I'm seriously done playing games here.
when you dismiss a fake FISA as "crap" there is no point in me re-hashing well traveled ground
FBI Would’ve Been Derelict Not to Use Steele Dossier for the Carter Page FISA Warrant
- Thread starter Nomad
- Start date
when you dismiss a fake FISA as "crap" there is no point in me re-hashing well traveled ground
She said one look at your little dick ... and that changed it.
I do wish you were amusing, even funny; but the only adjectives that come to mind about your posts would be unoriginal, asinine and humorless.
The ONLY way anyone can believe that the Russians got Trump elected are mindless dullards; are you one? This notion that Russia, under Obama's watch, helped Trump to get elected is the most asinine, repugnant claim the left has ever invented.
I do wish you were amusing, even funny; but the only adjectives that come to mind about your posts would be unoriginal, asinine and humorless.
I guess somewhere in the universe, your opinions count.
Just not here.
I guess somewhere in the Universe you think you are relevant and your dishonest bloviating factual.
I guess somewhere in the Universe you think you are relevant and your dishonest bloviating factual.
Right here a Home I'm Da-Man
... just ask my Wife
Nomad
Every trumper is a N4T.
More deflection and nonsense.
From Just Security.org:
"How High Was the Bar for Getting a FISA Warrant to Monitor Carter Page?"
Asha Rangappa, a former FBI agent who specialized in counterintelligence investigations, wrote on that very topic. Before jumping into Rangappa’s analysis (see lengthy excerpt below), note that the Washington Post provides a capsule summary of the content of the FBI’s application to the FISA court:
“The government’s application for the surveillance order targeting Page included a lengthy declaration that laid out investigators’ basis for believing that Page was an agent of the Russian government and knowingly engaged in clandestine intelligence activities on behalf of Moscow, officials said.”
In an article titled, “It Ain’t Easy Getting a FISA Warrant: I Was an FBI Agent and Should Know,” here’s what Rangappa wrote:
… As someone who obtained FISA warrants while conducting counterintelligence investigations for the FBI, I can attest to the fact that they not only don’t involve the White House, but the process includes too many layers of approval to be granted without strong evidence.
There are two ways to obtain a wiretap – also known as electronic surveillance – on U.S. persons (citizens and permanent residents), and both include the courts. For criminal investigations, the FBI can seek a warrant under Title III of the U.S. criminal code by showing a federal court that there is probable cause to believe the target has engaged, or is engaging in, criminal activity. This is a fairly high standard because of a strong presumption in favor of our Fourth Amendment right to privacy, and requires a showing that less intrusive means of obtaining the same information aren’t feasible.
The standard for electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes, though, is a little lower. This is because when it comes to national security, as opposed to criminal prosecutions, our Fourth Amendment rights are balanced against the government’s interest in protecting the country. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) allows the FBI to get a warrant from a secret court, known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), to conduct electronic surveillance on U.S. persons if they can show probable cause that the target is an “agent of a foreign power” who is “knowingly engag[ing]…in clandestine intelligence activities.” In other words, the government has to show that the target might be spying for a foreign government or organization.
But even under this standard, it’s not like the FBI can just decide to stop by a FISC to get a FISA warrant after going through the McDonald’s drive-thru for lunch. To even begin the process leading to a FISA, the FBI has to follow several steps outlined in the Attorney General Guidelines, which govern FBI investigations. First, the FBI has to conduct a “threat assessment” in order to establish grounds for even opening an investigation on potential FISA subjects. If a threat exists, the FBI must then formally open an investigation into possible foreign intelligence activity.
What does this look like in practice? Well, say, hypothetically, that a group of U.S. persons seem to have not infrequent contact with diplomats known to be Russian spies, whom the FBI are already monitoring. (Pro-tip: While it’s possible that such contacts could be accidental – I mean, hypothetically, the Trump inner circle could be a riot to hang out with socially – spies, particularly Russian ones, are pretty good at what they do and don’t spend time with people unless there’s a good reason.) The FBI might determine that, if the U.S. persons have access to classified information or could otherwise be “developed” for intelligence purposes by a foreign spy service, a significant enough threat exists to open an investigation – this would require at least one layer of approval within the FBI, and possibly more if the investigation concerns high-profile individuals.
