of those conversations was released to the press.
It is not a question of IF laws were broken. It is a question of how many laws were broken and by whom they were broken.