Breaking - FusionGPS was a subcontractor for the FBI - ran 702 inquiries w/out FISA

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: xstealth

I just heard that Simpson, the head of Fusion GPS., admitted yesterday that there is no FBI Insider inside the Trump campaign or Trump Administration.

A lot of people are trying to correct this story or hide or some other thing.

FusionGPS is trying to walk back some of Simpsons statements.

Namely the inside source (there was not one) and the claim someone died connected to the dossier (no one died).

Thankyou for summarizing where things stand, Xcathdra. I read in another thread that the pressure is starting to make both little and big "birdies" start to talk, and even sing.

Jack Posobiec
🇺🇸
‏Verified account @JackPosobiec
1h1 hour ago

A certain agent is singing like a bird right now to keep himself out of jail

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Xcathdra

Congress just reauthorized the act that made all of this perfectly legal. That is the issue now. For once I am applauding Rand Paul.

Passing the law and Trump signing it are 2 different things. Absent extremely strong safeguards for American citizens the FISA law is an unacceptable danger.

a reply to: DJW001

Clinton won the popular vote in every single state she carried and Trump won the popular vote in every single state he carried. Trump carried more states than Clinton and because of that he carried more electoral votes than Clinton.

Populous states do not get to disenfranchise voters from other states.

We use an electoral college system and not a national popular vote.

You guys seriously need to understand how our system works and accept the fact the Democrats rigged a primary so Clinton could run. Given that fact, that the DNC conspired to rig the primary for Clinton, the left has no right to lecture anyone on what the people want.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: tadaman

Popular opinion is the basis of democracy.

Only in the democracy the person with the opinion participates in.
Otherwise , a useless waste of time....

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: Xcathdra

Interestingly enough, the security markings on the 2013 document (which is known to be authentic) differ from those on the recent document. They are: TOP SECRET//COMINT//ORCON,NOFORN (on the old document) compared to TOP SECRET/SI/ORCON/NOFORN (on the new document). The 2013 classification scheme is formally correct; Top Secret is the highest classification, COMINT is a compartment of Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI). You have to have a TS clearance to be eligible for access to an SCI compartment. ORCON (Originator Controlled) and NOFORN (No Release to Foreign Nationals) are not classification levels, as such, they are caveats that describe who has the authority to declassify the material and who is not allowed to see it. These 3 different kinds of descriptors are all delimited from each other by different delimiters (double backslashes and commas). The classification scheme in the recently released document seems to me to be erroneous; SI is not a compartment, as far as I know, and all of the different descriptors are all separated by the same delimiters (commas), implying that they are all of the same importance (which they're not)

Could the genuine document from 2013 have been used as a template by someone to produce a recent disinformation document?

This is an honest question. Has someone already figured this out, one way or the other, and I just haven't heard about it?

Inquiring minds want to know.

I was wondering what SI meant too... sports illustrated? Lol but seriously if this is a photoshop hoax I would be shocked that no authorities already caught that, but again, it does sound possible to be a redo

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Spot on mate. I wonder how many of those missing 33,000 e-mails from HRC's server illustrate precisely what you have summarized.

a reply to: Xcathdra

But less populous states do get to disenfranchise voters from other states.

Of course the system has to be respected, anything else would be absolutely wrong. But that doesn't mean it's a good system. Just extra layers of complexity that can potentially be gamed, plus the unequality. And the problem will get worse if differences in population keep growing.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Xcathdra

Congress just reauthorized the act that made all of this perfectly legal. That is the issue now. For once I am applauding Rand Paul.

Passing the law and Trump signing it are 2 different things. Absent extremely strong safeguards for American citizens the FISA law is an unacceptable danger.

Trump can't wait to use it against his enemies. Of course he will sign it.

a reply to: DJW001

Possibly true, but still an assumption.

On the other hand we know for a fact the democrats have used it in an attempt to squash their political rivals.

Either way we the people should vote out anyone that voted for the continuation of the Fisa system.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Populous states do not get to disenfranchise voters from other states.

The last election saw "empty states" disenfranchise populous states. You Trump supporters need to understand that when a President cannot convince the majority of the population that he is acting on their behalf, they will rise up against him. There have already been massive protests, and Republican congressmen are retiring rather than get defeated because of Trump's unpopularity. There are many reasons why Trump should be removed from office. The least painful would be simply to declare him mentally unfit, since that is obvious and would not require any criminal charges.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: DJW001

Possibly true, but still an assumption.

On the other hand we know for a fact the democrats have used it in an attempt to squash their political rivals.

Either way we the people should vote out anyone that voted for the continuation of the Fisa system.

