Quid Pro Quo

[bendog]

So what is the quid pro quo we do know about now?
a) According to the President's own released 'transcripts' we know that he specifically asked Ukraine to investigate the mythical DNC server and Joe Biden.
b) According to the text messages from Trump's diplomats we know that aid was being held up pending Ukraine's agreement to make a public announcement regarding starting an investigation into the DNC server
c) Also we know that a very desired meeting at the White House with the new Ukrainian President and Trump was being held up pending that public announcement of an investigation.
d) We also know that at least one U.S. diplomat expressed concern that aid was being held up because of a demand for a political favor.
e) And finally we have Trump's own Chief of Staff admitting that there was a quid pro quo when it came to aid and the DNC server investigation. And that it happens all the time.

But the Trumpettes are cool with a quid pro quo by a sitting U.S. President- just so long as that President is Trump.

JMO, but I can't see removing a potus for a one time attempt at illegally trying to gain a political favor in exchange for military aid.

I'm a little surprised the walls haven't fallen in on Trump with other transgressions. But so far the dems seem content to show Trump is pretty much in contempt of Ukrainian corruption.

I mean, I'd think there are rotten timbers in Saudi Arabia and the boychinkin with 666 real estate.

 

[Syriusly]

Politically motivated investigations trying to prove Russian propaganda...

Wonderful

No. Actually they are investigating to determine how Russian Disinformation resulted in illegal spying on the Trump campaign

What illegal spying on the Trump campaign?

All of it. When you lie to FISC to get a FISA warrant, the spying that results is illegal.

What lies to get the FISA warrant?

All 4 applications:

Claimed that the information showing that Carter Page was a Russian Spy was verified, when it was unverified.

Claimed that Steele was honest and trustworthy even though they had fired him for lying.

Claimed press accounts were "corroboration" even though they found out before the subsequent renewals that Steele was the same source for both.

They claimed, under oath that ALL pertinent information had been disclosed to the court, yet they concealed from the Court that the Clinton campaign paid for the Dossier.

They didn't tell the Court the truth because if they had, the warrants would have been denied. Lies aren't suddenly laundered into truth simply because you tricked a FISC judge into approving your spying application.

Well lets dig into that- shall we?
Document: Justice Department Releases Carter Page FISA Application
The FISA warrant on Carter Page claimed that he was a Russian agent- which can mean many things. The FISA application also says that the FBI relied on information from the State Department- and as you are aware- vast amounts of info is redacted. Now in order for it to be a lie it would have be a) false and b) made knowing it is false. We have no evidence at the moment that either is true.

Actually it claimed that Source #1- Steele- was assessed as reliable. And when the first FISA request was granted- Steele was still an FBI informant.- Steele was not removed as an informant for the FBI until a month later when the FBI found out he was leaking info to the press.

re: the press issue- so you admit that this wasn't relevant during the initial FISA authorization- but for the subsequent ones authorized by Trump officials?

And regarding 'pertinent information' you are getting nowhere there either because the FBI noted the pertinent information in the footnote. to the FISA application. Not a lie- simply your disagreement with the FBI on what is pertinent.

I for one am looking forward to the FISA report.
What do I expect? Probably critical on details, and not finding that the FISA warrants themselves were illegal or that anyone did anything actually illegal, but there will be some criticism of the process.

 

[Syriusly]

So what is the quid pro quo we do know about now?
a) According to the President's own released 'transcripts' we know that he specifically asked Ukraine to investigate the mythical DNC server and Joe Biden.
b) According to the text messages from Trump's diplomats we know that aid was being held up pending Ukraine's agreement to make a public announcement regarding starting an investigation into the DNC server
c) Also we know that a very desired meeting at the White House with the new Ukrainian President and Trump was being held up pending that public announcement of an investigation.
d) We also know that at least one U.S. diplomat expressed concern that aid was being held up because of a demand for a political favor.
e) And finally we have Trump's own Chief of Staff admitting that there was a quid pro quo when it came to aid and the DNC server investigation. And that it happens all the time.

But the Trumpettes are cool with a quid pro quo by a sitting U.S. President- just so long as that President is Trump.

JMO, but I can't see removing a potus for a one time attempt at illegally trying to gain a political favor in exchange for military aid.

I'm a little surprised the walls haven't fallen in on Trump with other transgressions. But so far the dems seem content to show Trump is pretty much in contempt of Ukrainian corruption.

I mean, I'd think there are rotten timbers in Saudi Arabia and the boychinkin with 666 real estate.

Oh certainly there are plenty of other avenues to pursue- but asking two foreign governments to dig up dirt on his political rival is enough for impeachment.

That alone won't be enough for a Senate conviction.

Will quid pro quo be enough for this Senate?
Would burglarizing the DNC be enough for this Senate?

 

[Zorro!]

Funny you don’t care about the illegal shit trumps doing that’s making people blow whistles.

They aren’t crying wolf. Trump did what they say he did and that’s why he’s getting impeached

Trump is the best president ever. He's never done anything to deserve impeachment.
You Dems are so desperate you're hoping to find some 2 dollar mistake on his taxes to lynch him on.

Impeachment is a dangerous bitterly partisan fraud.

A Trump Impeachment Imperils the Constitution.

The impeachment effort is itself an attempt to subvert our Constitutional scheme.​

By proceeding in secret, Mrs. Pelosi and her designated impeachment hatchet man, Adam Schiff, are violating our Constitutional norms of due process. These violations include the fact that the president has been deprived of the right to confront witnesses, the failure to follow the Nixon and Clinton precedents of initiating impeachment proceedings by a vote of the entire membership of the House, and the failure to accord Republicans the right to summon witnesses to the closed-door hearings.​

The framers understood that impeachment would be politically divisive, and by limiting impeachable offenses to “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” they sought to ensure that impeachment would not be simply a tool of a partisan majority, and that it would not be used to frustrate the will of the people. Representative Biggs quite properly believes that what is now occurring is just what the framers feared.​

What’s funny is, people say that we should impeach Trump because he’s a threat to norms and the Constitution.

And of course that again is just pure BS.

The President has no 'right to confront witnesses' in an impeachment investigation according to the Constitution.
The House doesn't have to follow how previous Houses handled impeachments.

Remember your Messiah is the one who has called it treason to even pursue impeachment against him- your Messiah is the one who is endangering the Constitution.

These are deep norms of the rights of the accused. It's very interesting how tyrannically minded the crazed anti-trumpers are.

This right to confront witnesses has such a long history that SCOTUS has cited the Acts of the Apostles 25:16 >Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012, 1015-16 (1988)< in noting this fundamental right's long and illustrious history. These are some of the rights that stand in the way of lynch mobs. The Roman governor, Porcius Festus discussing the proper treatment of his prisoner Paul: "It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man up to die before the accused has met his accusers face-to-face, and has been given a chance to defend himself against the charges." It is also cited in Shakespeare Richard II, Blackstone treatises and statutes. These are ancient natural rights. We retain ALL of our rights except those forbidden by the Constitution. It's amazing what the Left would casually destroy if they could because they cannot accept that they lost the 2016 election.

But, by all means, impeach Trump and then claim that he cannot call witnesses in his defense, or cross examine witnesses that accuse him, face to face. We demand you do this now so we can ram this all right down your throats before a national audience during the Senate Trial.

Not to really get into this with you, but impeachment in the House and Senate does not involve rules of criminal procedure...

Yes, rights we ALWAYS enjoy are recognized in the criminal code, but that recognition does not mean we are shorn of them in any other situation.

... if a potus is found guilty...

