One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
Report: Mueller has sordid history with FISA court
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: 1 2 3 4 next>>
Feb 7, 2019 10:27:41   #
no propaganda please (a regular here)
 
WND
Report: Mueller has sordid history with FISA court
'The episode is taking on new significance'

WASHINGTON - FBI Director Robert Mueller testifies during a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee July 26, 2007 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. The hearing was held to examine whether the FBI have misused their power. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON – FBI Director Robert Mueller testifies during a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee July 26, 2007 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. The hearing was held to examine whether the FBI have misused their power. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

A large part of the “Russia” investigation that Democrats – and FBI special counsel Robert Mueller – have left unexplained so far is how the opposition research document funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign, the so-called “dossier” which remains unverified to this day, ended up as “evidence” before the secret Washington FISA court that then on its weight authorized spying on the Trump campaign.

Republicans in the House were working on prying that information out of the D.C. establishment when the Democrats abruptly were given the majority.

But a new report in the Hill explains that Mueller has a record of being summoned before FISA judges to explain evidence that was – or was not submitted.

Award-winning investigative writer John Solomon explained Mueller, “once was hauled before the nation’s secret intelligence court to address a large number of instances in which the FBI cheated on sensitive surveillance warrants, according to evidence gathered by congressional investigators.”

He pointed out the events of years ago have “escaped public notice” because of the secrecy embedded in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.”

It’s come out now because of testimony from a former FBI lawyer.

“The episode is taking on new significance as Mueller moves into the final stages of his Russia probe while evidence mounts that the FBI work preceding his appointment as special prosecutor may have involved improprieties in the securing of a FISA warrant to spy on Donald Trump’s campaign in the final weeks of the 2016 campaign,” Solomon explained.

Back then it was material facts that FBI agents applying for FISA warrants in counterterrorism and counterintelligence cases simply … left out.

“Such omissions are a serious matter at the FISC, because it is the one court in America where the accused gets no representation or chance to defend himself. And that means the FBI is obligated to disclose evidence of both guilt and innocence about the target of a FISA warrant,” Solomon explained.

The lawyer, Trisha Anderson, testified before House investigators that early in Mueller’s time as FBI director, “the FISC summoned the new director to appear before the judges to address concerns about extensive cheating on FISA warrants.”

“It preceded my time with the FBI but as I understood it, there was a pattern of some incidents of omission that were of concern to the FISA court that resulted in former Director Mueller actually appearing before the FISA court,” Anderson told Congress.

Mueller’s office now declined to comment on Solomon’s report.

But Solomon said other sources confirmed the court was concerned during the 2002 and 2003 time frame, “shortly after America was stunned by the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks – when the FISC learned the FBI had omitted material facts from FISA warrant applications in more than 75 terrorism cases that dated back to the late 1990s.”



The report said the judges wanted to be assured the “new sheriff in town” was going to halt such “abuses.”

Solomon reported, “Mueller does not appear ever to have publicly addressed his appearance before the FISC. But once, in follow-up written answers to the Senate Judiciary Committee, he acknowledged there was a period in which the FBI was caught filing inaccurate FISA warrants.”

Mueller told senators in 2003, “Prior to implementation of the so-called Woods Procedures there were instances where inaccurate information was provided by FBI field offices and headquarters personnel to the court.”

The report noted that in once case, the FBI sought a FISA warrant, but failed to tell the judges their target was their own informant.

The report said, “We now know the FBI, in 2016, omitted significant information from the application for the FISA warrant that allowed it to spy on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page in hopes of finding evidence of collusion between Russia and the GOP presidential nominee’s campaign.”

That was that the “primary evidence,” the dossier, wasn’t evidence at all, but was “political opposition research produced on behalf of and paid for by the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s campaign, in hopes of harming Trump’s election chances.”

| Reply
Feb 7, 2019 10:54:45   #
byronglimish (a regular here)
 
no propaganda please wrote:
WND
Report: Mueller has sordid history with FISA court
'The episode is taking on new significance'

WASHINGTON - FBI Director Robert Mueller testifies during a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee July 26, 2007 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. The hearing was held to examine whether the FBI have misused their power. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON – FBI Director Robert Mueller testifies during a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee July 26, 2007 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. The hearing was held to examine whether the FBI have misused their power. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

A large part of the “Russia” investigation that Democrats – and FBI special counsel Robert Mueller – have left unexplained so far is how the opposition research document funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign, the so-called “dossier” which remains unverified to this day, ended up as “evidence” before the secret Washington FISA court that then on its weight authorized spying on the Trump campaign.

