officials interviewing with mr. trump for that fbi job. now, as you know the doj follows very detailed rules on getting warrants for surveillance. is your reporting that rosenstein was considering illegal surveillance or trying to get a warrant to do the wire or that it never got that far? well, i don t think it got to the point of legal review on what to do with this. this was not a wire in the sense of tapping the president s phone or installing a listening device. it would be a recording as if, you know, you sat down and we had coffee and i recorded it. washington, d.c. is a one-party consent so you know, anyone can basically record any type of one-on-one conversation with them. obviously taking such a move with the president would have been extraordinary. this is something the justice department uses in drug cases or gang cases and to go back to the you mentioned the one-party consent law. michael, as law enforcement they wouldn t go near wiretapping
let s read what you wrote there. rosenstein raised the idea of wearing a recording device or wire to secretly tape the president when he visited the white house or other fbi officials interviewing with mr. trump for that fbi job. now, as you know the doj follows very detailed rules on getting warrants for surveillance. is your reporting that rosenstein was considering illegal surveillance or trying to get a warrant to do the wire or that it never got that far? well, i don t think it got to the point of legal review on what to do with this. this was not a wire in the sense of tapping the president s phone or installing a listening device. it would be a recording as if, you know, you sat down and we had coffee and i recorded it. washington, d.c. is a one-party consent so you know, anyone can basically record any type of one-on-one conversation with them. obviously taking such a move with the president would have been extraordinary. this is something the justice department uses in dru
very detailed rules on getting warrants for surveillance. is your reporting that rosenstein was considering illegal surveillance or trying to get a warrant to do the wire or that it never got that far? well, i don t think it got to the point of legal review on what to do with this. this was not a wire in the sense of tapping the president s phone or installing a listening device. it would be a recording as if, you know, you sat down and we had coffee and i recorded it. washington, d.c. is a one-party consent so you know, anyone can basically record any type of one-on-one conversation with them. obviously taking such a move with the president would have been extraordinary. this is something the justice department uses in drug cases or gang cases and to go back to the you mentioned the one-party consent law. michael, as law enforcement they wouldn t go near wiretapping someone in the executive branch without more.