• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Criminal referral backs up Nunes on dossier claims

Jack Fabulous

Friend Zone
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
Messages
16,948
Reaction score
6,739
Location
midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Criminal referral backs up Nunes on dossier claims, as Dems push rebuttal memo | Fox News

The referral also helps explain a point of contention in recent days, after Nunes seemed to admit on “Fox & Friends” after the release of his memo that the FBI application did include a “footnote” acknowledging some political origins of the dossier. This admission helped fueled Democratic claims, from ranking Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and others, that the dossier’s political connection was not concealed from the surveillance court as alleged.

According to Grassley and Graham’s referral, the FBI “noted to a vaguely limited extent the political origins of the dossier” in a footnote that said the information was compiled at the direction of a law firm “who had hired an ‘identified U.S. person’ – now known as Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS.” A subsequent passage in the letter is redacted. But they said the DNC and Clinton campaign were not mentioned.
This is just going to keep getting worse until all of the source documents are revealed and transcripts of the proceedings are all made public. The way I see it there are only two possible outcomes and neither of them is good. Either the FISA court was misled about the evidence presented to grant the warrant or the threshold which must be met for such a warrant to be granted needs a thorough and complete overhaul.

Seriously, is anyone comfortable with a system which allows the work of political agents doing opposition research to be considered as credible evidence worthy of granting a warrant authorizing government surveillance of U.S. citizens? This is crazy!
 
What was used to get the FISA warrants on Page dating back to 2014? We know it wasn't the dossier, and we know those warrants existed before 2016.

I'm at the point that I really don't care about Carter Page having a third FISA warrant on him. He wasn't even working for Trump in 2016 when it was re-upped.

If the Republicans are so against the FISA warrants now, they have control of DC - they should get rid of their usage.

I'm so tired of hearing about this.
 
Criminal referral backs up Nunes on dossier claims, as Dems push rebuttal memo | Fox News


This is just going to keep getting worse until all of the source documents are revealed and transcripts of the proceedings are all made public. The way I see it there are only two possible outcomes and neither of them is good. Either the FISA court was misled about the evidence presented to grant the warrant or the threshold which must be met for such a warrant to be granted needs a thorough and complete overhaul.

Seriously, is anyone comfortable with a system which allows the work of political agents doing opposition research to be considered as credible evidence worthy of granting a warrant authorizing government surveillance of U.S. citizens? This is crazy!
Only 0.03% of FISA requests have been rejected. This system needs to be reformed now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Court
 
What was used to get the FISA warrants on Page dating back to 2014? We know it wasn't the dossier, and we know those warrants existed before 2016.

I'm at the point that I really don't care about Carter Page having a third FISA warrant on him. He wasn't even working for Trump in 2016 when it was re-upped.

If the Republicans are so against the FISA warrants now, they have control of DC - they should get rid of their usage.

I'm so tired of hearing about this.

I miss the days when Democrats cared about FISA abuse. As much as I oppose Glenn Greenwald on a variety of issues, he's at least consistent, and he's remained outraged about this abuse.
 
I miss the days when Democrats cared about FISA abuse. As much as I oppose Glenn Greenwald on a variety of issues, he's at least consistent, and he's remained outraged about this abuse.

I miss the days when the Republicans didn't care about who was being surveilled. Unlike the hypocrites, I'm still not caring.
 
I miss the days when the Republicans didn't care about who was being surveilled. Unlike the hypocrites, I'm still not caring.

That's not a position that's generally going to find sympathy with the public.
 
Criminal referral backs up Nunes on dossier claims, as Dems push rebuttal memo | Fox News


This is just going to keep getting worse until all of the source documents are revealed and transcripts of the proceedings are all made public. The way I see it there are only two possible outcomes and neither of them is good. Either the FISA court was misled about the evidence presented to grant the warrant or the threshold which must be met for such a warrant to be granted needs a thorough and complete overhaul.