He won't be found guilty in an unjust process, he will only need to point to the injustice to shame the zealots that attempted to overturn the election and were so pathetic that they used an unjust process to do so. We dare you to try it, we will ram this right down your throats before a National Audience in the Senate.

If you put the nation through this, and frankly, you already are, and you do not have solid unimpeachable proof of bribery, treason or other black letter felonies that are clearly inherently illegal acts, there is going to be holy hell to pay from the electorate, your fancy footwork and fine tuned parsing not with standing.

... See impeachment of Clinton.

Exactly. He committed felonies, but, still the American People and the Senate did not want him removed from office. It's a very high bar and some didn't did your i or cross your T bullshit isn't going to cut it.

As for the application of inherent rights not codified in US law, one of the votes to acquit Clinton invoked ancient Scottish law. The American People have a strong sense of fair play and the anti-trumpers have lost their minds over the 2016 election. You are not thinking rationally and the Senate trial will illustrate just how completely you have lost your minds.

WE DEMAND YOU IMPEACH HIM - WE WANT THE SENATE TRIAL!

 

[bendog]

Trump is the best president ever. He's never done anything to deserve impeachment.
You Dems are so desperate you're hoping to find some 2 dollar mistake on his taxes to lynch him on.

Impeachment is a dangerous bitterly partisan fraud.

A Trump Impeachment Imperils the Constitution.

The impeachment effort is itself an attempt to subvert our Constitutional scheme.​

By proceeding in secret, Mrs. Pelosi and her designated impeachment hatchet man, Adam Schiff, are violating our Constitutional norms of due process. These violations include the fact that the president has been deprived of the right to confront witnesses, the failure to follow the Nixon and Clinton precedents of initiating impeachment proceedings by a vote of the entire membership of the House, and the failure to accord Republicans the right to summon witnesses to the closed-door hearings.​

The framers understood that impeachment would be politically divisive, and by limiting impeachable offenses to “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” they sought to ensure that impeachment would not be simply a tool of a partisan majority, and that it would not be used to frustrate the will of the people. Representative Biggs quite properly believes that what is now occurring is just what the framers feared.​

What’s funny is, people say that we should impeach Trump because he’s a threat to norms and the Constitution.

And of course that again is just pure BS.

The President has no 'right to confront witnesses' in an impeachment investigation according to the Constitution.
The House doesn't have to follow how previous Houses handled impeachments.

Remember your Messiah is the one who has called it treason to even pursue impeachment against him- your Messiah is the one who is endangering the Constitution.

These are deep norms of the rights of the accused. It's very interesting how tyrannically minded the crazed anti-trumpers are.

This right to confront witnesses has such a long history that SCOTUS has cited the Acts of the Apostles 25:16 >Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012, 1015-16 (1988)< in noting this fundamental right's long and illustrious history. These are some of the rights that stand in the way of lynch mobs. The Roman governor, Porcius Festus discussing the proper treatment of his prisoner Paul: "It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man up to die before the accused has met his accusers face-to-face, and has been given a chance to defend himself against the charges." It is also cited in Shakespeare Richard II, Blackstone treatises and statutes. These are ancient natural rights. We retain ALL of our rights except those forbidden by the Constitution. It's amazing what the Left would casually destroy if they could because they cannot accept that they lost the 2016 election.

But, by all means, impeach Trump and then claim that he cannot call witnesses in his defense, or cross examine witnesses that accuse him, face to face. We demand you do this now so we can ram this all right down your throats before a national audience during the Senate Trial.

Not to really get into this with you, but impeachment in the House and Senate does not involve rules of criminal procedure...

Yes, rights we ALWAYS enjoy are recognized in the criminal code, but that recognition does not mean we are shorn of them in any other situation.

... if a potus is found guilty...

He won't be found guilty in an unjust process, he will only need to point to the injustice to shame the zealots that attempted to overturn the election and were so pathetic that they used an unjust process to do so. We dare you to try it, we will ram this right down your throats before a National Audience in the Senate.

If you put the nation through this, and frankly, you already are, and you do not have solid unimpeachable proof of bribery, treason or other black letter felonies that are clearly inherently illegal acts, there is going to be holy hell to pay from the electorate, your fancy footwork and fine tuned parsing not with standing.

... See impeachment of Clinton.

Exactly. He committed felonies, but, still the American People and the Senate did not want him removed from office. It's a very high bar and some didn't did your eye or cross your T bullshit isn't going to cut it.

As for the application of inherent rights not codified in US law, one of the votes to acquit invoked ancient Scottish law. The American People have a strong sense of fair play and the anti-trumpers have lost their minds over the 2016 election.

WE DEMAND YOU IMPEACH HIM - WE WANT THE SENATE TRIAL!

Impeachment in the House and Trial in the senates does NOT involve rules of criminal procedure FOR ANY POTUS OF ANY PARTY. And conviction is not a CRIMINAL OFFENSE FOR WHICH A POTUS SUFFERS ANY FINE OR IMPRISONMENT. The BILL OF RIGHTS IS NOT AT ISSUE. The only const issue is just impeachment.

JFC, it's like history started for you in 2016. And Scottish law. You're killing me. Who writes your stuff? Hanpatty. LOL

 

[Syriusly]

The whistle blowers resemble enemy spies.

Funny you don’t care about the illegal shit trumps doing that’s making people blow whistles.

They aren’t crying wolf. Trump did what they say he did and that’s why he’s getting impeached

Trump is the best president ever. He's never done anything to deserve impeachment.
You Dems are so desperate you're hoping to find some 2 dollar mistake on his taxes to lynch him on.

Impeachment is a dangerous bitterly partisan fraud.

A Trump Impeachment Imperils the Constitution.

The impeachment effort is itself an attempt to subvert our Constitutional scheme.​

By proceeding in secret, Mrs. Pelosi and her designated impeachment hatchet man, Adam Schiff, are violating our Constitutional norms of due process. These violations include the fact that the president has been deprived of the right to confront witnesses, the failure to follow the Nixon and Clinton precedents of initiating impeachment proceedings by a vote of the entire membership of the House, and the failure to accord Republicans the right to summon witnesses to the closed-door hearings.​

The framers understood that impeachment would be politically divisive, and by limiting impeachable offenses to “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” they sought to ensure that impeachment would not be simply a tool of a partisan majority, and that it would not be used to frustrate the will of the people. Representative Biggs quite properly believes that what is now occurring is just what the framers feared.​

What’s funny is, people say that we should impeach Trump because he’s a threat to norms and the Constitution.

And of course that again is just pure BS.

The President has no 'right to confront witnesses' in an impeachment investigation according to the Constitution.
The House doesn't have to follow how previous Houses handled impeachments.

Remember your Messiah is the one who has called it treason to even pursue impeachment against him- your Messiah is the one who is endangering the Constitution.

These are deep norms of the rights of the accused. It's very interesting how tyrannically minded the crazed anti-trumpers are.

This right to confront witnesses has such a long history that SCOTUS has cited the Acts of the Apostles 25:16 >Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012, 1015-16 (1988)< in noting this fundamental right's long and illustrious history. These are some of the rights that stand in the way of lynch mobs. The Roman governor, Porcius Festus discussing the proper treatment of his prisoner Paul: "It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man up to die before the accused has met his accusers face-to-face, and has been given a chance to defend himself against the charges." It is also cited in Shakespeare Richard II, Blackstone treatises and statutes. These are ancient natural rights. We retain ALL of our rights except those forbidden by the Constitution. It's amazing what the Left would casually destroy if they could because they cannot accept that they lost the 2016 election.

