Trump is finally...

[Rightguide]

Unlike RG and Arpy.

The FISC requires all exculpatory evidence/information be included in FISA applications against American citizens and that all information presented to the court be "verified." Two points you fail to recognize.

 

[Rightguide]

Who says? Link, please.

The House Intelligence Committee.

 

[phrodeau]

The House Intelligence Committee.

Can’t find a link? Not even from a fake news site?

 

[Kantarii]

Who says? Link, please.

Why do you need people to do your legwork?

 

[HisArpy]

Why do you need people to do your legwork?

It's a deflection game called: "Please go find me a link to public knowledge available everywhere for free". It's designed to make you waste your time doing what they want you to do while they fully intend to ignore the results anyway.

"Chase the Laser dot" for cats is the equivalent.

 

[Kantarii]

It's a deflection game called: "Please go find me a link to public knowledge available everywhere for free". It's designed to make you waste your time doing what they want you to do while they fully intend to ignore the results anyway.

"Chase the Laser dot" for cats is the equivalent.

I figured as much. I’m too lazy to work for anyone but myself. Guess that’s why I work for myself

 

[cowslinger64]

It's a deflection game called: "Please go find me a link to public knowledge available everywhere for free". It's designed to make you waste your time doing what they want you to do while they fully intend to ignore the results anyway.

"Chase the Laser dot" for cats is the equivalent.

Actually, it's you constantly post complete bullshit and back it up with your opinion...which has been shown numerous times to be absolutely worthless.

 

[Rightguide]

Can’t find a link? Not even from a fake news site?

I gave you the source now google it.

 

[jomar]

It's a deflection game called: "Please go find me a link to public knowledge available everywhere for free". It's designed to make you waste your time doing what they want you to do while they fully intend to ignore the results anyway.

"Chase the Laser dot" for cats is the equivalent.

LOL, have you forgotten your “I’m not doing your homework for you. Keep up with the class.” comments?

Can’t have it both ways.

 

[phrodeau]

I gave you the source now google it.

Ok, will The Daily Caller do?

https://dailycaller.com/2018/03/04/fbi-dossier-verified/

Nunes noted a passage in the FBI’s Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide which states that “the accuracy of information contained within FISA applications is of utmost importance.”

“Only documented and verified information may be used to support FBI applications [FISA] to the court [FISC],” reads an unredacted version of the guide, dated Oct. 15, 2011.

But national security experts and former FBI officials say that verification of each and every fact mentioned in FISA applications is not necessarily required.

“Evidence presented to the court does not have to be rigorously proved or corroborated. But it does have to be plausible and credible — not just rumor or hearsay,” Steven Aftergood, the director of the Project on Government Secrecy for the Federation of American Scientists, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

The FBI can cite information that the bureau has not fully verified or corroborated as long as the source for the information is made clear and an assessment of the reliability of the information is included in the application.

 

[phrodeau]

Now that we know what the FISC accepts, who says that they were misinformed?

 

[about_average]

Oh the ironing!!!

*edited to add*

Freaking speel chicker.

Since the word "salacious" refers to sexual matters

salacious- adjective - bawdy, carnal, coarse, corrupt, debauched, depraved, dirty, dissolute, erotic, Fescennine, filthy, foul, free, goatish, gross, immoral, impure, incontinent, indecent, lascivious, lecherous, lewd, libertine, libidinous, licentious, lickerish, lickerous, loose, lurid, lustful, obscene, offensive, polluted, profligate, provocative, prurient, ribald, risque, ruttish, satyric, satyrical, scabrous, scarlet, scrofulous, scurrile, scurrilous, sensual, sexy, shameful, shameless, sinful, smutty, spicy, suggestive, titillating, unblushing, unchaste, unclean, unexpurgated, unprintable, virtueless, wanton

apparently you think, like RG, that the entire dossier was about sex.

You can't have it both ways, Comey said "parts" of it were salacious, or the entire dossier was about sexual matters. Which is it?

Why do you need people to do your legwork?

Because we want you to actually learn something rather than repeating the Trump cult BS.

It's a deflection game called: "Please go find me a link to public knowledge available everywhere for free".

