- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
re: Jack Smith lied to Congress under oath
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:21 pm to supatigah
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:21 pm to supatigah
quote:
To have the contents of my phone be acquired without me participating in it requires the provider or a third-party monitoring system like the FBI OR NSA gather the data and pull the phone info without me knowing it
LEO can get a search warrant for the cell provider and it will send all that info pursuant to the SW. Subpoenas can act the same way with the right law behind it.
There are certain things on a phone this won't deliver, obviously, but it will deliver texts.
I see this daily
2
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:22 pm to supatigah
And so who at NSA, supposedly a white hat agency, is going along with this?
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:23 pm to SlowFlowPro
very true, but he was not supposed to have that information and texts would have been excluded in the subpoena. The fact that they had it means either the cellular provider provided more than they were supposed to, or they asked for all of it got it and Jack Smith pretended like he didn’t know that they had it and he never saw it. Which would imply that his office was full of rogue actors. He is in a literal catch 22.
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:24 pm to boosiebadazz
John Smith, Director of Deep State Projects and Federal Coverups
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:25 pm to supatigah
quote:
very true, but he was not supposed to have that information and texts would have been excluded in the subpoena.
Go re-read this x post
quote:
Smith was specifically asked about *toll records* obtained from *Members of Congress.* He accurately said those records didn’t include message content.
Grassley's docs relate to texts of *WH officials,* obtained via *NARA,* which happened to include exchanges w/ congresspeople.
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:27 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Do you realize how many things he's made a fool of himself over the past 8 years?
Link?
And yet, he is still where he is and you are in Puddle Chuck trying divorce cases or whatever you do.
Ok, counselor.
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:27 pm to supatigah
Next you’re gonna tell me some jabroni named Ron Watkins is running a secret war on the DS or something
This post was edited on 7/14/26 at 9:28 pm
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:31 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
LEO can get a search warrant for the cell provider and it will send all that info pursuant to the SW. Subpoenas can act the same way with the right law behind it.
Jack Smith had access to whatever he wanted and all to get PDJT and the opposition party to the Deep State.
Have you not been paying attention?
Damn you are truly obtuse.
Empirical evidence and common sense are wonderful genetic traits you obviously did not inherit.
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:32 pm to Speckhunter2012
quote:
Link?
And yet, he is still where he is and you are in Puddle Chuck
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:32 pm to SlowFlowPro
Smith is very smart and knows how to answer questions
he knew exactly what he was saying
the scandal is that they had the text messages at all, not how they got them IMHO
now flip all of the R to D and look at this scenario again, this wouid have been an enormous scandal and overreach screamed from the MSM rooftops
he knew exactly what he was saying
the scandal is that they had the text messages at all, not how they got them IMHO
now flip all of the R to D and look at this scenario again, this wouid have been an enormous scandal and overreach screamed from the MSM rooftops
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:32 pm to Speckhunter2012
quote:
Jack Smith had access to whatever he wanted and all to get PDJT and the opposition party to the Deep State.
Have you not been paying attention?
Damn you are truly obtuse.
Empirical evidence and common sense are wonderful genetic traits you obviously did not inherit.
At least I can read
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:33 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Next you’re gonna tell me some jabroni named Ron Watkins is running a secret war on the DS or something
or I might say something else like, why dont we sit back and watch what happens?
you never know what i might say
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:34 pm to supatigah
quote:
R to D and look at this scenario again, this wouid have been an enormous scandal and overreach screamed from the MSM rooftops
Did the Ds do what the Rs did on J6 in your hypothetical?
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:36 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
How many people would be in on this and what kind of paper and electronic trail would it create? That’s always the problem with grand conspiracies- too many lackies would have to be involved.
We know they already illegally spied on Carter Page and the trump campaign.
That’s the problem with trying to label everything inconvenient a grand conspiracy.
This post was edited on 7/14/26 at 9:37 pm
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:37 pm to Warboo
quote:
Negative ghost rider. It will be held in the great state of Florida.
If we're talking about his lying to Congress (Perjury, False Statement), that happened in DC so that's going to be heard in DC. That's not even a "maybe".
However, if we're talking about his spying, that could be different. Generally, the court with jurisdiction is going to be where the offense occurred and that's going to be viewed as happening where the member of Congress was when the spying happened. If it's multiple locations (member of Congress' home state, another state while on vacation, DC, etc) then any of those could have jurisdiction (read: court shopping) but for a high-profile case like spying on a member of Congress would be something the DOJ would normally want to have tried in their back yard.
Normally. With the Trump DOJ, if there is a way to get the spying case(s) out of DC and into a friendlier (or at least objective) district court, they will. If they don't even try, then you know the fix is in.
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:38 pm to boosiebadazz
counselor I am not sure what the correlation or relevance is to Jan 6 in my very simple and straightforward hypothetical of this situation
can you clarify what you mean? I can not answer the question as presented
can you clarify what you mean? I can not answer the question as presented
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:39 pm to uggabugga
Water is wet. Plenty of Reps and Dems blatantly lied under oath.
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:40 pm to Bard
Probably as good of a time as any to point out that Jack smith’s very involvement in this case was unconstitutional.
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:42 pm to G2160
quote:
Jack smith’s very involvement in this case was unconstitutional.
The only applicable appellate ruling on Earth disagrees with you
Posted on 7/14/26 at 9:45 pm to supatigah
Sure, you stated this:
Without the context of what happened to even bring about a Special Counsel like Jack Smith.
quote:
now flip all of the R to D and look at this scenario again, this wouid have been an enormous scandal and overreach screamed from the MSM rooftops
Without the context of what happened to even bring about a Special Counsel like Jack Smith.
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News