The case still wouldn’t be FISA bound. FISA warrant investigations can’t be opened “solely on the basis of First Amendment activities,” so mere fraternization, even with sketchy people, wouldn’t be enough. The FBI would have to gather evidence to support a the claim that the U.S. target was knowingly working on behalf of a foreign entity. This could include information gathered from other methods like human sources, physical surveillance, bank transactions or even documents found in the target’s trash. This takes some time, and, when enough evidence had been accumulated, would be outlined in an affidavit and application stating the grounds for the FISA warrant. The completed FISA application would go up for approval through the FBI chain of command, including a Supervisor, the Chief Division Counsel (the highest lawyer within that FBI field office), and finally, the Special Agent in Charge of the field office, before making its way to FBI Headquarters to get approval by (at least) the Unit-level Supervisor there. If you’re exhausted already, hang on: There’s more.
The FISA application then travels to the Justice Department where attorneys from the National Security Division comb through the application to verify all the assertions made in it. Known as “Woods procedures” after Michael J. Woods, the FBI Special Agent attorney who developed this layer of approval, DOJ verifies the accuracy of every fact stated in the application. If anything looks unsubstantiated, the application is sent back to the FBI to provide additional evidentiary support – this game of bureaucratic chutes and ladders continues until DOJ is satisfied that the facts in the FISA application can both be corroborated and meet the legal standards for the court. After getting sign-off from a senior DOJ official (finally!), a lawyer from DOJ takes the FISA application before the FISC, comprised of eleven federal district judges who sit on the court on a rotating basis. The FISC reviews the application in secret, and decides whether to approve the warrant.
Now, it’s true that since its inception in 1978, the FISC has approved the vast majority of the over 25,000 FISA applications it has reviewed – some estimates put the number at over 99 percent. But that’s not surprising given the extensive process described above. In fact, if some reports are true that the initial FISA applications submitted to the FISC were rejected, prompting the FBI and DOJ to change its targets to the Russian banks doing business with Trump associates rather than the associates themselves (which would only require showing probable cause that the banks are a “foreign power,” which by definition they are), then a FISA application for Trump Tower, if one exists, would have been subject to even more scrutiny than would normally be the case.
In short, the FISA warrant process is designed to protect against the very abuse of power that the President has accused his predecessor of exercising. You could even say that FISA applications go through an “extreme vetting” process before being granted – something that the Trump administration ought to support.
https://www.justsecurity.org/39886/high-bar-fisa-warrant-monitor-carter-page/
Why would I ask anything of a woman stupid enough to marry "a" you?
Your Best Move yet ...
Nomad
Every trumper is a N4T.
Visible portions showed that the F.B.I. in stark terms had told the intelligence court that Mr. Page “has established relationships with Russian government officials, including Russian intelligence officers”; that the bureau believed “the Russian government’s efforts are being coordinated with Page and perhaps other individuals associated with” Mr. Trump’s campaign; and that Mr. Page “has been collaborating and conspiring with the Russian government.”
Yet, after all the spying and FISA warrants:
Mr. Page has denied being a Russian agent and has not been charged with a crime in the nearly two years since the initial wiretap application was filed.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/21/us/politics/carter-page-fisa.html
The warrant:
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...isa-documents-foia-release/full/optimized.pdf
Yet, after all the spying and FISA warrants:
Mr. Page has denied being a Russian agent and has not been charged with a crime in the nearly two years since the initial wiretap application was filed.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/21/us/politics/carter-page-fisa.html
The warrant:
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...isa-documents-foia-release/full/optimized.pdf
I've read this a dozen times on my own..
for once can you do more the c/pLONG articles without making your point? I doubt you can.
But buried in that mass of generalities is this:
now think about what I told you in the beginning -i even started a thread.
There was a LONG Email chain where there was discussion about the Steele dossier being unverified.
