FISA Abuse Memo, prediction thread (update post 120 maybe)

[QUOTE="fonzob1, post: 138335491, member: 465871" To obtain a FISA warrant, officials had to testify under oath that the claims made in the dossier (and any other "evidence" they had) were factual as far as they knew.

You are painting your own reality for your own partisan reasons.[/QUOTE]


Bullshit. This is utterly legally unsound. In order to obtain a warrant you need to establish probable cause, and to a smaller degree demonstrate that the scope of the warrant will help you flesh out said accusations. I'm not even sure what the fuck you're talking about above. You don't have to testify under oath about a warrant application. It's already a submitted court document.

If I submit a warrant application with 20 eye witness accounts to the identity of a bank robber, and 1 out of those 20 turns out to be complete and utter horseshit, the warrant still stands.

For fucks sake, the compiler of the dossier has stated that the dossier contained no information the fbi and justice department already had.

You aren't doing anything other that beating the partisan drum, without any idea what the argument actually is.
 
It was a neat trick for the FBI to spy on the Trump campaign via an advisor who left the Trump campaign before they obtained the warrant.

All part of the master Obama plan, something something, who the fuck knows, hillary is guilty.
 
There's a big reason I like chatting with waigouren over some of the serious hacks. I disagree with him, but he's knowledgeable enough that if someone makes a questionable claim, he can point to it as such.

If you do it with these hacks, they'll only question something if it challenges their priors, so it'll slip by and they'll even work it into their narrative, changing those facts so it fits.

I'll second this as well. I disagree with his conclusions 95% of the time. But the guy takes the time to put for his argument in an intelligent and thought out manner. It's refreshing to get a genuinely good republican poster, as before we had to make due with teenager or trolls.
 
There's a big reason I like chatting with waigouren over some of the serious hacks. I disagree with him, but he's knowledgeable enough that if someone makes a questionable claim, he can point to it as such.

If you do it with these hacks, they'll only question something if it challenges their priors, so it'll slip by and they'll even work it into their narrative, changing those facts so it fits.
If only he wasn't so ferociously tribalistic
@waiguoren
 
Bullshit. This is utterly legally unsound. In order to obtain a warrant you need to establish probable cause, and to a smaller degree demonstrate that the scope of the warrant will help you flesh out said accusations. I'm not even sure what the fuck you're talking about above. You don't have to testify under oath about a warrant application. It's already a submitted court document.

If I submit a warrant application with 20 eye witness accounts to the identity of a bank robber, and 1 out of those 20 turns out to be complete and utter horseshit, the warrant still stands.

For fucks sake, the compiler of the dossier has stated that the dossier contained no information the fbi and justice department already had.

You aren't doing anything other that beating the partisan drum, without any idea what the argument actually is.

I don't believe a word you say. lol

When all is said and done, the FBI would have to convince a FISA judge that a native born American man, who accumulated a fortune off of the American free market system and is running for President of the United States, also happens to be a spy for the socialist "republic" of Russia. The whole story could be a blockbuster comedy, and the people who continue to perpetuate this nonsense are irredeemably lost.

https://www.justsecurity.org/38422/aint-easy-fisa-warrant-fbi-agent/

FISA warrant investigations can’t be opened “solely on the basis of First Amendment activities,” so mere fraternization, even with sketchy people, wouldn’t be enough. The FBI would have to gather evidence to support the claim that the U.S. target was knowingly working on behalf of a foreign entity.
 
Last edited:
When all is said and done, the FBI would have to convince a FISA judge that a native born American man, who accumulated a fortune off of the American free market system and is running for President of the United States, also happens to be a spy for the socialist "republic" of Russia. The whole story could be a blockbuster comedy, and the people who continue to perpetuate this nonsense are irredeemably lost.

No. Just no. The FBI needs to show probable cause that a federal crime has been committed in order to get a warrant. They don't have to prove their case, let alone specifically that he's a spy. And him being a native born American man has fuck all to do with it.

I don't believe a word you say. lol

Well you could take two fucking seconds to google what it takes to get a warrant. Or just keep closing your partisan ears and making an ass of yourself.
 
No. Just no. The FBI needs to show probable cause that a federal crime has been committed in order to get a warrant. They don't have to prove their case, let alone specifically that he's a spy. And him being a native born American man has fuck all to do with it.
I don't think the standard is even that strict when it comes to communications with foreign power.
 
You have to swear to the judge, that everything in the warrant is true and correct to the best of your knowledge, at the time he signs it. They’ll literally ask you themselves before they sign.

Think that’s what he means.
 
No. Just no. The FBI needs to show probable cause that a federal crime has been committed in order to get a warrant. They don't have to prove their case, let alone specifically that he's a spy. And him being a native born American man has fuck all to do with it.



Well you could take two fucking seconds to google what it takes to get a warrant. Or just keep closing your partisan ears and making an ass of yourself.

Yeah, dude. It is apparent that I could just use Google searches to get the same level of education you claim to have received in law school. What the hell does Trey Gowdy know about obtaining FISA warrants? Why trust his word over "Dark Balls" (the Sherdog legal "expert")? lol
 
I don't think the standard is even that strict when it comes to communications with foreign power.

Not registering as a foreign agent in D.C. is like speeding at the Indy 500.
 
Now we have texts from Mark Warner trying to meet a Russian lobbyist and Steele. Specifically to meet alone.

Its getting better and better
 
This is it!!!
"Russia is fucking with our shit."
"Doesn't matter, they are exposing corrupt dems. Also, no they aren't. Also also, it's really the dems that are in collusion with Russia."
 
"Russia is fucking with our shit."
"Doesn't matter, they are exposing corrupt dems. Also, no they aren't. Also also, it's really the dems that are in collusion with Russia."

When the head democrat in the senate has texts asking to meet with a Russian Lobbyist. Yea they were in "collusion " also

But collusion really isn't a crime
 
When the head democrat in the senate has texts asking to meet with a Russian Lobbyist. Yea they were in "collusion " also

But collusion really isn't a crime
Essentially ticks two of the three boxes imo
 
Back
Top