This appears to be a technical foul by an individual.Do you have any evidence of a "conspiracy"?
No. Just that conversations around this topic tend to be unproductive and this thread already has the hallmarks of being an unproductive thread
Not at all. However the article in the OP is reasonably innocuous. Hence any further discussion to be had will be rooted in your imaginations until further results come out. That and you don't seem to be all that well informed in the first place means that as usual, conversation on this topic will be unproductive (until those factors change).
Again, i'm not saying they didn't commit crimes. Maybe they did. But there was circumstantial evidence that trump and his associates were engaging in crime. They were investigating that potential crime.
ok, but how much of that is standard practice though? the FISA process is super shadowy by design. Saying there were 17 errors or omissions means nothing if that is how lots of FISA applications work.
parts of it, sure. Lots of it was very accurate.
do you think the FBI notifies the president of their investigations? Why would they do that?
There is no evidence that any elected official did anything wrong. There is evidence that some FBI agents committed some crimes while investigating potentially serious crimes. This is nothing even close to the Watergate scandal. So hyping it up will go over great on right wing forums. But to regular people it just sounds stupid.
Because spying on a political opponent via a hotel burglary is worse than using the FBI to do it.
You are uninformed. We all are to an extent. It's just I have the grace to wait for more information instead of throwing out baseless conjectures.
Gotta wait on Durham.
For the FISA warrants? Nope. Page was a CIA informant. It was literally his job at the time. The FBI withheld that info at first and later lied about. Is that not a problem to you?
What does this even mean lol. There are rules that were violated by the 17 errors and omissions. It’s definitely not how FISA applications work. You are required to tell the truth and give all the information to the judge.
parts of it, sure. Lots of it was very accurate.It was funded by the DNC. You think any judge would sign off on the warrant knowing this was opposition research by the opposite political party during an election season?
do you think the FBI notifies the president of their investigations? Why would they do that?If it’s of high level people? Definitely.
Yet. If this was all Durham had, it would be over by now. There are more people and higher ups involved for sure even if it’s not Barack Obama. If it’s Comey or Lynch or Yates for example. They all have direct ties to the President. Remember when y’all were saying Trump was a conspiracy theorist for saying his campaign was wiretapped? Not a conspiracy theory anymore huh?
yes. it is a problem. I never said it wasn't. But comparing it is nowhere near the level of seriousness of watergate.
true. but FISA warrants are by design a secretive process with not much oversight. My point was that since this process is designed to be secretive neither you nor I have any idea how much this system is abused. It is entirely possible that this case is totally normal for the FISA courts. And again, that is a terrible thing. But you are trying to pretend like this is somehow in the same ballpark as Watergate, which is nuts.
It was funded by republicans. Then when they lost interest the DNC continued their work. But that doesn't, in any way, dispute the fact that alot of the report was accurate and it was therefore evidence that serious crimes had been committed.
where is your evidence of that?
lol trump lies a dozen times a day. he says crazy ass shit constantly. One of the thousands of crazy things he says happened to have level of truth in it so we are supposed to pretend like he is somehow reliable?
Just because it’s abused doesn’t make it ok lol.
And it’s arguably similar to Watergate. Wiretapping a campaign official illegally to listen in on a presidential campaign and even Donald Trump himself.
Lmao, no it wasn’t. The Steele Dossier was never corroborated. Dont take my word for it. Take the word of DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz. There was no evidence that it was true. Period.
where is your evidence of that?How did Obama know of the investigation into Michael Flynn?
lol trump lies a dozen times a day. he says crazy ass shit constantly. One of the thousands of crazy things he says happened to have level of truth in it so we are supposed to pretend like he is somehow reliable?Lol.
I never said it was. But the system was designed to work this way. So pretending like this specific example of it's abuse is somehow more serious is just your bias.
The other was law enforcement agents investigating potentially very serious crimes and committing crimes to do it. They weren't elected officials. They weren't doing it to protect their own power and they had legitimate reasons to believe a crime had been committed.
you're aware the dossier contains lots of information on lots of different things right? Lots of it is accurate. Some of it isn't.
what are you talking about? Why do you just make vague statements and pretend like you have made an argument?
yes, Trump is a sad, pathetic joke. He spends most of his days spreading lies and misinformation and his cultish follower eat it up. When it is disproved they pretend it never happened. When 1 out of the thousands of lies ends up having a grain of truth they pretend like he was always telling the truth. It's really sad.
