Article Of Impeachment Filed Against Rosenstein

[Borillar]

If the impeachment is successful, no doubt he'll lose his precious security clearance and pension.

It'll never pass the Senate.

 

[Slade3200]

There was nothing wrong with the third FISA warrant and nothing wrong with FISA warrant 1 and 2 signed by others either.

You bought in to a pile of doo doo..... NOTHING was illegal about any of the FISA warrants on Carter Page..... absolutely nothing.

Wrong. It is HIGHLY ILLEGAL to use unverified documents to submit to a FISA court to wiretap and spy on an American citizen.

Nunes: FBI may have violated criminal statutes in FISA application to spy on Trump adviser Carter Page

What was unverified? Did you notice all those little black marks covering up most of the FISA application? Those are classified sources and methods that were used to validate the intel. This dossier narrative is so weak.

No, we have no idea what the redactions show. In the past redactions exposed have shown nothing more than embarrassing the Clinton administration's methods. If it's been verified, why hide it? Why heavily redact something like that?

It was unverfied info paid for by a political opponent to Russia (oh there is collusion alright, between Clinton and Russia) for a fake dossier used to spy on a campaign.

Partner, if that ain't illegal I've got heroin ready to sell to kids legal smeagle.

It doesn’t matter who paid for it. If it was intel that was verified then it is credible. Let me ask you a simple question. Take a meeting that was reported in the dossier. How would they verify it? Through one of their sources right? Do you think that source would be made public or be redacted? Use your brain. They didn’t redact a hundred pages of embarrassing methods in a FISA application. You aren’t being objective

It doesn't matter who paid for it. BUT THAT MUST BE DISCLOSED TO THE FISA COURT JUDGE. It was never stated. The judge must get ALL information about the application to make a decision. You don't think the judge might have made a different decision had he known that all this info in front of him was paid for by Clinton and unverified in sources and methods?

Like you said, USE YOUR HEAD.

All the info in front of them was not from a Clinton dossier, a portion of it was and if you don’t think it was check in and verified then I don’t think you are being objective. I know you want to make it all about this dossier because that feeds your narrative. I hear the BS on conservative radio. It’s just not honest or realistic

 

[flacaltenn]

And I'm pissed off. Because when I was "in" these areas, the US did NOT ALLOW the powerful foreign intel agencies to GO NEAR any domestic operations. This all got out of control after 9/11. And if this can all be abused for POLITICS, than it's not a stretch that it could be abused for FINANCIAL gain, or spying on dissidents and groups identified as "threats".

 

[BULLDOG]

So which members of the political were "SPIED ON" that weren't already under surveillance for interactions to known Russian assets?

We now know that in addition to gaining access to the Awesome Spy Machine, these conspirators also planted "assets" INTO the campaign before those warrants were issued. The purpose of those assets were to pose as Russian connected folks that could LEAD campaign associates to Hillary dirt. That's not "informers". Those are pro Intel operations to DIRTY UP the Trump associates.

So most of those "russian contacts" were the STING and ENTRAPMENT operators PLANTED into the campaign. Page, Caputo, Papdopolous and their defense teams have ALL compared notes and traced these sketchy "russian" contacts back to the "implants" from the US sponsored Intelligence sting.

Sounds like damning evidence. Now, if you could just tie everything together, and show how Hillary used any of the info found to help herself or hurt Trump's election chances, you could easily end this whole thing this afternoon. Let me know what you come up with.

 

[flacaltenn]

Wrong. It is HIGHLY ILLEGAL to use unverified documents to submit to a FISA court to wiretap and spy on an American citizen.

Nunes: FBI may have violated criminal statutes in FISA application to spy on Trump adviser Carter Page

What was unverified? Did you notice all those little black marks covering up most of the FISA application? Those are classified sources and methods that were used to validate the intel. This dossier narrative is so weak.

No, we have no idea what the redactions show. In the past redactions exposed have shown nothing more than embarrassing the Clinton administration's methods. If it's been verified, why hide it? Why heavily redact something like that?

It was unverfied info paid for by a political opponent to Russia (oh there is collusion alright, between Clinton and Russia) for a fake dossier used to spy on a campaign.

Partner, if that ain't illegal I've got heroin ready to sell to kids legal smeagle.

