Judiciary Committee hearing on IG report - Wray and Rosenstein - 6/28 live feed

So Rosenstein approved something he didn't read.

Go Go Gohmert!

Rosenstein just admitted to four different federal judges signed off on the different FISA warrant applications, Man, Rosy sure is squirming.

originally posted by: toysforadults
any updates on any information coming out or should I wait for Ben Shapiro to cover it?

MSNBC will have all the facts and important parts.

😵👁😵

a reply to: xuenchen

lamo Swalwell, this ought to be GOOD!

a reply to: seeker1963

Note that Rosenstein said that he, "wasn't aware of any undisclosed conflicts of interest..." which indicates to me that there are disclosed conflicts of interest but that they have been overlooked.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: xuenchen
Oh please !!!

RR just said he doesn't know how many FISA Judges there are 😃😃

Gee he's only the Assistant Attorney General.

There are currently only 11 FISA judges, which is why the fisa warrants (4 of them) are so troublesome. Each warrant was signed off on by a different judge. That is a red flag as it gives the impression they judge shopped intentionally to prevent a judge from figuring out they were renewing the fisa warrant using old information and not the required new information needed for a renewal.

Interesting. How do the warrants being signed by different judges give such an impression of the specific intent you describe?

I've not seen that mentioned before and I wonder how you came to that conclusion.

Warrants, as you probably know, are not open ended. When one is issued there is a time frame attached to it (and like any warrant requires probable cause to obtain). The same standard continues to apply for subsequent continuation warrants. When you are resubmitting a warrant request you must have new information in order to justify the extension.

Generally, but not always, you use the same judge. Larger cities / jurisdictions will have more judges than those with less population but it doesnt change the facts on what the system requires. If you go see a different judge and misrepresent the facts to that judge you have a massive problem. Since you are required to have a prosecutor sign off on the warrant application before going to a judge also means you are generally using the same prosecutor. Larger jurisdictions can assign prosecutors to different law enforcement departments / precincts.

Misrepresentation can and does include omitting required information, such as we already obtained a warrant for this individual and we need to extend the warrant. Failing to disclose that info OR representing old information from the previous warrant as new is a no no.

FISA warrants fall into the smaller agency / population comparison because of what that part of the courts do and the number of judges assigned to it. Here is the other massive issue. These FISA judges are not all located in one federal district.

Currently -
3 are based in DC
1 in Florida
1 in New York
1 in Oklahoma
1 in Virginia
1 in New Jersey
1 in Oregon
1 in Kentucky
1 in Massachusetts

So they didnt use the same judge and given the placement of the judges they had to go to a different district to obtain at least one and thats assuming they used all 3 DC judges.

Granted - using different judges to sign off on warrants etc for the same case does occur. Given the nature of how the FISA court operates and given what we know about the FISA application not disclosing who paid for the dossier it suggests to me they judge shopped in order to keep extending the warrants. Given the FISA process is classified FISA judges arent going to be discussing what they are doing in that realm with each other.

If you feel different thats cool. I am basing my opinion off my experience on criminal investigations and warrant requirements.

ETA - and Rosenstein just confirmed the 4 different FISA judges were used.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: seeker1963

Note that Rosenstein said that he, "wasn't aware of any undisclosed conflicts of interest..." which indicates to me that there are disclosed conflicts of interest but that they have been overlooked.

Yea, this dude is so delusional about Russia, I'll bet he checks under his bed every night. He reminds me of that other guy that thought Guam might tip over. Absolute freaking morons!

originally posted by: xuenchen
No man, they're fumbling on the FISA applications !!!!!!!!!!

They "approved" them and now they're not sure of the contents !!!!!!!!

💥POP💥

💥😃💥

Yeah trying to use the defense of I didnt know what was in the warrant wont fly.

You sign off on it... you own it.

a reply to: Xcathdra

They make it sound like it was an office girl signing a receipt for donuts !!

😃

a reply to: Xcathdra

Thanks for that. It was quite informative.

I did not know that Strzok had a polygraph that was "out of scope" which basically means he failed the test and was kept on the investigation after this fact.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: seeker1963

Note that Rosenstein said that he, "wasn't aware of any undisclosed conflicts of interest..." which indicates to me that there are disclosed conflicts of interest but that they have been overlooked.

When Mueller was appointed Rosenstein signed off on his conflict of interest waiver however the details wont be disclosed. Again, imo, another red flag.


Justice Department won't disclose details on Mueller ethics waiver By JOSH GERSTEIN 12/12/2017 05:07 AM EST

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
So Rosenstein approved something he didn't read.

Go Go Gohmert!

Rosenstein just admitted to four different federal judges signed off on the different FISA warrant applications, Man, Rosy sure is squirming.

Too much trust in the wrong people, or something more sinister?

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

That was a big revelation, and I am surprised there wasnt a response from Wray or Rosenstein that denied knowledge of this out of scope polygraph...

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
I did not know that Strzok had a polygraph that was "out of scope" which basically means he failed the test and was kept on the investigation after this fact.

Polygraph tests are not absolute and they dont flat out tel you a person is lying or not. It measures certain physical reactions, like galvanic skin response. When you lie your body does give off a reaction that can be detected by the equipment. However because its not an absolute science the results are not admissible in court.

You either pass or it gives a response that says the person was being misleading.

a reply to: Xcathdra


Like Pelosi signed off on ObamaCare before knowing what was in it.

BTW.. I see that president Trump is in Wisconsin giving a speech right now. Did he go home last night?

a reply to: jadedANDcynical


Scary thought:

It might be a Plus to obtain functions he does/did provide.

and now Congressman Lieu is going off on immigration children.

Bahahaha, Rosenstein would not answer the question about Lisa Page saying "POTUS wants to know everything that's happening..."

The wriggling that worm is doing and the questions which he dancing around tell much.

a reply to: carewemust

Trump came to Milwaukee to stay overnight last night and then took off down to Mount Pleasant at the Foxconn groundbreaking. He is indeed speaking rn.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
Bahahaha, Rosenstein would not answer the question about Lisa Page saying "POTUS wants to know everything that's happening..."

The wriggling that worm is doing and the questions which he dancing around tell much.

What is Rosenstein supposed to know that the I.G. Report didn't spell out, regarding those text messages? Back then, in 2016, what was Rosenstein's position?