Sara Carter: Dossier was used for FISA warrant
- Thread starter TarHeelEer
- Start date
Sure I do. They frequently call former agents back in for consultation. If you're fired, like Comey and McCabe were, you lose your clearance, which I stated last night and you questioned. If you retire or resign, you can keep your clearance.
You keep your clearance, like I said. For up to two years, if you need to see classified info, at a simple request, it is reactivated and the process is quick.
Why argue with trumps lil doggies defending his every fart? They ain't the sharpest pencils in the box but dang them folks is loyal to the one grabbing their pussies.
Nothing in that article discredits the claims by the Trump team. It addresses the issue at a very high level and doesn’t discuss the details of each item. Click bait.
Counter Intelligence investigation dates back to at least March with Halper. They were probably using 702 searches prior to Admiral Rogers to shut them down before that. GHCQ was nosing around in late 2015. We don't have all of the details yet. To say the investigation started with Papadopolous, however, is ignorant at best.
^^^ Above, back to February 2016, like Sara babe said yesterday.
Also not so new: FBI leaking stories, then using stories to obtain FISA warrants.
Also not so new: FBI leaking stories, then using stories to obtain FISA warrants.
LOL, so that's where the cc was going. Fabulous. I wonder how all of our CIA agents in China died/disappeared? I wonder if I can piece this together...
...and Rosenfraud signed off on each and every one of them (FISA warrants) knowing there was nothing substantiated behind them except media hype. He refues to release unredacted documents, or turn over other FOIA requests. The media expects us to believe he's helping Trump's DOJ get to the bottom of this swamp of corruption?
![[eyeroll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/rolleye/rolleye0011.r191677.gif "Eye roll [eyeroll]")
That's a lot of information, I'll have to digest that late tonight.
So now China has to go to top of the list for the source of Hillbag's email to Wikileaks.
1) China
2) Inside source
3) Clinton Maid
4) Dan Rather
5) Scarlet with a candlestick
.
.
.
183) Russia
Flashback: China 'dismantled' CIA spying ops
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...smantled-cia-spying-operations-new-york-times
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...smantled-cia-spying-operations-new-york-times
I couldn't finish it during lunch (got to #26) but from what I read it's the ultimate "collusion" caper! It's amazing to me how exactly opposite all Trump is accused of regarding "collusion" with Russians the Democrats apparently were hip deep in!
Unreal.
I'll finish this "spy novel" tonight. Thanks for posting @WVU82 .
You know, just saying things to us that overwhelmingly apply to you doesn’t distance yourself from them. It just makes you look ignorant.
The libs will take this as The Don being wrong, but my take: This is even worse for Hillbag. Notice the FBI's careful wording.
Must be hard to fake people you're lucid when you're either comatose or a walking zombie?
They didn't push back on the accusation that the ODNI IG report stated that the emails were being cc'd. Only that China didn't hack the server. That would be a tall order to setup during an offsite hack, by the way. So if not China hacking, then who set it up?
Hard to find evidence when you didn’t inspect the server because it wasn’t provided to you.
This is all very interesting to me. I have not been in the discussion much. I was in ICU most of the beginning conversation.
Two points I would like clarification on. How did IG investigation coincide with what is being basis of Right position at this time? The other, Snoops position when the libs used him as a source to verify their argument?
I would think IG and Snoops diverged from what is now being presented. Anyone with reasonable recollection would be greatly appreciated just for my entertainment value only. Thanks.
Two points I would like clarification on. How did IG investigation coincide with what is being basis of Right position at this time? The other, Snoops position when the libs used him as a source to verify their argument?
I would think IG and Snoops diverged from what is now being presented. Anyone with reasonable recollection would be greatly appreciated just for my entertainment value only. Thanks.
