ADVERTISEMENT

Immediate actions the administration needs to take

I'm probably too aggressive, but this is what I'd do
  • Have Sessions demand an update from Mueller. If Mueller tells Sessions that Russian collusion is a dead end as everyone thinks, then Sessions can un-recuse himself.
  • Allow Mueller to continue his investigation
  • Fire Rosenstein, replace with non-Fed DA from a large city.
  • Attempt a FISA warrant on Carter right now with exact same prior evidence, but append evidence as to the source and publicize results of the attempt
  • Put Comey, McCabe, Lynch, Strzok, Ohr's, others on no fly list
Good ****ing lord, I just read this, you dudes have swallowed more than kool aid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: countryroads89
Should I type it slow for you? Will that help? They have said all along that parts of the dossier were used as a PARTIAL basis for the warrant.

Another little tid bit: what part of "they were watching Page since 2013" is too complicated to understand?
You cant use unverified evidence part or in full.
 
You cant use unverified evidence part or in full.
They used the verified portion. You guys don't think they used the PeePee tape do you? This was about admitted Kremlin friend Carter Page's contacts with Russian spies.
 
Another little tid bit: what part of "they were watching Page since 2013" is too complicated to understand?
It doesnt matter if they were watching him before. Every FISC warrant is based on the evidence provided and its application and whatever happened in 2013 never led to any charge. Not to mention that Page was no longer part of the trump campaign when the fisa warrant was granted.
 
They used the verified portion. You guys don't think they used the PeePee tape do you? This was about admitted Kremlin friend Carter Page's contacts with Russian spies.

So they had one sentence? "Carter went to Russia, the end"?
 
Sharyl has a beef with prior FBI personnel.

I think this is where maybe we are confusing each other (you and I, the board, the country at large). Do you think a) the FBI used the entire dossier on the FISA application, or b) the FBI shouldn't use any of the dossier until all of the dossier was verified?
 
Guess we'll need to see all of the underlying info to find out. I'm willing to bet that more than that one sentence was verified.
Unverified information can be used, they do it all the time from informant information given to investigators. Even from sources that are shaky and unreliable. When added to other circumstantial evidence, warrants are approved. Renewals of FISA’s is the biggest issue to me. They have to prove the surveillance is producing to receive renewals, and this was renewed (3 or 5?) times by different judges.
Page was in contact with Rosneft- verified. Trump was close with the guy from Azerbaijan- verified. I don’t think anyone really knows how much of the dossier is verified or not. I wish those people saying it was completely fake would link me to an article that actually had the information checked and proven wrong. All I’ve heard about is the lawyer’s travels were proven wrong?
 
I think this is where maybe we are confusing each other (you and I, the board, the country at large). Do you think a) the FBI used the entire dossier on the FISA application, or b) the FBI shouldn't use any of the dossier until all of the dossier was verified?

I believe the reports that came out about McCabe's testimony that the only thing verified was Page's trip to Moscow, from multiple outlets from multiple sources, but not sure if redundant sources. If that's true, then they used more than just that on the warrant, because the warrant would not have been accepted without the dossier, also per McCabe.
 
I think this is where maybe we are confusing each other (you and I, the board, the country at large). Do you think a) the FBI used the entire dossier on the FISA application, or b) the FBI shouldn't use any of the dossier until all of the dossier was verified?
People in the FBI knew of Steele's dislike of Trump and they used his leaked info to a news source to verify it. The guy who Steele talked to was Michael Izakoph( sp).
 
If proffered info is false then the warrant can't be used in a court of law. Fruit of the poisonous tree.
Here's a very conservative, former Chief Asst US Attorney - "I don’t understand commentary about whether FISA warrant is ‘invalid.’ That’s crim law concept. FISA is intel — it’s not like govt has to give back information it learns. This is not prosecution situation where not fruit-of-poisonous-tree doctrine applies."
 
Not on a FISA warrant. Google Woods procedure.
Then, honestly, I don’t think they used any unverified info from the dossier. I think they used what they verified. The FISA would prove it. Trump can release it, and end all the partisan bs right now. He can read it, and he can release it. Nunes didn’t even read it.
 
Then, honestly, I don’t think they used any unverified info from the dossier. I think they used what they verified. The FISA would prove it. Trump can release it, and end all the partisan bs right now. He can read it, and he can release it. Nunes didn’t even read it.

