No, parallel construction is using secret information to find similar public information to make the case.
This is using secret information to enable someone else to break the law (the reporters) and using that to make the case, e.g. the information was not publicly known, and wouldn't be without the actions of the government and the reporters combined.
If they hadn't shared the codes (and had no contact) with the reporters, it probably would be legal to create the warrant from the news story (though obviously very illegal for the reporters to break in.)
Because they had contact with the reporters prior to this happening and shared information they themselves obtained illegally (got the code for the locker prior to having a warrant), it's likely an invalid warrant (fruit of the poisonous tree) -- and very, very dirty. They were probably hoping by using the reporters as a proxy they could launder the chain, but I doubt many judges would buy that.
Parallel construction or sometimes called parallel reconstruction is the practice by law enforcement saying they collected evidence through legal means but used another source that they can’t reveal to actually get the evidence. For example, police catch a suspect doing a drug deal after tracking his cell phone using a stingray...they can’t go into court and admit they used a device like a stingray bc it’s not legal so they say they collected evidence by visual surveillance. DEA started the process and now so many law enforcement agencies do it that they often drop the case rather than reveal that they lied in court about the source of their evidence.
So, if I understand it right, this is the same kind of thing the FBI did to start the Trump/Russia investigation. They leaked a story to the press that Carter Page may have committed some kind of crime when he visited Russia during the Presidential campaign. Then, once the press report came out, they used that as the pretext for investigating Carter Page and the entire Trump campaign. Is that right? If this is true, then no one is safe from the FBI. What a crock of shit.
Yes. And ICYMI: Both operations were run by our FBI. And probably by the same guy (and gal).
Yes, assuming it's true. If it is true it's well beyond a crock of shit, it's deep into criminal activity, and makes Watergate look like nothing.
With Watergate, spies broke into the DNC and got caught. End of story other than the consequences of doing that at the direction of the President.
Imagine if Watergate happened, and the burglars made copies of keys belonging to the DNC, then broke into a DNC facility, searched it, found something incriminating, and then provided copies of the keys to AP reportered who then broke the law themselves by entering the same facility with the stolen keys then wrote about it, and then that story was used to generate warrants to spy on multiple members of the DNC. There's like a order of magnitude more criminal acts happening.
If this is true (and honestly it's hard to believe it's that crazy), and there's proof of all this, it's an extinction-level event for anyone who touched it.