It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
FAKE NEWS > [optics] 'FALSE' majority > BLUE WAVE
BLUE WAVE [optics] > No Voter Irregularities > Nothing to See Here
FAKE NEWS > Voter Irregularities Challenge > CONSPIRACY
FC: Justice Department publishes "list of post-9-11 accomplishments"
But a troubling whisper has begun inside the Justice Department. “FISAs aren’t required to include exculpatory evidence,” one official told me on background in a recent text message.
That emerging sentiment should alarm all of us, no matter our political stripe. A court that excludes legal representation for the accused almost certainly will fail to protect civil liberty if it isn’t allowed to see proof of innocence or evidentiary flaws.
Rogers played a major role in uncovering ongoing FISA abuses, and his efforts are revealed in the April 26, 2017, FISA court ruling. Significant changes to the handling of raw Section 702 FISA data resulted from the FISA court’s findings.
On April 18, 2016, Rogers moved aggressively in response to the disclosures. He abruptly shut down all FBI outside-contractor access. At this point, both the FBI and the DOJ’s National Security Division (NSD) became aware of Rogers’s compliance review. They may have known earlier, but they were certainly aware after outside-contractor access was halted.
That is going to be something to see. You would need one hell of a proof for them to believe it.
originally posted by: RelSciHistItSufi
a reply to: queenofswords
I'm not only having a "wait until you find out who's been talking to you here" but also a "wait until you find out who you yourselves are" moment.
Anonymous said they found much to dislike. “None of us are happy with your bull#,” they wrote. “We gonna wreck you. We are Anonymous.”
More at: www.wsj.com...
WASHINGTON—The Justice Department is expected to publish a legal opinion in support of Matthew Whitaker’s installation as acting attorney general as early as Tuesday, a person familiar with the matter said, following questions about whether he can legally serve in the role.
The department’s Office of Legal Counsel is expected to say that President Trump had the ability to appoint Mr. Whitaker, the person said. Mr. Whitaker took over last week as an interim replacement for former Attorney General Jeff Sessions when Mr. Sessions was ousted by Mr. Trump.
The opinion is expected to support the Trump administration’s position that the president’s authority to tap Mr. Whitaker is affirmed by guidance the office issued in 2003. At that time, the office concluded that President George W. Bush could name a non-confirmed employee of the Office of Management and Budget as the agency’s acting director.
The OMB director, like the attorney general, is a principal officer of the federal government. The 2003 opinion avoided that problem by defining an acting director as an “inferior officer,” who under Supreme Court precedent doesn’t require Senate approval to be appointed.
Critics from across the ideological spectrum have said Mr. Whitaker’s appointment is a potentially invalid end-run around the Senate’s power to provide “advice and consent” on senior executive-branch nominations. Others have said Mr. Whitaker’s appointment was lawful under a statute called the Vacancies Reform Act.
In addition, others say Mr. Whitaker’s ties to a witness in special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into Russian interference in the 2016 elections and his history of critical comments about that inquiry raise questions about his impartiality and his ability to supervise it. The special counsel is designed to be insulated from political considerations.
originally posted by: Bill1960
Sorry Q, but I think you've over played your hand. We've been patient, quietly believing that crimes that have been rubbed in our collective faces would be served with justice. We believed only to be rewarded with a blue wave of stolen elections. Our forefathers are wretching in heaven as I type. All will be revealed, my ass. Trust the plan, my ass. Here's my advice to you, # or get off the pot. Here's what I do know, at this point I'm done across the board and to me, when you can steal our most sacred institution, our electoral process. Well my friend, the law of the jungle is how I'm moving forward. Sorry guys
originally posted by: CanadianMason
a reply to: Creep Thumper
Pallets of cash was money belonging to Iran that was frozen and returned. It wasn't yours (USA's) to begin with.