Intelligence Committee To Petition FISA Court

[asaratis]

Now we're talking.

Nunes just stated on Fox he was going to petition the court for the entire proceedings.

The Republicans voted to unanimously release the Democrat's back peddle memo.

Grassley now after Steele.

It's getting ugly out there for all the crooks. And I'm going to love the next round of Intelligence Committee reports to hit the headlines over the next several months. And the FBI, IG, report will be a big wort on Comey's nose.

That is the obvious next move.

So, not a single Communists favored releasing the Memo. Not a single Republican voted to suppress the Communist rebuttal.

Now release the entire document so America can see who the crooks and traitors are.

Hint: It's the ones who tried to suppress information.

Democrats are crooks

This is the root cause of their opposition to release of the factual memos from Nunes, Grassley and others down the line while they support release of rebuttal memos from the left. The left has a LOT TO LOSE in the exposure of the truth.

The American people are not stupid, as the prime architect of Obama(doesn't)Care, Goober Gruber has stated. The public is slowly becoming aware of the corruption and lack of honesty being continuously exhibited by the Democrat Party and career politicians.

I contend (and hope) that the Democrats will lose seats in both Chambers of Congress in 2018. The more the truth about who colluded with whom comes out, the more likely my prediction will become a historical fact.

The Democrat Party is in deep doo-doo and is frantically trying to cover itself with rose petals and Febreze.

 

[The Original Tree]

Natalie V. worked for Fusion GPS, so Did Steele, which means Natalia V. gained access to Trump Tower, to meet with Trump Jr. under false pretenses, and was sent by The Clinton Campaign to entrap Trump Jr.

But, she got kicked out, when she started talking about things other than what they discussed prior.
Not only that, Trump Tower was under Surveillance and Obama's Big Ugly Ears, and his Crooked Cronies at The FBI listened in to every fucking word said in that meeting.

Trump Jr. also turned over every fucking email he had to the FBI, unlike Hillary Clinton who violated two Federal Preservation orders with Comey's Consent when she destroyed 33,000 emails.

Because Clinton's illegal and unauthorized and unsecured server was under two Federal Preservation Orders, that alone is a Felony and was enough to put her in JAIL RIGHT THEN AND THERE.

BTW, The IG went to Mueller and told him he has major issues with his Russia Russia Investigation...as in....that dog isn't going to hunt....so you are going to have to wrap it up soon.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes it does because for one, it shows intent. Two, the information was never verified.

When you pay somebody looking for an outcome, you usually get that outcome even if it's not totally true. And any court should have questioned why this clown was not still working for his government if he was so reliable and good.

The motives of the informant have no bearing on the validity of the information.
You have no idea what was used from the dossier or if it had been corroborated.

The court sure wanted to know what the intent of the informant was. It's one of the questions on the FISA application. I can't wait to see how it was answered too because Steele was a well known Trump hater.

The intent is irrelevant. If I inform the cops on you and you get arrested, my feelings or motives are irrelevant as long as the information is reliable.

Obviously it was reliable as it was used subsequently for three renewals.

You go to police and tell them I have illegal narcotics in my home. There isn't a court in the country that would issue a search warrant based on that information alone.

Your claim would have to be investigated, the DEA would have to set up phony drug purchases from me. They would need to have evidence such as the narcotics, and then they can approach the court for a warrant.

For all the police know, you may be a nosy neighbor that wants to get even with me because I blew my snow on your lawn in the winter, or setup a surveillance camera pointed at your property. So you made the whole thing up for revenge.

When the FBI approaches the court with evidence, that evidence has to have been investigated first. It has to be presented as a factual claim--not some guy working for Hillary.

And the FBI did investigate and confirm some of the details of the dossier.

They are not to confirm "some" of anything. If they are going to use the dossier, they need to verify all of it.

 

[asaratis]

Now we're talking.

Nunes just stated on Fox he was going to petition the court for the entire proceedings.

The Republicans voted to unanimously release the Democrat's back peddle memo.

Grassley now after Steele.

It's getting ugly out there for all the crooks. And I'm going to love the next round of Intelligence Committee reports to hit the headlines over the next several months. And the FBI, IG, report will be a big wort on Comey's nose.

Anything worthwhile will be redacted.

Doesn't matter. Adam Schitt will leak it out without redaction.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That is a good question, but the pertinent question is, if the original warrant was improperly granted, anything stemming from additional surveillance would be inadmissible to any court.

That alone should tell you that it probably wasn't just bullshit to begin with.

