Any news on Exculpatory Evidence omitted from the FISA Warrant?

[Penelope]

Jim Jordan, what a big quack. Isn't he the one that new boys were be sexually abused and didn't say anything. Yep.

In other news H. Clinton paid Antifa 800,000 for gear and attack articles.
or was she responsible for Seth Rich murder.

as it turns out both.

You guys will believe anything.

If tramp or some other people told you Jesus was coming, you'd say when?

 

[BlindBoo]

Someone said Hannity was about break more bad news:
of proof that Exculpatory Evidence was withheld from the FISA warrants
that was REQUIRED to present and would have prevented obtaining warrants on false grounds.

The closest I could find was this but it's not recent and seems to apply to a different warrant:
Mueller appears to have edited voicemail transcript between John Dowd and Flynn lawyer

Can anyone find me the source where
"Exculpatory Evidence was withheld"

Instead of just "speculating" on this, the source I'm looking for
is establishing CONCRETE legal-record evidence RECENTLY
because Trump DECLASSIFIED a lot more information so this can be accessed.

Anyone have the source, link or description of this new information
recently or about to become public knowledge?

Hannity tends to go over board

I remember turning one day to Hannity just in time to hear his CT on the disappearance of MH370. It was hijacked by terrorist who were hiding it somewhere in SE Asia and were going to use it in a 911 style attack on the West.

Real reliable guy, Sean.

 

[WillPower]

This was brought to my attention with the claim that sentencing to prison
would HAVE to be enforced, because this is such a blatant abuse of govt to commit violations.

Is it really that serious?
How is it worse than Clinton not facing any consequences for
destroying evidence on the server.

If that wasn't pursued, then why would this be different?

These jokers lied to FISA Court judges.....they knew the dossier was bogus and yet represented it as fact....those are felonies. Barr is a straight-shooter...he plays by the rules and won't tolerate them abusing the standards he's lived his life and practiced law by. Will they go to prison? Hard to say because there are still Clinturd and Obama judges out there who couldn't care less what they did as long as they tried to get rid of Trump. I want to see them frog-marched, charged, convicted and hanged for treason, but that's just me.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Getting the information, first hand, from people who have seen it

Um, hey genius...that's not "first hand"

Well Genius... IF they have seen the evidence what hand is it? Fucking Moron..

That would be secondhand when you get it from them, idiot.

Getting the information, first hand, from people who have seen it

Um, hey genius...that's not "first hand"

Well Genius... IF they have seen the evidence what hand is it? Fucking Moron..

Until we see the evidence it is nothing but more hot air.

Oh I Get it, you all think that it is not evidence until you see it and determine if it is... Stupidity should be painful...

No, you do not get it. What “it” is, is that I am not a partisan sheep and and I do not blindly accept what I am told based up the party of the one saying it.

I do not trust any of them, left or right. They are all dirty and your blind trust speaks volumes about you

 

[toobfreak]

Getting the information, first hand, from people who have seen it

Um, hey genius...that's not "first hand"

Well Genius... IF they have seen the evidence what hand is it? Fucking Moron..

Democrats have a lot of explaining. Why all the foot dragging on this if nothing is there? We need to subpoena both Hillary and Obama and get them grilled before Congress.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Someone said Hannity was about break more bad news:
of proof that Exculpatory Evidence was withheld from the FISA warrants
that was REQUIRED to present and would have prevented obtaining warrants on false grounds.

The closest I could find was this but it's not recent and seems to apply to a different warrant:
Mueller appears to have edited voicemail transcript between John Dowd and Flynn lawyer

Can anyone find me the source where
"Exculpatory Evidence was withheld"

Instead of just "speculating" on this, the source I'm looking for
is establishing CONCRETE legal-record evidence RECENTLY
because Trump DECLASSIFIED a lot more information so this can be accessed.

Anyone have the source, link or description of this new information
recently or about to become public knowledge?

I've never written or signed off on a warrant for an for arrest, or to receive from a judge the authority to search and seize likely evidence of a crime which included anything exculpatory.

No request for a warrant includes anything exculpatory, once again proof that Hannity is full of shit and not very bright.

Law Enforcement obtains warrants by providing a judge with information that they have gathered; the information is in the form of written statements under oath—called “affidavits”—that report either their own observations or those of private citizens or police informants or other probative evidence.

An affidavit is a written statement of facts that the “affiant” (person making the statement) swears to be true. An affidavit requires a signature under penalty of perjury, if any assertions aren’t true they risk losing their job and being prosecuted for a felony.

 

[Third Party]

Someone said Hannity was about break more bad news:
of proof that Exculpatory Evidence was withheld from the FISA warrants
that was REQUIRED to present and would have prevented obtaining warrants on false grounds.

The closest I could find was this but it's not recent and seems to apply to a different warrant:
Mueller appears to have edited voicemail transcript between John Dowd and Flynn lawyer

Can anyone find me the source where
"Exculpatory Evidence was withheld"

Instead of just "speculating" on this, the source I'm looking for
is establishing CONCRETE legal-record evidence RECENTLY
because Trump DECLASSIFIED a lot more information so this can be accessed.

