It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Justice Department Discloses No FISA Court Hearings Held on Carter Page Warrants

page: 3
40
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 31 2018 @ 09:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

So at the end of the day, my conclusion is that we will just never know.

We are just scratching the surface of the second layer of what has been going on in the intelligence agencies. This could go on for years and will eventually bore the "bread and circuses" audience that is the American public.

There will never be a public demand to focus on the issue.

Which is why they keep winning.

By sheer entropy.

How sad.




posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 06:12 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

FISA records are not available to the public.
Judicial watch is lying.



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 06:22 AM
link   
a reply to: 14377

They indicted and got a new guilty plea from Sam Patten. This one directly links to trumps inauguration fund and laundered foreign donations. They had Unnamed Americans write a check for a donation and immediately they were reimbursed by Ukrainian oligarchs in some back channel deal.

www.vox.com...



The Mueller investigation has resulted in yet another plea deal. Sam Patten, a Republican lobbyist, pleaded guilty Friday to violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act in his unregistered work for a Ukrainian politician and a Ukrainian oligarch — and agreed to cooperate with the government.

Patten was charged by the US attorney’s office for the District of Columbia. But Mueller’s team referred the investigation there and Patten’s plea agreement specifically says he must cooperate with the special counsel’s office. Andrew Weissmann, an attorney on Mueller’s team, attended Patten’s hearing Friday



Guess this blows the whole it better be over by Sept first or some ton of bricks # would be happening. Giuliani didn't have much piss and vinegar yesterday after making that comment two weeks ago. When a reporter asked him yesterday about it not ending and asked "or what?" He just said "or nothing" we hope he honors the tradition. Tradition is not making public legal announcements close to an election. But nobody in Muellers crosshairs is actually running for anything anyway.
edit on 912018 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 06:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

They're not lying. Can you copy and paste the part where Judicial Watch claimed that the FISA records can be viewed publicly? Did you miss the part where it stated that Judicial Watch obtained the heavily redacted Page warrant applications, because they filed "a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for all hearing transcripts of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants related to Carter Page and Michael Flynn (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-01050))?"



Judicial Watch today announced that in response to a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, the Justice Department (DOJ) admitted in a court filing last night that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court held no hearings on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) spy warrant applications targeting Carter Page, a former Trump campaign part-time advisor who was the subject of four controversial FISA warrants.


LINK TO THAT FOIA REQUEST FILED ON 05/18/2018 (pdf FILE):
www.judicialwatch.org...


The Department of Justice previously released to Judicial Watch the heavily redacted Page warrant applications. The initial Page FISA warrant was granted just weeks before the 2016 election. The DOJ filing is in response to a Judicial Watch lawsuit for the FISA transcripts (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-01050)).

www.judicialwatch.org... s/


edit on 9/1/2018 by shawmanfromny because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 07:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist
So, you can get approval to spy on people with no hearing what so ever now? Appears so. How can anyone be ok with this?


Because if they agree with this then it means they are against Trump. As long as they are against Trump they will sell their soul to the devil.
* gladly the devil does not want to buy their souls and Trump has more money than he does.



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 08:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

it's illegal to except foreign campaign contributions when you're running for office. As far as I know it's not illegal to donate money for a party .



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 09:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: xuenchen

FISA records are not available to the public.
Judicial watch is lying.

You are much like an ape at the zoo.
Whatever you pull out of your ass you show for all to see then throw it at the wall to see if it sticks.
FISA records are available. We have this amazing right, you should look it up, FOIA.



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody
Whatsa matta baby? Getting nervous? Don't take it out on me. I didn't make you back the asshole. But the records are not available to the pubic not even in a FOIA request. Oops.
You should research before you start your infantile name calling.



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody
Whatsa matta baby? Getting nervous? Don't take it out on me. I didn't make you back the asshole. But the records are not available to the pubic not even in a FOIA request. Oops.
You should research before you start your infantile name calling.

Just tired of your outright lies.
The fact that you exhibit apelike behavior is on you, perhaps one f your hexes gone wrong?
You were one of those that believed CNN when they told you not to read Wikileaks weren't you?



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 09:24 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody


Secrecy

Because of the sensitive nature of its business, the court is a "secret court" – its hearings are closed to the public. While records of the proceedings are kept, , they also are unavailable to the public,, although copies of some records with classified information redacted have been made public



Some...which are redacted but generally. Nope.
Gee that was so hard to find.



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Too bad I never lie.
And I also don't watch CNN.
edit on 912018 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 09:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

although copies of some records with classified information redacted have been made public 


Lol
You are a poor witch, you cant hide your lies effectively.

edit on 1/9/2018 by shooterbrody because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Yeah last month when they redacted parts of Pages to release by order of trump.
Remember?

Can you name another time?



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 11:19 AM
link   


WASHINGTON — The Trump administration disclosed on Saturday a  previously top-secret set of documents related to the wiretapping of Carter Page, the onetime Trump campaign adviser who was at the center of highly contentious accusations by Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee that the F.B.I. had abused its surveillance powers.
www.nytimes.com...

edit on 912018 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 11:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme


WASHINGTON — The Trump administration disclosed on Saturday a  previously top-secret set of documents related to the wiretapping of Carter Page, the onetime Trump campaign adviser who was at the center of highly contentious accusations by Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee that the F.B.I. had abused its surveillance powers.
www.nytimes.com...



On Saturday evening, those materials — an October 2016 application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to wiretap Mr. Page, along with several renewal applications — were released to The New York Times and other news organizations that had filed Freedom of Information Act lawsuits to obtain them. Mr. Trump had declassified their existence earlier this year.


Hmmmm....why would Ttump want people know they even existed? And why would they point out all the judges that signed off on it as being appointed by Republicans? Interesting methinks....



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: xuenchen

FISA records are not available to the public.
Judicial watch is lying.


Bwaaahahaha they got it from the DOJ because of the FOIA.

Read the whole article the links are there.

😀😀😀😀



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

The DOJ who never reviewed it for approval? That DOJ? Hahaha, The claim that JW is making is so stupid it's laughable. Of course there was a hearing. Remember it was turned down once? But I'm done with this thread. It also is laughable.
Have fun with your circle jerk boys. A little tickle every now and then is effective...



posted on Sep, 1 2018 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme




A little tickle every now and then is effective...


LOL you and Stormy would know..



posted on Sep, 2 2018 @ 12:12 AM
link   
a reply to: notsure1

Perhaps that's the key to that ones hate and outrage.
A scorned past lover perhsps?
Trump do some in person inspection to see if the drapes matched the carpet for the self identified interior design specialist?
It would answer a lot with respect to that ones time devoted to threads insulting potus.



posted on Sep, 2 2018 @ 04:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: xuenchen

The DOJ who never reviewed it for approval? That DOJ? Hahaha, The claim that JW is making is so stupid it's laughable. Of course there was a hearing. Remember it was turned down once? But I'm done with this thread. It also is laughable.
Have fun with your circle jerk boys. A little tickle every now and then is effective...


LOL

If all these court orders for material releases are producing fake stories and doctored documents, then why hasn't any big Democrat political law firm challenged anything in court yet??

That's a riddle you and your packs can ponder for a year or two.

Dumbfoundedness is contagious among Democrats who make up assbackward rebuttals and expect people to actually believe it.

LOL



"don't get donkey-konged !!"



new topics




 
40
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join