Right wingers need to answer this question (Page 5): Parroting. Pimped. Gullible. I***t. Cult. Anyone see a pattern here?

Larry the Legend Loc: Not hiding in Milton

Kevyn wrote:

Wrong you are, oh so wrong. You are parroting a false narrative pimped to the gullible members of the I***t Pumpkinfuhrer’s cult. The threshold to obtain a warrant is simply probable cause. There is no obligation to provide exculpatory evidence when applying for a warrant. There is no need to provide proof beyond reasonable doubt or even a preponderance of evidence. Probable cause is all, and then it is at the judges discretion.

Parroting. Pimped. Gullible. I***t. Cult. Anyone see a pattern here?

Big dog

Larry the Legend wrote:

Parroting. Pimped. Gullible. I***t. Cult. Anyone see a pattern here?

Sorry, I don’t read anything Kevyn posts

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

Larry the Legend wrote:

Parroting. Pimped. Gullible. I***t. Cult. Anyone see a pattern here?

He's guilty! of these and a Pandora's box of more.

JoyV

Ricktloml wrote:

The great majority of the media LIED for over 2 ye... (show quote)

I couldn't have it better!!!!!

Reality

Airforceone wrote:

Trump for 3 months has taken to the bully pulpit and keeps telling the American people that finally the Muellar investigation is over and its case closed I have been 100% exonerated it’s time to move on.

But why is he still attacking Muellar why is he still attacking Mueller's team of investigators, why is he blocking Subpoenas why is he refusing to turn over documents.

After all he has been exonerated. He should be putting Muellar on Rushmore

Because it was an attempted c**p foo!

JoyV

Airforceone wrote:

The investigation into Russians hacking our e******n was illegally initiated and the FBI found Trump officials h*****g out with the people that hacked our e******n.

If Trump and his cronies did nothing illegal why are they still obstructing the investigation

So you hang in there son your ignorance is about to be exposed but ignorant people don’t know there because there to ignorant.
And don’t call me son

How can anyone be STILL obstructing an investigation which has ended and been released to the public?

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Kevyn wrote:

As long as the official applying for the warrant doesn't know the information is false there is no issue. As an example if an informant gives a police officer erroneous information about a suspect and the police act in good faith applying for the warrant the warrant remains legal as the cop did not act in bad faith. Beyond that if some of the information used to obtain the warrant is false and someone true the warrant is still completely legitimate.

The FISC does not operate the same as a criminal court. The FISC does not issue arrest or search warrants. FISC exists solely to issue a warrant to conduct surveillance on an American citizen.

. . . . 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.

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 t***sactions 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.

Comey’s confession: dossier not verified before, or after, FISA warrant

Liberty Tree

Big dog wrote:

Sorry, I don’t read anything Kevyn posts

I am with you. The best response to kevyn is to not read his posts and certainly not respond in any manner.

JoyV

Airforceone wrote:

4 more years of Trump this country falls under a dictator. You people have no idea who Trump is and what he is capable of and what he will do.

Okay give me one bill Trump has sponsored that created this economy. And the BS at the southern border is a self inflicted crisis. Only an i***t cannot see that but r****t are usually blind they can’t see the forest thru the tress unless it’s an all white society.

People like you make me sick

First of all, the crisis at our border has been so bad well before Trump took office that my state in desperation after pleading for federal aide which was denied, finally attempted to try to stem the flood ourselves. THEN Obama acted. Not to uphold his oath of office or the American people, but to sue our state! Now you tell me how Trump created that crisis?

Trump is not, nor ever said he would "create" an economy. Government control and manipulation to "create" an economy will never work. Instead Trump is doing what he promised. He is creating an environment friendly to business. It is business which creates jobs and boosts our economy. In other words, he is taking off the shackles from the industrial sector.

As for one bill; how bout a recent one. The Dodd Frank Deregulation bill passed by both the house and Senate which he just signed into law. This will not deregulate large banks but will ease regulations on small and medium banks.

JoyV

son of witless wrote:

A couple of newsflashes. The Russians always try to meddle in our e******ns. An incoming administration meeting with Russians because they will have to deal with them later is not collusion. It is not even unusual.

Ignorant is as ignorant does.

Louie27 Loc: Peoria, AZ

jimpack123 wrote:

there will be no impeachment as the GOP rules the senate but the House will try to show what Trump is guilty of and then let the American v**ers decide in 2020 by then the economy will slow down thanks to Trumps tariffs. Trump is slowly h*****g himself lol

As of now the House nor neither the Mueller investigation have shown any crime of obstruction, just allegations that were not proven. Dream on Trump h**ers, dream on.

JoyV

Kevyn wrote:

As long as the official applying for the warrant doesn't know the information is false there is no issue. As an example if an informant gives a police officer erroneous information about a suspect and the police act in good faith applying for the warrant the warrant remains legal as the cop did not act in bad faith. Beyond that if some of the information used to obtain the warrant is false and someone true the warrant is still completely legitimate.

But it was those applying for the warrant who used information documentation (such as emails) proved they knew was false.

What legitimate info was used?

JoyV

Big dog wrote:

If the Dementiacrats can conjure up enough f**e evidence to have him arrested, I’d encourage him and cheer him on if he stole Airforce One.

They won't conjure up any evidence that would hold up in court. But in any case, Trump would never be so unAmerican as to contemplate stealing Airforce One. Nor could he if he wanted to. Military personnel are well trained in only obeying LEGAL orders.

JoyV

JoyV wrote:

I couldn't have it better!!!!!

Yikes! Left out the word SAID. I couldn't have said it better.

IrreverentOne75 Loc: Minnesota

Kevyn wrote:

Wrong you are, oh so wrong. You are parroting a false narrative pimped to the gullible members of the I***t Pumpkinfuhrer’s cult. The threshold to obtain a warrant is simply probable cause. There is no obligation to provide exculpatory evidence when applying for a warrant. There is no need to provide proof beyond reasonable doubt or even a preponderance of evidence. Probable cause is all, and then it is at the judges discretion.

The document that was provided as evidence of probable cause was a manufactured lie. Paid for by the Clinton Campaign, better known as the Arkansas Mafia, and the DNC, better known as the Democrat C*******t Party.