No, it's called, "You've repeatedly made a false claim that you've repeatedly been shown to be complete BS, so either provide a scintilla of evidence that your claim has some merit or just admit you're posting BS."

Apparently you learned nothing in law school, assuming you actually ever went.

I can picture you now
"Court is now in session"
Arpy - "That man is guilty, guilty, guilty!. The state rests."

 

[about_average]

Can’t find a link? Not even from a fake news site?

I know why people like RG and Arpy keep repeating the same BS over and over, they are just plain lazy. Unwilling to search much, knowing they'll be proved wrong.
When doing a search on the Steele dossier and the FISA warrant you have to wade through many pages of shouted BS from members of the Trump Cult.
Who wants to do that when it's so easy to go with confirmation bias?

Here's some worthwhile information from someone who actually understands things, as opposed to the knee jerk "Trump can do no wrong" cult.

The third point, and the crux of McCarthy’s argument, is that the FBI did not properly “verify” the information in the application, which is a technical requirement in a FISA application. McCarthy claims that the FBI was not permitted to rely solely on hearsay information provided by Steele, its source of information, but rather was required to test the credibility of, and reliance on, each sub-source who gave information to Steele. But that is simply not what is required in FISA applications (or criminal wiretap applications), and in particular under the Woods Procedures that govern FISA applications. Under FISA, “verification” simply requires both the FBI and lawyers in the Department of Justice to verify that the facts as set forth in the affidavit are supported by evidence obtained as part of the investigation. That does not mean, however, that the FBI is required, for example, to travel to Russia to interview a sub-source to confirm that the sub-source actually did tell Steele what Steele reported to the FBI. That, of course, almost certainly would not be possible. It is therefore not surprising that McCarthy cites no authority for his assertion that such a step is required.

The reason why hearsay information is permitted in warrant applications is simple: It is hard enough for law enforcement to develop sources who can infiltrate criminal organizations or foreign threats to our national security. If the FBI were required to not only learn of the information from its own sources but also confirm that information with the sub-sources, it would not be able to do its job. Instead, the FBI is legally entitled to rely upon the assertions of a previously credible source, such as Steele, in relaying information from other sub-sources to whom the FBI does not have direct access.

Our nation’s law permits this process because the standard for a warrant such as this one is probable cause, not the higher standard of beyond a reasonable doubt that applies in a criminal trial. McCarthy characterizes the FISA application to include “serious, traitorous allegations against an American citizen and, derivatively, an American presidential campaign.” That is wrong. The FISA application made no such allegations nor did it charge Page with a crime or violation of law. Rather, in order to further investigate credible allegations of wrongdoing, the FISA application simply provided evidence that there was probable cause to believe that Carter Page was an agent of a foreign power and may have, or may be about to, commit violations of criminal law.

Probable cause means a “fair probability.” It is more than a “mere suspicion” but far less than the “reasonable doubt” standard required to convict someone of a crime. While information from a source such as Steele’s more than meets this probable cause standard, that is clearly not all that the warrant relied upon. Just from what we can see in unredacted form — and the majority of the application is redacted — it also walks through Page’s interactions several years ago with Russians who were eventually charged with being agents of Russian intelligence. McCarthy somehow claims that he knows that the redacted sections do not corroborate or add to Steele’s information. But he misses the point. Even if the specific details in the Steele dossier are not directly confirmed, the fact that other evidence unrelated to the dossier corroborates the dossier’s main allegations is sufficient to support a finding of probable cause.

The reason why hearsay information is permitted in warrant applications is simple: It is hard enough for law enforcement to develop sources who can infiltrate criminal organizations or foreign threats to our national security. If the FBI were required to not only learn of the information from its own sources but also confirm that information with the sub-sources, it would not be able to do its job. Instead, the FBI is legally entitled to rely upon the assertions of a previously credible source, such as Steele, in relaying information from other sub-sources to whom the FBI does not have direct access.

https://www.brennancenter.org/blog/...t-use-steele-dossier-carter-page-fisa-warrant

 

[about_average]

Now that we know what the FISC accepts, who says that they were misinformed?

The Trump Cult.
The FISA warrant clearly states the Steele Dossier was opposition research.

