Mueller "Witch Hunt"

[jnug]

And you don’t seam to be concerned about the new text that shows they had nothing factual to support the investigation, or the resent meeting with Page were she confirmed they had nothing, are you ok with our FBI treating private citizens this way. Or maybe you don’t like Trump so you don’t care!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They had the Russian hacking and interference as a recognized actuality by every intelligence agency we have. That combined with your boy's BIG MOUTH is what created this investigation. Deal with it. Had Donald not had 5 stories about why he fired Comey, we would not likely have had an investigation reaching into his campaign. He is the baboon that announced to the world in the middle of all his blather that he fired Comay over the Russia Investigation. Ding...ding...ding. Investigation time!!!

Once an Investigation starts, you have to wait for the results PERIOD. there is no investigating the investigators during the investigation. There is no releasing classified documents from an ongoing investigation. There is none of that garbage or there should not be. This all started with card carrying idiot Deven Nunes with his nose stuck up Donald's butt.

If you are so wrapped up in ideology that you cannot make some reasonable judgement about the voracity of an investigation from the result of said investigation then you are incapable of critical thought. If you are incapable of critical thought, that is your problem, not the country's problem. You do not have the right to employ the raging audacity to rip into FISA documents for your own personal political gain and self aggrandizement as Donald has and if you can't as a citizen wait for the investigation to close you are just a pawn of Putin apparently so incapable of critical thought that you don't even know when to use it, never mind how! You do not have the right to jump the process. The most critical piece of any investigation into the voracity of an investigation is the RESULT of that investigation. All of this STUFF that is going on at present is garbage. If anything it proves that people on the other side of this discussion have no interest in actually understanding the voracity of the investigation or the investigators. Those on that side have outed themselves for all time.

Folks on the "lets see the stuff now" side of the argument should go find the Incapable of Critical Thought forum. There must be dozens to choose from.

 

[Athanasius68]

I completely agree.
But you stated that probable cause was the standard that had to be met. Are you changing your position?

Example: the polic receive an anonymous tip that X(a known felon) is running a crack house in a specified neighborhood.
This is NOT probable cause for an arrest warrant or a search warrant.
It is NOT reasonable suspicion to stop or detain X.

By your claim that probable cause is necessary for an investigation, it follows that your opinion would be the police should ignore the tip altogether.

I would consider that poor police work. I hold that the police should investigate that neighborhood and X’s activities to see if there is any evidence that the tip is true, or determine if it is false.

Do you still claim probable cause is the standard?

The specific issue being raised by analogy would be in obtaining a FISA warrant on our friendly neighborhood drug dealer. In order to do that, the authorities would have to show evidence that he HAD, or was about to commit, a crime in concert with his being an agent of a foreign government or on behalf of terrorism.

But what CANNOT happen is to seek and obtain a FISA warrant on our friendly neigborhood drug dealer as a backdoor way to gather the evidence needed against him for prosecution in a criminal trial for running a drug den in our neighborhood.

The concerns raised with the FISA warrants against Page is that it was used as a backdoor way to investigate and gather evidence for a criminal prosecution against Page, and in reality, Trump & Co. Thats why there has been such a clamor to see the basis for the warrants on Page.

 

[MrShangles]

They had the Russian hacking and interference as a recognized actuality by every intelligence agency we have. That combined with your boy's BIG MOUTH is what created this investigation. Deal with it. Had Donald not had 5 stories about why he fired Comey, we would not likely have had an investigation reaching into his campaign. He is the baboon that announced to the world in the middle of all his blather that he fired Comay over the Russia Investigation. Ding...ding...ding. Investigation time!!!

Once an Investigation starts, you have to wait for the results PERIOD. there is no investigating the investigators during the investigation. There is no releasing classified documents from an ongoing investigation. There is none of that garbage or there should not be. This all started with card carrying idiot Deven Nunes with his nose stuck up Donald's butt.

If you are so wrapped up in ideology that you cannot make some reasonable judgement about the voracity of an investigation from the result of said investigation then you are incapable of critical thought. If you are incapable of critical thought, that is your problem, not the country's problem. You do not have the right to employ the raging audacity to rip into FISA documents for your own personal political gain and self aggrandizement as Donald has and if you can't as a citizen wait for the investigation to close you are just a pawn of Putin apparently so incapable of critical thought that you don't even know when to use it, never mind how! You do not have the right to jump the process. The most critical piece of any investigation into the voracity of an investigation is the RESULT of that investigation. All of this STUFF that is going on at present is garbage. If anything it proves that people on the other side of this discussion have no interest in actually understanding the voracity of the investigation or the investigators. Those on that side have outed themselves for all time.