Republicans in the House were working on prying that information out of the D.C. establishment when the Democrats abruptly were given the majority.

But a new report in the Hill explains that Mueller has a record of being summoned before FISA judges to explain evidence that was – or was not submitted.

Award-winning investigative writer John Solomon explained Mueller, “once was hauled before the nation’s secret intelligence court to address a large number of instances in which the FBI cheated on sensitive surveillance warrants, according to evidence gathered by congressional investigators.”

He pointed out the events of years ago have “escaped public notice” because of the secrecy embedded in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.”

It’s come out now because of testimony from a former FBI lawyer.

“The episode is taking on new significance as Mueller moves into the final stages of his Russia probe while evidence mounts that the FBI work preceding his appointment as special prosecutor may have involved improprieties in the securing of a FISA warrant to spy on Donald Trump’s campaign in the final weeks of the 2016 campaign,” Solomon explained.

Back then it was material facts that FBI agents applying for FISA warrants in counterterrorism and counterintelligence cases simply … left out.

“Such omissions are a serious matter at the FISC, because it is the one court in America where the accused gets no representation or chance to defend himself. And that means the FBI is obligated to disclose evidence of both guilt and innocence about the target of a FISA warrant,” Solomon explained.

The lawyer, Trisha Anderson, testified before House investigators that early in Mueller’s time as FBI director, “the FISC summoned the new director to appear before the judges to address concerns about extensive cheating on FISA warrants.”

“It preceded my time with the FBI but as I understood it, there was a pattern of some incidents of omission that were of concern to the FISA court that resulted in former Director Mueller actually appearing before the FISA court,” Anderson told Congress.

Mueller’s office now declined to comment on Solomon’s report.

But Solomon said other sources confirmed the court was concerned during the 2002 and 2003 time frame, “shortly after America was stunned by the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks – when the FISC learned the FBI had omitted material facts from FISA warrant applications in more than 75 terrorism cases that dated back to the late 1990s.”



The report said the judges wanted to be assured the “new sheriff in town” was going to halt such “abuses.”

Solomon reported, “Mueller does not appear ever to have publicly addressed his appearance before the FISC. But once, in follow-up written answers to the Senate Judiciary Committee, he acknowledged there was a period in which the FBI was caught filing inaccurate FISA warrants.”

Mueller told senators in 2003, “Prior to implementation of the so-called Woods Procedures there were instances where inaccurate information was provided by FBI field offices and headquarters personnel to the court.”

The report noted that in once case, the FBI sought a FISA warrant, but failed to tell the judges their target was their own informant.

The report said, “We now know the FBI, in 2016, omitted significant information from the application for the FISA warrant that allowed it to spy on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page in hopes of finding evidence of collusion between Russia and the GOP presidential nominee’s campaign.”

That was that the “primary evidence,” the dossier, wasn’t evidence at all, but was “political opposition research produced on behalf of and paid for by the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s campaign, in hopes of harming Trump’s election chances.”
WND br Report: Mueller has sordid history with FIS... (show quote)




Mueller is a known professional framer!

His main method of operation is to steer an investigation away from the guilty and frame the innocent.

That's his history, he turns my stomach by just looking at him.

I believe that Whitey Bulger was murdered because he knew too much about Mueller.

Lucifer must be proud of his son Robert Swan Mueller.

| Reply
Feb 7, 2019 11:07:44   #
Kevyn (a regular here)
 
no propaganda please wrote:
WND
Report: Mueller has sordid history with FISA court
'The episode is taking on new significance'

WASHINGTON - FBI Director Robert Mueller testifies during a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee July 26, 2007 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. The hearing was held to examine whether the FBI have misused their power. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON – FBI Director Robert Mueller testifies during a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee July 26, 2007 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. The hearing was held to examine whether the FBI have misused their power. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

A large part of the “Russia” investigation that Democrats – and FBI special counsel Robert Mueller – have left unexplained so far is how the opposition research document funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign, the so-called “dossier” which remains unverified to this day, ended up as “evidence” before the secret Washington FISA court that then on its weight authorized spying on the Trump campaign.

