So Aimless without the politically paid for Steele Dossier would the FISA warrant have been issued? Hell would it have even been requested?
Printable View
So Aimless without the politically paid for Steele Dossier would the FISA warrant have been issued? Hell would it have even been requested?
You didn't read about the released FISA documents showing the Steele dossier was clearly NOT the sole reason for the first warrant, and that even without it there was enough 'probable cause'? Also, those warrant applications have to be re-issued every few months, with new and compelling information required.
Lewk, you may not like FISA courts (unless they're targeting Islamic Terrorists, of course) but they are working within the framework set up by congress and DoJ. And the panel of judges were all appointed by a Republican president.
It would have been requested or the FBI would've pursued other legal means of gathering foreign intelligence until they would've had sufficient evidence to justify a FISA warrant. This has been confirmed previously.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Your dimwitted fixation with the dossier being "political" is not as insightful as you imagine it to be. Do you think that compromising information on criminals who are being investigated always come from their friends? Do you think people gladly snitch on their friends? Do you believe the feds are the friends of the people they investigate? The dossier ultimately having been commissioned by two separate political opponents is irrelevant if the claims are corroborated by other independently gathered evidence, which is why several judges independently authorized and reauthorized the FISA warrants despite knowing that the information was intended to be used by political opponents.
Now, you and I both know that if a non-white petty criminal were brought to trial, you would want all available evidence to be used against that person, even evidence that had not been obtained legally. Dismissing that evidence would be unacceptable to you and you'd sneer at the absurd notion of letting criminals get away on technicalities. In light of this it is especially pathetic of you to oppose the entirely legal gathering and use of damning evidence against someone collaborating with intelligence officers from a hostile foreign enemy of the US. We all know why you've suddenly decided to change your standards, but it's pathetic nevertheless.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C7Z2qjrU0AAxSTT.jpg
You can't trust smoke alarms, as they come from manufactures who are ideologically opposed to fires.
Well if you think about it fires are really in their best interests. Just saying.
oh my god
You are completely missing the problem here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
A biased group of people acted against the political associates of the man running for president. They used information from a political hit piece paid for by the political opponents to substantiate a surveillance warrant. They then proceeded NOT to tell the FISA court that their maid piece of evidence was unsubstantiated and originated as a political oppo research.
But hey lets also ignore the text messages with things like: "insurance policy" and "we'll stop him"
And lets ignore the IG report that pointed to bad behavior by the Deputy Director of the FBI which led to his justified firing.
There's a massive amount of inappropriate behavior, bias and political ill will in an election year. Compounding all of this we have a DOJ official who thinks Congress shouldn't be allowed to carry out their oversight responsibilities.
New strategy. Collusion. So what?
Twitter Link
Repeating this claim over and over is not going to make it true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Ignoring the facts such as the Steele dossier being taken seriously by the intelligence community and parts of it have already been verified is not going to make them go away.
Desperately trying to present the Strzok texts as some big "gotcha" moment is not going to stop them from being a feeble basis for a ridiculous conspiracy theory.
Calling anyone and everyone who tries to hold Republican crooks accountable "biased" and while continuing to uncritically repeat obvious and easily exposed lies from people David Nunes or venues like Fox News is not going to do much to hide your own stupid-ass agenda from anyone here.
I sense from the amount of time you've put into this thread you think you're onto a big win to 'own the libs' or whatever the fuck you think it is important... but you're really not.
As was FORETOLD:Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Twitter Link
Not that Lewk needs any help digging his hole concerning the dossier, but...the author just won a libel suit concerning it.
ruled that the oligarchs had failed to prove a key part of their case: that Steele knew that some information in the dossier was inaccurate
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...stopher-steele
Love how his ignorance ages :haha:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Steely, you may have missed a step:Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
Twitter Link
I think that comes under 'there's proof but it doesn't matter'.
Good point, we're still on schedule then I guess.
Twitter Link
Twitter Link
Hahahaha jackasses