It doesn’t matter who paid for it. If it was intel that was verified then it is credible. Let me ask you a simple question. Take a meeting that was reported in the dossier. How would they verify it? Through one of their sources right? Do you think that source would be made public or be redacted? Use your brain. They didn’t redact a hundred pages of embarrassing methods in a FISA application. You aren’t being objective

It doesn't matter who paid for it. BUT THAT MUST BE DISCLOSED TO THE FISA COURT JUDGE. It was never stated. The judge must get ALL information about the application to make a decision. You don't think the judge might have made a different decision had he known that all this info in front of him was paid for by Clinton and unverified in sources and methods?

Like you said, USE YOUR HEAD.

All the info in front of them was not from a Clinton dossier, a portion of it was and if you don’t think it was check in and verified then I don’t think you are being objective. I know you want to make it all about this dossier because that feeds your narrative. I hear the BS on conservative radio. It’s just not honest or realistic

We're being told that BESIDES the phony as shit Hillary/Russian dossier, that they used fucking MEDIA reports in the FISA apps. And MAYBE a bit of highly twisted content on Carter Page. But STILL --- the dossier was the PRIMARY "evidence" submitted. It's LAUGHABLE to launch a spy mission on a political campaign "from media reports". (actually not funny at all).

 

[airplanemechanic]

Wrong. It is HIGHLY ILLEGAL to use unverified documents to submit to a FISA court to wiretap and spy on an American citizen.

Nunes: FBI may have violated criminal statutes in FISA application to spy on Trump adviser Carter Page

What was unverified? Did you notice all those little black marks covering up most of the FISA application? Those are classified sources and methods that were used to validate the intel. This dossier narrative is so weak.

No, we have no idea what the redactions show. In the past redactions exposed have shown nothing more than embarrassing the Clinton administration's methods. If it's been verified, why hide it? Why heavily redact something like that?

It was unverfied info paid for by a political opponent to Russia (oh there is collusion alright, between Clinton and Russia) for a fake dossier used to spy on a campaign.

Partner, if that ain't illegal I've got heroin ready to sell to kids legal smeagle.

It doesn’t matter who paid for it. If it was intel that was verified then it is credible. Let me ask you a simple question. Take a meeting that was reported in the dossier. How would they verify it? Through one of their sources right? Do you think that source would be made public or be redacted? Use your brain. They didn’t redact a hundred pages of embarrassing methods in a FISA application. You aren’t being objective

It doesn't matter who paid for it. BUT THAT MUST BE DISCLOSED TO THE FISA COURT JUDGE. It was never stated. The judge must get ALL information about the application to make a decision. You don't think the judge might have made a different decision had he known that all this info in front of him was paid for by Clinton and unverified in sources and methods?

Like you said, USE YOUR HEAD.

All the info in front of them was not from a Clinton dossier, a portion of it was and if you don’t think it was check in and verified then I don’t think you are being objective. I know you want to make it all about this dossier because that feeds your narrative. I hear the BS on conservative radio. It’s just not honest or realistic

Irrelevant. At least SOME of the information disclosed to the FISA court judge was information illegally obtained and paid for by an opposing political candidate WITHOUT BEING DISCLOSED.

I asked for proof this was all legal. That its legal for an opposing candidate to pay for a fake dossier to a british agent through Russia to submit to a FISA court judge to spy on that campaign. Where is the proof? I've asked twice now. I don't want "Well if it's illegal, blah blah blah." No PROVE ITS LEGAL.

That's kinda like saying "officer, most of the drugs you found on me were legal." Well yea, but that one bottle had illegal drugs in it. That doesn't make it any better.

 

[flacaltenn]

So which members of the political were "SPIED ON" that weren't already under surveillance for interactions to known Russian assets?

We now know that in addition to gaining access to the Awesome Spy Machine, these conspirators also planted "assets" INTO the campaign before those warrants were issued. The purpose of those assets were to pose as Russian connected folks that could LEAD campaign associates to Hillary dirt. That's not "informers". Those are pro Intel operations to DIRTY UP the Trump associates.

So most of those "russian contacts" were the STING and ENTRAPMENT operators PLANTED into the campaign. Page, Caputo, Papdopolous and their defense teams have ALL compared notes and traced these sketchy "russian" contacts back to the "implants" from the US sponsored Intelligence sting.

