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.

 

Comey: Dossier Was Unverified Before And After FBI Used It To Obtain Spy Warrants

page: 5
50
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 03:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: six67seven

Well, you know, it's different for them. This is their moral crusade and when you fight evil, any means justify the ends. Who cares about those pesky laws, right?


You could be talking about Trump here, you know! Who were you talking about? I got confused.
edit on 11pmTue, 11 Dec 2018 15:38:17 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

Your own source says the pages that weren’t blacked out were reason enough to wiretap him

So according to your own source, trump need only get an unverified allegation that anyone of his opponents is a Chinese spy, and he can wiretap them for months on end

I’m a glad you are ok with that standard

As to then the rest of that sources claims to just trust them, the super secret parts we haven’t seen have the goods, sorry not buying it

From what we have seen the and claims within it make up the bulk of the pages alone

And if these other sources were so damning, why is page why include the unverified dossier

And why is page still walking free?

These sources were so good that the knew page was a spy, but after 2 years of investigating, including spying on him, they can’t charge page with any crime?

Nonsense



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: darkbake

The additional evidence were news stories based on allegations begun by the dossier.

Moreover, we now know that the FBI knew Steele was talking to this guy, before they presented the Dossier and the news article as evidence. They knew the article was not independent corroboration of the Dossier, but they falsely presented it as such to the FISA court.

The warrant contains multiple provably-false claims. It is invalid. The house of cards should by all rights collapse.



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

My point was that there was more evidence than that in the dossier to justify the FISA warrant. My other point was that the law was followed.

As far as if the FISA court needs changing? It might, I would have to research it more. One of the articles I cited did mention that this could be the case. But that doesn't get Trump and his associates off the hook, as far as I know.
edit on 11pmTue, 11 Dec 2018 15:52:55 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 03:52 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

Trump had an affair. By all accounts, it was consensual. The person in question signed an NDA which is also consensual and took money for doing so.

At best, they can call this a campaign finance violation. But lots of politicians make these all the time and the best that gets leveled at them is a fine.

There is no crime here worth more than a fine. Obama even made them and paid a fine.



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 03:52 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

If Trump did anything wrong, put him away, whatever the law says. Just explain why the same crimes of others didn't warrant any real punishment?

But my crime I referred to, is that your sources explaining what was used to get the FISA warrants have offered nothing but their word that we should believe, nothing to back it up. So as crazy as it sounds, sometimes folks lie. If they did, then a biggie was broken and it matters very bigley.



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 03:55 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

That could be the case, but Trump tried to cover up the payment and this could be a crime, too. In any case, it could be worthy of impeachment, just like Clinton got impeached for lying about Lewinsky.

Here is more on why it would be illegal even if Trump used his own money:


Those laws barred candidates’ supporters from making donations — including in-kind donations — worth more than $2,700 to presidential campaigns during the 2016 general election. And while those laws allow candidates to spend an unlimited amount of their own money to help their campaigns, they require the candidates to disclose such self-funding, both as donations to their campaigns and as expenditures.


The New York Times
edit on 11pmTue, 11 Dec 2018 15:55:44 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)


However, I will admit that Trump might get off with a fine. I would have to look into that more. Trump may not even get into trouble because he is President and possibly has immunity. However, politically, it looks like trouble for sure.
edit on 11pmTue, 11 Dec 2018 16:01:27 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 04:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: darkbake
a reply to: Grambler

My point was that there was more evidence than that in the dossier to justify the FISA warrant. My other point was that the law was followed.

As far as if the FISA court needs changing? It might, I would have to research it more. One of the articles I cited did mention that this could be the case. But that doesn't get Trump and his associates off the hook, as far as I know.


Your point is wrong

At the very least, a substantial piece of evidence used to spy on a presidential campaign was paid for by his opponent and not verified by the fbi

And that is probably illegal, as well as corrupt


This sensational allegation came from Christopher Steele, the former British spy. The FISA court was not told that the Clinton campaign was behind Steele’s work. Nor did the FBI and Justice Department inform the court that Steele’s allegations had never been verified. To the contrary, each FISA application — the original one in October 2016, and the three renewals at 90-day intervals — is labeled “VERIFIED APPLICATION” (bold caps in original). And each one makes this breathtaking representation:

The FBI has reviewed this verified application for accuracy in accordance with its April 5, 2001 procedures, which include sending a copy of the draft to the appropriate field office(s).

In reality, the applications were never verified for accuracy.


