PPP Is Full of Racism Posted March 6, 2018 Posted March 6, 2018 2 hours ago, row_33 said: Jump in when you feel the urge, it's a safe space for most views. trust me i don't need a safe space from those full of schiff 1
B-Man Posted March 6, 2018 Posted March 6, 2018 HE COULD BE BUT HE WON’T BE BECAUSE HE’S ON THE PROTECTED SIDE: Jonathan Turley: If Andrew McCabe lied, could he be charged like Michael Flynn? “It is a perceived luxury enjoyed by federal prosecutors that routinely charge others with even borderline false statements but rarely face such charges themselves. While most prosecutors adhere to the highest ethical standards, a minority of Justice Department lawyers have been accused of false or misleading statements in federal cases. However, they are virtually never charged with false statements by their colleagues. There is no such reluctance in using this easily charged crime against targets outside of the department.” Related question: If Comey or Mueller or McCabe or others lied to President Trump — who’s every bit as much a federal official as anyone from the FBI — could they be charged? Same answer: Yes, but they’re protected. So things go, at the Department of Justice. .
Deranged Rhino Posted March 7, 2018 Author Posted March 7, 2018 Here's the official request... https://goodlatte.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=1157
Deranged Rhino Posted March 7, 2018 Author Posted March 7, 2018 Page was always about getting that third hop. Always.
Deranged Rhino Posted March 7, 2018 Author Posted March 7, 2018 (edited) Speaking of hops, I cannot recommend this article enough, especially for those of you who think the FISA abuse claims are not important. http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/256333/fisas-license-to-hop Quote And they don’t stop there. A conspiratorial enterprise is bound to involve communications beyond Carter Page’s first circle of direct contact, so investigators need to look at the next circle as well. They may need to look further, depending on the communications patterns they find in the first two circles radiating from their named target. But under current rules, it’s the first two that government investigators can routinely gain access to in order to “uncover the full scope of a conspiratorial enterprise,” without needing to apply for further warrants. This convention is referred to as the “two-hop” rule, and, like many provisions of surveillance law, has come in for criticism by civil libertarians. The original FISA was passed in 1978, before the internet age. After 9/11, information technology enabled surveillance operators under the Patriot Act, which complemented and in some ways overlapped FISA surveillance, to inaugurate a “three-hop” rule exploiting computer-networked communications to look well beyond the first-order contacts of a central subject (under Patriot Act surveillance, a terror suspect). This was done via presidential order and came as an unwelcome surprise to the public when the practice was revealed, and initially dubbed “warrantless wiretapping,” in 2005. Subsequent efforts to rein in intelligence-community hopping resulted in some restrictions on the margins, but ultimately in the codification of post-9/11 practice, which was framed as aiming to prevent a terror attack on the US homeland. In 2008, with the FISA Amendments Act, Congress effectively authorized the three-hop rule used under the Patriot Act—although that point was understood by the public only in hindsight, following the revelations about surveillance practices made by National Security Agency (NSA) contract worker Edward Snowden. (snip) But: The use of controls should not obscure for us the scope of what’s actually going on. Data-mining, in particular, is inherently about hunting through data that’s already there, because it is routinely collected, or stored under legal requirements and made available to the US intelligence community on demand. For some types of communications data, it is possible to retrieve information from as much as five years back in the relevant database. In the case of a subject like Carter Page, that means investigators who obtain a warrant in October 2016 can hunt through his communications going back several years before that date—and can use their “license to hop” to probe the first and second order of correspondents linked to him at any point during that period in the same fashion. (As mentioned at links above—here and here—analysts working national-security surveillance without a targeted warrant can routinely go back for an 18-month haul.) Links from the past can then be exploited going forward. What this means in practice is that, under a single warrant, anyone Page had a text or phone call with in the Trump campaign during the brief months of his association with it in 2016, was fair game, as a direct connection, all the way through the end of the last warrant-extension period on Page in October 2017. The second-hop connections of those initial contacts—meaning everyone that those people had contact with—are also fair game. In other words, it’s likely that almost everyone on the Trump campaign staff was included in the universe of first- and second-order contacts of Carter Page. The entirety of their correspondence is therefore also covered by the initial warrant, regardless of whether or not they ever met or corresponded with Carter Page, or whether that correspondence referred to him in any way, directly or indirectly. (snip) Think that over for a moment, and you can see why the Carter Page warrant is important. The possible abuse of that warrant for partisan political purposes would likely be a violation not just of Page’s rights, but of the rights of thousands of other Americans—and by extension, of the right of all Americans to be free from warrantless surveillance. Edited March 7, 2018 by Deranged Rhino posted more from the article.
DC Tom Posted March 8, 2018 Posted March 8, 2018 2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: Speaking of hops, I cannot recommend this article enough, especially for those of you who think the FISA abuse claims are not important. http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/256333/fisas-license-to-hop ****, thanks to Twitter and Facebook, it's likely that most of us here are a third-order hop away from Page.
Cinga Posted March 8, 2018 Posted March 8, 2018 2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: In the case of a subject like Carter Page, that means investigators who obtain a warrant in October 2016 can hunt through his communications going back several years before that date—and can use their “license to hop” to probe the first and second order of correspondents linked to him at any point during that period in the same fashion. And yet once again, no charges as of yet against Page.... But also with perhaps thousands caught up in this web, no one has been charged with collusion or spying, or any of the other things they filed for this warrant for I've been against FISA since I first learned of it during the so called Patriot Act debate. A secret court answerable to no one, now who could imagine it would ever be abused? 3
Deranged Rhino Posted March 8, 2018 Author Posted March 8, 2018 21 minutes ago, Cinga said: And yet once again, no charges as of yet against Page.... But also with perhaps thousands caught up in this web, no one has been charged with collusion or spying, or any of the other things they filed for this warrant for I've been against FISA since I first learned of it during the so called Patriot Act debate. A secret court answerable to no one, now who could imagine it would ever be abused? It's been a bug up my ass for a couple years now as well. To me the simple fix is to have a public advocate in the court room to defend the rights of the suspects. There is a need for the FISC, especially in today's world, but there must be balance. Having an opposing voice in the room would be a good step to leveling the field. Had there been for Page, none of this would have happened.
Koko78 Posted March 8, 2018 Posted March 8, 2018 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: It's been a bug up my ass for a couple years now as well. To me the simple fix is to have a public advocate in the court room to defend the rights of the suspects. There is a need for the FISC, especially in today's world, but there must be balance. Having an opposing voice in the room would be a good step to leveling the field. Had there been for Page, none of this would have happened. Two problems with the public advocate approach: 1.) The FISC Judge will most likely ignore them - they've already shown to be nothing more than rubber stamps; and 2.) It is hard to advocate for someone when you're not going to be allowed to talk to them. 3
Warren Zevon Posted March 8, 2018 Posted March 8, 2018 Trump hired a Russian spy (Carter Page) as his foreign policy adviser. What a rotten tangerine.
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 8, 2018 Posted March 8, 2018 2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: It's been a bug up my ass for a couple years now as well. To me the simple fix is to have a public advocate in the court room to defend the rights of the suspects. There is a need for the FISC, especially in today's world, but there must be balance. Having an opposing voice in the room would be a good step to leveling the field. Had there been for Page, none of this would have happened. A "public advocate" whose job it is to appear before a secret court to defend a person who is not being aware of the charges against him, or that his rights are being violated, is nothing more than an additional rubber stamp in a process doomed to the worst sorts of corruption. The whole notion of a secret court is an anathema to a free people, and must be done away with. 5 hours ago, garybusey said: fair game also fair game What is fair game? 3
Deranged Rhino Posted March 8, 2018 Author Posted March 8, 2018 Good read: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/02/27/jeff-sessions-affirms-inspector-general-review-of-fisa-court-abuse-by-dept-of-justice/ 1
Deranged Rhino Posted March 8, 2018 Author Posted March 8, 2018 Just now, Nanker said: Good read indeed. 2 minutes ago, Nanker said: Good read indeed. Things could start to move quite fast once it kicks off.
Tiberius Posted March 8, 2018 Posted March 8, 2018 5 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: Things could start to move quite fast once it kicks off. I thought The Memo was the kick off? There's a new kick off? 1
Bob in Mich Posted March 8, 2018 Posted March 8, 2018 Turns out Nunes was called for illegal touching on the memo kickoff. Re-kick 2
Warren Zevon Posted March 8, 2018 Posted March 8, 2018 Just now, Bob in Mich said: Turns out Nunes was called for illegal touching on the memo kickoff. Re-kick Bob you are the poster of the year in PPP for 2018 so far 1 1
row_33 Posted March 8, 2018 Posted March 8, 2018 On 3/6/2018 at 4:23 PM, m_w_hunter said: trust me i don't need a safe space from those full of schiff you will do just fine here!
Recommended Posts