I am with you there. If the government wants to spy on citizens, they should do it illegally... that way they can be challenged in court.

originally posted by: Outlier13
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Spot on mate. I wonder how many of those missing 33,000 e-mails from HRC's server illustrate precisely what you have summarized.

If they did, they would have been on WikiLeaks by now. Russian hackers are extremely competent.

a reply to: DJW001

You can try to make it seem like most people side with you. Must feel like that from your vantage point but I dont think you really get out as much as you feel you do.

No one can say that they have an overwhelming majority of support ideologically

Most states voted for Trump. A couple million people in California or NY dont decide for the rest of the country since that would destroy the union and bring the rest of the states bearing down on them.

Trump won a geographic majority, and half the popular votes nearly down the line.

Half the country by head count.

Deal with it. I will just accept that certain states let people vote who arent legally able to, but whatever.

Democrats have some VERY serious explaining to do or there will be protests. No one will pay for them and they wont just stop because our rage will sustain us. We are pissed guy. The cats out of the bag and this will not be business as usual.

I dont care if the chicken came before the egg. The deed is done, now they need to fix it or get ready for ever living hell.

I will not live under a bannana republic where government uses the resources we give it to in turn control our political climate nationally.

Big nope.

a reply to: DJW001

So, then, its about Agenda 21? Forcing the urbanization of America? "You will only have a voice if you add it to the urban collective"

That doesnt really feel like it encourages land ownership, small scale (noncorporate) agriculture, or individual rights. It sounds wonderful for the globalist corporations though. They can have us plebes herded into cities to squabble over politics and then monetize the lands left behind.

Not very representative at all

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

If the electoral system was designed today, would it make sense to give some more power than others? Seems to me that it is the way it is for historical reasons, not because it's the fairest or most logical or most efficient system. It's unlikely to be changed in this two party system, as one of the two will always and up benefiting from it and depending on it.

If you want to subsidize land ownership, independent agriculture, etc, then would it not be fairer to just openly give farmers say 1.05 votes instead of 1, or land owners 1.1 votes, and so on.

I get that states and their citizen are worried about being stepped on, it's more that reasonable. But I'm worried about what people will think when they see their votes are not so important compared to others. It's demoralizing. I know one guy who said he's only voted once, in a strong blue state, because the he felt it didn't make a difference anyway.

Of course personally I don't think voting ever makes a difference, but it's not like we have a better system, and a lot of people believe in it, so who am I to say

a reply to: Cutepants


Someone will always be slighted no matter what, take California for instance on a state level they actually have more than a few deep red counties, but they are always marginalized by the big city.
As we expand to the national level in the current system California gives the democrats a 55pt lead in the electoral college before the first vote is cast.

It is very near an insurmountable lead, The only reason Trump won is he managed to eek out wins in traditionally blue states.

It takes a perfecft storm of democrat incompetance for a republican to win the white house now a days, the system actually works pretty darn well in my opinion.

a reply to: Cutepants

I think the strife is, and has been, urban vs rural. Ive witnessed New Yorkers berate my "stupid hick" employees for daring to have an accent. Its been going on since right after reformation.

The wounds of the civil war never healed, and you can see it in the derisive ways people refer to the rural South and Midwest.

I think we will war again. The result will be Cascadia, Texas, and something along the lines of a North and a South. But 4 countries will eventually emerge. Hopefully not in my lifetime.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Cutepants

I think the strife is, and has been, urban vs rural. Ive witnessed New Yorkers berate my "stupid hick" employees for daring to have an accent. Its been going on since right after reformation.

The wounds of the civil war never healed, and you can see it in the derisive ways people refer to the rural South and Midwest.

I think we will war again. The result will be Cascadia, Texas, and something along the lines of a North and a South. But 4 countries will eventually emerge. Hopefully not in my lifetime.

I think your 100% on the money, majority of my family is from Pittsburgh, my folks were smart enough to run south as soon as they had a few bucks to rub together. They routinely say things disparging about the south, especially hitting on race relations as why we are so ignorant and backwards.
This coming from a city that still has neighborhoods from Italians, others for Irish, others for black people etc.

When I was young I figured we would have a civil war by the end of my grand kids lifetimes (assuming I had any) but with the state of things today I think that time is rapidly approaching us.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

Yeah no thanks. I already know who falls for this.

Yep, it was you who fell for it and can't stand to find out how wrong you have been, Case closed!

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Not sure when there'll be war again but I can imagine your employees where called that. I blame coastal, liberal types for this rift more than any rednecks with guns, for sure. I identify somewhat more with the liberal mindset, but that doesn't mean they aren't idiots. And MSM deserves a lot of blame for their hillbilly stereotyping.