I’m addition, you should at least be worried that the publicly available evidence for spying on a presidential campaign is unverified

But instead you are willing to take the word of people who hate trump to just trust them, it’s ok if the dossier was used and unverified, cause the redacted portions make it ok

That is absurd

The source above goes on


The senators went on to recount the concession by former FBI director James Comey that the bureau had relied on the credibility of Steele (who had previously assisted the bureau in another investigation), not the verification of Steele’s sources. In June 2017 testimony, Comey described information in the Steele dossier as “salacious and unverified.”

Moreover, the FBI’s former deputy director, Andrew McCabe, told Congress that the bureau tried very hard to verify Steele’s information but could provide no points of verification beyond the fact that Page did travel to Russia in July 2016 — a fact that required no effort to corroborate since the trip was unconcealed and widely known. (Page delivered a public commencement address at the New Economic School.) Furthermore, in British legal proceedings, Steele himself has described the information he provided to the FBI as “raw intelligence” that was “unverified.”

I freely acknowledge that we do not know what the redactions say. But we have been very well informed about what they do not say. They do not verify the allegations in the Steele dossier. I have no doubt that they have a great deal to say about Russia and its nefarious anti-American operations. But the FBI has been taking incoming fire for months about failing to corroborate Steele. No institution in America guards its reputation more zealously than does the FBI. If Steele had been corroborated, rest assured that the bureau would not be suffering in silence.


www.nationalreview.com...



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Trump has a track record of lying quite a lot himself, so I wouldn't trust anything he says regarding Russian interference in the election or his campaign finance violation. As for Schiff, I don't think he has a track record of lying.

I think this is a partially a problem of belief. We don't know all of the facts about the ongoing investigation, so we both speculate based on what we want to happen. In the end, at least as far as I know, we will have to wait until we know more before we can ascertain if Trump himself is going to get in trouble regarding his involvement with Russia.

One other piece of information regarding Trump and Russia has come out - Trump continued to have dealings with Russia regarding Trump Tower Moscow well into the primaries and there were some lies said to cover that up, too.



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

For those that don’t want to read

Why would comey still say the dossiers claims, which in the case of page were saying he was a Russian spy, were unverified if the redacted portions priced page was a Russian spy?

In other words, they don’t prove that or else comey and others would have said that the central claim of the dossier about page was verified



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Fools


the Republican party better start fighting fire with fire wherever and whenever they can




The time for kid gloves and petty games is long past. Our Pols need to play to win, not to "signal" their conservative values but to instead act on them and actually do the people's business. We had (and currently have until Jan.) enough of a majority to undo a hundred or so years of repressive and unconsitutional infringement of our rights through the legislature and have done very little in that regard

Trump has been working day-in day-out but this worthless Congress doesn't know how to do anything. I am beside myself that they permit so much of our public business to go unfinished.

The bureaucracy is strangling this country and running it into the ground. And complicit leftists are all too happy to see it go. I saw a poll on one of their pathetic/petty websites where nearly 90% of respondents were cheering on the recent stock market losses. Namely because, in their estimation, it reflected poorly on Trump while a small majority of horses' asses were pleased that those "rich enough to have stock are suffering"

And then you have traitors like Comey (J. Edgar want to be) who delegitimize our justice system and discredit our system of government every second he remains a free man, astonishingly uncharged with a single criminal offense. It is an insult to all Americans and an affront to every thing good and decent that these people remain free despite their seditious conspiracies



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 04:18 PM
link   
No it is not. You get subpoena power to verify the allegations presented to the FISA court. The information at that point was deemed reliable as Steele had provided reliable info to the FBI on prior occasion.

"You never should have gotten the warrant in the first place", is a defense used by the innocent? i don't think so.



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: darkbake
a reply to: shooterbrody

It looks like this angle is incorrect. The FBI explained the dossier to the best of its knowledge at the time, even discussing its origin ("provenance"). "The FBI also brought additional evidence forth to support its conclusion that the key claims in the dossier were at least credible."


Among other things, and contrary to the claims by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, the government did indeed apprise the FISA Court of the provenance of the “Steele dossier” (and former spy Christopher Steele’s possible bias); it offered additional evidence to support its conclusion that the key claims in the dossier were at least “credible;” and there appears to have been at least some other evidence besides the dossier offered in support of the government’s claim that there was “probable cause” to believe that Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power.


NBC

How was he a credible source when the fbi fired him prior to using his dossier to defraud the fisa court?