But, by all means, impeach Trump and then claim that he cannot call witnesses in his defense, or cross examine witnesses that accuse him, face to face. We demand you do this now so we can ram this all right down your throats before a national audience during the Senate Trial.

Again you are simply confused by the lies fed to you by Trump and his Right Wing lie machine.

Do you think you have the right to confront witnesses when you are being investigated by the police for burglary?
Do you think you have the right to confront witnesses when a Grand Jury is investigating
White House Letter Distorts Both Law and History on Impeachment
The House’s constitutional function is merely to approve charges, not to adjudicate them. Thus, the legal procedure to which the duties of the House are most analogous is the process by which grand juries approve indictments.

The White House demands that the House afford Mr. Trump the rights to confront witnesses, call witnesses, and be represented by counsel. And it claims that unless the House yields to these demands, the whole procedure is constitutionally invalid and can be ignored with impunity. But of course, thousands of defendants are indicted every day by federal grand juries in which those defendants have no right to call or confront witnesses or to be represented by counsel. To suggest that “due process” requires that a president facing only loss of office get more rights at the accusatory stage than a criminal defendant facing loss of liberty or even life is not only constitutionally unsupportable, but ludicrous.

 

[Faun]

Trump is the best president ever. He's never done anything to deserve impeachment.
You Dems are so desperate you're hoping to find some 2 dollar mistake on his taxes to lynch him on.

Impeachment is a dangerous bitterly partisan fraud.

A Trump Impeachment Imperils the Constitution.

The impeachment effort is itself an attempt to subvert our Constitutional scheme.​

By proceeding in secret, Mrs. Pelosi and her designated impeachment hatchet man, Adam Schiff, are violating our Constitutional norms of due process. These violations include the fact that the president has been deprived of the right to confront witnesses, the failure to follow the Nixon and Clinton precedents of initiating impeachment proceedings by a vote of the entire membership of the House, and the failure to accord Republicans the right to summon witnesses to the closed-door hearings.​

The framers understood that impeachment would be politically divisive, and by limiting impeachable offenses to “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” they sought to ensure that impeachment would not be simply a tool of a partisan majority, and that it would not be used to frustrate the will of the people. Representative Biggs quite properly believes that what is now occurring is just what the framers feared.​

What’s funny is, people say that we should impeach Trump because he’s a threat to norms and the Constitution.

And of course that again is just pure BS.

The President has no 'right to confront witnesses' in an impeachment investigation according to the Constitution.
The House doesn't have to follow how previous Houses handled impeachments.

Remember your Messiah is the one who has called it treason to even pursue impeachment against him- your Messiah is the one who is endangering the Constitution.

These are deep norms of the rights of the accused. It's very interesting how tyrannically minded the crazed anti-trumpers are.

This right to confront witnesses has such a long history that SCOTUS has cited the Acts of the Apostles 25:16 >Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012, 1015-16 (1988)< in noting this fundamental right's long and illustrious history. These are some of the rights that stand in the way of lynch mobs. The Roman governor, Porcius Festus discussing the proper treatment of his prisoner Paul: "It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man up to die before the accused has met his accusers face-to-face, and has been given a chance to defend himself against the charges." It is also cited in Shakespeare Richard II, Blackstone treatises and statutes. These are ancient natural rights. We retain ALL of our rights except those forbidden by the Constitution. It's amazing what the Left would casually destroy if they could because they cannot accept that they lost the 2016 election.

But, by all means, impeach Trump and then claim that he cannot call witnesses in his defense, or cross examine witnesses that accuse him, face to face. We demand you do this now so we can ram this all right down your throats before a national audience during the Senate Trial.

Not to really get into this with you, but impeachment in the House and Senate does not involve rules of criminal procedure...

Yes, rights we ALWAYS enjoy are recognized in the criminal code, but that recognition does not mean we are shorn of them in any other situation.

... if a potus is found guilty...

He won't be found guilty in an unjust process, he will only need to point to the injustice to shame the zealots that attempted to overturn the election and were so pathetic that they used an unjust process to do so. We dare you to try it, we will ram this right down your throats before a National Audience in the Senate.

If you put the nation through this, and frankly, you already are, and you do not have solid unimpeachable proof of bribery, treason or other black letter felonies that are clearly inherently illegal acts, there is going to be holy hell to pay from the electorate, your fancy footwork and fine tuned parsing not with standing.

... See impeachment of Clinton.

Exactly. He committed felonies, but, still the American People and the Senate did not want him removed from office. It's a very high bar and some didn't did your eye or cross your T bullshit isn't going to cut it.

As for the application of inherent rights not codified in US law, one of the votes to acquit invoked ancient Scottish law. The American People have a strong sense of fair play and the anti-trumpers have lost their minds over the 2016 election.

WE DEMAND YOU IMPEACH HIM - WE WANT THE SENATE TRIAL!

Dumbfuck, the right to face one's accuser is a right in legal matters, which an impeachment is not. Impeachment is merely a parliamentary procedure to remove a malfeasant individual from their office.

 

[Syriusly]

Impeachment is a dangerous bitterly partisan fraud.

A Trump Impeachment Imperils the Constitution.

The impeachment effort is itself an attempt to subvert our Constitutional scheme.​

By proceeding in secret, Mrs. Pelosi and her designated impeachment hatchet man, Adam Schiff, are violating our Constitutional norms of due process. These violations include the fact that the president has been deprived of the right to confront witnesses, the failure to follow the Nixon and Clinton precedents of initiating impeachment proceedings by a vote of the entire membership of the House, and the failure to accord Republicans the right to summon witnesses to the closed-door hearings.​

The framers understood that impeachment would be politically divisive, and by limiting impeachable offenses to “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” they sought to ensure that impeachment would not be simply a tool of a partisan majority, and that it would not be used to frustrate the will of the people. Representative Biggs quite properly believes that what is now occurring is just what the framers feared.​

What’s funny is, people say that we should impeach Trump because he’s a threat to norms and the Constitution.

And of course that again is just pure BS.

The President has no 'right to confront witnesses' in an impeachment investigation according to the Constitution.
The House doesn't have to follow how previous Houses handled impeachments.

Remember your Messiah is the one who has called it treason to even pursue impeachment against him- your Messiah is the one who is endangering the Constitution.

These are deep norms of the rights of the accused. It's very interesting how tyrannically minded the crazed anti-trumpers are.

This right to confront witnesses has such a long history that SCOTUS has cited the Acts of the Apostles 25:16 >Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012, 1015-16 (1988)< in noting this fundamental right's long and illustrious history. These are some of the rights that stand in the way of lynch mobs. The Roman governor, Porcius Festus discussing the proper treatment of his prisoner Paul: "It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man up to die before the accused has met his accusers face-to-face, and has been given a chance to defend himself against the charges." It is also cited in Shakespeare Richard II, Blackstone treatises and statutes. These are ancient natural rights. We retain ALL of our rights except those forbidden by the Constitution. It's amazing what the Left would casually destroy if they could because they cannot accept that they lost the 2016 election.

But, by all means, impeach Trump and then claim that he cannot call witnesses in his defense, or cross examine witnesses that accuse him, face to face. We demand you do this now so we can ram this all right down your throats before a national audience during the Senate Trial.

Not to really get into this with you, but impeachment in the House and Senate does not involve rules of criminal procedure...

Yes, rights we ALWAYS enjoy are recognized in the criminal code, but that recognition does not mean we are shorn of them in any other situation.

... if a potus is found guilty...

He won't be found guilty in an unjust process, he will only need to point to the injustice to shame the zealots that attempted to overturn the election and were so pathetic that they used an unjust process to do so. We dare you to try it, we will ram this right down your throats before a National Audience in the Senate.