Sounds like damning evidence. Now, if you could just tie everything together, and show how Hillary used any of the info found to help herself or hurt Trump's election chances, you could easily end this whole thing this afternoon. Let me know what you come up with.

I don't give a damn about Hillary. Their are enough asses in a sling. But I want Mueller to look into the HUNDREDS of nasty Russian oligarchs and mafioso that PODESTA was being paid to represent while he was "with Her" as a campaign mgr and representing a Russian bank that LITERALLY OWNS 1/3 of all the value and assets that exist in Russia.

 

[BULLDOG]

Like was stated earlier, its one of the most convoluted and complicated schemes ever devised against a political candidate.

The only people laughing are the republicans who have began impeachment proceedings against the witness in the case, who also happens to the attorney general LOL

God its so corrupt you have to laugh.

So you're telling me had you found out Trump had colluded with Russia, drew up fake documents against Clinton and used unverified methods and sources to spy on her campaign, planted spies within her campaign to try to catch her colluding with Russia, you'd be totally fine with that?

Yea right, get lost you fucking political hack.

Are they still laughing now that Ryan killed their impeachment efforts?

 

[Borillar]

This is nothing but a partisan spectacle by the House Teabagger NaziCons. Even if it does pass the House - there is no way to get a 2/3 majority to pass in the Senate. I even have doubts it will pass in the House. Meadows and Jordan want information they don't even have a right to during a federal investigation.

GOP HARD-LINERS MOVE TO IMPEACH ROSENSTEIN

Pretty sure it doesn't work like that for bureau people. That's how it is for the president, not the peons.

Rosenstein is in deep doodoo.

What doesn't work like that?

"I don't think it will go anywhere," said Eric Herzik, chairman of the political science department at the University of Nevada-Reno. "I don't think leadership will ever bring it to the House floor."

Though going after Rosenstein might appeal to hard-core Trump voters, it could backfire with most of the electorate and hurt moderate Republicans in swing districts in the congressional elections in November, he said.

Even if the House impeached Rosenstein, the closely divided Senate would never convict him, Herzik said. It takes a two-thirds majority to convict someone in a Senate impeachment trial. Republicans hold a slim 51-49 majority, and many of the Republicans would side with Democrats against conviction, the professor said.

"I'm sure (Senate Majority Leader) Mitch McConnell is rolling his eyes and looking at (House Speaker) Paul Ryan and saying, 'Get your guys under control,' " Herzik said.

House conservatives "are having fun talking about" impeachment, said Jack Pitney, a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College in California. "But if they actually pulled the trigger, it might blow up in their face," he said. "If they moved forward and had impeachment hearings and an investigation, they could turn over some rocks that don't make the Trump administration look good."

Could Trump allies really impeach Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein? Not likely, experts say

You do not get what you want, just because you demand it, that's the mentality of a dumbass spoiled brat. The world does not work that way, sorry.

You on the right might want to recognize what you have just said.

Why? You on the left are criminal thugs.. Are you afraid we will hold you all accountable? That is what is missing from America... Non of the criminal communists and clans are being held accountable and were tired of your ANTIFA fascism and bullying..

You were warned it would only last so long before we started taking you people to task... Guess what... Here it comes...

If those on the left are criminal thugs, why are the Rethuglicans moving to impeach one of their own? Why are the Rethuglicans investigating a Rethuglican President and his Rethuglican administration?

 

[Slade3200]

What was unverified? Did you notice all those little black marks covering up most of the FISA application? Those are classified sources and methods that were used to validate the intel. This dossier narrative is so weak.

No, we have no idea what the redactions show. In the past redactions exposed have shown nothing more than embarrassing the Clinton administration's methods. If it's been verified, why hide it? Why heavily redact something like that?

It was unverfied info paid for by a political opponent to Russia (oh there is collusion alright, between Clinton and Russia) for a fake dossier used to spy on a campaign.

Partner, if that ain't illegal I've got heroin ready to sell to kids legal smeagle.