Republicans in the House were working on prying that information out of the D.C. establishment when the Democrats abruptly were given the majority.

But a new report in the Hill explains that Mueller has a record of being summoned before FISA judges to explain evidence that was – or was not submitted.

Award-winning investigative writer John Solomon explained Mueller, “once was hauled before the nation’s secret intelligence court to address a large number of instances in which the FBI cheated on sensitive surveillance warrants, according to evidence gathered by congressional investigators.”

He pointed out the events of years ago have “escaped public notice” because of the secrecy embedded in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.”

It’s come out now because of testimony from a former FBI lawyer.

“The episode is taking on new significance as Mueller moves into the final stages of his Russia probe while evidence mounts that the FBI work preceding his appointment as special prosecutor may have involved improprieties in the securing of a FISA warrant to spy on Donald Trump’s campaign in the final weeks of the 2016 campaign,” Solomon explained.

Back then it was material facts that FBI agents applying for FISA warrants in counterterrorism and counterintelligence cases simply … left out.

“Such omissions are a serious matter at the FISC, because it is the one court in America where the accused gets no representation or chance to defend himself. And that means the FBI is obligated to disclose evidence of both guilt and innocence about the target of a FISA warrant,” Solomon explained.

The lawyer, Trisha Anderson, testified before House investigators that early in Mueller’s time as FBI director, “the FISC summoned the new director to appear before the judges to address concerns about extensive cheating on FISA warrants.”

“It preceded my time with the FBI but as I understood it, there was a pattern of some incidents of omission that were of concern to the FISA court that resulted in former Director Mueller actually appearing before the FISA court,” Anderson told Congress.

Mueller’s office now declined to comment on Solomon’s report.

But Solomon said other sources confirmed the court was concerned during the 2002 and 2003 time frame, “shortly after America was stunned by the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks – when the FISC learned the FBI had omitted material facts from FISA warrant applications in more than 75 terrorism cases that dated back to the late 1990s.”



The report said the judges wanted to be assured the “new sheriff in town” was going to halt such “abuses.”

Solomon reported, “Mueller does not appear ever to have publicly addressed his appearance before the FISC. But once, in follow-up written answers to the Senate Judiciary Committee, he acknowledged there was a period in which the FBI was caught filing inaccurate FISA warrants.”

Mueller told senators in 2003, “Prior to implementation of the so-called Woods Procedures there were instances where inaccurate information was provided by FBI field offices and headquarters personnel to the court.”

The report noted that in once case, the FBI sought a FISA warrant, but failed to tell the judges their target was their own informant.

The report said, “We now know the FBI, in 2016, omitted significant information from the application for the FISA warrant that allowed it to spy on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page in hopes of finding evidence of collusion between Russia and the GOP presidential nominee’s campaign.”

That was that the “primary evidence,” the dossier, wasn’t evidence at all, but was “political opposition research produced on behalf of and paid for by the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s campaign, in hopes of harming Trump’s election chances.”
WND br Report: Mueller has sordid history with FIS... (show quote)
Mueller was assigned to investigate the role our Russian adversaries played in the 2016 election and if there were any ties to the Trump campaign. This is likely the most important thing to know in order to mitigate forign meddeling in future elections and severely punish any Americans who facilitated the Russians in this endeavor.

No patriotic American can in any way be against finding out everything we can about this sculduggery. In the process of investigating Russian meddeling Mueller has uncovered evidence of other organized criminal activities and has refered them for prosecution, as he should.

The Dossier Trumps apologists demonize was information collected by a former British intelligence officer none of it is fictitious and much of it is demonstrably true. This evidence was so alarming the former agent brought it to the attention of the FBI. It was commissioned initially as opposition research not by anyone in the Clinton campaign but by republicans running against Donald Trump in the primaries. Discrediting how a warrant was obtained is nothing but a mobsters way of trying to wiggle out of criminal charges, looking for a loophole in the law to dodge prosecution. It is a joke in this instance as the evidence presented to obtain a search warrant is not proof beyond reasonable doubt or even a preponderance of evidence it is simply probable cause. The Steel Dossier clearly meets and far exceeds this threshold.

| Reply
Feb 7, 2019 11:10:13   #
no propaganda please (a regular here)
 
Kevyn wrote:
Mueller was assigned to investigate the role our Russian adversaries played in the 2016 election and if there were any ties to the Trump campaign. This is likely the most important thing to know in order to mitigate forign meddeling in future elections and severely punish any Americans who facilitated the Russians in this endeavor.