Anyone have the source, link or description of this new information
recently or about to become public knowledge?

Hannity tends to go over board

I remember when we used to call that, "lying".

Lying is the opposite of truthing-going over board is stretching or contracting truth.

 

[emilynghiem]

If tramp or some other people told you Jesus was coming, you'd say when?

??? Penelope
Given that Jesus means faith in Justice for All,
are you saying that only "tramps" believe in Universal Justice and Peace
coming for all humanity?

What?

So Saints and other people who live and give their lives
for the sake of Charity and Higher Justice are all "tramps"?

????

 

[Care4all]

Someone said Hannity was about break more bad news:
of proof that Exculpatory Evidence was withheld from the FISA warrants
that was REQUIRED to present and would have prevented obtaining warrants on false grounds.

The closest I could find was this but it's not recent and seems to apply to a different warrant:
Mueller appears to have edited voicemail transcript between John Dowd and Flynn lawyer

Can anyone find me the source where
"Exculpatory Evidence was withheld"

Instead of just "speculating" on this, the source I'm looking for
is establishing CONCRETE legal-record evidence RECENTLY
because Trump DECLASSIFIED a lot more information so this can be accessed.

Anyone have the source, link or description of this new information
recently or about to become public knowledge?

exculpatory evidence is not required for a FISA... FISA warrants are for foreign nationals and or Americans shown to be agents of a foreign power...

its for foreign information gathering... 'national intelligence gathering'

NOT for any criminal purposes.... not to lock someone up and put away in jail.

How High Was the Bar for Getting a FISA Warrant to Monitor Carter Page? - Just Security

 

[Care4all]

How is it worse than Clinton not facing any consequences for
destroying evidence on the server.

Hillary did not destroy evidence on her server. The subpoena was for Benghazi and Libyan emails, her lawyer gathered those emails and complied with the subpoena for those specific emails, and then had her personal emails erased along with the emails he copied and sent to comply with the subpoena.

NOTHING against the law, NOTHING was Criminal about the cleaning of her server...

THUS NO CHARGES against her, because erasing private emails is not against the law. Erasing her entire server was not against the law, after she complied with giving the House the emails their subpoena asked for... which she did supply them with their subpoena request for Benghazi and Libya emails

Is that really so hard to understand?

You are having a problem with discerning fact from fiction, fact from made up right wing conspiracy bull crud spun by the spinmeisters.... be careful....

 

[Care4all]

How is it worse than Clinton not facing any consequences for
destroying evidence on the server.

Hillary did not destroy evidence on her server. The subpoena was for Benghazi and Libyan emails, her lawyer gathered those emails and complied with the subpoena for those specific emails, and then had her personal emails erased along with the emails he copied and sent to comply with the subpoena.

NOTHING against the law, NOTHING was Criminal about the cleaning of her server...

THUS NO CHARGES against her, because erasing private emails is not against the law. Erasing her entire server was not against the law, after she complied with giving the House the emails their subpoena asked for... which she did supply them with their subpoena request for Benghazi and Libya emails

Is that really so hard to understand?

You are having a problem with discerning fact from fiction, fact from made up right wing conspiracy bull crud spun by the spinmeisters.... be careful....

 

[emilynghiem]

How is it worse than Clinton not facing any consequences for
destroying evidence on the server.

Hillary did not destroy evidence on her server. The subpoena was for Benghazi and Libyan emails, her lawyer gathered those emails and complied with the subpoena for those specific emails, and then had her personal emails erased along with the emails he copied and sent to comply with the subpoena.

NOTHING against the law, NOTHING was Criminal about the cleaning of her server...

THUS NO CHARGES against her, because erasing private emails is not against the law. Erasing her entire server was not against the law, after she complied with giving the House the emails their subpoena asked for... which she did supply them with their subpoena request for Benghazi and Libya emails

Is that really so hard to understand?

You are having a problem with discerning fact from fiction, fact from made up right wing conspiracy bull crud spun by the spinmeisters.... be careful....

Dear Care4all
1. It wasn't even necessary to prove criminal intent or anything criminal.
2. The first few emails researched ALREADY PROVED there was classified information
that should never have been transacted on private systems, and thus there was NEGLIGENCE in breaching policy
which was enough to establish violations.
3. So since nothing further was needed, and negligence was already established,
why was it necessary for Clinton to smash cell phones and destroy devices so the
requested materials could not be retrieved.