Folks on the "lets see the stuff now" side of the argument should go find the Incapable of Critical Thought forum. There must be dozens to choose from.

If you can’t see all the conflicts of interest on this one maybe you’re the one incapable of critical thought, or the just released text messages and emails, or lisa page saying they had nothing on Trump.
But you shouldn’t worry if it’s all credible then we will see with the new unclassified material coming, right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jnug]

If you can’t see all the conflicts of interest on this one maybe you’re the one incapable of critical thought, or the just released text messages and emails, or lisa page saying they had nothing on Trump.
But you shouldn’t worry if it’s all credible then we will see with the new unclassified material coming, right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry....the original point I made is sound. THE MOST CRITICAL, MOST RELEVANT piece in any effort to judge the voracity of any investigation is the result of the investigation. PERIOD. Without a recognition of that and a willingness to wait for that you should just stop trying to make believe this is about the voracity of the Investigation or the Investigators.

What you want to do is the equivalent of pouring some cream and sugar in a cup, tasting it and announcing a verdict on the coffee you haven't poured into the mix yet. Is that a simple enough analogy? Is that a judgement worth breaking all of these protocols for?

In bold above is a ridiculous argument and the reasons have already been discussed ad nauseam. You simply do not release information from an ongoing investigation and you do not release unredacted classified information either. Just stop with that. We should see it when its OVER. not now...right? Does a "RIGHT" at the end of the sentence make it better for you?

 

[pinqy]

Sure the police will drive buy so called location, if they never catch so called criminal at said location, can they start investigating said criminals family and friends for crimes and investigate said criminal until they maybe find something all because someone said he might be. Is that how it works?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If they see his family and/or friends engaged in suspicious behavior, then yes, of course.

 

[pinqy]

The specific issue being raised by analogy would be in obtaining a FISA warrant on our friendly neighborhood drug dealer. In order to do that, the authorities would have to show evidence that he HAD, or was about to commit, a crime in concert with his being an agent of a foreign government or on behalf of terrorism.

Correct. But that’s for a warrant, not an investigation. You’re changing the topic. apdst was claiming no kind of investigation could occur without meeting the standard of probable cause.

But what CANNOT happen is to seek and obtain a FISA warrant on our friendly neigborhood drug dealer as a backdoor way to gather the evidence needed against him for prosecution in a criminal trial for running a drug den in our neighborhood.

You couldn’t obtain a warrant without probable cause.

The concerns raised with the FISA warrants against Page is that it was used as a backdoor way to investigate and gather evidence for a criminal prosecution against Page,

Are you seriously claiming that the FBI, for absolutely no reason at all, decided they wanted to prosecute Page without any reason to think he was involved in a crime or espionage? And them somehow, without probable cause or even evidence, convinced the FISC to grant a warrant. Oh wait, you said it was to get to Trump, in 2014, before there was a Trump campaign.

I’m sorry, i’m going to have to go to the Flat Earth Society website to read something more ridiculous.

 

[pinqy]

Probable cause means they have evidence. :lamo

Holy crap!...lol

And in my hypothetical, there was no evidence that a crime had been committed. Should an investigation be conducted or should the tip just be ignored? He’ll, for most 911 calls there is no evidence a crime has been committed, but the police investigate.

 

[apdst]

And in my hypothetical, there was no evidence that a crime had been committed. Should an investigation be conducted or should the tip just be ignored? He’ll, for most 911 calls there is no evidence a crime has been committed, but the police investigate.

Special councels can't be initiated based on a tip.

 

[pinqy]

Special councels can't be initiated based on a tip.

But we weren’t talking about a special counsel. You stated that an investigation (no qualifiers) required probable cause to be constitutional and also that an investigation is a search.

If you can’t admit you were mistaken about that, how can we possibly have a rational discussion about a special counsel?

 

[apdst]

But we weren’t talking about a special counsel. You stated that an investigation (no qualifiers) required probable cause to be constitutional and also that an investigation is a search.

If you can’t admit you were mistaken about that, how can we possibly have a rational discussion about a special counsel?

Mueller isn't a special councel, now?

 

[pinqy]

Mueller isn't a special councel, now?

No. He is a special counsel, though.

True or false: but my example of the police had nothing to do with Mueller. I was just trying to get you to understand that you were talking out of your ass claiming any criminal investigation requires probable cause and that probable cause and reasonable suspicion mean the same thing.