Incorrect. Many a case has been thrown out due to information that wasn't collected legitimately.

I have no problem with petitioning the court and opening up this warrant for everyone to see.

all four of them. the extensions as well. let's see what they actually found. nothing we know otherwise he'd be in jail.

It's not necessarily true that he would be in jail. Especially if he is working to help get the intelligence.

Given that Mueller hasn't charged Page with a crime, and squeezed him to talk for a plea deal, I think it's pretty obvious Page is not going to be accused of a crime. Rather, I think all that I've read about Page is that he was simply a go between from Russia to Trump, and possibly not a very effective one at that. But if the FBI had a reasonable basis to think he was passing information from one camp to another, that would be probable cause to tap his phone.

More than likely they could care less about Page. He was just a cheap excuse to get to Trump.

 

[asaratis]

Is the Trump Administration the first time that Nazis and Russians have controlled our government? I'm 71, and this is all new to me.

Wait for your brain to catch up with the rest of your body. Even if your brain gains 10 years for every passing year from now on, you'll be about 90 before you realize how stupid you have been.

 

[bendog]

Now we're talking.

Nunes just stated on Fox he was going to petition the court for the entire proceedings.

The Republicans voted to unanimously release the Democrat's back peddle memo.

Grassley now after Steele.

It's getting ugly out there for all the crooks. And I'm going to love the next round of Intelligence Committee reports to hit the headlines over the next several months. And the FBI, IG, report will be a big wort on Comey's nose.

That is the obvious next move.

So, not a single Communists favored releasing the Memo. Not a single Republican voted to suppress the Communist rebuttal.

Now release the entire document so America can see who the crooks and traitors are.

Hint: It's the ones who tried to suppress information.

Democrats are crooks

This is the root cause of their opposition to release of the factual memos from Nunes, Grassley and others down the line while they support release of rebuttal memos from the left. The left has a LOT TO LOSE in the exposure of the truth.

The American people are not stupid, as the prime architect of Obama(doesn't)Care, Goober Gruber has stated. The public is slowly becoming aware of the corruption and lack of honesty being continuously exhibited by the Democrat Party and career politicians.

I contend (and hope) that the Democrats will lose seats in both Chambers of Congress in 2018. The more the truth about who colluded with whom comes out, the more likely my prediction will become a historical fact.

The Democrat Party is in deep doo-doo and is frantically trying to cover itself with rose petals and Febreze.

I hope the entire truth of Putin Trump comes out, regardless of what it turns out to be. I'm sure you feel the same (joke)

 

[WEATHER53]

No facts support your beliefs because you have no fucking way of knowing either exactly what the FBI thought Page knew or what they learned through the tap extension.

I fking know he was cleared in 2014 when he testified for the FBI in a court case. yes, I do know! Now you post up evidence he was an asset.

How about you post up what you have saying he was cleared. That would get us on the same page.

why don't you post up why you think he was an asset and under investigation after he testified.

I never said he was.

Then there was no need for a warrant!

No legal need for one but a big political desire for one
Again. Emotions and not Fact

 

[bendog]

That alone should tell you that it probably wasn't just bullshit to begin with.

Incorrect. Many a case has been thrown out due to information that wasn't collected legitimately.

I have no problem with petitioning the court and opening up this warrant for everyone to see.

all four of them. the extensions as well. let's see what they actually found. nothing we know otherwise he'd be in jail.

It's not necessarily true that he would be in jail. Especially if he is working to help get the intelligence.

Given that Mueller hasn't charged Page with a crime, and squeezed him to talk for a plea deal, I think it's pretty obvious Page is not going to be accused of a crime. Rather, I think all that I've read about Page is that he was simply a go between from Russia to Trump, and possibly not a very effective one at that. But if the FBI had a reasonable basis to think he was passing information from one camp to another, that would be probable cause to tap his phone.

More than likely they could care less about Page. He was just a cheap excuse to get to Trump.

Well yeah, but if he did anthing illegal, Mueller would have his nuts in a vise now. LOL But if Page was an excuse to get to Trump, the question is whether Trump and Putin did a deal.

 

[asaratis]

^^^^Spoon feed me Chief. I am too lazy to work that hard at this entertainment-learning center. Give bite sized chunks or I wander.

Well, I'm sorry that's the case, but I generally try to express myself and my thinking in a fairly complete way. That's how I was taught to do so, and it's unlikely that I'll soon stop doing so.

