Was the buck-toothed one carrying out OVERSEAS TASKS...?
Hmm...!!!
Was Chelsea also a part of the biggest rip-off scheme in world history..?
Posted on 02/02/2018 2:40:41 PM PST by Bigtigermike
The FISA ‘warrant’ request, against Carter Page, was made October 21st, 2016, under Title I of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Meaning the surveillance application was specifically stating, to the court, the U.S. individual was likely an actual agent of a foreign government, ie. “a spy.”
The DOJ (National Security Division) and the FBI (Counterintelligence Division) were not asking to review ancillary data collected on U.S. Person Carter Page as an outcome of surveillance on a foreign person, or foreign agent; that would be Title 7 (FISA-702).
In action outlined within the HPSCI memo, the DOJ and FBI were specifically telling the FISA court they had evidence that U.S. Person Carter Page was working as an agent of a foreign government. He was their target, and therefore requesting direct FISA Title 1 surveillance of that target on October 21st, 2016
[....]
AND as such they carried full surveillance authority upon all of this activities, interactions, communications and contacts therein.
Because of this direct approach, any group, organization or entity who came in contact with U.S. Person Carter Page was then open for ancillary review and FBI investigation
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
Was the buck-toothed one carrying out OVERSEAS TASKS...?
Hmm...!!!
Was Chelsea also a part of the biggest rip-off scheme in world history..?
Very, very important!
IIRC from the above, the Title I designation means they can not only surveil the original target (Page), but then anyone who he talks to, and then anyone that person talks to, in an ever expanding circle.
Now, that’s the way we’d like it to work for real spies and terrorists, but not for otherwise law-abiding citizens who might be political opponents. So this Title designation is extremely important, and it would seem that a Title I designation should get heavier scrutiny from the Court.
Why isn’t anyone in Congress or media who do want the truth pointing this out today? Carter Page was designated a spy and therefore the Obama DOJ could spy on him and any contacts in Trump campaign legally!!!! But in fact as we know it was illegally under a false pretense of a fake dossier!!
However, if those who signed on the FISA warrant request KNEW bogus claims were used to obtain surveillance, as I remember all McCabe (?) could testify was that Page travelled to Russia but no other details were verified, it is still a crime.
So was Carter Page mentioned in the Dossier?
Yes he was mentioned, never mind.
One open question: unmasking.
It seems Conservative Treehouse is the only place to learn the nuances of what the FBI/DOJ did.
BUMP!!!!
BTTT!!!!!!!
The scandal just grew exponentially!
YUP. Everyone who had any electronic contact (phone, email, text, etc.) with Carter Page was potentially subjected to FISA surveillance. EVERYONE.
No wonder the Obama team scumbags were “unmasking” hundreds of names. Of course this surveillance would have embraced many in the Trump team, even though Carter Page was reportedly a rather minor figure — but he would have had various contacts, at least in passing, with various people in Trump Tower. Even “cc-ing” people on an email could have exposed them to the FISA warrant surveillance.
This is frickin’ HUGE....
True, but we do not know how much Admiral Rogers knew. He might have been informed about the whole attempted coup. It would explain Trump’s wiretap tweet.
Yes, I agree that the comment on Admiral Rogers may have missed that important point. No reason to assume Rogers did not get clued into at least a large proportion of what was going on, maybe all of it (he was head of the NSA, after all). No wonder he took the initiative to visit Trump Tower without consulting or informing his “colleagues” in the intel community.
Right!!!
“Approval of a FISA application requires the court find probable cause that the target of the surveillance be a “foreign power” or an “agent of a foreign power”, .......[NOTE]..and that the places at which surveillance is requested is used or will be used by that foreign power or its agent “
Carter Page would have called Trump tower or visit there and therefore the FBI, CIA or whoever could legally bugged Trump tower and other Trump campaign places because that’s where the foreign agent would make communications!!!
Cheesea is too stupid to perform any overseas tasks, aside from taking selfies with camels.
I wondered about the Title VII thing....
Not so much. Reply #10 makes it look like unmasking was entailed in the very FISA warrant itself.Title 1 allows not only surveillance of US citizen Carter Page (accused of being a foreign agent by the Clinton financed Steele Trump hating dossier), but also follow up surveillance of any of his direct contacts—the entire Trump team, irrespective of when Page stopped being a campaign advisor. Logic of FISA title one is simple—catch the entire spy network. Result is horrific. Any Page call or email to the Trump team exposed the entire Trump team to surveillance under title 1 of FISA.
So is the investigation of Page where all the unmasking came from? i.e. - they are bugging Page and those around him and therefore capturing other Trump campaign and transition folks? I am not sure how that worked and always assumed per the media reports that the unmasking occurred because U.S. citizen A was talking to foreigner A, but following the description of Title 1, would other persons captured on “surveillance of Page and associates” still need to be unmasked?
That is the other part of this that nobody is talking about - all the unmasking of the Trump team led to the flood of leaks to the media during the transition and well into his first year.
Yup. And why the committee didn't better explain this in the memo is beyond me.
That is what I am thinking and wondering. Maybe it’s Papadopolis, but he was pretty junior, and might not have had any connections. Or maybe it’s Flynn, who seems to have dabbled in international security consulting, but how did they get to him in 2016?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.