 

[Rightguide]

I know why people like RG and Arpy keep repeating the same BS over and over, they are just plain lazy. Unwilling to search much, knowing they'll be proved wrong.
When doing a search on the Steele dossier and the FISA warrant you have to wade through many pages of shouted BS from members of the Trump Cult.
Who wants to do that when it's so easy to go with confirmation bias?

Here's some worthwhile information from someone who actually understands things, as opposed to the knee jerk "Trump can do no wrong" cult.https://www.brennancenter.org/blog/...t-use-steele-dossier-carter-page-fisa-warrant

The Brennan Center??? Really???

 

[phrodeau]

The FISC requires all exculpatory evidence/information be included in FISA applications against American citizens and that all information presented to the court be "verified." Two points you fail to recognize.

It looks to me that your second point is false.

The Brennan Center??? Really???

Really. What have you got to refute it, besides “google yourself”?

 

[HisArpy]

LOL, have you forgotten your “I’m not doing your homework for you. Keep up with the class.” comments?

Can’t have it both ways.

Sure I can.

I'm not going to run around finding and posting links to sources of what is public knowledge AND current debate topics. If you're not aware enough of what's being discussed, then you have no business joining the discussion and demanding that you be brought up to speed by the efforts of others. Especially when such a request is nothing more than a droll attempt to get noticed rather than a genuine wish to enter the discussion.

OTOH, I'm also not going to run around finding sources to counter my debate positions. If you want to engage in counter argument, then do your own homework.

If there's a specific legit point I'm making, then I post links which support my position. This is the usual method of debate. No one should be required to post links that prove generic sentences such as "the sky is blue" or suffer the fate of a gauntlet of trolls such as yourself attempting to show nothing of substance or value.

Debate, isn't about slinging the words of others through citation, it's about engaging your mind on the topics. If all you have are the words of others, then you're nothing but a parrot.

Want a cracker?

 

[icanhelp1]

The Trump Cult.
The FISA warrant clearly states the Steele Dossier was opposition research.

If I'm not mistaken, what makes the application for the first warrant possibly illegal or let say inappropriate, was the information that was not mentioned and possibly hidden from the FISC. Probable cause could be anything, and probable cause which is even based on an unverified source could be legal, but if the source has a biased agenda or is compensated by the opposition and that is hidden to intentionally mislead the court, then that constitutes spoliation of evidence, that I believe is the crime. Obtaining the warrant is legal and because it was issued also makes it a legal document. If the signator advances the use of said document knowing he intentionally misled the court on the first and ( leaving out exculpatory evidence, 2nd 3rd and 4th ) applications, well, can't be a good thing for Comey. It would seem to me that to cross over to a criminal investigation without standing questions the constitutionality or legality for establishing a special counsel in the first place. Just my humble opinion.

 

[phrodeau]

The problem that arises is the FISC was not told what part was verified and what part wasn't.

If I'm not mistaken, what makes the application for the first warrant possibly illegal or let say inappropriate, was the information that was not mentioned and possibly hidden from the FISC. Probable cause could be anything, and probable cause which is even based on an unverified source could be legal, but if the source has a biased agenda or is compensated by the opposition and that is hidden from the court then that constitutes spoliation of evidence, that I believe is the crime.

Can you come up with any evidence that there was any info withheld from the FISC?

 

[icanhelp1]

Can you come up with any evidence that there was any info withheld from the FISC?

Payment for dossier by DNC

 

[phrodeau]

Payment for dossier by DNC

That has nothing to do with the verity of things in the dossier.

 

[KeithD]

Anyone who hasn't figured out the vileness and threat of Trump all by themselves by now has more than a few dead batteries in their brains.

 

[Kantarii]

Anyone who hasn't figured out the vileness and threat of Democrats all by themselves by now has more than a few dead brains cells.

Fixed your lie for accuracy. Thank me later. Kant

 

[icanhelp1]

Fixed your lie for accuracy. Thank me later. Kant

SKY PILOT ( KiethD ) is like the old WASHING MACHINE CHARLIE, he buzzes around then drops a few bombs way off target then flies away only to come back another day.

 

[Kantarii]

SKY PILOT ( KiethD ) is like the old WASHING MACHINE CHARLIE, he buzzes around then drops a few bombs way off target then flies away only to come back another day.

The military calls that carpet bombing

It’s a waste of time and resources.