NOTE: the language was changed from "gross negligence" to "extreme carelessness" to avoid triggering legal action:

"According to FBI documents, investigators determined a total of thirteen devices were associated with Clinton’s two phone numbers and personal email domain, eight of which she used during her tenure as Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013. The FBI requested that all thirteen devices be handed over, but Clinton’s attorneys informed the FBI that they were “unable to locate any of these devices,” so the bureau was unable to examine them. Another Clinton aide, Huma Abedin, told FBI agents that the whereabouts of Clinton’s unwanted devices would “frequently become unknown.” *

*On the question of transparency rather than security, none of this should let Clinton off the hook entirely. It’s still not clear whether her efforts to eliminate her data were motivated by the desire to conceal information as her critics imply or dedication to information security — or a bit of both. But given that Clinton was relying on a handful of aides with limited resources to act as her entire IT infrastructure, it was the right idea from a security standpoint to attempt to destroy the devices rather than letting them sit exposed in a local Goodwill, says Jonathan Zdziarski, an iOS forensics expert and security researcher. He says the FBI report “shows that [Clinton’s aides] were very serious about wanting to destroy the content, but very inexperienced with how to do it.”

The FBI, then headed by former director James Comey, famously and controversially cleared Clinton of any criminal charges, with Comey announcing on 5 July 2016 that the FBI found no evidence of intentional misconduct, although the Secretary and her aides were “extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”

Normally, that degree of NEGLIGENCE is already a breach of security, and does NOT require proving criminal intent.

 

[Crepitus]

Someone said Hannity was about break more bad news:
of proof that Exculpatory Evidence was withheld from the FISA warrants
that was REQUIRED to present and would have prevented obtaining warrants on false grounds.

The closest I could find was this but it's not recent and seems to apply to a different warrant:
Mueller appears to have edited voicemail transcript between John Dowd and Flynn lawyer

Can anyone find me the source where
"Exculpatory Evidence was withheld"

Instead of just "speculating" on this, the source I'm looking for
is establishing CONCRETE legal-record evidence RECENTLY
because Trump DECLASSIFIED a lot more information so this can be accessed.

Anyone have the source, link or description of this new information
recently or about to become public knowledge?

No. It was just another bullshit attempt to keep tRumpkins occupied and distracted from the real issues.

Obviously worked fairly well.

 

[emilynghiem]

How is it worse than Clinton not facing any consequences for
destroying evidence on the server.

Hillary did not destroy evidence on her server. The subpoena was for Benghazi and Libyan emails, her lawyer gathered those emails and complied with the subpoena for those specific emails, and then had her personal emails erased along with the emails he copied and sent to comply with the subpoena.

NOTHING against the law, NOTHING was Criminal about the cleaning of her server...

THUS NO CHARGES against her, because erasing private emails is not against the law. Erasing her entire server was not against the law, after she complied with giving the House the emails their subpoena asked for... which she did supply them with their subpoena request for Benghazi and Libya emails

Is that really so hard to understand?

You are having a problem with discerning fact from fiction, fact from made up right wing conspiracy bull crud spun by the spinmeisters.... be careful....

BTW Care4all
If you want to go there,
It isn't "against the law" for Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky to have sex on
govt property on tax paid time.
Normal people would get FIRED from JOBS for doing that which is
against WORKPLACE policy.

Breaches of security protocol are against GOVT policy
and are enough to establish NEGLIGENCE and incur administrative actions.

You don't have to bring up any "criminal issues" to find
Clinton responsible for violations by negligence regarding classified information.

That whole battlecry to try to find criminal intent
was all a DISTRACTION from what was already established.

 

[emilynghiem]

Someone said Hannity was about break more bad news:
of proof that Exculpatory Evidence was withheld from the FISA warrants
that was REQUIRED to present and would have prevented obtaining warrants on false grounds.

The closest I could find was this but it's not recent and seems to apply to a different warrant:
Mueller appears to have edited voicemail transcript between John Dowd and Flynn lawyer

Can anyone find me the source where
"Exculpatory Evidence was withheld"

Instead of just "speculating" on this, the source I'm looking for
is establishing CONCRETE legal-record evidence RECENTLY
because Trump DECLASSIFIED a lot more information so this can be accessed.

Anyone have the source, link or description of this new information
recently or about to become public knowledge?

exculpatory evidence is not required for a FISA... FISA warrants are for foreign nationals and or Americans shown to be agents of a foreign power...

its for foreign information gathering... 'national intelligence gathering'

NOT for any criminal purposes.... not to lock someone up and put away in jail.

How High Was the Bar for Getting a FISA Warrant to Monitor Carter Page? - Just Security

Thank you Care4all
Would a conflict of interest in who paid for the information
in the Dossier be a factor in consideration and approval?

Is that connection something that is required to disclose?

Thanks for your help BTW to unravel where my friend's
rabid fervor for exposing the EXTENT of wrongdoing here is going
too far off the track and not necessary to go that far.

I still see there is too much APPEARANCE of conflicts of interest,
and that is normally enough for professionals in the legal and judicial
process to recuse themselves and ask for others to intervene instead.

Even if it's not criminal, the fact that it's unethical should be enough
to stop this kind of overreaching for political interests that are
putting PARTY above govt duty to the public and costing taxpayers
for activities that are more political campaigns. www.ethics-commission.net