What was the Russia hoax? At the root, "Competing memos from the Republicans and the Democrats on the House intelligence committee both say that information about George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, had prompted the FBI investigation in July 2016."https://www.factcheck.org/2019/03/dossier-not-what-started-all-of-this/
I never said it was. But the system was designed to work this way. So pretending like this specific example of it's abuse is somehow more serious is just your bias.Let me put it this way: it’s illegal. It doesn’t matter how many times it’s happened. It’s still illegal.
But there was no reason to surveil Carter Page lol. He was freakin CIA informant which the FBI didn’t include at first and then falsified it.
The warrant was illegitimate. Period.
Sally Yates even said she wouldn’t have signed it based on what she knew today. The judges on the FISA court wouldn’t have signed it either.
How is it vague? Did Obama know of the Flynn investigation as part of Crossfire Hurricane? Yes or No? If he did then how’d he find out? Who told him about it. It’s pretty obvious Obama knew.
I guess Trump should wiretap Biden officials because of Hunter Biden’s connections to Russia purposefully withholding evidence in the process. You seem fine with it.
of course it is. I have never claimed it isn't. You are attempting to paint this specific case as if it is as important as watergate. The reality is that this entire FISA process is shady and corrupt. Pointing to one specific case of it's misuse and pretending like it is unique is stupid.
there was good reason to believe he was a russian agent. Lots of spies play both sides. Just like lots of criminals inform to the FBI. It doesn't make them less of a criminal.
no, it wasn't.
which one? There were lots of warrents issued.
what the hell are you even talking about? You just keep making random statements and asking random questions. I have no idea what your point is.
So because a law enforcement agency did shady stuff while investigating a legitimate threat, you think that an incredibly corrupt politician should abuse that agency?
This is the only one we know of. The fact it’s happening should concern you. You’re trying to justify the action by saying it’s shady anyways.
What lol. If this was the case why didn’t they tell the court that they thought this. Why did they purposefully omit he was CIA and why didn’t the FBI ask the CIA if they thought it was true lol. Carter Page had no prior criminal record anyways.
You asked how the President would know about FBI investigations. I said if it involved high ranking officials, the President would definitely know. Now I’m pointing to a high ranking official that Barack Obama knew about as part of the overarching operation called Crossfire Hurricane.
You’re just proving my point lol. FBI does shady stuff because of Hunter Biden’s connections to Ukrainian oligarchs as part of one of the most corrupt nations. They use this to moniter conversations between Joe Biden and Hunter Biden. Does that seem ok to you?
I'm not justifying it. It is completely unacceptable. But you are pretending like it is somehow comparable to Watergate. It isn't.
they did tell the court that. The court agreed.
you haven't provided any evidence of anything. In fact your narrative itself is kind of all over the place.
Hunter Biden didn't actually do anything at all. He sat on a board. There is no evidence, or even legitimate suspicion, he committed any kind of crime. There is no comparison.
Spying on a campaign during election season is comparable to Watergate.
you haven't provided any evidence of anything. In fact your narrative itself is kind of all over the place.Susan Rice email to herself. Obama knew about the investigation.
There’s no evidence of Russian collusion either. Saint Mueller said so.
in the same way that a fire cracker is comparable to nuclear bomb, sure. They are both explosions. But one is massively bigger in scale. So pretending like they are the same thing makes you look insanely biased or delusional.
are you ever going to explain what you are taking about and provide some evidence? Or are you just going to keep making random statements make no sense?
what? Are you kidding? The investigation “identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign” and established that the Trump Campaign “showed interest in WikiLeaks's releases of documents and welcomed their potential to damage candidate Clinton”Muller found lots of evidence of collusion and they wanted to use this collusion to damage clinton.
Now the question how early did he know about?
You’re high dude. “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”
This is exact text from the email you are referring to. It says he was not asking for information about or instructing them to do anything. Jesus, even your own "evidence" goes contrary to the narrative you are trying to set.
The trump team did collude with russia. They wanted to use WikiLeaks to damage clinton. Mueller was very clear about that. Then the russians went ahead and did it. There just isn't a neat line between the Trump team trying to commit a crime, and the russians who actually carried out the crime the trump team wanted to commit.