FWIW, in verbal communication, I'm often notably less comprehensive; however, the reasons for that are:

• In settings where I communicate verbally, nobody in the audience presumes they know more about the matter I'm discussion than do I, though some rightly presume they of the matter know as much as I. The very reason for them being in the audience, more often than not, is that they acknowledge me as an authority on the matter they've paid to have me discuss and they presume I will provide insights they don't already possess.
• I'm just not willing to risk that something I wrote and shared publicly be misinterpreted by people who have strong reading skills. As go folks having mediocre to weak reading and/critical thinking skills, well, I don't much care what they think. (Don't get any idea that I'm implying you fall into either group; I'm not. Why would I? You were very clear: the reason for your remarks is indolence not ignorance, and I have no basis for thinking you are cognitively deficient. The differences among those traits is not at all lost on me.)

I do like this one from you......"adamantine intransigence"

Thank you.

I once knew a pretentious pedant....just like you.

 

[asaratis]

Yeeeah, and let's see if Democrats back the request to release all of the FISA proceedings. Let's just see.

So far Dems have been virtually mute about releasing the McCabe transcript, even though they claim that Nunes has misquoted McCabe's testimony. Well, there's one way to settle that point in a hurry: release the transcript of McCabe's testimony. If he did in fact say that without the Steele dossier there would have been no FISA application, Schiff & Co. will once again be exposed as liars.

It was recorded. He said it.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The motives of the informant have no bearing on the validity of the information.
You have no idea what was used from the dossier or if it had been corroborated.

The court sure wanted to know what the intent of the informant was. It's one of the questions on the FISA application. I can't wait to see how it was answered too because Steele was a well known Trump hater.

The intent is irrelevant. If I inform the cops on you and you get arrested, my feelings or motives are irrelevant as long as the information is reliable.

Obviously it was reliable as it was used subsequently for three renewals.

You go to police and tell them I have illegal narcotics in my home. There isn't a court in the country that would issue a search warrant based on that information alone.

Your claim would have to be investigated, the DEA would have to set up phony drug purchases from me. They would need to have evidence such as the narcotics, and then they can approach the court for a warrant.

For all the police know, you may be a nosy neighbor that wants to get even with me because I blew my snow on your lawn in the winter, or setup a surveillance camera pointed at your property. So you made the whole thing up for revenge.

When the FBI approaches the court with evidence, that evidence has to have been investigated first. It has to be presented as a factual claim--not some guy working for Hillary.

And the FBI did investigate and confirm some of the details of the dossier.

They are not to confirm "some" of anything. If they are going to use the dossier, they need to verify all of it.

Why do they need to verify all of it?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes it does because for one, it shows intent. Two, the information was never verified.

When you pay somebody looking for an outcome, you usually get that outcome even if it's not totally true. And any court should have questioned why this clown was not still working for his government if he was so reliable and good.

The motives of the informant have no bearing on the validity of the information.
You have no idea what was used from the dossier or if it had been corroborated.

The court sure wanted to know what the intent of the informant was. It's one of the questions on the FISA application. I can't wait to see how it was answered too because Steele was a well known Trump hater.

The intent is irrelevant. If I inform the cops on you and you get arrested, my feelings or motives are irrelevant as long as the information is reliable.

Obviously it was reliable as it was used subsequently for three renewals.

You go to police and tell them I have illegal narcotics in my home. There isn't a court in the country that would issue a search warrant based on that information alone.

Your claim would have to be investigated, the DEA would have to set up phony drug purchases from me. They would need to have evidence such as the narcotics, and then they can approach the court for a warrant.

For all the police know, you may be a nosy neighbor that wants to get even with me because I blew my snow on your lawn in the winter, or setup a surveillance camera pointed at your property. So you made the whole thing up for revenge.

When the FBI approaches the court with evidence, that evidence has to have been investigated first. It has to be presented as a factual claim--not some guy working for Hillary.

I said if it were reliable. That assumes the due diligence has been done. You don't have any idea of how the dossier information was used, what it was used in conjunction with or what steps had been taken to verify or corroborate the information.

The biggest mistakes you dopes make is assuming the dossier is 100% nonsense and that Russia didn't interfere.

Anything submitted to the FISA court has to be 100% checked out. When the FBI got rid of Steele, that too had to be submitted in their FISA renewals. it sure doesn't seem like it was.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The court sure wanted to know what the intent of the informant was. It's one of the questions on the FISA application. I can't wait to see how it was answered too because Steele was a well known Trump hater.