Do you see the monkey wrench in the works?
https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/4...vide-most-damning-evidence-of-fisa-abuses-yet
The email exchanges show the FBI was aware — before it secured the now-infamous warrant — that there were intelligence community concerns about the reliability of the main evidence used to support it: the Christopher Steele dossier.
The exchanges also indicate FBI officials were aware that Steele, the former MI6 British intelligence operative then working as a confidential human source for the bureau, had contacts with news media reporters before the FISA warrant was secured.
f the FBI knew of his media contacts and the concerns about the reliability of his dossier before seeking the warrant, it would constitute a serious breach of FISA regulations and the trust that the FISA court places in the FBI.
That’s because the FBI has an obligation to certify to the court before it approves FISA warrants that its evidence is verified, and to alert the judges to any flaws in its evidence or information that suggest the target might be innocent.
There was no "probable" cause and most of the "causation" listed in the actual application was pure unadulterated speculation. This was a set up by anti-Trump criminals like Comey, Mary B. McCord, Rachel L. Brand, Peter Strzok, Loretta Lynch, Lisa Page, James Clapper, Susan Rice, Sally Yates and John Brennan.
Tranquillus in Exile
New member
You said: Yes it was leaked to the media.
I repeat: WHAT was leaked to the media?
If you can show that the FBI spied on a presidential campaign and used the information for political purposes, that's a hundred times worse than any crap FISA.
But you can't, because it didn't happen. So it's back to Carter Page ... YAWN.
Moron; nothing says "dishonest" more than leftists pretending they can't use the internet. STFU
By October 2016, Steele had compiled 33 pages (16 memos), and he then passed on what he had discovered to David Corn, a reporter from Mother Jones magazine. On October 31, 2016, a week before the election, Mother Jones reported that a former intelligence officer, whom they did not name, had produced a report based on Russian sources and turned it over to the FBI.
Tranquillus in Exile
New member
WTF are you going on about, you idiot? I know that STEELE passed some of his stuff to David Corn. He had been trying to get the liberal media to publish it for months.
In the post I was replying to, anatta implied that THE FBI carried out political spying on Trump's campaign and leaked what they found to the media. I asked what he meant by that. He clammed up.
Can't you see the difference?
when? For sure Comey leaked to get Mueller.
and Comey knew the FISA was corrupt by the Email chain just discovered. but here.
New Texts Show FBI Officials Had Media Leak Strategy To Hurt Trump During Russia Probe
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattv...cials-had-media-leak-strategy-during-n2517655
in the first message, Strzok, who then served as deputy chief of the FBI’s counterintelligence division, wrote to Page that: “I had literally just gone to find this phone to tell you I want to talk to you about media leak strategy with DOJ before you go.”
Strzok was at that time the lead investigator on the FBI’s probe into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government. He joined the special counsel’s investigation after it was formed in May 2017. He was removed from the investigation in July 2017 after the discovery of anti-Trump text messages that he exchanged with Lisa Page. He was fired from the FBI on Aug. 10.
In one Aug. 8, 2016, message, Strzok told Page that President Donald Trump would never become president, because “We’ll stop it.”
Meadows says in his letter that an April 12, 2017, text message shows Strzok congratulating Page while referring to two damaging articles about former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.
Meadows wrote that “in the text, Strzok warns Page two articles are coming out, one which is ‘worse’ than the other about Lisa’s ‘namesake.'”
“Well done, Page,” Strzok wrote. It is unclear if he was referring to Lisa Page or Carter Page.
The text messages were included in a batch of records recently provided to Congress.
Tranquillus in Exile
New member
I was referring to the FBI investigation in 2016, which anatta said was "bogus".
anatta replied in post #31:
FBI Leaked To Media, Used Media's Reports To Get FISA Warrants, Congressman Says
"FBI intelligence analyst Jonathan Moffa’s Friday testimony behind closed doors before the House Judiciary and Oversight committees."
https://www.dailywire.com/news/35150/fbi-leaked-media-used-medias-reports-get-fisa-ryan-saavedra
Yeah, I know asshat; it's fake news right?
so are you good on the leaks? now if we can get your mind right on the fake FISAs