Posted on 02/05/2018 5:26:55 AM PST by smileyface
I always thought VJ’s ‘we have two judges ready to go’ meant they WOULD have two once they blackmailed Roberts into catching a terrible case of the flu.
The Nunes memo does not quote the warrant, but it does indicate that the surveillance hoped "to obtain derogatory information on Donald Trump's ties to Russia."That misrepresents what the Nunes memo claims about the warrant.
Given a substantial basis of the article is materially false, I hereby deem the article and the author to be "not trustworthy."
Failed U.S. District Court “Judge” Rudolph Contreras did not understand his immense conflict of interest when he tried to review and approve charges against Flynn to support his original FISA warrant approval to surveill Flynn.
Better to have an honest player review and pass judgement on Rudolph Contreras “work”
I’ve been stating the same since I turned anti-GW for his support of PA (the metaphorical nail in the coffin was his handling of the P3 incident).
It’s clear that none of these “anti-terrorism” laws are being used to combat terrorism, but to combat conservatism.
And who did the FBI share this information with? Did they tell Fusion GPS either directly, or through Nellie Ohr?
My guess is that they if learned something valuable, they would have acted on it by now. Already, they're grasping at straws trying to make something stick, and they have nothing. So, they kept renewing the warrant hoping to find something, and it just never happened.
I’m sure the threats McCabe made against Nunes are just the tip of the iceberg compared to the sort of threats Brennan and Clapper will make against all sorts of people if they try and take them down.
Stilll pissed about this.
Fascinating ... thank you SO MUCH for the post!!!
Rudolph Contreras
Clearly paints a picture of GW despite the fawning here at FR by some...
Is the CIA required to get a warrant for surveillance?
From the perspective of the law, the same rules apply across the board.
A warrant only matters when the case is brought before the court. IOW, it only matter when the government gets caught, or brings a case into court itself.
I got down in the weeds following a set of cases against the NSA, about 10 of them, were consolidated. FISA has civil damages for people "aggrieved," meaning surveilled without a warrant. FISA has civil damages to deter "illegal" surveillance.
The government successfully had the cases tossed on state secrets grounds.
The only cases I know of that maybe involved CIA were physical searches of property of US persons, done overseas. Allowed.
Thank you. Brennan showing up to itch on the Sunday mass news shows, cause me to wonder just who he was talking to.
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.