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 04:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical
No it is not. You get subpoena power to verify the allegations presented to the FISA court. The information at that point was deemed reliable as Steele had provided reliable info to the FBI on prior occasion.

"You never should have gotten the warrant in the first place", is a defense used by the innocent? i don't think so.



Great

Love the standard

So when trumo pays for some dirt and spies on all of the Dems

You will be right here applauding him telling Dems criticizing the warrant only makes them look guilty.

I am sure you will be consistent!



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical


"You never should have gotten the warrant in the first place", is a defense used by the innocent? i don't think so.


Irrelevant. Fruit of the poisonous tree. An excellent defense really

It doesn't matter, nothing that has come to light even comes close to any sort of "collusion" in regard to the election. Having business contacts in Russia and coordinating with Russia's government RE: foreign policy is normal, standard operating procedure for incoming administrations. Nothing Trump said, did, promised or floated contradicted Obama's policy toward Russia at the time.

Russia is an adversary only of the US, although we cooperate in several key areas. They are a far cry from an "enemy" and legally no state of war exists between us (war must be declared formally by Congress). Any sort of "treason" nonsense being thrown around by the desperate left is nothing more than a petty attempt to conflate potential procedural violations of campaign finance law with some sort of strange, bizarre, unfounded "collusion delusion conclusion" which so many of these petty individuals have staked their entire reputations on. They need "collusion" to be true, or at least believed by the bulk idiots out there. Otherwise, all their strange, bizarre, unfounded "collusion" conspiracy theories sink them and permanently destroy their credibility.

Good luck. When Trump isn't impeached/convicted you people will finally be proven wrong once and for all. Apparently all the exposed misconduct, evidence of actual conspiracy and blatant attempts to subvert a lawfully elected President isn't enough. I don't know. It can't be made any more clear.



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Of course, because the ends justify the means to these folks

LWNJs would violate any law and abridge any freedom to impose their idea of the "just society" on others. Apparently they think this non-existent and mythical virtue-signalling BS is more important than maintaining the most just and prosperous civilization possible (only achievable by following the Constitution vs. interpreting away the inconvenient or "dangerous" parts)



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

The House voted to impeach Clinton, but the Senate refused to indict. And the party that voted to impeach Clinton did it over sex and never again held a House majority until after the first part of Obama's first term.

Democrats might want to cool their jets over this because most people in this country are going to view this the same way.

**EDIT**

I know, I know ... I said he was impeached over perjury, and he was. But most people see it as him being impeached over sex. To this day, you have to re-explain why he got impeached. What the crime was. He lied under oath about sex. But as far as almost everyone is concerned, it was about sex.

This will be viewed the same way. Everyone knew Trump paid off Stormy Daniels. They've known it for a while, and no matter what the press says, this impeachment will be about Trump paying off Stormy Daniels. So, they are impeaching him over sex - like Clinton. This is the Democrats getting even, no more, no less.
edit on 11-12-2018 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical
No it is not. You get subpoena power to verify the allegations presented to the FISA court. The information at that point was deemed reliable as Steele had provided reliable info to the FBI on prior occasion.

"You never should have gotten the warrant in the first place", is a defense used by the innocent? i don't think so.



If that's how it worked then no one is safe from a warrant. All any cop has to do is tell a court they have reasonable suspicion your house harbors the evidence they need to confirm you've been part of a crime. They don't have to provide any evidence whatsoever to back up those allegations or any substantiation to back up those allegations.

So, you are now a notorious mob boss, and the cop is sure that with a warrant the evidence needed to prove that will be found in your house.

Of course, you're not, but isn't it awesome how they searched your place of residence and found evidence of a bunch of minor crimes while they were at it. Most would be punishable with small fines for most anyone else, but they decide to throw the max at you, which is a several year jail sentence because they don't like you.

And remember, in today's society there are so many laws, we're all guilty of something. Heck, I got pulled out on my way home from my dad's hip surgery yesterday for having a crack on the passenger side of my windshield. Car is perfectly legal in MO, but in KS, the cop decided it was "obstructing my field of vision."
edit on 11-12-2018 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 06:49 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

yaup . WTF , do elections even matter anymore ? I doubt there is an honest member of congress or the senate . Rule of law only means its for us not them



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 06:56 PM
link   
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

It's a defense used by the not guilty because it does in fact get all evidence gathered by said illegal warrant thrown out.







 
50
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join