It doesn’t matter who paid for it. If it was intel that was verified then it is credible. Let me ask you a simple question. Take a meeting that was reported in the dossier. How would they verify it? Through one of their sources right? Do you think that source would be made public or be redacted? Use your brain. They didn’t redact a hundred pages of embarrassing methods in a FISA application. You aren’t being objective

It doesn't matter who paid for it. BUT THAT MUST BE DISCLOSED TO THE FISA COURT JUDGE. It was never stated. The judge must get ALL information about the application to make a decision. You don't think the judge might have made a different decision had he known that all this info in front of him was paid for by Clinton and unverified in sources and methods?

Like you said, USE YOUR HEAD.

All the info in front of them was not from a Clinton dossier, a portion of it was and if you don’t think it was check in and verified then I don’t think you are being objective. I know you want to make it all about this dossier because that feeds your narrative. I hear the BS on conservative radio. It’s just not honest or realistic

We're being told that BESIDES the phony as shit Hillary/Russian dossier, that they used fucking MEDIA reports in the FISA apps. And MAYBE a bit of highly twisted content on Carter Page. But STILL --- the dossier was the PRIMARY "evidence" submitted. It's LAUGHABLE to launch a spy mission on a political campaign "from media reports". (actually not funny at all).

That’s just idocracy. The redacted classified intel that was the majority of the application not the dossier. Did you even read it? What the hell do you think they were blacking out?

 

[sartre play]

Throw a big ugly out there & then go on vacation for a month? how is that good for our country?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Throw a big ugly out there & then go on vacation for a month? how is that good for our country?

A big ugly what?

 

[Slade3200]

What was unverified? Did you notice all those little black marks covering up most of the FISA application? Those are classified sources and methods that were used to validate the intel. This dossier narrative is so weak.

No, we have no idea what the redactions show. In the past redactions exposed have shown nothing more than embarrassing the Clinton administration's methods. If it's been verified, why hide it? Why heavily redact something like that?

It was unverfied info paid for by a political opponent to Russia (oh there is collusion alright, between Clinton and Russia) for a fake dossier used to spy on a campaign.

Partner, if that ain't illegal I've got heroin ready to sell to kids legal smeagle.

It doesn’t matter who paid for it. If it was intel that was verified then it is credible. Let me ask you a simple question. Take a meeting that was reported in the dossier. How would they verify it? Through one of their sources right? Do you think that source would be made public or be redacted? Use your brain. They didn’t redact a hundred pages of embarrassing methods in a FISA application. You aren’t being objective

It doesn't matter who paid for it. BUT THAT MUST BE DISCLOSED TO THE FISA COURT JUDGE. It was never stated. The judge must get ALL information about the application to make a decision. You don't think the judge might have made a different decision had he known that all this info in front of him was paid for by Clinton and unverified in sources and methods?

Like you said, USE YOUR HEAD.

All the info in front of them was not from a Clinton dossier, a portion of it was and if you don’t think it was check in and verified then I don’t think you are being objective. I know you want to make it all about this dossier because that feeds your narrative. I hear the BS on conservative radio. It’s just not honest or realistic

Irrelevant. At least SOME of the information disclosed to the FISA court judge was information illegally obtained and paid for by an opposing political candidate WITHOUT BEING DISCLOSED.

I asked for proof this was all legal. That its legal for an opposing candidate to pay for a fake dossier to a british agent through Russia to submit to a FISA court judge to spy on that campaign. Where is the proof? I've asked twice now. I don't want "Well if it's illegal, blah blah blah." No PROVE ITS LEGAL.

That's kinda like saying "officer, most of the drugs you found on me were legal." Well yea, but that one bottle had illegal drugs in it. That doesn't make it any better.

Illegally obtained? No

You have to break a law for something to be illegal. What law was broken?

 

[Dana7360]

Well, Lyin Ryan....killed it.
Figures.
Deep State fucker zombie

You do realize that paul ryan is a republican don't you?

You realize that Rosenstein, Mueller and Wray are republicans appointed by trump and fellow republicans don't you?

I bet you voted for Romney/Ryan in 2012. Yet you claim that he's a part of the "deep state". You voted for a person in the "deep state" in 2012.

Interesting, most of the people in this "deep state" are republicans. Most were appointed by republicans or as with ryan, voted into office by republicans.

So you're saying that republicans created this deep state. That those same republicans who were either elected or appointed by republicans are in this deep state. That they're all out to get trump.

Do you realize how paranoid and crazy you are?