And yes, I have noticed that you have never even tried to support your claim and refuse to even acknowledge the proof I have given that you were wrong. Complete lack of integrity.

 

[pinqy]

Weird. I must have typed “true or false” intending to go one way, but forgot I started that way and went in a completely different directions.

 

[Athanasius68]

Correct. But that’s for a warrant, not an investigation. You’re changing the topic. apdst was claiming no kind of investigation could occur without meeting the standard of probable cause.


You couldn’t obtain a warrant without probable cause.


Are you seriously claiming that the FBI, for absolutely no reason at all, decided they wanted to prosecute Page without any reason to think he was involved in a crime or espionage? And them somehow, without probable cause or even evidence, convinced the FISC to grant a warrant. Oh wait, you said it was to get to Trump, in 2014, before there was a Trump campaign.

I’m sorry, i’m going to have to go to the Flat Earth Society website to read something more ridiculous.

Page hasnt been prosecuted, even though he has had several FISA warrants issued on him and even though a FISA warrant (on an American) requires proof of criminal activity.

It does seem the hiring of Carter Page by the Trump campaign set off alarm bells in the FBI. It also seems that the government failure to prosecute Page for crimes related to the circumstances of the various FISA warrants since 2013 suggests they had no case to prosecute.

Which should set off alarm bells by those who think Trump & Co. conspired with Russia to throw the election.

 

[jnug]

Special councels can't be initiated based on a tip.

Though the poster's comments in response to your posts are accurate, just for the record the Special Counsel was not named because of a tip. That has been covered Ad nauseam in this and other threads but you keep coming back with the same bogus arguments. Very trumpian.....but not very effective.

 

[apdst]

Though the poster's comments in response to your posts are accurate, just for the record the Special Counsel was not named because of a tip. That has been covered Ad nauseam in this and other threads but you keep coming back with the same bogus arguments. Very trumpian.....but not very effective.

The special councel was appointed to investigate a non-crime.

 

[jnug]

The special councel was appointed to investigate a non-crime.

Wrong again covered ad nauseam in this and other threads.

 

[apdst]

Wrong again covered ad nauseam in this and other threads.

And not once have any of you been right.

No matter how many times you say it, there's no crime called "collusion". At no time did the Mueller witch hunt begin in order to look for "defrauding The United States". Opposition research isn't a crime. Exchanging information (which is literally protected by the 1st Amendment) isn't a campaign finance violation. There were/was zero for grounds/evidence/suspicion/probable cause to begin a criminal investigation.

Flynn didn't break the law by speaking with the Russian ambassador. That's literally what incoming administrations do between the election and inauguration, as well they should.

It's time to admit that yall's motivation is based in butthurt and not reality.

 

[jnug]

And not once have any of you been right.

No matter how many times you say it, there's no crime called "collusion". At no time did the Mueller witch hunt begin in order to look for "defrauding The United States". Opposition research isn't a crime. Exchanging information (which is literally protected by the 1st Amendment) isn't a campaign finance violation. There were/was zero for grounds/evidence/suspicion/probable cause to begin a criminal investigation.

Flynn didn't break the law by speaking with the Russian ambassador. That's literally what incoming administrations do between the election and inauguration, as well they should.

It's time to admit that yall's motivation is based in butthurt and not reality.

And no matter how many times you make some absurd contention on the topic it is Donald himself that has been screaming "NO collusion" ten times a day from the start which is in the context of Mueller's prosecutorial effort, the only effort of relevance at the moment, an entirely meaningless claim by Donald. THAT has also been covered about ten times in this thread. Once again you just keep running around in the same circular ditch you have dug for yourself. Collusion or No collusion only has relevance in the political process of Impeachment for which there is no current effort.

Rudy takes it one step farther claiming that "collusion is not a crime". Wow Rudy tell me something I don't already know. The criminal charges if applicable will be Conspiracy changes.

So go ahead, make your usual post in that regard. I have been down this road with you already. You have got another circular rut you are running around in on this one too. Trying to make your own Olympic symbol of nonsense apparently.

 

[Jetboogieman]

And not once have any of you been right.

No matter how many times you say it, there's no crime called "collusion". At no time did the Mueller witch hunt begin in order to look for "defrauding The United States". Opposition research isn't a crime. Exchanging information (which is literally protected by the 1st Amendment) isn't a campaign finance violation. There were/was zero for grounds/evidence/suspicion/probable cause to begin a criminal investigation.