If you put the nation through this, and frankly, you already are, and you do not have solid unimpeachable proof of bribery, treason or other black letter felonies that are clearly inherently illegal acts, there is going to be holy hell to pay from the electorate, your fancy footwork and fine tuned parsing not with standing.

... See impeachment of Clinton.

Exactly. He committed felonies, but, still the American People and the Senate did not want him removed from office. It's a very high bar and some didn't did your eye or cross your T bullshit isn't going to cut it.

As for the application of inherent rights not codified in US law, one of the votes to acquit invoked ancient Scottish law. The American People have a strong sense of fair play and the anti-trumpers have lost their minds over the 2016 election.

WE DEMAND YOU IMPEACH HIM - WE WANT THE SENATE TRIAL!

Dumbfuck, the right to face one's accuser is a right in legal matters, which an impeachment is not. Impeachment is merely a parliamentary procedure to remove a malfeasant individual from their office.

Impeachment is not even that- it is the bringing of charges against a President(or judge or whatever).

 

[Zorro!]

No. Actually they are investigating to determine how Russian Disinformation resulted in illegal spying on the Trump campaign

What illegal spying on the Trump campaign?

All of it. When you lie to FISC to get a FISA warrant, the spying that results is illegal.

What lies to get the FISA warrant?

All 4 applications:

Claimed that the information showing that Carter Page was a Russian Spy was verified, when it was unverified.

Claimed that Steele was honest and trustworthy even though they had fired him for lying.

Claimed press accounts were "corroboration" even though they found out before the subsequent renewals that Steele was the same source for both.

They claimed, under oath that ALL pertinent information had been disclosed to the court, yet they concealed from the Court that the Clinton campaign paid for the Dossier.

They didn't tell the Court the truth because if they had, the warrants would have been denied. Lies aren't suddenly laundered into truth simply because you tricked a FISC judge into approving your spying application.

Well lets dig into that- shall we?
Document: Justice Department Releases Carter Page FISA Application
The FISA warrant on Carter Page claimed that he was a Russian agent- which can mean many things. The FISA application also says that the FBI relied on information from the State Department- and as you are aware- vast amounts of info is redacted. Now in order for it to be a lie it would have be a) false and b) made knowing it is false. We have no evidence at the moment that either is true...

You think that if a vague notion floats through a bitterly partisan government hack's brain that someone is working as a spy for a foreign government that the full weight of Intelligence Communities Vast Spying powers can be brought against an American Citizen? You'll have to provide me links to when anyone with a brain made these claims while any portion of FISA was being passed or reauthorized.

But, I will love watching the deranged clowns making arguments like that to the American People once the Barr Durham and Horowitz reports have been released.

That great power and authority may only be loosed on a US Citizen if based on compelling evidence, the FBI suspects individuals of acting as clandestine agents of a hostile foreign power. Every Warrant requires a Sworn Oath that ALL the information is verified and that the record is accurate and complete. Further, as these are ex-parte proceedings, the government has the highest burden possible to disclose any weak spots in their submission or exculpatory information.

What the upcoming reports are examining is what triggered such an investigation in a democratic republic whose norms strongly discourage an incumbent administration’s use of the government’s spying powers against political opponents?

The Obama administration did not apply this norm to the Trump campaign at a time when they were supremely confident that Hillary Clinton would be elected and that no one would ever know that this vast spy power had been repeatedly unleashed against the Trump Campaign... Ooops!

If all the Obama administration had been trying to do was check out a few bad apples with suspicious Russia ties, the FBI could easily have alerted any of a number of Trump campaign officials with solid national-security credentials — Rudy Giuliani, Jeff Sessions, Chris Christie. The agents could have asked for the campaign’s help. Instead, Obama officials made the Trump campaign the subject of a full-blown counterintelligence investigation, an action that could only be justified by unimpeachable fully verified and corroborated evidence that Donald Trump was a Russian agent.

...Actually it claimed that Source #1- Steele- was assessed as reliable. And when the first FISA request was granted- Steele was still an FBI informant.- Steele was not removed as an informant for the FBI until a month later when the FBI found out he was leaking info to the press....

Yes. He was fired by the FBI for acting in an untrustworthy manner. At that moment they had a duty to immediately inform the Court of his untrustworthy action. They did not. They also did not disclose to the Court of his actions through 3 subsequent renewals.

...the press issue- so you admit that this wasn't relevant during the initial FISA authorization- but for the subsequent ones authorized by Trump officials?...

As soon as learned, they had a duty to update the Court. They did not and they repeated this "corroboration" through three renewals even though they knew it to be false.

...And regarding 'pertinent information' you are getting nowhere there either because the FBI noted the pertinent information in the footnote. to the FISA application. Not a lie- simply your disagreement with the FBI on what is pertinent...

They did NOT reveal in a footnote that the Clinton campaign was funding Steele. They deliberately concealed this from the Court, and the reason for their deliberately duplicity, on all 4 applications is obvious. The Court wouldn't have approved this information had they known it.

...
I for one am looking forward to the FISA report.
What do I expect? Probably critical on details, and not finding that the FISA warrants themselves were illegal or that anyone did anything actually illegal, but there will be some criticism of the process.

I too am concerned that rather than resulting in criminal charges that through this process we will also find that only administration penalties apply, suspensions, terminations, write ups and the like, basically employment actions. If that's the case, that's a big hole in our legal framework that will need to be addressed through legislation. Trusting in the virtue of the FBI and DOJ clearly is not sufficient. Some very despicable characters ended up in the highest DOJ, IC and FBI positions in the Nation.

 

[Zorro!]

Funny you don’t care about the illegal shit trumps doing that’s making people blow whistles.

They aren’t crying wolf. Trump did what they say he did and that’s why he’s getting impeached

Trump is the best president ever. He's never done anything to deserve impeachment.
You Dems are so desperate you're hoping to find some 2 dollar mistake on his taxes to lynch him on.

Impeachment is a dangerous bitterly partisan fraud.

A Trump Impeachment Imperils the Constitution.

The impeachment effort is itself an attempt to subvert our Constitutional scheme.​

By proceeding in secret, Mrs. Pelosi and her designated impeachment hatchet man, Adam Schiff, are violating our Constitutional norms of due process. These violations include the fact that the president has been deprived of the right to confront witnesses, the failure to follow the Nixon and Clinton precedents of initiating impeachment proceedings by a vote of the entire membership of the House, and the failure to accord Republicans the right to summon witnesses to the closed-door hearings.​

The framers understood that impeachment would be politically divisive, and by limiting impeachable offenses to “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” they sought to ensure that impeachment would not be simply a tool of a partisan majority, and that it would not be used to frustrate the will of the people. Representative Biggs quite properly believes that what is now occurring is just what the framers feared.​

What’s funny is, people say that we should impeach Trump because he’s a threat to norms and the Constitution.

And of course that again is just pure BS.

The President has no 'right to confront witnesses' in an impeachment investigation according to the Constitution.
The House doesn't have to follow how previous Houses handled impeachments.

Remember your Messiah is the one who has called it treason to even pursue impeachment against him- your Messiah is the one who is endangering the Constitution.

These are deep norms of the rights of the accused. It's very interesting how tyrannically minded the crazed anti-trumpers are.

This right to confront witnesses has such a long history that SCOTUS has cited the Acts of the Apostles 25:16 >Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012, 1015-16 (1988)< in noting this fundamental right's long and illustrious history. These are some of the rights that stand in the way of lynch mobs. The Roman governor, Porcius Festus discussing the proper treatment of his prisoner Paul: "It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man up to die before the accused has met his accusers face-to-face, and has been given a chance to defend himself against the charges." It is also cited in Shakespeare Richard II, Blackstone treatises and statutes. These are ancient natural rights. We retain ALL of our rights except those forbidden by the Constitution. It's amazing what the Left would casually destroy if they could because they cannot accept that they lost the 2016 election.