 

[BULLDOG]

Doesn’t Trumps newly appointed FBI Director Chris Wray also stand behind the investigation? These are guys that have seen the evidence, so why are you assuming to know more than they do?

It was reported that when Wray saw the evidence against Strzok - according to CNN - he was 'shocked'...and Strzok was immediately assigned to a desk in Human Relations - supposedly the 2nd Best Expert in Counter-Intelligence' and Field Agent immediately hidden in the basement of the FBI building working for HR. Bwuhahahaha!

Trump MESSED UP BAD by putting another 'Good Ol' Boy FBI Loyalist, someone who puts his loyalty in the FBI and who is intent on protecting it first and foremost over GUTTING IT / BURNING IT DOWN IF NEED BE to once and for all get the criminals like Comey, McCabe, and Strzok OUT.

Wray already proved he is 'THAT' guy by NOT IMMEDIATELY firing Strzok, for NOT agreeing with the US IG who identified McCabe's crimes and recommended him to the DOJ for indictment and prosecution. Instead, Wray has tried to protect the FBI by trying to protect Strzok, McCabe, and Comey from indictment and prosecution.

COME ON - Mueller, a previous Director of the FBI, knew immediately when the story broke about Strzok's texts / criminal bias / SEDITION that he HAD to FIRE Strzok off of his Investigative Team because even Mueller was smart enough and honest enough to know PERCEPTION is REALITY, that PERCEPTION has everything to do with TRUST! He knew if he kept Strzok, on top of all the other Conflicts of Interest, Strzok would be the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. For the continued existence of and trust in his Special Counsel Strzok had to go.

WRAY was faced with the SAME EXACT THING. Strzok was exposed. KEEPING him would be d@mning to the FBI - PERCEPTION is reality, again, especially regarding 'TRUST'. Wray made the wrong call - unlike Mueller, he chose loyalty to the FBI and to corrupt exposed criminals and traitors like Strzok. The PERCEPTION of most now is that Strzok perjured himself in front of Congress, his testimony was contradicted by the agent he had an affair with - Congress stated HER testimony was extremely credible, that Strzok helped save Hillary from indictment, and that Strzok at the least should have been fired and many think he should be in jail. The fact that Wray CHOSE TO STAND WITH HIM, TO PROTECT HIM, gives people the PERCEPTION that Wray isn't much different than Comey. The fact that Wray has also obstructed Justice by not complying with Congress' subpoena by releasing documents shows Wray is a criminal by definition, too, and is, again, proving he is little / no better than Comey, that the leadership of the FBI is STILL corrupt as hell.

Back to perception again. It's obvious that the right wing perception is determined solely by anything that will protect Trump's crimes from being exposed.

When will that happen? It's been over a year, people were illegally spied on by our own govt and they found nothing. Page has not been charged with a SINGLE crime. That's the ugly part that liberals don't want to say. They love saying "There have been XX indictments from this investigation."

Lets look at those:

19 indictments of Russians.
NO indictments of Page (illegally spied on) or any against Trump, who has been accused of Russian meddling.
Multiple indictments from other non-related crimes, some going back as far as 1999.

So STILL, even with illegal spying, nobody has been charged with anything related to Russia, other than one person being charged with lying. That's not quite the same.

If investigating Page was illegal, then you should explain that to the judges. They don't seem to agree with you, but I'll bet if you explain it to them as well as you have explained it here, they will thank you and change their minds. Why haven't you done that yet?

Page is guilty of nothing. IN FACT, he was an FBI/Intel asset working for our side. The info on him in the Hillary Dossier was pure crap. YET -- it was used to pick him as the ACCESS point for Big Brother spying.

How do you know Page is guilty of nothing? Did Mueller, or someone on his team share what he has learned with you? Are you just going by what fox and Rudy and Alex Jones told you?

 

[BULLDOG]

The claimed conflicts of interest are not conflicts of interest. The partisan right is trying to claim they are PERCEIVED conflicts of interest for purely political reasons. That part is obvious. Lots more reasons to discount the right's claims, but there is no need. It's all just political theater on their part anyway.

