The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.

See the part that's bolded? Yeah, that applies to the FISA warrant, used to investigate the President. You remember the FISA warrant, right? It's the one that the FBI admitted to lying to the FISA court, and circumventing all kinds of rules to obtain, remember? The warrant based entirely on a bullshite dossier, fabricated out of whole cloth, paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton, remember?

tl/dr:

frick you, you ignorant frick.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by TBoy

Kalamazoo

Member since Dec 2007

24006 posts

Posted on 1/15/19 at 9:24 am to troyt37

quote:
See the part that's bolded? Yeah, that applies to the FISA warrant, used to investigate the President. You remember the FISA warrant, right? It's the one that the FBI admitted to lying to the FISA court, and circumventing all kinds of rules to obtain, remember? The warrant based entirely on a bullshite dossier, fabricated out of whole cloth, paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton, remember?

So this is actually about whether a single warrant for surveillance of Carter Page should have been approved by a judge? So you don't think investigations of Carter Page or even Trump are unconstitutional? You just take issue with that single warrant?

Tell me, great sage, exactly what did the judge actually evaluate in issuing that warrant? (Hint--You don't know.) And tell me exactly what evidence was obtained because of that warrant. (Hint--You don't know.) And tell me how that one warrant makes "The Meuller investigation and the FBI violated the constitution?" (Hint--You are a parrot.)

1 ...

Report Post

Political Talk - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board