But, by all means, impeach Trump and then claim that he cannot call witnesses in his defense, or cross examine witnesses that accuse him, face to face. We demand you do this now so we can ram this all right down your throats before a national audience during the Senate Trial.

Again you are simply confused by the lies fed to you by Trump and his Right Wing lie machine.

Do you think you have the right to confront witnesses when you are being investigated by the police for burglary?...

Of course. After studying their claims about your conduct, the attorney takes their deposition and under an adversarial process asks them very tough questions so that all may assess their credibility.

... Do you think you have the right to confront witnesses when a Grand Jury is investigating
White House Letter Distorts Both Law and History on Impeachment...

Do you think one goes directly from Grand Jury referral to trial?

...the right to confront witnesses, call witnesses, and be represented by counsel...the whole procedure is constitutionally invalid and can be ignored with impunity...

It can be ignored because the House has not voted on inquiry. If they had, the Republicans would have already assured Trump of his inherent rights to confront witnesses, call witnesses to rebut them or to make points of his own and of course to be represented by counsel. To have his counsel present at the deposition of witnesses to cross examine them under an adversarial process that allows weaknesses to be uncovered.

The Senate Trial is going to a great education for the American People. They are going to learn that the folks who illegally spied on him and then spent 3 years trying to illegally drive him from office are working hand in glove with the folks who impeached him, who claimed they could do so in secret, depose witnesses without the involvement of Trump's legal team and believe that Trump's right to confront witnesses against him could be violated in secret precedents in the House basement. All these deluded folks think they have the power to undo an election if they disagree with the outcome.

The American People are going to be shocked at just how out of your mind you guys are.

...The BILL OF RIGHTS IS NOT AT ISSUE...

Have fun making that claim to the American People and the US Senate. It's an open admission that you guys have raped his rights. Our rights are not provided by the Bill of Rights, they are recognized by the Bill of Rights. We held these rights long before the Constitution recognized them.

... is just impeachment...

That will be another fun point to watch you guys make. It's JUST impeachment, as if overturning the election of The President Of The United States is just a minor issue, so minor, that you can't just wait a matter of months and let the Electorate decide who the President will be. But you see, we all know why you won't wait for the electorate. You think The Electorate made the "wrong" choice last time, so hey, they could make the "wrong" choice again!

A vile bitterly deranged group of partisans are misusing the impeachment process to attack the Electoral Process, because they do not agree with The American Electorate about who should be The President of The United States. This is a tremendous violation of their constitutional oath.

Folks don't know how crazy you folks are, we are doing you a favor in warning you that you really shouldn't do this, because there will not be any hiding it any longer. But hey, no danger in warning you, we know you won't listen, SO BY ALL MEANS, CONTINUE!

... JFC, it's like history started for you in 2016. And Scottish law. You're killing me. Who writes your stuff? Hanpatty. LOL

Now that's funny. Everyone with brain knows about this. And you who are ignorant, claim I'm ignorant, based on your ignorance of what the entire nation saw during the Senate vote during the Clinton Impeachment trial.

 

[Zorro!]

.

 

[Crepitus]

Chinese Reportedly Hacked Hillary Server. During Same Time, 12 CIA Sources Reportedly Killed by China. Coincidence?

That's fake news.

You guys are so worthless and unimaginative you're even using Trump's own term....fake news . Really pathetic.

You fuckin' moron. tRump didn't coin that phrase.
Educate yourself.

The (almost) complete history of 'fake news'

 

[Faun]

.

Best post you ever made. Congrats!

 

[Crepitus]

Chinese Reportedly Hacked Hillary Server. During Same Time, 12 CIA Sources Reportedly Killed by China. Coincidence?

That's fake news.

You guys are so worthless and unimaginative you're even using Trump's own term....fake news . Really pathetic.

THE ACTUAL LAWS TRUMP HAS BROKEN, JUST WITH THE UKRAINE AND CHINA AFFAIRS, COULD LAND HIM 10 YEARS IN PRISON

That's some mighty strong Kool-Aid you found...... congratulations. You might consider microdosing though because it's becoming a little too apparent

Guess what kiddo?

He backed it up with links.

Too bad you tRumplings don't do that.

 

[basquebromance]

this is Trump's Waterloo my friends. it will break him!

 

[Syriusly]

What illegal spying on the Trump campaign?

All of it. When you lie to FISC to get a FISA warrant, the spying that results is illegal.

What lies to get the FISA warrant?

All 4 applications:

Claimed that the information showing that Carter Page was a Russian Spy was verified, when it was unverified.

Claimed that Steele was honest and trustworthy even though they had fired him for lying.

Claimed press accounts were "corroboration" even though they found out before the subsequent renewals that Steele was the same source for both.

They claimed, under oath that ALL pertinent information had been disclosed to the court, yet they concealed from the Court that the Clinton campaign paid for the Dossier.

They didn't tell the Court the truth because if they had, the warrants would have been denied. Lies aren't suddenly laundered into truth simply because you tricked a FISC judge into approving your spying application.

Well lets dig into that- shall we?
Document: Justice Department Releases Carter Page FISA Application
The FISA warrant on Carter Page claimed that he was a Russian agent- which can mean many things. The FISA application also says that the FBI relied on information from the State Department- and as you are aware- vast amounts of info is redacted. Now in order for it to be a lie it would have be a) false and b) made knowing it is false. We have no evidence at the moment that either is true...

You think that if a vague notion floats through a bitterly partisan government hack's brain that someone is working as a spy for a foreign government that the full weight of Intelligence Communities Vast Spying powers can be brought against an American Citizen? You'll have to provide me links to when anyone with a brain made these claims while any portion of FISA was being passed or reauthorized.

But, I will love watching the deranged clowns making arguments like that to the American People once the Barr Durham and Horowitz reports have been released.

That great power and authority may only be loosed on a US Citizen if based on compelling evidence, the FBI suspects individuals of acting as clandestine agents of a hostile foreign power. Every Warrant requires a Sworn Oath that ALL the information is verified and that the record is accurate and complete. Further, as these are ex-parte proceedings, the government has the highest burden possible to disclose any weak spots in their submission or exculpatory information.

What the upcoming reports are examining is what triggered such an investigation in a democratic republic whose norms strongly discourage an incumbent administration’s use of the government’s spying powers against political opponents?

The Obama administration did not apply this norm to the Trump campaign at a time when they were supremely confident that Hillary Clinton would be elected and that no one would ever know that this vast spy power had been repeatedly unleashed against the Trump Campaign... Ooops!

If all the Obama administration had been trying to do was check out a few bad apples with suspicious Russia ties, the FBI could easily have alerted any of a number of Trump campaign officials with solid national-security credentials — Rudy Giuliani, Jeff Sessions, Chris Christie. The agents could have asked for the campaign’s help. Instead, Obama officials made the Trump campaign the subject of a full-blown counterintelligence investigation, an action that could only be justified by unimpeachable fully verified and corroborated evidence that Donald Trump was a Russian agent.

...Actually it claimed that Source #1- Steele- was assessed as reliable. And when the first FISA request was granted- Steele was still an FBI informant.- Steele was not removed as an informant for the FBI until a month later when the FBI found out he was leaking info to the press....

