- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Confirmed Comey FBI never told FISA court Dossier was funded by Clinton
Posted on 2/5/18 at 8:16 pm
Posted on 2/5/18 at 8:16 pm
Very bad news for Comey...FISA judge never given information per Hannity show. 
This post was edited on 2/6/18 at 8:12 am
9
Posted on 2/5/18 at 8:23 pm to Volkosoby
We got a memo coming out though.
Posted on 2/5/18 at 8:26 pm to Volkosoby
And let justice roll down like diarrhea from a stray mutt
Posted on 2/5/18 at 8:27 pm to Volkosoby
I pray to god they followed Woods procedures.
Posted on 2/5/18 at 8:28 pm to Volkosoby
quote:
Confirmed Comey FBI never told FISA court Dossier was funded by Clinton
Yet another nugget of illegal activity conducted by Comey.
Maybe that scum bag will hire his co-conspirator as his counsel for this as well.
Posted on 2/5/18 at 8:29 pm to Volkosoby
quote:
per Hannity show
Posted on 2/5/18 at 8:42 pm to Volkosoby
Even Nunes admitted today that the application did disclose that funding for the dossier was political in nature.
And considering Carter page had been the subject of FISA warrants going back as far as 2014, well before the dossier existed and before there was even a Trump campaign, I think Hannity is going to have a hard time getting anyone but his most brainwashed of couch potatoes to care about whether or not the disclosure specifically named Clinton or not.
And considering Carter page had been the subject of FISA warrants going back as far as 2014, well before the dossier existed and before there was even a Trump campaign, I think Hannity is going to have a hard time getting anyone but his most brainwashed of couch potatoes to care about whether or not the disclosure specifically named Clinton or not.
Posted on 2/5/18 at 8:46 pm to GuiceIsNice
quote:
political in nature
quote:
whether or not the disclosure specifically named Clinton
Not naming the DNC and/or Clinton is a HUGE....HUUUUUUUUGE omission.
Posted on 2/5/18 at 8:54 pm to moneyg
quote:
Not naming the DNC and/or Clinton is a HUGE....HUUUUUUUUGE omission.
Unlike you, the judge probably doesn't fly into a fit of white hot rage at the mere mention of the name, "Clinton". And since they weren't applying for a FISA warrant on Trump, but rather on Carter Page, whom the FBI had enough evidence regarding to have FISA warrants going all the back to 2014... yeah, this is just one more thing for hardcore Trumpkins to circle jerk over only to be disappointed in the end.
Posted on 2/5/18 at 9:05 pm to GuiceIsNice
Nice work there, sparky. Feel better?
Posted on 2/5/18 at 9:07 pm to GuiceIsNice
What does political in nature even mean?
Judge: where did you obtain this information?
FBI: well your honor, the source is political in nature.
Judge: oh well if you say it’s of a political nature, say no more. Warrant granted.
Now take that same scenario and insert the following.
Judge: where did you obtain this info?
FBI: well your honor, surrogates of the Hillary Clinton campaign paid a law firm who hired a company called Fusion GPS. They hired a former British spy who we are also paying to come up with the info.
Judge: gtfo of my courtroom.
Judge: where did you obtain this information?
FBI: well your honor, the source is political in nature.
Judge: oh well if you say it’s of a political nature, say no more. Warrant granted.
Now take that same scenario and insert the following.
Judge: where did you obtain this info?
FBI: well your honor, surrogates of the Hillary Clinton campaign paid a law firm who hired a company called Fusion GPS. They hired a former British spy who we are also paying to come up with the info.
Judge: gtfo of my courtroom.
Posted on 2/5/18 at 9:09 pm to GuiceIsNice
quote:
Unlike you, the judge probably doesn't fly into a fit of white hot rage at the mere mention of the name, "Clinton". And since they weren't applying for a FISA warrant on Trump, but rather on Carter Page, whom the FBI had enough evidence regarding to have FISA warrants going all the back to 2014... yeah, this is just one more thing for hardcore Trumpkins to circle jerk over only to be disappointed in the end.
So dumbshit, if Page is such a criminal why did the FISA warrant on him back then just lapse without charging him with anything?
I will tell you what they did. They told themselves, "Hey we spied on this guy before and now he is tangentially connected to Trump so we can use him as an excuse to burrow into the Trump campaign!"
That is fricking obvious. You would have to be a moron not to see it.
Posted on 2/5/18 at 9:10 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
I pray to god they followed Woods procedures
They did.
They independently verified the information by sourcing a reporter that cooberated the evidence.
Posted on 2/5/18 at 9:11 pm to GuiceIsNice
quote:This, is how you double down on stupid.
Unlike you, the judge probably doesn't fly into a fit of white hot rage at the mere mention of the name, "Clinton". And since they weren't applying for a FISA warrant on Trump, but rather on Carter Page, whom the FBI had enough evidence regarding to have FISA warrants going all the back to 2014... yeah, this is just one more thing for hardcore Trumpkins to circle jerk over only to be disappointed in the end.
Welcome to the board libtard.
Posted on 2/5/18 at 9:11 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:Of course you do Decaturbadazz.
I pray to god they followed Woods procedures.
Posted on 2/5/18 at 9:15 pm to boosiebadazz
Lol so far they’ve not followed ANY proper procedure or protocols, in any aspect. Why would you think they followed Woods?!
That’s the Dems main argument right now, that because the Woods procedures in place follow a very rigorous and detailed process, that because the warrant was granted, that the FBI must’ve met the requirements.
What happens when it’s proven that the FBI skirted those procedures too, either with additional false info, or more partisan co-conspirators within the courts?
That’s the Dems main argument right now, that because the Woods procedures in place follow a very rigorous and detailed process, that because the warrant was granted, that the FBI must’ve met the requirements.
What happens when it’s proven that the FBI skirted those procedures too, either with additional false info, or more partisan co-conspirators within the courts?
Posted on 2/5/18 at 9:15 pm to gthog61
Page wasn't connected to any campaign when his warrant was procured
Tell us all how that was the conspiracy to spy on Trump
Tell us all how that was the conspiracy to spy on Trump
Posted on 2/5/18 at 9:16 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
quote:
Judge: gtfo of my courtroom.
Posted on 2/5/18 at 9:16 pm to Jbird
Really for two reasons: (1) avoid a constitutional crisis; and (2) the melts here. Hard to know which one would bring me more joy.
Posted on 2/5/18 at 9:17 pm to CheniereTiger108
Then we have a legit constitutional crisis on our hands as that would suggest some level of criminality by members of the last administration
This post was edited on 2/5/18 at 9:18 pm
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News