State Dept Official met with Christopher Steele before FBI filed FISA application

[JasperL]

The DNC didn't reveal the dossiers political origins, Perkins Coi did after the Court ruled against Fusion GPSs attempt to block the release of their financial records.

I didn't say the DNC did. And so what? The point was those resisting the subpoenas were under a contractual obligation to resist disclosures they were prohibited to make without consent of the client. When that consent was granted, the information released.

NO ONE should have to explain to you why using DNC opposition research to spy on the opposition candidate and campaign is relevant

Why does it matter if it's the "DNC" or the "Hillary for President Campaign" or "Conservatives Against Trump?" They all have the same motive, disclosed by FBI, to "discredit Trump's campaign."

So now the dossier is irrelevant ?

I didn't say the "dossier" was "irrelevant." Read my comment again and reply to what I did say if you want.

Lol ! Yeah that's the exact same as thing as telling FISC that Hillary's campaign and the DNC funded the creation of the dossier, or telling FISC that this information was going to be leaked to the media prior to the election
Or pointing out the innacuracies the State Department noted....Lol !

I didn't say it was the "exact" same thing, but I did ask you to explain why it matters who paid for the opposition research, that FBI told the court was opposition research "to discredit Trump's campaign." Trump lemmings might foam at the mouth when "DNC" :shock: !!!!!! is mentioned, but that's not normal or rational.

And the "inaccuracies" that matter are any included in the FISA warrant request. If you can't name any inaccuracies FBI included in the application and relied on by the court, some OTHER inaccuracies not part of the warrant request don't matter much. If police hear 30 rumors but only include 3 in the warrant request, why do they need to alert the court to the 27 rumors that aren't relied on for the warrant?

The equivalent in this case is a DEA agent who has a dozen sources, and he reports what his sources told him to his superiors, who only treat some of those rumors as sufficiently credible for inclusion in a warrant request. Those rumors disregarded are simply not relevant.

Jesus H man, this isn't Cuba, Venezuela or the Soviet union circa 1960.
Trump has the same 4rth amendment rights that you and I have and the Govt cannot just go on a fishing expedition in search for criminal activity that's predicated on partisan and fabricated oppo-research.

What's the old Stalin quote ? Show me the man and I'll show you the crime ?

All you're doing is asserting as fact that Page's 4th Amendment rights (not Trump's) were violated, but either ignore or straw man or red herring any attempt to pin you down on the details, the evidence.

To prove it, you'll need to provide evidence that assertions in the warrant request didn't meet the probably cause standard, i.e. that FBI knew or should have known were false, and that the warrant was issued without the required justifications. You've not even really ATTEMPTED to do that.