Seriously, is anyone comfortable with a system which allows the work of political agents doing opposition research to be considered as credible evidence worthy of granting a warrant authorizing government surveillance of U.S. citizens? This is crazy!
You need to distinguish between facts and talking points and legal procedures.
 
That's not a position that's generally going to find sympathy with the public.

I didn't know we were supposed to have opinions that are intended to find sympathy with the public. I guess I am a little too keen on the concept of individual freedom and not group think.
 
What was used to get the FISA warrants on Page dating back to 2014? We know it wasn't the dossier, and we know those warrants existed before 2016.

I'm at the point that I really don't care about Carter Page having a third FISA warrant on him. He wasn't even working for Trump in 2016 when it was re-upped.

If the Republicans are so against the FISA warrants now, they have control of DC - they should get rid of their usage.

I'm so tired of hearing about this.

That's a damn good question, because if the dossier was their biggest piece of evidence and they had been surveilling Page since 2013, then the probable cause used prior to the dossier comes under serious question.
 
I didn't know we were supposed to have opinions that are intended to find sympathy with the public. I guess I am a little too keen on the concept of individual freedom and not group think.

You're really going to preach about individual freedom while granting FISA abuse to spy on Americans without their knowledge?
 
You're really going to preach about individual freedom while granting FISA abuse to spy on Americans without their knowledge?

The Republicans can end the FISA process right now. Why are annoyed with me? You're a Trump supporter. Email him and tell him to make it go away. With the Patriot Act, too.

Or have him change the rules so you can only spy on Americans with their knowledge first. That may work too.
 
Criminal referral backs up Nunes on dossier claims, as Dems push rebuttal memo | Fox News


This is just going to keep getting worse until all of the source documents are revealed and transcripts of the proceedings are all made public. The way I see it there are only two possible outcomes and neither of them is good. Either the FISA court was misled about the evidence presented to grant the warrant or the threshold which must be met for such a warrant to be granted needs a thorough and complete overhaul.

Seriously, is anyone comfortable with a system which allows the work of political agents doing opposition research to be considered as credible evidence worthy of granting a warrant authorizing government surveillance of U.S. citizens? This is crazy!

I agree with that. The sleazy underbelly of politicis and the Deep State is revealed and it ain't pretty. I don't think identifying Glenn Simpson and Fusion GPS is enough to earn acknowledgement of possible political sourcing. Now it is time to go after Clapper and the CIA and their non-existent Russian election tampering. It just isn't so.
./
 
I have a fundamental Question? It will caveat but become relevant.

1) Accusation of RUSSIA Collusion? Where did it start and HOW did it start? (rhetorical sorta I know the basic, but underlying)
2) Kushners & Jr and others meeting with Russian's are NOT illegal? Unless they are discussing Sensitive matters? Right? The biggest one was the Trump Tower meeting with the Russian Lawyers right?
2a) What is the difference between Trump Tower Meeting and DNC/Clinton Campaign actually PAYING a source and working with Russians for a Dossier? (FUNDAMENTAL Questions?) Accusation of Collusion usually warants a criminal act right? Trump tower meeting was not criminal right? DNC actually PAID money to someone?
3) I have been asking proof... but actually now we can kinda see there was NO crime it was actually cry wolf? NO? An accusation without cause?
4) The FISA was TRYING To Find Something if there was anything? But there was no underlying crime to warrant the accusation? Its like me saying, Pepsi has been putting coke inside their bottles? Its just an accusation? NO no warranted points.

So really Page, What was the concern back in 2013. How many other Warrants were issued? If the Government was Monitoring since 2016 would they NOT have anything, or again.. Was it just an accusation without and criminal intent to try to find ANYTHING?


We should have a special counsel on DNC and Clinton since we can "accuse" Russian Collusion? NO?
 
