Two stunning revelations on Russia hoax investigation

What hoax? Whats the hoax part again???

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: network dude

You'd think with all the bottomless proofs available to the internet, the AG would capitalize. I guess they don't have the ats Twitter feed.

you'd think someone using the critical thinking part of the brain would realize acting in haste is a bad idea when the facts won't change and timing will be of GREAT advantage. There is no hurry on this, but there is a need to be right and get EVERYONE that can be got. Enough facts that exist and have been verified to point to some serious trouble for the left. But you gloat a while longer. It's an amusing look.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: xuenchen

Please explain how the outcome of a court case is illegal in some way?

I mean, the FISA court is literally a legal process.

Ah, liberal logic. If you lie through your teeth to the court and get them to rule in your favour for a warrant, all is ok - because the court said you were good to go. Your liberal mindset has corrupted your brain and probably everything else about you.

We might find out ChrO is actually a Conservative Libertarian like myself and others here and is just helping us get our facts straight like we do when we challenge shills and their BS. I have fun with the Astronomy guy on ATS and catching him shilling for lies in Climate. In that case I know way more about the subject just by not parroting the lies, but that doesn't bother silly people at all.

NO he is not?!?!?

Well, surprises may never cease?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
What hoax? Whats the hoax part again???

zi dozzier 😆

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: xuenchen

Please explain how the outcome of a court case is illegal in some way?

I mean, the FISA court is literally a legal process.

So it is legal to lie to get a warrant?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
What hoax? Whats the hoax part again???

zi kolluzion 😆

originally posted by: Sillyolme
What hoax? Whats the hoax part again???

That Trump et al colluded with Russia.

More evidence exists that Hillary did, however.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: xuenchen

Please explain how the outcome of a court case is illegal in some way?

I mean, the FISA court is literally a legal process.

So it is legal to lie to get a warrant?

Please read my original post which was more than the small quoted snippet.

The court is not illegal, nor are its conclusions, even if based upon fraudulent evidence.

The illegal part is the person or persons who presented the fraudulent evidence. In the case of the FISA court, multiple evidences were presented by multiple authorities.

Which would better be described as a conspiracy to commit perjury.

But that does not immediately condemn everyone who contributed to the FISA application. Only those who supplied those fraudulent evidence would be chargeable. Which still means that there may be some grounds for the service of a warrant.

Of course you can't throw the baby out with the bath water and declare the FISA warrants to be invalid if there was some remaining valid justification for them. They are, after all, about national security and you don't want to leave the country exposed to foreign influence because of some legal bind-up.

A warrant is an authorization to perform a search, not a conviction. A search of someone who has done nothing wrong will reveal that fact and exonerate the suspect.

The FISA warrants were not groundless nor were they served against Donald Trump, which are two presumptions often repeated but are entirely untrue. The fact that Donald Trump is tweeting about his innocence and that the FISA cases are 'illegal', when he obviously has not been targeted, nor are the cases illegal. Is a warning that there must be a reason for such motivation, at least in Trump's mind.

a reply to: chr0naut

Once again you show your ignorance of our laws.
Everyone who signed off on the fraudulent application will be charged.
It was extended 3 times.

They took a denied application and added british agent bs to it.

They should all hang.

a reply to: chr0naut

Spoken like a person unfamiliar with inalienable rights, and more accustomed to a monarchy.

tRump must be peached!

Just look at all the terrible things he is doing! There seems to be no end in site of the horrendous poor decisions by this Russian puppet.

There are things Americans must protest against right away!

