Trish Regan: FBI’s 2016 tactics should absolutely face scrutiny

The Attorney General of the United States of America says yes, spying did occur in the Trump 2016 presidential campaign. The question, he says, is why?

This is a massive development and it could have significant consequences, because if spying occurred for political reasons, as many suspect, then this may turn out to be a kind of Watergate on steroids.

Just last night, I spoke to Michael Caputo, a Donald Trump adviser in the 2016 campaign and he believes the Feds were trying to set him up.

So, the question is: were they doing this because there was a legitimate belief that the Trump campaign had been compromised? Or because they wanted to set Mr. Caputo up so that the world would think the Trump campaign had been compromised?

I go back to the question I’ve been asking and will keep asking until we know what happened. What was going on in the FBI that anyone would think it was okay to present a judge with evidence that the FBI hadn’t gathered nor sourced. I’m talking about the infamous dossier. They used that piece of opposition research that had been bought and paid for by the campaign of Hillary Clinton.

Who thought that was at all legal to not tell a judge issuing a warrant to spy on an innocent American? Who thought that was okay?


The Obama Justice Department wasn’t exactly what you’d call a well-run shop, given the legendary tarmac meeting between then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton. So, with  that kind of track record, Americans should be asking questions. Barr should be asking questions.

I’m glad he is.