The intent is irrelevant. If I inform the cops on you and you get arrested, my feelings or motives are irrelevant as long as the information is reliable.

Obviously it was reliable as it was used subsequently for three renewals.

You go to police and tell them I have illegal narcotics in my home. There isn't a court in the country that would issue a search warrant based on that information alone.

Your claim would have to be investigated, the DEA would have to set up phony drug purchases from me. They would need to have evidence such as the narcotics, and then they can approach the court for a warrant.

For all the police know, you may be a nosy neighbor that wants to get even with me because I blew my snow on your lawn in the winter, or setup a surveillance camera pointed at your property. So you made the whole thing up for revenge.

When the FBI approaches the court with evidence, that evidence has to have been investigated first. It has to be presented as a factual claim--not some guy working for Hillary.

And the FBI did investigate and confirm some of the details of the dossier.

They are not to confirm "some" of anything. If they are going to use the dossier, they need to verify all of it.

Why do they need to verify all of it?

They need to verify anything they submit to the court.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Sad, sordid and sullied mess that Hillary is so utterly consumed with power that her and Barry used the FBI and FISA to try and swing the election, then conjured up the Russia story to cover their tracks. Federal politics is dispicable
Also, those of you who say "intent" is meaningless are in fact meaningless as to comment worthiness

I don't think you can throw FISA in the mix just yet.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Incorrect. Many a case has been thrown out due to information that wasn't collected legitimately.

I have no problem with petitioning the court and opening up this warrant for everyone to see.

all four of them. the extensions as well. let's see what they actually found. nothing we know otherwise he'd be in jail.

It's not necessarily true that he would be in jail. Especially if he is working to help get the intelligence.

Given that Mueller hasn't charged Page with a crime, and squeezed him to talk for a plea deal, I think it's pretty obvious Page is not going to be accused of a crime. Rather, I think all that I've read about Page is that he was simply a go between from Russia to Trump, and possibly not a very effective one at that. But if the FBI had a reasonable basis to think he was passing information from one camp to another, that would be probable cause to tap his phone.

More than likely they could care less about Page. He was just a cheap excuse to get to Trump.

Well yeah, but if he did anthing illegal, Mueller would have his nuts in a vise now. LOL But if Page was an excuse to get to Trump, the question is whether Trump and Putin did a deal.

A deal on what? The only deal between Russia and the US is Russia and Steele who was working for Hillary.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The motives of the informant have no bearing on the validity of the information.
You have no idea what was used from the dossier or if it had been corroborated.

The court sure wanted to know what the intent of the informant was. It's one of the questions on the FISA application. I can't wait to see how it was answered too because Steele was a well known Trump hater.

The intent is irrelevant. If I inform the cops on you and you get arrested, my feelings or motives are irrelevant as long as the information is reliable.

Obviously it was reliable as it was used subsequently for three renewals.

You go to police and tell them I have illegal narcotics in my home. There isn't a court in the country that would issue a search warrant based on that information alone.

Your claim would have to be investigated, the DEA would have to set up phony drug purchases from me. They would need to have evidence such as the narcotics, and then they can approach the court for a warrant.

For all the police know, you may be a nosy neighbor that wants to get even with me because I blew my snow on your lawn in the winter, or setup a surveillance camera pointed at your property. So you made the whole thing up for revenge.

When the FBI approaches the court with evidence, that evidence has to have been investigated first. It has to be presented as a factual claim--not some guy working for Hillary.

I said if it were reliable. That assumes the due diligence has been done. You don't have any idea of how the dossier information was used, what it was used in conjunction with or what steps had been taken to verify or corroborate the information.

The biggest mistakes you dopes make is assuming the dossier is 100% nonsense and that Russia didn't interfere.

Anything submitted to the FISA court has to be 100% checked out. When the FBI got rid of Steele, that too had to be submitted in their FISA renewals. it sure doesn't seem like it was.

Anything submitted to the FISA court has to be 100% checked out

Sure. You don't know that it wasn't. It obviously met the standard four times in front of four different judges.

You're assuming that everyone involved with the application process lied and every judge and their staff is incompetent. That's just dumb.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The intent is irrelevant. If I inform the cops on you and you get arrested, my feelings or motives are irrelevant as long as the information is reliable.

Obviously it was reliable as it was used subsequently for three renewals.

You go to police and tell them I have illegal narcotics in my home. There isn't a court in the country that would issue a search warrant based on that information alone.

