• Train hauling GOP Congressman hits truck...one dead

  • Needless flaming & idiocy are grounds for banning.
Needless flaming & idiocy are grounds for banning.
Forum rules: Please keep all conversation civil and productive. Any trolling or shit-posting will be removed and repeat offenders will be banned from the Enlightened Discussion forum.
 #101566  by kocher
 Wed Jan 31, 2018 4:01 pm
JohnnyP wrote:
Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:27 pm
kocher wrote:
Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:56 pm
JohnnyP wrote:
Wed Jan 31, 2018 1:59 pm
Image
Image
Image
Did you read the article? The article doesn't in anyway assert that the Obama admin specifically targeted Trump or his campaign, but rather Russian officials themselves, some of which may have happened to include Trump aides. A majority of the intercepted intel was Russian-Russian communications.
The FISA warrant was to monitor Carter Page. Trump's foreign policy advisor during the 2016 campaign. Anymore lies you wanna tell?

http://thehill.com/policy/national-secu ... eased-memo

"I originally hoped that DOJ and the FBI would've released my illegitimate FISA application when I requested it last May, but it's been eight months since I submitted my Privacy Act/[Freedom of Information Act] request letters to them and I haven't received any of that information yet"
That wasn't denial that warrants had ever been issued, it's a summation of the article you wrongly concluded to use as a contradiction to a CNN headline for this specific situation.

In regards to the legitimacy of the warrant in court ala the dossier, it's been addressed by SCOTUS in Delaware v. Franks.
(a) To mandate an evidentiary hearing, the challenger's attack must be more than conclusory, and must be supported by more than a mere desire to cross-examine. The allegation of deliberate falsehood or of reckless disregard must point out specifically with supporting reasons the portion of the warrant affidavit that is claimed to be false. It also must be accompanied by an offer of proof, including affidavits or sworn or otherwise reliable statements of witnesses, or a satisfactory explanation of their absence. P. 438 U. S. 171.
Political smokescreen to whip up their base and discredit the FBI. Can't wait for this non-cherry picked non-heavily redacted memo!
 #101595  by JohnnyP
 Wed Jan 31, 2018 6:28 pm
kocher wrote:
Wed Jan 31, 2018 4:01 pm
JohnnyP wrote:
Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:27 pm
kocher wrote:
Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:56 pm


Did you read the article? The article doesn't in anyway assert that the Obama admin specifically targeted Trump or his campaign, but rather Russian officials themselves, some of which may have happened to include Trump aides. A majority of the intercepted intel was Russian-Russian communications.
The FISA warrant was to monitor Carter Page. Trump's foreign policy advisor during the 2016 campaign. Anymore lies you wanna tell?

http://thehill.com/policy/national-secu ... eased-memo

"I originally hoped that DOJ and the FBI would've released my illegitimate FISA application when I requested it last May, but it's been eight months since I submitted my Privacy Act/[Freedom of Information Act] request letters to them and I haven't received any of that information yet"
That wasn't denial that warrants had ever been issued, it's a summation of the article you wrongly concluded to use as a contradiction to a CNN headline for this specific situation.

In regards to the legitimacy of the warrant in court ala the dossier, it's been addressed by SCOTUS in Delaware v. Franks.
(a) To mandate an evidentiary hearing, the challenger's attack must be more than conclusory, and must be supported by more than a mere desire to cross-examine. The allegation of deliberate falsehood or of reckless disregard must point out specifically with supporting reasons the portion of the warrant affidavit that is claimed to be false. It also must be accompanied by an offer of proof, including affidavits or sworn or otherwise reliable statements of witnesses, or a satisfactory explanation of their absence. P. 438 U. S. 171.
Political smokescreen to whip up their base and discredit the FBI. Can't wait for this non-cherry picked non-heavily redacted memo!
First you said they never spied directly on Americas. When I give you proof they did you make excuses for why the dossier was used as a legit reason to spy on Americas. Then you post some legal case that has nothing to do with how warrants are obtained in a FISA court.

The FISA court is supposed to be used for foreign nationals only. Thats because it's unconstitutional to use it to spy on American citizens because evidence FOR WARRANTS has to be shown in court. But keep making excuses for the scum in the Obama Admin. I can't wait to hear your excuses when these people are led away in handcuffs.
 #101707  by HolidayFriday
 Thu Feb 01, 2018 2:54 pm
Just to set the record straight, several things happened right there:



1) Trump was called on the fact that no one wiretapped Trump Tower - but get this - it's because the communications were tapped into somewhere else.

2) They were in fact listening to Russian Ambassadors when much to their surprise one of Trump's people was in contact with them.

3) The conversation had nothing to do with Trump, and he can't be held accountable in any way.



So I wonder what the memo says about all this. We should be hearing something any day now.