Nope. OBVIOUS conflict of interest. Rosenstein is obstructing access to the FISA docs used to hijack the NSA Big Brother machine to SPY on a political campaign. All along he KNEW he provided APPROVAL for that spying. That makes him more recusable and more "involved with the campaign" than Jeff Sessions EVER was.

This 2 AG situation is bullshit. Sessions needs to UN-recuse unless there's proof he contributed more than an endorsement and some stage time to the campaign.

So which members of the political were "SPIED ON" that weren't already under surveillance for interactions to known Russian assets? How exactly was any info found by the surveillance used in any way to effect the outcome of the election? The investigation into Hillary was announced with great fanfare just a few days before the election. The investigation you are whining about wasn't even mentioned until after the election.....Why? If you can come up with credible answers to those questions, I'll probably switch sides.

The reason to GET a FISA warrant is to get the keys to drive the awesome NSA Big Brother spy machine that you just paid for. This sucks up EVERYTHING domestic and archives it. Access is SUPPOSED to be extremely limited for US persons.

It was designed post Patriotic Act to make NETWORKS AND CONNECTIONS of terrorist connections HERE in the US more visible and probable. When you GET ACCESS -- you get access to a whole NETWORK of associates and colleagues and suppliers and financial connections. ALL of these can be probed. ANY member of the Trump team was exposed BECAUSE of the design of this system. It lets you make complex maps of relationships.

Hope you KNEW this. Sucks if you didn't. That "terrorist surveillance system" was WEAPONIZED for politics by these events. They did not NEED access to it for pro forma investigations on the campaign but they CHOSE to access it.

Yes, I know how it works. However, you have no proof that anything in your last paragraph is true. A little proof of what you claim would be helpful, but "because I think so" just doesn't cut it. Why would you believe those claims anyway? Because Trump said so? His own wife doesn't believe anything he says.

What's wrong with my last paragraph? That system was accessed. DIDN'T NEED to be accessed for a preliminary investigation of a political campaign. That should be a bar NOT CROSSED.

For DECADES, the FBI uncovered mafia, graft and corruption with gum shoes and a land line telephone and mostly PUBLIC sources. That's WHY it's obvious they didn't need to LEAP to using a ultra classified "terrorist surveillance system" as their primary weapon.

Also -- about seven years of service in these areas helps me get perspectives that Moaning Joe and Chris Cuomo have no concept of.

I'm sure it will come as a shock to you, but you don't seem yo have the authority to make that decision. Don't feel bad though, cause they didn't ask me either.

 

[Circe]

You don't get your fantasy.

The speaker of the house paul ryan killed the bill.

Which I'm not surprised.

Too bad. you can't go after Rosenstein like you wanted to.

You lose again. LOL.

Wow, are you wrong. Ryan DID deep-six the impeachment idea (yeah, it would require 2/3 of the Senate to convict, can't get that). BUT he immediately, within minutes negotiated a better solution with Rep. Mark Meadows, whom I am hoping will be the next House Majority Leader.

"House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows said Ryan had agreed to a different deal: Conservatives would give the Justice Department “one last chance” in August to turn over a range of documents that lawmakers subpoenaed in March or else Rosenstein would face charges of contempt of Congress."
Ryan rejects conservative push to impeach Rosenstein

Contempt of Congress! That's what I've been hoping for all along.

Another solution is that Trump could simply declassify every document. No redactions, no nothing, spill them out. However, this isn't really Trump's issue: it is a contempt of Congress problem. Well, why is the FBI being so stubborn?

Because, I assume, the documents would expose gross FBI corruption and bad-acting. Which is also why they are redacting so much. Pretending to "release" documents covered with heavy black bars of ink, uh-huh.

Why doesn't the FBI trust Congress to keep it all secret? Because it's not in House Republicans' interest to do so. Remember when Comey sent his letter to Congress about re-opening the Hillary investigation 11 days before the election, with the added attractions of underage sex and a baby on the bed and the connection with the evil Iranian who would be in the Oval Office if Hillary were elected?

Yeah, that took 15 minutes to be leaked to the entire world media: they timed it. So sure, the FBI doesn't want Congress to leak the FISA documents --- they'll look bad and they know it.

Timing: give them August for "another chance." THEN -- oh, happy day -- in September and October, right before the Midterm Elections, bring charges of Contempt of Congress against these obvious Hillary shills. Play it night and day for weeks, win the Midterms in a landslide.