No patriotic American can in any way be against finding out everything we can about this sculduggery. In the process of investigating Russian meddeling Mueller has uncovered evidence of other organized criminal activities and has refered them for prosecution, as he should.

The Dossier Trumps apologists demonize was information collected by a former British intelligence officer none of it is fictitious and much of it is demonstrably true. This evidence was so alarming the former agent brought it to the attention of the FBI. It was commissioned initially as opposition research not by anyone in the Clinton campaign but by republicans running against Donald Trump in the primaries. Discrediting how a warrant was obtained is nothing but a mobsters way of trying to wiggle out of criminal charges, looking for a loophole in the law to dodge prosecution. It is a joke in this instance as the evidence presented to obtain a search warrant is not proof beyond reasonable doubt or even a preponderance of evidence it is simply probable cause. The Steel Dossier clearly meets and far exceeds this threshold.
Mueller was assigned to investigate the role our R... (show quote)


Except that the entire Steel Dossier is a FRAUD!!!!!

| Reply
Feb 7, 2019 11:19:41   #
byronglimish (a regular here)
 
Kevyn wrote:
Mueller was assigned to investigate the role our Russian adversaries played in the 2016 election and if there were any ties to the Trump campaign. This is likely the most important thing to know in order to mitigate forign meddeling in future elections and severely punish any Americans who facilitated the Russians in this endeavor.

No patriotic American can in any way be against finding out everything we can about this sculduggery. In the process of investigating Russian meddeling Mueller has uncovered evidence of other organized criminal activities and has refered them for prosecution, as he should.

The Dossier Trumps apologists demonize was information collected by a former British intelligence officer none of it is fictitious and much of it is demonstrably true. This evidence was so alarming the former agent brought it to the attention of the FBI. It was commissioned initially as opposition research not by anyone in the Clinton campaign but by republicans running against Donald Trump in the primaries. Discrediting how a warrant was obtained is nothing but a mobsters way of trying to wiggle out of criminal charges, looking for a loophole in the law to dodge prosecution. It is a joke in this instance as the evidence presented to obtain a search warrant is not proof beyond reasonable doubt or even a preponderance of evidence it is simply probable cause. The Steel Dossier clearly meets and far exceeds this threshold.
Mueller was assigned to investigate the role our R... (show quote)




If it was a lawful investigation, Hillary's involvement wouldn't be so closely guarded.

I understand that the Progs are so insanely biased that they have not delved into the truth about Muellers past, and only parrot what Maddow hypnotizes them to parrot.

Polly want a cracker?

| Reply
Feb 7, 2019 14:32:05   #
Kevyn (a regular here)
 
no propaganda please wrote:
Except that the entire Steel Dossier is a FRAUD!!!!!

It clearly is not a fraud at all. Much if not all of its content is factual weather or not it would stand up to evidentiary rules in court it is certainly more than enough to raise the rather easy issues of probable cause necessary to obtain a warrant. Any of dozens of unsavory things Trump did during the campaign were more than enough to cross that threshold including publicly inviting the Russians to hack a United States Secretary of State.

| Reply
Feb 7, 2019 14:34:21   #
Kevyn (a regular here)
 
byronglimish wrote:
If it was a lawful investigation, Hillary's involvement wouldn't be so closely guarded.

I understand that the Progs are so insanely biased that they have not delved into the truth about Muellers past, and only parrot what Maddow hypnotizes them to parrot.

Polly want a cracker?

Mueller has closely guarded his investigation of your idiot Pumpkinfuhrer. The only thing we know about the investigation comes from the numerous charges filed and guilty pleas from Trumps accomplices.

| Reply
Feb 7, 2019 15:26:21   #
Bad Bob (a regular here)
 
no propaganda please wrote:
WND
Report: Mueller has sordid history with FISA court
'The episode is taking on new significance'

WASHINGTON - FBI Director Robert Mueller testifies during a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee July 26, 2007 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. The hearing was held to examine whether the FBI have misused their power. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON – FBI Director Robert Mueller testifies during a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee July 26, 2007 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. The hearing was held to examine whether the FBI have misused their power. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

A large part of the “Russia” investigation that Democrats – and FBI special counsel Robert Mueller – have left unexplained so far is how the opposition research document funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign, the so-called “dossier” which remains unverified to this day, ended up as “evidence” before the secret Washington FISA court that then on its weight authorized spying on the Trump campaign.

