Trump Tower Bugged by BHO?

[C-Mag]

The memo doesn't prove that the FISA warrant was issued solely on the Steele Doss.. Instead, it states things we already know- like that Carter Page was the target of those surveillances and that the warrant was re-issued like three-time- including under Trump's own Justice Department. All it is is Nunes' opinions about the surveillance and his attempts to stop Mueller's investigation.

Did it damage National Security gravely? As was stated by the FBI just the day before.
Did Samsung lose all the FBI's text messages ? No

How many fucking lies the media and FBI push do just agree with Penner ?

[pineapplemike]

Well it was reissued with the Steele dossier as part of the application, right? Who knows if it would have been approved without it. I haven't looked into the timeline closely enough to verify but do we know why the FISA application was denied the first time? Isn't the FISA approval rate something like 99%? But it was denied at first, right? I don't know the details but that seems like a red flag to me

Has Carter Page been charged with anything yet?

[Penner]

Well it was reissued with the Steele dossier as part of the application, right? Who knows if it would have been approved without it. I haven't looked into the timeline closely enough to verify but do we know why the FISA application was denied the first time? Isn't the FISA approval rate something like 99%? But it was denied at first, right? I don't know the details but that seems like a red flag to me

Has Carter Page been charged with anything yet?

I thought that it was re-issued three times afterward and even under Trump's Justice Department. So even if they cited the Steele Doss. there seemed to be other info that they believed to re-issued it two other times, plus the original warrant.

[Okeefenokee]

Well it was reissued with the Steele dossier as part of the application, right? Who knows if it would have been approved without it. I haven't looked into the timeline closely enough to verify but do we know why the FISA application was denied the first time? Isn't the FISA approval rate something like 99%? But it was denied at first, right? I don't know the details but that seems like a red flag to me

Has Carter Page been charged with anything yet?

This is what is wrong with the electorate.

Don't take it the wrong way, Mike, but there's no excuse for not knowing the details at this point.

There is only one detail in the memo that wasn't already known.

The FBI neglected to mention that they knew the dossier was paid for by the DNC.

They knew it came from Hillary. They kept that to themselves.

Four times they presented it, and not once did they admit that they had already recorded testimony proving it was paid for by the DNC.

Four times they sought warrants against US citizens on information they knew came from the DNC, and four times they hid that fact.

[Okeefenokee]

Well it was reissued with the Steele dossier as part of the application, right? Who knows if it would have been approved without it. I haven't looked into the timeline closely enough to verify but do we know why the FISA application was denied the first time? Isn't the FISA approval rate something like 99%? But it was denied at first, right? I don't know the details but that seems like a red flag to me

Has Carter Page been charged with anything yet?

I thought that it was re-issued three times afterward and even under Trump's Justice Department. So even if they cited the Steele Doss. there seemed to be other info that they believed to re-issued it two other times, plus the original warrant.

All four times this warrant was requested the FBI knew the dossier was paid for by Clinton, and all four times they declined to admit it.

[pineapplemike]

Hey screw you pal, I get my news from the MHF so you all only have yourselves to blame

but really I know the FBI misled the FISA court, the circular Yahoo News information laundering trick was news to me too. Other than that the memo merely confirmed many of the details we all knew, I'm just asking other questions

[C-Mag]

Well it was reissued with the Steele dossier as part of the application, right? Who knows if it would have been approved without it. I haven't looked into the timeline closely enough to verify but do we know why the FISA application was denied the first time? Isn't the FISA approval rate something like 99%? But it was denied at first, right? I don't know the details but that seems like a red flag to me

Has Carter Page been charged with anything yet?

I thought that it was re-issued three times afterward and even under Trump's Justice Department. So even if they cited the Steele Doss. there seemed to be other info that they believed to re-issued it two other times, plus the original warrant.

It was reissued 3 times, BUT, the FBI never told the FISA Judge the Exculpatory evidence related to the dossier, that it was biased campaign research, that the Yahoo article used in the FISA was based on the Dossier. When the FISA Warrant goes to the judge, the FBI is swearing that all information is true and presented correctly to the Court. Leaving out the Exculpatory evidence is Obstruction of Justice.