Your claim would have to be investigated, the DEA would have to set up phony drug purchases from me. They would need to have evidence such as the narcotics, and then they can approach the court for a warrant.

For all the police know, you may be a nosy neighbor that wants to get even with me because I blew my snow on your lawn in the winter, or setup a surveillance camera pointed at your property. So you made the whole thing up for revenge.

When the FBI approaches the court with evidence, that evidence has to have been investigated first. It has to be presented as a factual claim--not some guy working for Hillary.

And the FBI did investigate and confirm some of the details of the dossier.

They are not to confirm "some" of anything. If they are going to use the dossier, they need to verify all of it.

Why do they need to verify all of it?

They need to verify anything they submit to the court.

Sure, just not the parts they didn't .

 

[asaratis]

Now we're talking.

Nunes just stated on Fox he was going to petition the court for the entire proceedings.

The Republicans voted to unanimously release the Democrat's back peddle memo.

Grassley now after Steele.

It's getting ugly out there for all the crooks. And I'm going to love the next round of Intelligence Committee reports to hit the headlines over the next several months. And the FBI, IG, report will be a big wort on Comey's nose.

That is the obvious next move.

So, not a single Communists favored releasing the Memo. Not a single Republican voted to suppress the Communist rebuttal.

Now release the entire document so America can see who the crooks and traitors are.

Hint: It's the ones who tried to suppress information.

Democrats are crooks

This is the root cause of their opposition to release of the factual memos from Nunes, Grassley and others down the line while they support release of rebuttal memos from the left. The left has a LOT TO LOSE in the exposure of the truth.

The American people are not stupid, as the prime architect of Obama(doesn't)Care, Goober Gruber has stated. The public is slowly becoming aware of the corruption and lack of honesty being continuously exhibited by the Democrat Party and career politicians.

I contend (and hope) that the Democrats will lose seats in both Chambers of Congress in 2018. The more the truth about who colluded with whom comes out, the more likely my prediction will become a historical fact.

The Democrat Party is in deep doo-doo and is frantically trying to cover itself with rose petals and Febreze.

I hope the entire truth of Putin Trump comes out, regardless of what it turns out to be. I'm sure you feel the same (joke)

No joke. I do favor the truth and nothing but the truth coming out. If Trump is stained by it, so be it. He should resign. However, I see a dead horse being beaten into mechanically separated animal parts. If Trump is guilty of collusion with the Russians to affect the 2016 election, Hillary will be in prison before he is.

BTW, collusion is not a crime, obstruction of justice is. The latter will be difficult to prove against Trump, but is patently obvious regarding Hillary.

 

[asaratis]

The court sure wanted to know what the intent of the informant was. It's one of the questions on the FISA application. I can't wait to see how it was answered too because Steele was a well known Trump hater.

The intent is irrelevant. If I inform the cops on you and you get arrested, my feelings or motives are irrelevant as long as the information is reliable.

Obviously it was reliable as it was used subsequently for three renewals.

You go to police and tell them I have illegal narcotics in my home. There isn't a court in the country that would issue a search warrant based on that information alone.

Your claim would have to be investigated, the DEA would have to set up phony drug purchases from me. They would need to have evidence such as the narcotics, and then they can approach the court for a warrant.

For all the police know, you may be a nosy neighbor that wants to get even with me because I blew my snow on your lawn in the winter, or setup a surveillance camera pointed at your property. So you made the whole thing up for revenge.

When the FBI approaches the court with evidence, that evidence has to have been investigated first. It has to be presented as a factual claim--not some guy working for Hillary.

I said if it were reliable. That assumes the due diligence has been done. You don't have any idea of how the dossier information was used, what it was used in conjunction with or what steps had been taken to verify or corroborate the information.

The biggest mistakes you dopes make is assuming the dossier is 100% nonsense and that Russia didn't interfere.

Anything submitted to the FISA court has to be 100% checked out. When the FBI got rid of Steele, that too had to be submitted in their FISA renewals. it sure doesn't seem like it was.

Anything submitted to the FISA court has to be 100% checked out

Sure. You don't know that it wasn't. It obviously met the standard four times in front of four different judges.

You're assuming that everyone involved with the application process lied and every judge and their staff is incompetent. That's just dumb.

You project too much. It doesn't take everyone involved in the process to be dishonest to get an OMISSION past the reviewers or the judge or judges. What judge do you know of that can recognize that something like that has been left out of an application? If Ray is dumb, you are dumber. (Y'all could make a movie!)