Reply With Quote
You need to provide other FISA applications to make that argument.
So Steele had a good reputation.
Do you think Steele was hired to make up things better than Fusion GPS could on it's own?
You need to provide other FISA applications to make that argument.
The court was never told it was politically funded.
They don’t exist, therefore it’s significant.
Steele was hired to give the dossier a appearance of credibility. Steele is not credible.
they told them the research was meant to discredit the trump campaign
The court has never granted a warrant to spy on a presidential campaign based on opposition dirt funded by the opposing campaign.
Was the court ever told it was politically funded yes or no?they told them the research was meant to discredit the trump campaign
No.
What would be the significance of the court being told it was politically funded?
Has the court ever granted a warrant to spy on a presidential campaign based on opposition dirt funded by someone other than the opposing campaign?
so you agree with me yet laugh at that fact? You’re strange.
Already answered two posts above.What would be the significance of the court being told it was politically funded?
If you agree the court was never told it was politically funded I’m not sure what you found so funny.
Fence sniper
I’m not aware of the FISC granting any warrant to spy on any campaign. Are you?
You can't use your lack of evidence as evidence.
This warrant wasn't for spying on a campaing. You got me there.
so if you're not aware, it doesn't exist
I'm sure tranny J Edgar Hoover had his corrupt FBI spy on everybody, including Pres candidates and campaigns, is how he stayed in power for 40 years. Are "you aware" of that?
and even if Trash's was the first Pres campaign tatooed with FISA warrants, so what?
FISA been around since the 1980 campaign. JEH FBI spy goes back to 1919.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 07-24-2018 at 05:53 PM.
IT WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE I SAID IT IS SIGNIFICANT
I agree that they weren't told who specifically funded. I laugh at how you make it seem like it is a game changer.
Two posts above you just said (with nothing to corroborate) that the court has never granted a warrant under those cir stances.Already answered two posts above.
That doesn't answer my question. Why would that information be relevant to the FISA judges?
answered above in this postIf you agree the court was never told it was politically funded I’m not sure what you found so funny.
what's the significance of knowing it was politically funded?
you keep dodging so i'll answer. it's significant because it would alert the judge to potential bias in the source, and the judge would then look at the claims with more scrutiny. By informing the court that the information was collected in an effort to discredit the trump campaign, the judge was alerted to potential bias in the source, and therefore likely looked at the claims with more scrutiny.
and he granted the warrant anyway.
and it was granted 4 times by 4 different republican judges
nah not really.
but then that sorta calls into question your position that the disclosure of the precise source of funding would typically be such a difference maker
Steele is very credible. That is why you fail.
You mean like trying to say all the redacted portions of the FISA application you can’t see somehow supports your theory the FBI did it by the book? That kind of lack of evidence as evidence?
Sure it was. Do you not understand a le 1 warrant?
Not my understanding. Have I missed something?But The Washington Post reported late Friday night that the court that approved the warrant was aware at the time that the dossier's production was politically motivated.
One official with knowledge of the matter told The Post that the DOJ made "ample disclosure of relevant, material facts" to the FISC which revealed "the research was being paid for by a political en y."
"No thinking person who read any of these applications would come to any other conclusion" other than that the dossier's production was carried out "at the behest of people with a partisan aim and that it was being done in opposition to Trump," they added.
The revelation appears to corroborate claims made in a 10-page rebuttal memo crafted by Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee. Sources told The New York Times on Friday that the Democratic memo also says the FBI informed the FISC that the dossier was politically motivated, but did not reveal which political en y specifically financed it.
https://www.businessinsider.com/nune...ebunked-2018-2
There are currently 8 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 8 guests)
Posting Permissions