1) He got conservative judge Neil Gorsuch on the Supreme Court.
2) The stock market is at an all-time high.
3) Consumer confidence is at an all-time high.
4) He created more than a million jobs by undoing Obama’s regulations.
5) Mortgage applications for new homes is at a 7 year high.
6) Unemployment rate is at a 16 year low.
7) Signed the promoting women in entrepreneurship act.
8) Gutted 800 Obama era regulations thus freeing up companies to hire again and get the economy moving once again.
9) Ended the war on coal and caused a new mine for coal mining to open that will mine clean coal. He also put the miners back to work.
10) Weakened Dodd-Frank regulations.
11) Promotes buying and hiring American.
12) Investments from major businesses such as Foxconn, Ford ,Toyota, Intel amd others will build here now.
13) Bids for the border wall are underway.
14) He’s fighting back against sanctuary cities.
15) Changed the rules of engagement against ISIS.
16) Drafted a plan to defeat ISIS.
17) Worked to reduce the cost of the F-35 fighter jets.
18) Imposed a five year lobbying plan.
19) Sanctioned Iran over its’ missile program.
20) Responded to Syria’s use of chemical weapons.
21) Reduced tax reform plan.
22) Renegotiated NAFTA.
23) He withdrew from the Trans Pacific Partnership thus keeping jobs here.
24) He pulled us out of the Paris Climate Accords thus saving us millions of dollars every year.
25) Created a task force to reduce crime.
26) The DOJ is targeting dangerous gangs like MS-13.
27) Signed independence and economic growth law.
28) Signed an executive order to protect police officers and target drug cartels.
29) Signed an executive order for religious freedom.
30) His administration is working on sending education back to the states.
31) He’s fixing the dept. of Veterans affairs so now vets can choose their own doctors and be covered. This also protects whistle blowers and allows VA to terminate bad employees..
32) Authorized construction of the Keystone and Dakota pipelines. The Dakota pipeline is up and running without harming the environment.
33) Created commissions on election fraud and opioid addiction.
34) Food stamp use is the lowest level in seven years.
35) Reduced the White House payroll saving taxpayers millions of dollars.
36) He’s donating his salary to various causes.
37) Signed 52 pieces of legislation.
38) Cut 600 billion from UN peacekeeping mission.
39) Gas prices lowest in more than 12 years.

This is a disgrace!
Please take this bad person out of office now!

originally posted by: chr0naut
Please read my original post which was more than the small quoted snippet.

The court is not illegal, nor are its conclusions, even if based upon fraudulent evidence.

No, the warrants would be illegal, and the people using fraudulent evidence would have committed a crime. Unless you can prove the court knew the evidence was fraudulent the court did nothing wrong.

Muller would probably love to testify. I doubt he will because it won't be only democrats asking the questions.
Then main question I would like to have him answer ,TRUTHFULLY, is when ,during his look into this, did he know that there was no collusion or obstruction. If I were a betting man I would say he knew immediately after starting. However, he had to keep up the facade at least until the 2018 midterms.
This is going to get really interesting!!

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: chr0naut

Page 16.

"Source #1" is Christopher Steele 😎

Page 23 alludes to the Dossier as "results of his research" 😎

Perhaps his name is in one of the redacted sections?

It may or may not be, but that is unimportant. The July 19, 2016 update to the dossier made by Steele makes the assertion that Carter Page met with various Russians when he was in Moscow a few weeks earlier, and had secret meetings with some of them. One name Steele mentioned in particular was Igor Sechin, a close associate of Putin and an individual who was personally under US Ukraine-related sanctions. According to Steele, Sechin (and others) discussed with Page the lifting of those sanctions and indicated that they had compromising information on Hilary Clinton that they were willing to share with the Trump campaign. Here is a pointer to the Steele dossier:

www.documentcloud.org...

The FISA court order against Carter Page that was approved in October of 2016 made reference to this set of assertions by Steele, but referred to him as Source #1 (page 16 of FISA warrant). The FBI said that, based on his history and reputation (chief British spy against the Russians) they considered him reliable and credible.

vault.fbi.gov...

There can be no doubt that Source#1 is Steele.

When the redacted Mueller report was published last month, it made reference to material that had presumably been uncovered as a result of the FISA warrant, including records of emails and other communications between Page and the Russians. These records document the fact that Page did go to Moscow in early July, 2016 and did communicate with Igor Sechin, just as Steele (Source #1) had told the FBI (page 99 of Mueller report).

www.politico.com...

There is a lot of text still blacked out in both the FISA warrant and the Mueller report around this discussion, leading to the speculation that the FBI probably has a lot more information about Page and the Russians from covert sources that they are not yet ready to release. The fact that the FBI had tried (unsuccessfully) twice before to get a FISA warrant against Page (starting in early July, as I recall) seems to imply that they had information that predates the Steele dossier on which to predicate a FISA warrant. Presumably, some of that information is contained in the redacted versions of the FISA warrant and has convinced three federal judges (who have seen the unreacted version) that the FISA warrant was well founded. I seem to recall (but I admit that I can't find the reference, right now) that the first two FISA applications were rejected by the judge not because there was insufficient reason to believe that Page was acting for a foreign power, but because the terms of the surveillance that the FBI was asking for were too broad. The judge asked the FBI to make the surveillance more focused and less intrusive. Be that as it may, the FISA application itself says that the FBI made the determination that Page's status as a foreign agent was determined in October 2016, based on evidence provided by the Secretary of State. I'm pretty sure that's why there was a line for John Kerry's signature on the signature page. The Steele information appears to have been incidental to getting the warrant approved.