Yes. He was fired by the FBI for acting in an untrustworthy manner. At that moment they had a duty to immediately inform the Court of his untrustworthy action. They did not. They also did not disclose to the Court of his actions through 3 subsequent renewals.

...the press issue- so you admit that this wasn't relevant during the initial FISA authorization- but for the subsequent ones authorized by Trump officials?...

As soon as learned, they had a duty to update the Court. They did not and they repeated this "corroboration" through three renewals even though they knew it to be false.

...And regarding 'pertinent information' you are getting nowhere there either because the FBI noted the pertinent information in the footnote. to the FISA application. Not a lie- simply your disagreement with the FBI on what is pertinent...

They did NOT reveal in a footnote that the Clinton campaign was funding Steele. They deliberately concealed this from the Court, and the reason for their deliberately duplicity, on all 4 applications is obvious. The Court wouldn't have approved this information had they known it.

...
I for one am looking forward to the FISA report.
What do I expect? Probably critical on details, and not finding that the FISA warrants themselves were illegal or that anyone did anything actually illegal, but there will be some criticism of the process.

I too am concerned that rather than resulting in criminal charges that through this process we will also find that only administration penalties apply, suspensions, terminations, write ups and the like, basically employment actions. If that's the case, that's a big hole in our legal framework that will need to be addressed through legislation. Trusting in the virtue of the FBI and DOJ clearly is not sufficient. Some very despicable characters ended up in the highest DOJ, IC and FBI positions in the Nation.

a bitterly partisan government hack's brain.....
Speaking of bitterly partisan. Face it you didn't have any problem with FISA until your Messiah felt threatened by being investigated.

There is no evidence that the "Obama Administration" had anything to do with the FISA warrant request.
As far as their obligation to notify the court once they terminated Steele as an informant for leaking information to the press and for lying to the FBI about the leaks- that wouldn't change the fact that the initial FISA was correct. Nor does it establish that the FBI no longer felt Steele was credible.

And finally- there was no obligation to do what you- or your Messiah- have ex post facto- decided must be done with a FISA warrant.

Notice by the way- that Trump has not made any moves to eliminate the FISA courts.......nor have the GOP.

 

[Syriusly]

Trump is the best president ever. He's never done anything to deserve impeachment.
You Dems are so desperate you're hoping to find some 2 dollar mistake on his taxes to lynch him on.

Impeachment is a dangerous bitterly partisan fraud.

A Trump Impeachment Imperils the Constitution.

The impeachment effort is itself an attempt to subvert our Constitutional scheme.​

By proceeding in secret, Mrs. Pelosi and her designated impeachment hatchet man, Adam Schiff, are violating our Constitutional norms of due process. These violations include the fact that the president has been deprived of the right to confront witnesses, the failure to follow the Nixon and Clinton precedents of initiating impeachment proceedings by a vote of the entire membership of the House, and the failure to accord Republicans the right to summon witnesses to the closed-door hearings.​

The framers understood that impeachment would be politically divisive, and by limiting impeachable offenses to “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” they sought to ensure that impeachment would not be simply a tool of a partisan majority, and that it would not be used to frustrate the will of the people. Representative Biggs quite properly believes that what is now occurring is just what the framers feared.​

What’s funny is, people say that we should impeach Trump because he’s a threat to norms and the Constitution.

And of course that again is just pure BS.

The President has no 'right to confront witnesses' in an impeachment investigation according to the Constitution.
The House doesn't have to follow how previous Houses handled impeachments.

Remember your Messiah is the one who has called it treason to even pursue impeachment against him- your Messiah is the one who is endangering the Constitution.

These are deep norms of the rights of the accused. It's very interesting how tyrannically minded the crazed anti-trumpers are.

This right to confront witnesses has such a long history that SCOTUS has cited the Acts of the Apostles 25:16 >Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012, 1015-16 (1988)< in noting this fundamental right's long and illustrious history. These are some of the rights that stand in the way of lynch mobs. The Roman governor, Porcius Festus discussing the proper treatment of his prisoner Paul: "It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man up to die before the accused has met his accusers face-to-face, and has been given a chance to defend himself against the charges." It is also cited in Shakespeare Richard II, Blackstone treatises and statutes. These are ancient natural rights. We retain ALL of our rights except those forbidden by the Constitution. It's amazing what the Left would casually destroy if they could because they cannot accept that they lost the 2016 election.

But, by all means, impeach Trump and then claim that he cannot call witnesses in his defense, or cross examine witnesses that accuse him, face to face. We demand you do this now so we can ram this all right down your throats before a national audience during the Senate Trial.

Again you are simply confused by the lies fed to you by Trump and his Right Wing lie machine.

Do you think you have the right to confront witnesses when you are being investigated by the police for burglary?...

Of course. After studying their claims about your conduct, the attorney takes their deposition and under an adversarial process asks them very tough questions so that all may assess their credibility.

... Do you think you have the right to confront witnesses when a Grand Jury is investigating
White House Letter Distorts Both Law and History on Impeachment...

Do you think one goes directly from Grand Jury referral to trial?

...the right to confront witnesses, call witnesses, and be represented by counsel...the whole procedure is constitutionally invalid and can be ignored with impunity...

It can be ignored because the House has not voted on inquiry. If they had, the Republicans would have already assured Trump of his inherent rights to confront witnesses, call witnesses to rebut them or to make points of his own and of course to be represented by counsel. To have his counsel present at the deposition of witnesses to cross examine them under an adversarial process that allows weaknesses to be uncovered.

The Senate Trial is going to a great education for the American People. They are going to learn that the folks who illegally spied on him and then spent 3 years trying to illegally drive him from office are working hand in glove with the folks who impeached him, who claimed they could do so in secret, depose witnesses without the involvement of Trump's legal team and believe that Trump's right to confront witnesses against him could be violated in secret precedents in the House basement. All these deluded folks think they have the power to undo an election if they disagree with the outcome.

The American People are going to be shocked at just how out of your mind you guys are.

...The BILL OF RIGHTS IS NOT AT ISSUE...

Have fun making that claim to the American People and the US Senate. It's an open admission that you guys have raped his rights. l.

Frankly that is just an admission that you have no ******* clue what the Constitution says.

That you think that your Messiah somehow has 'rights' in an Impeachment that are not afforded to any defendant in any criminal investigation just shows how much kool aid you have drunk

The White House demands that the House afford Mr. Trump the rights to confront witnesses, call witnesses, and be represented by counsel. And it claims that unless the House yields to these demands, the whole procedure is constitutionally invalid and can be ignored with impunity. But of course, thousands of defendants are indicted every day by federal grand juries in which those defendants have no right to call or confront witnesses or to be represented by counsel. To suggest that “due process” requires that a president facing only loss of office get more rights at the accusatory stage than a criminal defendant facing loss of liberty or even life is not only constitutionally unsupportable, but ludicrous.

What is happening now is an investigation. Not an impeachment.

Until you understand that.....well hell......you will never understand that....

 

[Syriusly]

Trump is the best president ever. He's never done anything to deserve impeachment.
You Dems are so desperate you're hoping to find some 2 dollar mistake on his taxes to lynch him on.

Impeachment is a dangerous bitterly partisan fraud.

A Trump Impeachment Imperils the Constitution.

The impeachment effort is itself an attempt to subvert our Constitutional scheme.​

By proceeding in secret, Mrs. Pelosi and her designated impeachment hatchet man, Adam Schiff, are violating our Constitutional norms of due process. These violations include the fact that the president has been deprived of the right to confront witnesses, the failure to follow the Nixon and Clinton precedents of initiating impeachment proceedings by a vote of the entire membership of the House, and the failure to accord Republicans the right to summon witnesses to the closed-door hearings.​

The framers understood that impeachment would be politically divisive, and by limiting impeachable offenses to “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” they sought to ensure that impeachment would not be simply a tool of a partisan majority, and that it would not be used to frustrate the will of the people. Representative Biggs quite properly believes that what is now occurring is just what the framers feared.​

What’s funny is, people say that we should impeach Trump because he’s a threat to norms and the Constitution.

And of course that again is just pure BS.

The President has no 'right to confront witnesses' in an impeachment investigation according to the Constitution.
The House doesn't have to follow how previous Houses handled impeachments.

Remember your Messiah is the one who has called it treason to even pursue impeachment against him- your Messiah is the one who is endangering the Constitution.

These are deep norms of the rights of the accused. It's very interesting how tyrannically minded the crazed anti-trumpers are.

This right to confront witnesses has such a long history that SCOTUS has cited the Acts of the Apostles 25:16 >Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012, 1015-16 (1988)< in noting this fundamental right's long and illustrious history. These are some of the rights that stand in the way of lynch mobs. The Roman governor, Porcius Festus discussing the proper treatment of his prisoner Paul: "It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man up to die before the accused has met his accusers face-to-face, and has been given a chance to defend himself against the charges." It is also cited in Shakespeare Richard II, Blackstone treatises and statutes. These are ancient natural rights. We retain ALL of our rights except those forbidden by the Constitution. It's amazing what the Left would casually destroy if they could because they cannot accept that they lost the 2016 election.

But, by all means, impeach Trump and then claim that he cannot call witnesses in his defense, or cross examine witnesses that accuse him, face to face. We demand you do this now so we can ram this all right down your throats before a national audience during the Senate Trial.

Again you are simply confused by the lies fed to you by Trump and his Right Wing lie machine.

Do you think you have the right to confront witnesses when you are being investigated by the police for burglary?...

Of course. After studying their claims about your conduct, the attorney takes their deposition and under an adversarial process asks them very tough questions so that all may assess their credibility.

... Do you think you have the right to confront witnesses when a Grand Jury is investigating
White House Letter Distorts Both Law and History on Impeachment...

Do you think one goes directly from Grand Jury referral to trial?

...the right to confront witnesses, call witnesses, and be represented by counsel...the whole procedure is constitutionally invalid and can be ignored with impunity...

It can be ignored because the House has not voted on inquiry. If they had, the Republicans would have already assured Trump of his inherent rights to confront witnesses, call witnesses to rebut them or to make points of his own and of course to be represented by counsel. To have his counsel present at the deposition of witnesses to cross examine them under an adversarial process that allows weaknesses to be uncovered.

The Senate Trial is going to a great education for the American People. They are going to learn that the folks who illegally spied on him and then spent 3 years trying to illegally drive him from office are working hand in glove with the folks who impeached him, who claimed they could do so in secret, depose witnesses without the involvement of Trump's legal team and believe that Trump's right to confront witnesses against him could be violated in secret precedents in the House basement. All these deluded folks think they have the power to undo an election if they disagree with the outcome.

The American People are going to be shocked at just how out of your mind you guys are.

...The BILL OF RIGHTS IS NOT AT ISSUE...

Have fun making that claim to the American People and the US Senate. It's an open admission that you guys have raped his rights. Our rights are not provided by the Bill of Rights, they are recognized by the Bill of Rights. We held these rights long before the Constitution recognized them.

... is just impeachment...

That will be another fun point to watch you guys make. It's JUST impeachment, as if overturning the election of The President Of The United States is just a minor issue, so minor, that you can't just wait a matter of months and let the Electorate decide who the President will be. But you see, we all know why you won't wait for the electorate. You think The Electorate made the "wrong" choice last time, so hey, they could make the "wrong" choice again!

A vile bitterly deranged group of partisans are misusing the impeachment process to attack the Electoral Process, because they do not agree with The American Electorate about who should be The President of The United States. This is a tremendous violation of their constitutional oath.

Folks don't know how crazy you folks are, we are doing you a favor in warning you that you really shouldn't do this, because there will not be any hiding it any longer. But hey, no danger in warning you, we know you won't listen, SO BY ALL MEANS, CONTINUE!

... JFC, it's like history started for you in 2016. And Scottish law. You're killing me. Who writes your stuff? Hanpatty. LOL

Now that's funny. Everyone with brain knows about this. And you who are ignorant, claim I'm ignorant, based on your ignorance of what the entire nation saw during the Senate vote during the Clinton Impeachment trial.

A vile bitterly deranged group of partisans are misusing the impeachment process to attack the Electoral Process, because they do not agree with The American Electorate about who should be The President of The United States. This is a tremendous violation of their constitutional oath.

Impeachment is every bit as Constitutional as Trump's electoral college electoral win.
You may not like that your Messiah is being threatened for his illegal and immoral actions but any impeachment action is by law just as Constitutional as Trump's own election.

 

[the other mike]

All of it. When you lie to FISC to get a FISA warrant, the spying that results is illegal.

What lies to get the FISA warrant?

All 4 applications:

Claimed that the information showing that Carter Page was a Russian Spy was verified, when it was unverified.

Claimed that Steele was honest and trustworthy even though they had fired him for lying.

Claimed press accounts were "corroboration" even though they found out before the subsequent renewals that Steele was the same source for both.

They claimed, under oath that ALL pertinent information had been disclosed to the court, yet they concealed from the Court that the Clinton campaign paid for the Dossier.

They didn't tell the Court the truth because if they had, the warrants would have been denied. Lies aren't suddenly laundered into truth simply because you tricked a FISC judge into approving your spying application.

Well lets dig into that- shall we?
Document: Justice Department Releases Carter Page FISA Application
The FISA warrant on Carter Page claimed that he was a Russian agent- which can mean many things. The FISA application also says that the FBI relied on information from the State Department- and as you are aware- vast amounts of info is redacted. Now in order for it to be a lie it would have be a) false and b) made knowing it is false. We have no evidence at the moment that either is true...

You think that if a vague notion floats through a bitterly partisan government hack's brain that someone is working as a spy for a foreign government that the full weight of Intelligence Communities Vast Spying powers can be brought against an American Citizen? You'll have to provide me links to when anyone with a brain made these claims while any portion of FISA was being passed or reauthorized.

But, I will love watching the deranged clowns making arguments like that to the American People once the Barr Durham and Horowitz reports have been released.

That great power and authority may only be loosed on a US Citizen if based on compelling evidence, the FBI suspects individuals of acting as clandestine agents of a hostile foreign power. Every Warrant requires a Sworn Oath that ALL the information is verified and that the record is accurate and complete. Further, as these are ex-parte proceedings, the government has the highest burden possible to disclose any weak spots in their submission or exculpatory information.

What the upcoming reports are examining is what triggered such an investigation in a democratic republic whose norms strongly discourage an incumbent administration’s use of the government’s spying powers against political opponents?

The Obama administration did not apply this norm to the Trump campaign at a time when they were supremely confident that Hillary Clinton would be elected and that no one would ever know that this vast spy power had been repeatedly unleashed against the Trump Campaign... Ooops!

If all the Obama administration had been trying to do was check out a few bad apples with suspicious Russia ties, the FBI could easily have alerted any of a number of Trump campaign officials with solid national-security credentials — Rudy Giuliani, Jeff Sessions, Chris Christie. The agents could have asked for the campaign’s help. Instead, Obama officials made the Trump campaign the subject of a full-blown counterintelligence investigation, an action that could only be justified by unimpeachable fully verified and corroborated evidence that Donald Trump was a Russian agent.