Republicans in the House were working on prying that information out of the D.C. establishment when the Democrats abruptly were given the majority.

But a new report in the Hill explains that Mueller has a record of being summoned before FISA judges to explain evidence that was – or was not submitted.

Award-winning investigative writer John Solomon explained Mueller, “once was hauled before the nation’s secret intelligence court to address a large number of instances in which the FBI cheated on sensitive surveillance warrants, according to evidence gathered by congressional investigators.”

He pointed out the events of years ago have “escaped public notice” because of the secrecy embedded in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.”

It’s come out now because of testimony from a former FBI lawyer.

“The episode is taking on new significance as Mueller moves into the final stages of his Russia probe while evidence mounts that the FBI work preceding his appointment as special prosecutor may have involved improprieties in the securing of a FISA warrant to spy on Donald Trump’s campaign in the final weeks of the 2016 campaign,” Solomon explained.

Back then it was material facts that FBI agents applying for FISA warrants in counterterrorism and counterintelligence cases simply … left out.

“Such omissions are a serious matter at the FISC, because it is the one court in America where the accused gets no representation or chance to defend himself. And that means the FBI is obligated to disclose evidence of both guilt and innocence about the target of a FISA warrant,” Solomon explained.

The lawyer, Trisha Anderson, testified before House investigators that early in Mueller’s time as FBI director, “the FISC summoned the new director to appear before the judges to address concerns about extensive cheating on FISA warrants.”

“It preceded my time with the FBI but as I understood it, there was a pattern of some incidents of omission that were of concern to the FISA court that resulted in former Director Mueller actually appearing before the FISA court,” Anderson told Congress.

Mueller’s office now declined to comment on Solomon’s report.

But Solomon said other sources confirmed the court was concerned during the 2002 and 2003 time frame, “shortly after America was stunned by the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks – when the FISC learned the FBI had omitted material facts from FISA warrant applications in more than 75 terrorism cases that dated back to the late 1990s.”



The report said the judges wanted to be assured the “new sheriff in town” was going to halt such “abuses.”

Solomon reported, “Mueller does not appear ever to have publicly addressed his appearance before the FISC. But once, in follow-up written answers to the Senate Judiciary Committee, he acknowledged there was a period in which the FBI was caught filing inaccurate FISA warrants.”

Mueller told senators in 2003, “Prior to implementation of the so-called Woods Procedures there were instances where inaccurate information was provided by FBI field offices and headquarters personnel to the court.”

The report noted that in once case, the FBI sought a FISA warrant, but failed to tell the judges their target was their own informant.

The report said, “We now know the FBI, in 2016, omitted significant information from the application for the FISA warrant that allowed it to spy on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page in hopes of finding evidence of collusion between Russia and the GOP presidential nominee’s campaign.”

That was that the “primary evidence,” the dossier, wasn’t evidence at all, but was “political opposition research produced on behalf of and paid for by the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s campaign, in hopes of harming Trump’s election chances.”
WND br Report: Mueller has sordid history with FIS... (show quote)


WND



| Reply
Feb 8, 2019 11:06:06   #
kemmer (a regular here)
 
Kevyn wrote:
Mueller has closely guarded his investigation of your idiot Pumpkinfuhrer. The only thing we know about the investigation comes from the numerous charges filed and guilty pleas from Trumps accomplices.


And today, we'll find out just how much of the classified Mueller investigation and findings have been fed to Trump by his minion Wittacker.

| Reply
Feb 8, 2019 19:03:17   #
Seth (a regular here)
 
Kevyn wrote:
Mueller was assigned to investigate the role our Russian adversaries played in the 2016 election and if there were any ties to the Trump campaign. This is likely the most important thing to know in order to mitigate forign meddeling in future elections and severely punish any Americans who facilitated the Russians in this endeavor.

No patriotic American can in any way be against finding out everything we can about this sculduggery. In the process of investigating Russian meddeling Mueller has uncovered evidence of other organized criminal activities and has refered them for prosecution, as he should.