Also, while Comey is telling Congress and the POTUS that the Dossier is " Salacious and Unverified" the FBI is using it in an FBI Warrant. Comey lied to somebody, the judge or Congress and the POTUS.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

As a slight antidote to the breathless hyperventilation of Trump partisans:

Here's the context. It turns out that there is lots of litigation on whether warrant applications need to discuss the bias of informants. Franks v. Delaware allows a criminal defendant to challenge a search warrant by arguing that the statement of probable cause that supported the warrants was fatally flawed. Maybe the officer who swore out the affidavit was lying about the basis for probable cause. Or maybe he recklessly included facts that he should have known were false. Or maybe–as is particularly relevant here–he intentionally or recklessly failed to include facts that the judge needed to know in order to pass on whether there was probable cause. Under Franks, a court will void a search warrant if the defendant can establish that the officer who swore out the warrant "knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth" either included information that was false or excluded information that was true when that information was critical to the probable cause determination.

Franks generates a lot of cases on informant bias. They typically run something like this. The government will get a warrant based in part on the statements or claims of an informant. The affidavit won't give specific reasons to doubt that the informant is credible. Down the road, the warrant will be challenged on the ground that the affidavit failed to tell the judge of good reasons to think the informant was biased and unreliable. Maybe the informant was facing criminal charges and had every incentive to manufacture evidence that others were involved in crimes to strike a better deal for himself. Maybe the informant was the suspect's estranged spouse in the middle of a bitter divorce battle, and she was trying to get him arrested to help get custody of the kids. In each of the cases, the defendant claims that the warrant should be voided because the government failed to disclose the informant's bias. If the government hadn't misled the court, the argument runs, no warrant would have issued because the judge would have seen that the informant could not be trusted.

How has this argument fared? It depends on the case. Most of the time, though, it hasn't fared very well.

Part of the problem is that judges figure that of course informants are often biased. Informants usually have ulterior motives, and judges don't need to be told that. A helpful case is United States v. Strifler, 851 F.2d 1197, 1201 (9th Cir. 1988), in which the government obtained a warrant to search a house for a meth lab inside. Probable cause was based largely on a confidential informant who told the police that he had not only seen a meth lab in the house but had even helped others to try to manufacture meth there. The magistrate judge issued the warrant based on the informant's detailed tip. The search was successful and charges followed.

The defendants challenged the warrant on the ground that the affidavit had failed to mention the remarkable ulterior motives of the informant. The affidavit didn't mention that the "informant" was actually a married couple that had been in a quarrel with the defendants; that the couple was facing criminal charges themselves and had been "guaranteed by the prosecutor that they would not be prosecuted if they provided information"; and that they had been paid by the government for giving the information. The affidavit didn't mention any of that. A big deal, right?

According to the court, no. "It would have to be a very naive magistrate who would suppose that a confidential informant would drop in off the street with such detailed evidence and not have an ulterior motive," Judge Noonan wrote. "The magistrate would naturally have assumed that the informant was not a disinterested citizen." The fact that the magistrate wasn't told that the "informant" was guaranteed to go free and paid for the information didn't matter, as "the magistrate was given reason to think the informant knew a good deal about what was going on" inside the house.

https://lawfareblog.com/dubious-legal-c ... asethememo

And, a more partisan critique, but from the other side:
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... -memo.html

Since the memo also seems to confirm that it was the Papadopoulos situation that led to the investigation, the obsession over Page is silly, and probably a mistake on the part of the pro-Trump crowed, seeing as Page was on the FBI radar since 2014, and only a moron would have hired him.

[C-Mag]

Great Hanarchy, now were explaining why it's OK for the FBI and DOJ to work with the DNC, Media and Hillary Campaign. Is this really where we want to go with our Investigative Agencies? Where the party in power uses these agencies in conjunction with political parties and hand picked candidates ?


Carter Page is my Fuckin Hero.............. What a Gangsta.
This badass has been under investigation for 5 years by the FBI, CIA, NSA, etc. and they can't even get enough on him to arrest him. Holy Cow, it makes me wonder what he did that got him 5 years of surveillance, and how clean he must be not to be in jail............
Really Hanarchy, we should question why the FBI has been investigating Carter Page for 5 years with no results. It reminds me of when dirty cop Bobby Mueller chased the wrong guy for 6 years related to the Anthrax attack.

[Speaker to Animals]

We probably should gas the normies.