...Actually it claimed that Source #1- Steele- was assessed as reliable. And when the first FISA request was granted- Steele was still an FBI informant.- Steele was not removed as an informant for the FBI until a month later when the FBI found out he was leaking info to the press....

Yes. He was fired by the FBI for acting in an untrustworthy manner. At that moment they had a duty to immediately inform the Court of his untrustworthy action. They did not. They also did not disclose to the Court of his actions through 3 subsequent renewals.

...the press issue- so you admit that this wasn't relevant during the initial FISA authorization- but for the subsequent ones authorized by Trump officials?...

As soon as learned, they had a duty to update the Court. They did not and they repeated this "corroboration" through three renewals even though they knew it to be false.

...And regarding 'pertinent information' you are getting nowhere there either because the FBI noted the pertinent information in the footnote. to the FISA application. Not a lie- simply your disagreement with the FBI on what is pertinent...

They did NOT reveal in a footnote that the Clinton campaign was funding Steele. They deliberately concealed this from the Court, and the reason for their deliberately duplicity, on all 4 applications is obvious. The Court wouldn't have approved this information had they known it.

...
I for one am looking forward to the FISA report.
What do I expect? Probably critical on details, and not finding that the FISA warrants themselves were illegal or that anyone did anything actually illegal, but there will be some criticism of the process.

I too am concerned that rather than resulting in criminal charges that through this process we will also find that only administration penalties apply, suspensions, terminations, write ups and the like, basically employment actions. If that's the case, that's a big hole in our legal framework that will need to be addressed through legislation. Trusting in the virtue of the FBI and DOJ clearly is not sufficient. Some very despicable characters ended up in the highest DOJ, IC and FBI positions in the Nation.

a bitterly partisan government hack's brain.....
Speaking of bitterly partisan. Face it you didn't have any problem with FISA until your Messiah felt threatened by being investigated.

There is no evidence that the "Obama Administration" had anything to do with the FISA warrant request.
As far as their obligation to notify the court once they terminated Steele as an informant for leaking information to the press and for lying to the FBI about the leaks- that wouldn't change the fact that the initial FISA was correct. Nor does it establish that the FBI no longer felt Steele was credible.

And finally- there was no obligation to do what you- or your Messiah- have ex post facto- decided must be done with a FISA warrant.

Notice by the way- that Trump has not made any moves to eliminate the FISA courts.......nor have the GOP.

You're either ignorant or you're lying.

Former Intel Officer Tony Shaffer on How the FBI Became a Political Tool Under Obama — American Thought Leaders

 

[Syriusly]

What lies to get the FISA warrant?

All 4 applications:

Claimed that the information showing that Carter Page was a Russian Spy was verified, when it was unverified.

Claimed that Steele was honest and trustworthy even though they had fired him for lying.

Claimed press accounts were "corroboration" even though they found out before the subsequent renewals that Steele was the same source for both.

They claimed, under oath that ALL pertinent information had been disclosed to the court, yet they concealed from the Court that the Clinton campaign paid for the Dossier.

They didn't tell the Court the truth because if they had, the warrants would have been denied. Lies aren't suddenly laundered into truth simply because you tricked a FISC judge into approving your spying application.

Well lets dig into that- shall we?
Document: Justice Department Releases Carter Page FISA Application
The FISA warrant on Carter Page claimed that he was a Russian agent- which can mean many things. The FISA application also says that the FBI relied on information from the State Department- and as you are aware- vast amounts of info is redacted. Now in order for it to be a lie it would have be a) false and b) made knowing it is false. We have no evidence at the moment that either is true...

You think that if a vague notion floats through a bitterly partisan government hack's brain that someone is working as a spy for a foreign government that the full weight of Intelligence Communities Vast Spying powers can be brought against an American Citizen? You'll have to provide me links to when anyone with a brain made these claims while any portion of FISA was being passed or reauthorized.

But, I will love watching the deranged clowns making arguments like that to the American People once the Barr Durham and Horowitz reports have been released.

That great power and authority may only be loosed on a US Citizen if based on compelling evidence, the FBI suspects individuals of acting as clandestine agents of a hostile foreign power. Every Warrant requires a Sworn Oath that ALL the information is verified and that the record is accurate and complete. Further, as these are ex-parte proceedings, the government has the highest burden possible to disclose any weak spots in their submission or exculpatory information.

What the upcoming reports are examining is what triggered such an investigation in a democratic republic whose norms strongly discourage an incumbent administration’s use of the government’s spying powers against political opponents?

The Obama administration did not apply this norm to the Trump campaign at a time when they were supremely confident that Hillary Clinton would be elected and that no one would ever know that this vast spy power had been repeatedly unleashed against the Trump Campaign... Ooops!

If all the Obama administration had been trying to do was check out a few bad apples with suspicious Russia ties, the FBI could easily have alerted any of a number of Trump campaign officials with solid national-security credentials — Rudy Giuliani, Jeff Sessions, Chris Christie. The agents could have asked for the campaign’s help. Instead, Obama officials made the Trump campaign the subject of a full-blown counterintelligence investigation, an action that could only be justified by unimpeachable fully verified and corroborated evidence that Donald Trump was a Russian agent.

...Actually it claimed that Source #1- Steele- was assessed as reliable. And when the first FISA request was granted- Steele was still an FBI informant.- Steele was not removed as an informant for the FBI until a month later when the FBI found out he was leaking info to the press....

Yes. He was fired by the FBI for acting in an untrustworthy manner. At that moment they had a duty to immediately inform the Court of his untrustworthy action. They did not. They also did not disclose to the Court of his actions through 3 subsequent renewals.

...the press issue- so you admit that this wasn't relevant during the initial FISA authorization- but for the subsequent ones authorized by Trump officials?...

As soon as learned, they had a duty to update the Court. They did not and they repeated this "corroboration" through three renewals even though they knew it to be false.

...And regarding 'pertinent information' you are getting nowhere there either because the FBI noted the pertinent information in the footnote. to the FISA application. Not a lie- simply your disagreement with the FBI on what is pertinent...

They did NOT reveal in a footnote that the Clinton campaign was funding Steele. They deliberately concealed this from the Court, and the reason for their deliberately duplicity, on all 4 applications is obvious. The Court wouldn't have approved this information had they known it.

...
I for one am looking forward to the FISA report.
What do I expect? Probably critical on details, and not finding that the FISA warrants themselves were illegal or that anyone did anything actually illegal, but there will be some criticism of the process.

I too am concerned that rather than resulting in criminal charges that through this process we will also find that only administration penalties apply, suspensions, terminations, write ups and the like, basically employment actions. If that's the case, that's a big hole in our legal framework that will need to be addressed through legislation. Trusting in the virtue of the FBI and DOJ clearly is not sufficient. Some very despicable characters ended up in the highest DOJ, IC and FBI positions in the Nation.

a bitterly partisan government hack's brain.....
Speaking of bitterly partisan. Face it you didn't have any problem with FISA until your Messiah felt threatened by being investigated.

There is no evidence that the "Obama Administration" had anything to do with the FISA warrant request.
As far as their obligation to notify the court once they terminated Steele as an informant for leaking information to the press and for lying to the FBI about the leaks- that wouldn't change the fact that the initial FISA was correct. Nor does it establish that the FBI no longer felt Steele was credible.

And finally- there was no obligation to do what you- or your Messiah- have ex post facto- decided must be done with a FISA warrant.

Notice by the way- that Trump has not made any moves to eliminate the FISA courts.......nor have the GOP.

You're either ignorant or you're lying.]

Your a Trumpkin- which means you are ignorant- and lying.