The Dossier Trumps apologists demonize was information collected by a former British intelligence officer none of it is fictitious and much of it is demonstrably true. This evidence was so alarming the former agent brought it to the attention of the FBI. It was commissioned initially as opposition research not by anyone in the Clinton campaign but by republicans running against Donald Trump in the primaries. Discrediting how a warrant was obtained is nothing but a mobsters way of trying to wiggle out of criminal charges, looking for a loophole in the law to dodge prosecution. It is a joke in this instance as the evidence presented to obtain a search warrant is not proof beyond reasonable doubt or even a preponderance of evidence it is simply probable cause. The Steel Dossier clearly meets and far exceeds this threshold.
Mueller was assigned to investigate the role our R... (show quote)


Kevyn, the very use of the word "patriotic" in any of your anti-Trump blurbs could only be described as offensive to any American who loves this country.

You haven't got a clue as to the meaning of the word "patriotic."

| Reply
Feb 8, 2019 19:09:41   #
Auntie Lulu (a regular here)
 
byronglimish wrote:
Mueller is a known professional framer!

His main method of operation is to steer an investigation away from the guilty and frame the innocent.

That's his history, he turns my stomach by just looking at him.

I believe that Whitey Bulger was murdered because he knew too much about Mueller.

Lucifer must be proud of his son Robert Swan Mueller.


It doesn't take much to convince me that Mueller certainly is a Son of Satan. His evil doings can be traced back several decades . . . yet nothing seems to stop him.

| Reply
Feb 8, 2019 19:16:31   #
Louie27 (a regular here)
 
Kevyn wrote:
Mueller was assigned to investigate the role our Russian adversaries played in the 2016 election and if there were any ties to the Trump campaign. This is likely the most important thing to know in order to mitigate forign meddeling in future elections and severely punish any Americans who facilitated the Russians in this endeavor.

No patriotic American can in any way be against finding out everything we can about this sculduggery. In the process of investigating Russian meddeling Mueller has uncovered evidence of other organized criminal activities and has refered them for prosecution, as he should.

The Dossier Trumps apologists demonize was information collected by a former British intelligence officer none of it is fictitious and much of it is demonstrably true. This evidence was so alarming the former agent brought it to the attention of the FBI. It was commissioned initially as opposition research not by anyone in the Clinton campaign but by republicans running against Donald Trump in the primaries. Discrediting how a warrant was obtained is nothing but a mobsters way of trying to wiggle out of criminal charges, looking for a loophole in the law to dodge prosecution. It is a joke in this instance as the evidence presented to obtain a search warrant is not proof beyond reasonable doubt or even a preponderance of evidence it is simply probable cause. The Steel Dossier clearly meets and far exceeds this threshold.
Mueller was assigned to investigate the role our R... (show quote)


You seem to forget that the Republicans that were involved initially, with an investigation into Trump, pulled out before the dossier was written by Steele for the Democratic party and Hillary, which is a known fact. Two high ranking people in the FBI also had said it was unverified. but you have your head so far stuck into the sand you do not realize the evidence against the dossier.

| Reply
Feb 8, 2019 19:18:51   #
Louie27 (a regular here)
 
Kevyn wrote:
It clearly is not a fraud at all. Much if not all of its content is factual weather or not it would stand up to evidentiary rules in court it is certainly more than enough to raise the rather easy issues of probable cause necessary to obtain a warrant. Any of dozens of unsavory things Trump did during the campaign were more than enough to cross that threshold including publicly inviting the Russians to hack a United States Secretary of State.


So now you have become a judge and jury into something that you have no first hand knowledge about, just speculation. So sad.

| Reply
Feb 8, 2019 19:22:07   #
Bad Bob (a regular here)
 
Auntie Lulu wrote:
It doesn't take much to convince me that Mueller certainly is a Son of Satan. His evil doings can be traced back several decades . . . yet nothing seems to stop him.



| Reply
Feb 8, 2019 20:14:33   #
Seth (a regular here)
 
Louie27 wrote:
You seem to forget that the Republicans that were involved initially, with an investigation into Trump, pulled out before the dossier was written by Steele for the Democratic party and Hillary, which is a known fact. Two high ranking people in the FBI also had said it was unverified. but you have your head so far stuck into the sand you do not realize the evidence against the dossier.


Correction: It's not in the sand that his head is stuck, there's somewhat more contortion in play.

| Reply
Page: 1 2 3 4 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2019 IDF International Technologies, Inc.