Flynn didn't break the law by speaking with the Russian ambassador. That's literally what incoming administrations do between the election and inauguration, as well they should.

It's time to admit that yall's motivation is based in butthurt and not reality.

So again apdst, with your legal expertise, why don’t you simply file an injunction against a Mueller?

Should be pretty simple if you’re correct that all this is so hyper illegal.

 

[haymarket]

What, dude you run around the forum all day, calling Muellers investigation illegal because "The Constitution".

So, if it's that clear cut, that simple.

Why don't you file an injunction on Trumps behalf, I'm sure he'd be grateful.

When I worked for the Michigan legislature, I got to know a particular State Senator from Detroit with a rather infamous or famous name. I discovered his true understanding of issues and policy was rather limited at best and relied on a tactic that he trotted out often to make high sounding pronouncements.

He kept in his jacket pocket one of those small copies of the US Constitution and when he wanted to sound intelligent he would take it out, wave it overhead, and intone that this was "a constitutional issue". I saw him do this so many times over three years that it became a joke that would cause me and others to smile when he did it.

Perhaps our brother member here also is familiar with the tactic?

 

[apdst]

So again apdst, with your legal expertise, why don’t you simply file an injunction against a Mueller?

Should be pretty simple if you’re correct that all this is so hyper illegal.

Do you think Mueller is above the law?

 

[apdst]

And no matter how many times you make some absurd contention on the topic it is Donald himself that has been screaming "NO collusion" ten times a day from the start which is in the context of Mueller's prosecutorial effort, the only effort of relevance at the moment, an entirely meaningless claim by Donald. THAT has also been covered about ten times in this thread. Once again you just keep running around in the same circular ditch you have dug for yourself. Collusion or No collusion only has relevance in the political process of Impeachment for which there is no current effort.

Rudy takes it one step farther claiming that "collusion is not a crime". Wow Rudy tell me something I don't already know. The criminal charges if applicable will be Conspiracy changes.

So go ahead, make your usual post in that regard. I have been down this road with you already. You have got another circular rut you are running around in on this one too. Trying to make your own Olympic symbol of nonsense apparently.

Damn you people are confused. :lamo

 

[pinqy]

Page hasnt been prosecuted, even though he has had several FISA warrants issued on him and even though a FISA warrant (on an American) requires proof of criminal activity.

Ummm no. A warrant for criminal activity wouldn’t go through the FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE Surveillance Court: it would be a normal warrant. A FISA warrant is to gather intelligence, not gather evidence for a crime.
50 USC 1842
Each application under this section shall require the approval of the Attorney General, or a designated attorney for the Government, and shall include--

(1)  the identity of the Federal officer seeking to use the pen register or trap and trace device covered by the application;

(2)  a certification by the applicant that the information likely to be obtained is foreign intelligence information not concerning a United States person or is relevant to an ongoing investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, provided that such investigation of a United States person is not conducted solely upon the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution;  and

(3)  a specific selection term to be used as the basis for the use of the pen register or trap and trace device.

seriously, am I the only one who actually does research?

 

[Athanasius68]

Ummm no. A warrant for criminal activity wouldn’t go through the FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE Surveillance Court: it would be a normal warrant. A FISA warrant is to gather intelligence, not gather evidence for a crime.
50 USC 1842
Each application under this section shall require the approval of the Attorney General, or a designated attorney for the Government, and shall include--

(1)  the identity of the Federal officer seeking to use the pen register or trap and trace device covered by the application;

(2)  a certification by the applicant that the information likely to be obtained is foreign intelligence information not concerning a United States person or is relevant to an ongoing investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, provided that such investigation of a United States person is not conducted solely upon the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution;  and

(3)  a specific selection term to be used as the basis for the use of the pen register or trap and trace device.

seriously, am I the only one who actually does research?

Yes. Congratulations.
In order to seek out and obtain a FISA warrant, there must be proof of criminal activity, or imminent criminal activity, by the person on behalf of a foreign country.
Thank you.

How many FISA warrants has been sworn out on Page? Why have there been NO criminal prosecutions of such an obviously dangerous guy? Maybe, just maybe, its because the government doesnt have a case.

 

[pinqy]

Yes. Congratulations.
In order to seek out and obtain a FISA warrant, there must be proof of criminal activity, or imminent criminal activity, by the person on behalf of a foreign country.

Ok. I just showed you and linked to the FISA act. There is absolutely no requirement for any criminal activity necessary. And yet you insist it says that even though it clearly does not.

How do you do that?