https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1235 ... 78400.html
Yes, Horowitz referred EVERYBODY involved in the Carter Page FISA warrant fraud to the DOJ for investigation.
Yes, Horowitz referred EVERYBODY involved in the Carter Page FISA warrant fraud to the DOJ for investigation.
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
If there was a bunch of corrupt government officials being investigated for their corruption, that would explain why they hate him.
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
The judge responded that he was NOT allowed to do it, so then Schumer bravely walked it back.
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
No argument here.
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
Two of the four warrants issued in 2016 were ruled 'invalid' (not fraudulent) by the DOJ in 2019. Two of the four warrants weren't. Do you think the subsequent invalidations are evidence of undue political influence in the initial issuing of warrants that allowed FBI investigators to undertake surveillance of Carter Page, and how might this relate to the valid warrants and to the matters to which he later confessed and/or was convicted for?Cunt wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 3:37 pmThis Brian Cates chap seems to think it is more than a 'nothingburger'.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1235 ... 78400.html
Yes, Horowitz referred EVERYBODY involved in the Carter Page FISA warrant fraud to the DOJ for investigation.
Right, which is why I think it's not useful for determining the truth of Trump's claim. It doesn't change the bottom line that fact the report does not conclude the FBI investigation was influenced by political bias.
My view zooms out a lot, and removes Trump from the picture. His drama is secondary to the challenge that FISA and its secret court poses to the civil liberties of Americans. The Horowitz report opens another window into how this compromise of 4th Amendment rights and national security needs invites abuse.
It also doesn't say there wasn't any evidence. It says that two kinds of evidence were not present.
Only in the abstract sense. You zoomed out so much, I can't tell what your opinion on spygate is.My view zooms out a lot, and removes Trump from the picture. His drama is secondary to the challenge that FISA and its secret court poses to the civil liberties of Americans. The Horowitz report opens another window into how this compromise of 4th Amendment rights and national security needs invites abuse.
Being Canadian I doubt this is very interesting to you, while the Trump show is quite entertaining, but this article by the Electronic Frontier Foundation is a pretty good primer if you are.
(emphasis mine)Last December, the Department of Justice's Office of the Inspector General issued a
comprehensive report examining, among other things, applications to the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Court for authority to conduct electronic surveillance of U.S. person Carter W.
Page. The OIG found that those applications contained significant factual inaccuracies and
omissions relevant to whether there was probable cause to believe Page was an agent of the
Russian government. There is thus little doubt that the government breached its duty of candor
to the Court with respect to those applications.
The frequency and seriousness of these errors in a case that, given its sensitive nature,
had an unusually high level of review at both DOJ and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have
called into question the reliability of the information proffered in other FBI applications
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
Ain't it the truth!
Not my problem. You have everything you need to figure it out, if you're willing. No offense if you're not.Cunt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:50 pmOnly in the abstract sense. You zoomed out so much, I can't tell what your opinion on spygate is.My view zooms out a lot, and removes Trump from the picture. His drama is secondary to the challenge that FISA and its secret court poses to the civil liberties of Americans. The Horowitz report opens another window into how this compromise of 4th Amendment rights and national security needs invites abuse.
Being Canadian I doubt this is very interesting to you, while the Trump show is quite entertaining, but this article by the Electronic Frontier Foundation is a pretty good primer if you are.
Canada's a free country so you can stick your flag in whatever mud you like. Just be careful it's actually mud, and really your flag.Cunt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:50 pmIt's ok, its dangerous to stick a flag in the mud, when it could surely be wrong. I don't have much faith in my guess, but at least I'm willing to guess.
I think the thing reminds me of the work I did around social work and 'confidentiality' requirements.
See, I found that rarely it protects the declared beneficiary (the clients) and very often protects others incidentally (shitty workers who decide not to break confidentiality)
Leaving people so much room to hide things is an invitation. Shitty, lying fuckers who don't like accountability will hide things behind those (often VERY well understood) obstructions.
Oh, and almost all people are shitty, lying fuckers in this context.
So no surprise that there was shit hidden behind these redactions, secrecy and just close-mouthed habits.
But I still think I'll stick my flag in the mud, and claim that the investigation was politically motivated, a lot more than 'intel' motivated.
What kind of evidence would change my mind?
Well, the pee-pee dossier for one. Mainly, that one would convince me that the 'NPC's who initially fell for the 'Russian Collusion' hoax had at least a reason to fall for it. The fact that it isn't present means they fell for other stuff without needing that initial bit of evidence to be present.
Maybe a US district judge could change my mind...(emphasis mine)Last December, the Department of Justice's Office of the Inspector General issued a
comprehensive report examining, among other things, applications to the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Court for authority to conduct electronic surveillance of U.S. person Carter W.
Page. The OIG found that those applications contained significant factual inaccuracies and
omissions relevant to whether there was probable cause to believe Page was an agent of the
Russian government. There is thus little doubt that the government breached its duty of candor
to the Court with respect to those applications.
The frequency and seriousness of these errors in a case that, given its sensitive nature,
had an unusually high level of review at both DOJ and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have
called into question the reliability of the information proffered in other FBI applications
Nope, that didn't do it...
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests