re: Biden FBI tracked Melania and Barron Trump's travel - even tapped Susie Wiles phone

quote:

---

In the June 2023 federal indictment (superseded in July 2023) in the Southern District of Florida, Trump faced 40 felony counts (plus related charges against aides Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira). The primary statutes were:

18 U.S.C. § 793(e) (Espionage Act provisions) — Willful retention of national defense information. This covered the bulk of the counts (32 separate counts, one for each specific document prosecutors identified as containing national defense information that was willfully retained and not delivered to the proper authorities). Penalties of up to 10 years per count were possible.

nytimes.com

Obstruction-related charges, including:

Conspiracy to obstruct justice.

Withholding or concealing documents/records.

False statements / schemes to conceal (e.g., under provisions related to 18 U.S.C. §§ 1519, 1001, and related conspiracy statutes).

These alleged efforts to impede the National Archives, grand jury, and investigators’ recovery of the materials. The most serious obstruction/conspiracy counts carried potential penalties of up to 20 years.

en.wikipedia.org

Trump pleaded not guilty to all counts. The case was dismissed in 2024 (Judge Aileen Cannon’s ruling, later followed by the special counsel dropping remaining efforts after the 2024 election). No convictions resulted.

---

quote:

---

Declassified records released in 2025–2026 (via FOIA, Judicial Watch, and the White House Government Transparency Task Force) document several points raised by critics:Internal FBI doubts about probable cause: Washington Field Office (WFO) counterintelligence personnel repeatedly stated in emails (including around July 2022) that they did not believe probable cause existed for a search warrant covering the residence, office, or bedroom.

They proposed less invasive alternatives such as contacting Trump’s counsel or seeking cooperation to recover any remaining materials. DOJ’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section disagreed and pushed for a broad warrant. One DOJ-related comment referenced in emails was characterized as not caring about “optics.”

judicialwatch.org

High-level approvals: Then-FBI Director Christopher Wray sought approval to open the Sensitive Investigative Matter. Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco recommended approval, and Attorney General Merrick Garland signed off (memos from March 2022 and related). Garland later stated he personally approved seeking the search warrant.

justthenews.com

Expansive investigative tactics: Agents tracked travel movements of Melania Trump and Barron Trump in planning the timing of the search. Later (2023, during the campaign period), a pen register/trap-and-trace device on Susie Wiles’s phone (then a top Trump adviser) captured metadata on calls with dozens of defense attorneys, campaign staff, journalists, and others. Critics describe this as a “tickle the wire” operation that swept in First Amendment-protected activity (legal defense, political association, press contacts).

ibtimes.co.uk

Critics (including current administration officials, some former agents, and congressional overseers) characterize these as evidence of political weaponization—prioritizing a high-profile target, overriding field concerns, and using broad surveillance amid an election cycle. They place Plasmic Echo in a sequence of probes (Crossfire Hurricane, Arctic Frost, etc.) allegedly targeting Trump and associates.

justthenews.com

---

quote:

---

Potential charges against those involved in the raid/investigation

No criminal charges have been filed against FBI or DOJ personnel specifically for opening Plasmic Echo or executing the Mar-a-Lago search. Legal theories discussed in public commentary, congressional oversight, and the current Florida probe include:18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 242 (Conspiracy against rights; Deprivation of rights under color of law):

These civil-rights statutes criminalize conspiracies or actions by officials that intentionally deprive someone of constitutional rights (e.g., Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches, First Amendment association/speech rights).

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon has publicly noted that conspiracy-against-rights tools are available if intentional violations of civil liberties in politically motivated investigations are proven. Proving specific intent to violate rights (beyond aggressive but good-faith investigation) is a high bar.

justthenews.com

Other potential theories raised in discussion: False statements in affidavits or reports, obstruction of justice (if evidence was mishandled or withheld), or related misconduct. These would require clear evidence of knowing falsehoods or bad faith, not mere disagreement over probable cause or aggressive tactics.

Practical realities: Prosecutors enjoy broad discretion and qualified immunity protections in many contexts. High-level officials often face additional hurdles. Field agents who documented concerns may have stronger defenses. Any charges would need to overcome arguments that the warrant was judicially authorized, documents were found, and national-security interests were at stake.

The current DOJ is examining these matters, but outcomes remain pending and unproven in court.In short, declassified records show internal friction, expansive methods, and high-level direction that fuel strong claims of political overreach.

Whether those amount to criminal “dirty politics” or a flawed but lawful national-security investigation is actively contested and under review; no one has been charged for the raid itself to date. Facts continue to emerge through transparency efforts and ongoing probes.

27 web pages

---

BOTTOM LINE: The FBI did not see or grant probable cause to search Trumps home.

Lisa Monoco, Garland, overruled this in political warfare LAWFARE entrapment.. They played serious games with serious charges (nuke codes at MAL in the news)

Within DOJ it seems Obama/Bidens cabinet, administration have immunity hiding in the DOJ NSC under the guise of nat sec.

quote:

---

That's not a "both sides" argument It's a comment about the legality of certain government behavior.

---

Yeah. Cannon had all of that information and she still ruled the search was legal.

Is she now part of the conspiracy?

Was her ruling lawfare?

Bad post for a typo

They got a local (crooked) magistrate to sign off on the warrant.

Lawfare, a judge isnt going to see in the moment, nor would she counter the magistrate.

quote:

---

They got a local (crooked) magistrate to sign off on the warrant.

Lawfare, a judge isnt going to see in the moment, nor would she counter the magistrate.

---

the web just keeps spinning!

quote:

---

SFP is especially embarrassing himself defendinf this BS

---

Defending?

I have argued it should be illegal

quote:

---

Lawfare, a judge isnt going to see in the moment, nor would she counter the magistrate.

---

So she should also be criminally charged as part of the conspiracy?

I wonder if there is any correlation with this and when Iran was promoting bounties on the heads of Trump's family and claiming to have knowledge of their day-to-day activities.

quote:

---

I wonder if there is any correlation with this and when Iran was promoting bounties on the heads of Trump's family and claiming to have knowledge of their day-to-day activities.

---

There are morally bankrupt people in the FBI that would 100% collude with Iran to get Trump if they knew they wouldn’t get caught. I think Jack Smith would do it too