I like it.

 

[Dana7360]

Wrong. It is HIGHLY ILLEGAL to use unverified documents to submit to a FISA court to wiretap and spy on an American citizen.

Nunes: FBI may have violated criminal statutes in FISA application to spy on Trump adviser Carter Page

What was unverified? Did you notice all those little black marks covering up most of the FISA application? Those are classified sources and methods that were used to validate the intel. This dossier narrative is so weak.

No, we have no idea what the redactions show. In the past redactions exposed have shown nothing more than embarrassing the Clinton administration's methods. If it's been verified, why hide it? Why heavily redact something like that?

It was unverfied info paid for by a political opponent to Russia (oh there is collusion alright, between Clinton and Russia) for a fake dossier used to spy on a campaign.

Partner, if that ain't illegal I've got heroin ready to sell to kids legal smeagle.

It doesn’t matter who paid for it. If it was intel that was verified then it is credible. Let me ask you a simple question. Take a meeting that was reported in the dossier. How would they verify it? Through one of their sources right? Do you think that source would be made public or be redacted? Use your brain. They didn’t redact a hundred pages of embarrassing methods in a FISA application. You aren’t being objective

It doesn't matter who paid for it. BUT THAT MUST BE DISCLOSED TO THE FISA COURT JUDGE. It was never stated. The judge must get ALL information about the application to make a decision. You don't think the judge might have made a different decision had he known that all this info in front of him was paid for by Clinton and unverified in sources and methods?

Like you said, USE YOUR HEAD.

All the info in front of them was not from a Clinton dossier, a portion of it was and if you don’t think it was check in and verified then I don’t think you are being objective. I know you want to make it all about this dossier because that feeds your narrative. I hear the BS on conservative radio. It’s just not honest or realistic

The original FISA warrant was approved by a republican judge before the dossier was even created and existed.

If the dossier was the reason for the warrants then how could it have been the reason when it didn't exist?

I've heard republicans scream the dossier is all a lie but they have never said what's a lie nor have they provided any proof it is a lie.

Meanwhile as we all know, some parts have been investigated and everything that's been investigated has turned out to be true.

These people think that by just saying something makes it true. It's very odd.

 

[BULLDOG]

So which members of the political were "SPIED ON" that weren't already under surveillance for interactions to known Russian assets?

We now know that in addition to gaining access to the Awesome Spy Machine, these conspirators also planted "assets" INTO the campaign before those warrants were issued. The purpose of those assets were to pose as Russian connected folks that could LEAD campaign associates to Hillary dirt. That's not "informers". Those are pro Intel operations to DIRTY UP the Trump associates.

So most of those "russian contacts" were the STING and ENTRAPMENT operators PLANTED into the campaign. Page, Caputo, Papdopolous and their defense teams have ALL compared notes and traced these sketchy "russian" contacts back to the "implants" from the US sponsored Intelligence sting.

Sounds like damning evidence. Now, if you could just tie everything together, and show how Hillary used any of the info found to help herself or hurt Trump's election chances, you could easily end this whole thing this afternoon. Let me know what you come up with.

I don't give a damn about Hillary. Their are enough asses in a sling. But I want Mueller to look into the HUNDREDS of nasty Russian oligarchs and mafioso that PODESTA was being paid to represent while he was "with Her" as a campaign mgr and representing a Russian bank that LITERALLY OWNS 1/3 of all the value and assets that exist in Russia.

You should put that on the list. Right now, he's investigating Russia's interference into our elections, and any Americans that might have helped them., but I'm sure he will be happy to jump tight on your complaints as soon as he finishes with his current project.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Like was stated earlier, its one of the most convoluted and complicated schemes ever devised against a political candidate.

The only people laughing are the republicans who have began impeachment proceedings against the witness in the case, who also happens to the attorney general LOL

God its so corrupt you have to laugh.

So you're telling me had you found out Trump had colluded with Russia, drew up fake documents against Clinton and used unverified methods and sources to spy on her campaign, planted spies within her campaign to try to catch her colluding with Russia, you'd be totally fine with that?

Yea right, get lost you fucking political hack.

Are they still laughing now that Ryan killed their impeachment efforts?

He didn't kill anything. The house won't vote before their break which starts today.