Criminal referral backs up Nunes on dossier claims, as Dems push rebuttal memo | Fox News

This is just going to keep getting worse until all of the source documents are revealed and transcripts of the proceedings are all made public. The way I see it there are only two possible outcomes and neither of them is good. Either the FISA court was misled about the evidence presented to grant the warrant or the threshold which must be met for such a warrant to be granted needs a thorough and complete overhaul.

Seriously, is anyone comfortable with a system which allows the work of political agents doing opposition research to be considered as credible evidence worthy of granting a warrant authorizing government surveillance of U.S. citizens? This is crazy!

Steele is also a retired member of British intelligence specializing in Russia and the FBI had a history of him being a reliable investigator. The dossier wasn't the only evidence, and a series of DoJ and FBI members including Trump appointees signed off on the Page warrant and the three renewals, all signed by four different judges at the FISC. So as you phrased the question, no, that wouldn't make me comfortable but you're missing a lot of information in that scenario.

And this has been noted a bunch of times by several people but the "political agents doing opposition research" allegation is another way to say should be allow the testimony of possibly extremely biased individuals to be used in warrant requests. The obvious answer is of course we should and do, likely 100s of times a day in various contexts. The reason is simply that it's people with extreme bias against the target who are willing to come forward and rat on them to the FBI or the local cops or DEA. If not that, they're paid informants, or those offered plea deals for information, all of which makes their information "biased" but in a different way.
 
This is just going to keep getting worse until all of the source documents are revealed and transcripts of the proceedings are all made public. The way I see it there are only two possible outcomes and neither of them is good. Either the FISA court was misled about the evidence presented to grant the warrant or the threshold which must be met for such a warrant to be granted needs a thorough and complete overhaul.

Seriously, is anyone comfortable with a system which allows the work of political agents doing opposition research to be considered as credible evidence worthy of granting a warrant authorizing government surveillance of U.S. citizens? This is crazy!

Oh look, another conservative narrative to bleat about. what proves your obedience to them is you don't even consider that there is nothing wrong with the process or the dossier. Don't worry, when your conservative masters get what they want, they'll toss their concern for fisa warrant applications in the same pile they put their concern for deficits, healthcare, presidents playing golf, LEOs and acting presidential. And you wont question it.
 
I have a fundamental Question? It will caveat but become relevant.

1) Accusation of RUSSIA Collusion? Where did it start and HOW did it start? (rhetorical sorta I know the basic, but underlying)
2) Kushners & Jr and others meeting with Russian's are NOT illegal? Unless they are discussing Sensitive matters? Right? The biggest one was the Trump Tower meeting with the Russian Lawyers right?
2a) What is the difference between Trump Tower Meeting and DNC/Clinton Campaign actually PAYING a source and working with Russians for a Dossier? (FUNDAMENTAL Questions?) Accusation of Collusion usually warants a criminal act right? Trump tower meeting was not criminal right? DNC actually PAID money to someone?
3) I have been asking proof... but actually now we can kinda see there was NO crime it was actually cry wolf? NO? An accusation without cause?
4) The FISA was TRYING To Find Something if there was anything? But there was no underlying crime to warrant the accusation? Its like me saying, Pepsi has been putting coke inside their bottles? Its just an accusation? NO no warranted points.

So really Page, What was the concern back in 2013. How many other Warrants were issued? If the Government was Monitoring since 2016 would they NOT have anything, or again.. Was it just an accusation without and criminal intent to try to find ANYTHING?


We should have a special counsel on DNC and Clinton since we can "accuse" Russian Collusion? NO?

can Russia find posters with better English skills?
 
Oh look, another conservative narrative to bleat about. what proves your obedience to them is you don't even consider that there is nothing wrong with the process or the dossier. Don't worry, when your conservative masters get what they want, they'll toss their concern for fisa warrant applications in the same pile they put their concern for deficits, healthcare, presidents playing golf, LEOs and acting presidential. And you wont question it.

Aaaaannnndddd... not a single challenge to anything factual. Frame the OP as purely a political objection and then fall back on rhetoric and hyperbole as a diversion. Par for the course for you.