In summary, in July 2016 Steele told the FBI that Page had just met with certain Russians in Moscow, in October 2016, the FISA court approved the FBI to intercept and recover Page’s communications with the Russians based in part but exclusively on those assertions, and those communications as published in the Mueller report showed that Steele’s information on this point was basically correct. I don't see where there is any lying to the FISA court or fraud in that series of events.

Another point to keep in mind is that the FISA warrant to surveil Page was NOT a criminal proceeding; it was clearly stated to be a counter intelligence matter (page 42). It seems to me that the facts presented easily establish a predicate to begin a counterintelligence investigation, even if they might not predicate a criminal investigation. And, of course, Page was never charged with a crime as a result of this investigation.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Sillyolme
What hoax? Whats the hoax part again???

zi kolluzion 😆

Kompromat!

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: chr0naut

Spoken like a person unfamiliar with inalienable rights, and more accustomed to a monarchy.

Those inalienable rights don't seem to include the right to presumption of innocence of the accused in a criminal trial.

(You do realize that human rights are encompassed within monarchist, as well as other systems of government?

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was unopposed and adopted by the 58 member states of the UN at the time.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights article 11, states: "Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense.").

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Thenail
a reply to: chr0naut
You’re not supposed to be able to lie to a judge to get a warrant. Especially when the guy you’re wiretapping is your opponent in a presidential race. I figured you’d of known that.

No FISA search warrants were served on Donald Trump (to my knowledge). You are mixing up the people involved. Obama, and several Presidents before him, re-authorized the NSA data collection (which, by the way, Trump has done nothing to stop), not Hillary.

The FISA search warrant against Cohen resulted in a conviction. So, it clearly wasn't groundless.

The FISA warrants against Mannafort resulted in a conviction. So, they clearly weren't groundless.

The FISA warrant against Gates (If there was such a warrant. He could have been charged due to the information gained from the FISA raid on Mannafort) resulted in a conviction. So, it clearly wasn't groundless.

Both convictions had nothing to do with Trump/Russian collusion you forgot to mention that so I thought someone should. Wasn't Manafort a Hillary advisor or Clinton foundation hoopla. "When your bias is against the truth the only one you deceive is yourself" A wise man said that so I can understand your incomprehension of it.

originally posted by: 1947boomer

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: chr0naut

Page 16.

"Source #1" is Christopher Steele 😎

Page 23 alludes to the Dossier as "results of his research" 😎

Perhaps his name is in one of the redacted sections?

It may or may not be, but that is unimportant. The July 19, 2016 update to the dossier made by Steele makes the assertion that Carter Page met with various Russians when he was in Moscow a few weeks earlier, and had secret meetings with some of them. One name Steele mentioned in particular was Igor Sechin, a close associate of Putin and an individual who was personally under US Ukraine-related sanctions. According to Steele, Sechin (and others) discussed with Page the lifting of those sanctions and indicated that they had compromising information on Hilary Clinton that they were willing to share with the Trump campaign. Here is a pointer to the Steele dossier:

www.documentcloud.org...

The FISA court order against Carter Page that was approved in October of 2016 made reference to this set of assertions by Steele, but referred to him as Source #1 (page 16 of FISA warrant). The FBI said that, based on his history and reputation (chief British spy against the Russians) they considered him reliable and credible.

vault.fbi.gov...

There can be no doubt that Source#1 is Steele.

When the redacted Mueller report was published last month, it made reference to material that had presumably been uncovered as a result of the FISA warrant, including records of emails and other communications between Page and the Russians. These records document the fact that Page did go to Moscow in early July, 2016 and did communicate with Igor Sechin, just as Steele (Source #1) had told the FBI (page 99 of Mueller report).

www.politico.com...