Get everyone you know to sign that petition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boomboom521
I believe the reports that came out about McCabe's testimony that the only thing verified was Page's trip to Moscow, from multiple outlets from multiple sources, but not sure if redundant sources. If that's true, then they used more than just that on the warrant, because the warrant would not have been accepted without the dossier, also per McCabe.
I'm still not following. Are you saying they used the entire dossier? Or are you saying they only used a portion of that dossier, but part of that portion was unverified?
 
Here's a very conservative, former Chief Asst US Attorney - "I don’t understand commentary about whether FISA warrant is ‘invalid.’ That’s crim law concept. FISA is intel — it’s not like govt has to give back information it learns. This is not prosecution situation where not fruit-of-poisonous-tree doctrine applies."

OH SHIT Tarheel! Better grab those meds.
 
I'm still not following. Are you saying they used the entire dossier? Or are you saying they only used a portion of that dossier, but part of that portion was unverified?

This is entirely guess; selective editing. They pulled out absurd parts like the pee pee tape. They called it verified based on Steele's reputation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WVUCOOPER
If that's true, then they used more than just that on the warrant, because the warrant would not have been accepted without the dossier, also per McCabe.

Also, this part of your response is completely misleading. Even the memo doesn't claim what you typed, but what McCabe said is in dispute until the transcript of his hearing is released.
 
Also, this part of your response is completely misleading. Even the memo doesn't claim what you typed, but what McCabe said is in dispute until the transcript of his hearing is released.

Screw his transcript, just release the application.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WVUCOOPER
This is entirely guess; selective editing. They pulled out absurd parts like the pee pee tape. They called it verified based on Steele's reputation.
I disagree, but at least understand it now.
 
I think both are needed. The transcript should be easier/quicker.

That was private disclosure again. Unless McCabe agrees to it, it will be difficult to do. Drag him back in while he's still an employee for public hearing, and if he pleads the 5th all over the place, then release it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WVUCOOPER
One question I have is this:

If Nunes didn’t read the FISA, and the biggest piece of information on the memo is about the securing of the FISA, why did he (or rather his staffers) write it? If Gowdy read the FISA, why didn’t Gowdy write it?
 
One question I have is this:

If Nunes didn’t read the FISA, and the biggest piece of information on the memo is about the securing of the FISA, why did he (or rather his staffers) write it? If Gowdy read the FISA, why didn’t Gowdy write it?
I believe Gowdy helped write it. Obviously I have no clue as to which parts he helped with.
 
One question I have is this:

If Nunes didn’t read the FISA, and the biggest piece of information on the memo is about the securing of the FISA, why did he (or rather his staffers) write it? If Gowdy read the FISA, why didn’t Gowdy write it?

I'd guess they used notes from all, and not just Nunes.
 
Unverified information can be used, they do it all the time from informant information given to investigators. Even from sources that are shaky and unreliable. When added to other circumstantial evidence, warrants are approved. Renewals of FISA’s is the biggest issue to me. They have to prove the surveillance is producing to receive renewals, and this was renewed (3 or 5?) times by different judges.
Page was in contact with Rosneft- verified. Trump was close with the guy from Azerbaijan- verified. I don’t think anyone really knows how much of the dossier is verified or not. I wish those people saying it was completely fake would link me to an article that actually had the information checked and proven wrong. All I’ve heard about is the lawyer’s travels were proven wrong?
I'm sure the FISC would take exception to your claim.
 
Here's a very conservative, former Chief Asst US Attorney - "I don’t understand commentary about whether FISA warrant is ‘invalid.’ That’s crim law concept. FISA is intel — it’s not like govt has to give back information it learns. This is not prosecution situation where not fruit-of-poisonous-tree doctrine applies."
Who said that?
 
The one? He is one of about 50.
Too bad thta a person who beleives the law is important is leaving, he would easily win elections, and you have people like Pelosi, Schumer and queer boy Schiff staying. Says a lot about them.
 
Here's a very conservative, former Chief Asst US Attorney - "I don’t understand commentary about whether FISA warrant is ‘invalid.’ That’s crim law concept. FISA is intel — it’s not like govt has to give back information it learns. This is not prosecution situation where not fruit-of-poisonous-tree doctrine applies."

That would be more in conjunction with Flynn. We still don't know how that started, except for intercepted communications with the Russian. How did Mueller get it from that, to requesting Strzok entrap him, errr, I mean interview him?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT