This report suggests the FBI should have presented exculpatory evidence to the FISA Court when it requested a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign:
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-15/fbi-concealed-evidence-directly-refutes-premise-trump-russia-probe-gop-lawmaker
That would have been nice, but I would be amazed if such a thing was common practice. Consider this:
Although the Fourth Amendment states that "no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause", it does not specify what "probable cause" actually means. The Supreme Court has attempted to clarify the meaning of the term on several occasions, while recognizing that probable cause is a concept that is imprecise, fluid and very dependent on context.
Source - https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/probable_cause
The courts must decide if probable cause existed in this case, and the possible existence of exculpatory evidence may or may not sway their decision.
In my view, there was no reason for the warrant(s) in the first place. This all has been a witch hunt from start to finish, and if the FISA Court had been doing its job no warrant(s) would have been issued.
No comments:
Post a Comment