There is a lot of text still blacked out in both the FISA warrant and the Mueller report around this discussion, leading to the speculation that the FBI probably has a lot more information about Page and the Russians from covert sources that they are not yet ready to release. The fact that the FBI had tried (unsuccessfully) twice before to get a FISA warrant against Page (starting in early July, as I recall) seems to imply that they had information that predates the Steele dossier on which to predicate a FISA warrant. Presumably, some of that information is contained in the redacted versions of the FISA warrant and has convinced three federal judges (who have seen the unreacted version) that the FISA warrant was well founded. I seem to recall (but I admit that I can't find the reference, right now) that the first two FISA applications were rejected by the judge not because there was insufficient reason to believe that Page was acting for a foreign power, but because the terms of the surveillance that the FBI was asking for were too broad. The judge asked the FBI to make the surveillance more focused and less intrusive. Be that as it may, the FISA application itself says that the FBI made the determination that Page's status as a foreign agent was determined in October 2016, based on evidence provided by the Secretary of State. I'm pretty sure that's why there was a line for John Kerry's signature on the signature page. The Steele information appears to have been incidental to getting the warrant approved.

In summary, in July 2016 Steele told the FBI that Page had just met with certain Russians in Moscow, in October 2016, the FISA court approved the FBI to intercept and recover Page’s communications with the Russians based in part but exclusively on those assertions, and those communications as published in the Mueller report showed that Steele’s information on this point was basically correct. I don't see where there is any lying to the FISA court or fraud in that series of events.

Another point to keep in mind is that the FISA warrant to surveil Page was NOT a criminal proceeding; it was clearly stated to be a counter intelligence matter (page 42). It seems to me that the facts presented easily establish a predicate to begin a counterintelligence investigation, even if they might not predicate a criminal investigation. And, of course, Page was never charged with a crime as a result of this investigation.

Thank you.

I agree with much of what you wrote.

It also doesn't fit the narrative that has been proposed by others, that the Steele dossier was the only prompter for the FISA warrants.

Clearly there was reason to believe that Carter Page, who had actually lived in Russia for three years, actually may have contact with RIS agents (among other things).

originally posted by: CrazyFox

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Thenail
a reply to: chr0naut
You’re not supposed to be able to lie to a judge to get a warrant. Especially when the guy you’re wiretapping is your opponent in a presidential race. I figured you’d of known that.

No FISA search warrants were served on Donald Trump (to my knowledge). You are mixing up the people involved. Obama, and several Presidents before him, re-authorized the NSA data collection (which, by the way, Trump has done nothing to stop), not Hillary.

The FISA search warrant against Cohen resulted in a conviction. So, it clearly wasn't groundless.

The FISA warrants against Mannafort resulted in a conviction. So, they clearly weren't groundless.

The FISA warrant against Gates (If there was such a warrant. He could have been charged due to the information gained from the FISA raid on Mannafort) resulted in a conviction. So, it clearly wasn't groundless.

Both convictions had nothing to do with Trump/Russian collusion you forgot to mention that so I thought someone should. Wasn't Manafort a Hillary advisor or Clinton foundation hoopla. "When your bias is against the truth the only one you deceive is yourself" A wise man said that so I can understand your incomprehension of it.

Firstly, since collusion is not a Federal offense, it comes as no surprise that no one was found guilty of a non crime that they weren't investigating.

Trump also has a soviet wife, and also a soviet ex-wife, and was carrying on business deals in Russia while at the same time he publicly denied that he had business interests there. Go figure?

The FISA warrants were not served against Trump. They were served against others, some of whom were found to be guilty.

Paul Manafort served as campaign chair for the Donald Trump 2016 presidential campaign from June 20 to August 19, 2016. As far as I know, there hasn't been any mention of a direct link to the Clinton campaign or Clinton Foundation.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Tarzan the apeman.

If Mueller said anything that differed from his report, then he'd being perjuring himself.

It'd be the ultimate irony if Mueller was arrested for lying to congress.

They shouldn't allow Mueller access to his own report, then we'll see how he likes it when he is charged with perjury for changing his story...just like he did to Gen. Flynn. However, Flynn was never told he was being officially interviewed... The FBI officers lied to Flynn knowing he wouldn't be able to remember word for word what he said in a conversation years ago... I do hope it happens and Mueller and company spends a looooooooong time in jail... Mueller is getting away with lying to witnesses to entrap them, and threatening for going after the family of witnesses if the witnesses didn't do as he and his SHillary puppets said they should do... If it had been done at the behest of Republicans, the demonrats would be up in arms...