Surprise, surprise...
 
can Russia find posters with better English skills?

My Apologies, my typing skills nor grammar is perfect. MY education is extremely limited, hence the reason to ask questions. But I guess the best people can do is attack my grammar rather than answer or address the actual issues. Guess this is how our democracy works....

Make accusations with NO facts or proof.... then when asked to back it up...... hit them on grammar...... Sad....... how far we have fallen.....
 
can Russia find posters with better English skills?

You haven't answered the post, nor responded with pertinent questioning. Your skills are the ones that need polished, eh?
/
 
You haven't answered the post, nor responded with pertinent questioning. Your skills are the ones that need polished, eh?
/

I didnt think I made the question that difficult to respond too.... But honestly those screaming collusion...have NO answers NOR proof. Nothing.... Its weird though, should we just accuse Obama and Clinton and see where it happens? I mean they did it to trump?

We just throw accusations around? I just dont understand ? More so, WAS our secret spy programs abused?
 
Aaaaannnndddd... not a single challenge to anything factual. Frame the OP as purely a political objection and then fall back on rhetoric and hyperbole as a diversion. Par for the course for you.

Surprise, surprise...

why isn't the idea that is nothing wrong with the fisa warrant process or the dossier a possibility? I know why, its because that possibility doesn't support the official conservative narratives.
 
Criminal referral backs up Nunes on dossier claims, as Dems push rebuttal memo | Fox News


This is just going to keep getting worse until all of the source documents are revealed and transcripts of the proceedings are all made public. The way I see it there are only two possible outcomes and neither of them is good. Either the FISA court was misled about the evidence presented to grant the warrant or the threshold which must be met for such a warrant to be granted needs a thorough and complete overhaul.

Seriously, is anyone comfortable with a system which allows the work of political agents doing opposition research to be considered as credible evidence worthy of granting a warrant authorizing government surveillance of U.S. citizens
? This is crazy!

To the bolded, I'm going to go ahead and give you a yes. That research can be verified or debunked, the original sources considered. The FBI should be able to use any verifiable information they can obtain legally, the end.

This is another manufactured counter-scandal from the GOP, and it will be just as effective as it's predecessors. Sad!
 
Criminal referral backs up Nunes on dossier claims, as Dems push rebuttal memo | Fox News


This is just going to keep getting worse until all of the source documents are revealed and transcripts of the proceedings are all made public. The way I see it there are only two possible outcomes and neither of them is good. Either the FISA court was misled about the evidence presented to grant the warrant or the threshold which must be met for such a warrant to be granted needs a thorough and complete overhaul.

Seriously, is anyone comfortable with a system which allows the work of political agents doing opposition research to be considered as credible evidence worthy of granting a warrant authorizing government surveillance of U.S. citizens? This is crazy!
I feel like the Republicans are use the drip drip drip tactic to really hurt the dems with. The dems need to be very careful how they respond because they have no idea what is going to be released to the public next.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
What was used to get the FISA warrants on Page dating back to 2014? We know it wasn't the dossier, and we know those warrants existed before 2016.

I'm at the point that I really don't care about Carter Page having a third FISA warrant on him. He wasn't even working for Trump in 2016 when it was re-upped.

If the Republicans are so against the FISA warrants now, they have control of DC - they should get rid of their usage.

I'm so tired of hearing about this.

LOL!! You are "tired of hearing about this." So your solution, it appears, is to get rid of the FISA system?

I don't think there is anything wrong with the FISA system on the whole. What's wrong is bad actors using and manipulating the FISA system for their own political purposes.

We saw this happen with the FISA 702 query system. The NSA, under Rogers, saw possible abuse happening, investigated, took his findings to the FISA court...and they ended the use of those queries.

BTW, it was the same FBI pukes doing that that are involved in the surveillance warrant issue.

I don't see the solution being any alteration of the FISA system, but rather, holding the abusers accountable for their actions and making them suffer the consequences of their actions.
 
Back
Top Bottom