- 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: Nunes: Formal, foreign surveillance was used on Trump; Obama admin surveilled associates
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:48 pm to Damone
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:48 pm to Damone
quote:
FISA literally allows the President to directly order surveillance without a court order under certain circumstances.
Please show where this is legal against a US citizen. FISA powers given to the President relate solely to foreign nations/actors.
The President cannot order surveillance of a US citizen. Period. That's why everyone freaked out over Trump's tweet.
This post was edited on 3/22/17 at 1:50 pm
1
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:49 pm to joshnorris14
nunes gonna get his arse handed to him.
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:49 pm to Damone
quote:That's true, but FISA law allows for surveillance without the president's explicit authorization if a warrant is obtained. You cannot use the fact that information was gathered under FISA law to argue that the president signed off on it.
FISA literally allows the President to directly order surveillance without a court order under certain circumstances.
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:50 pm to Hog on the Hill
It's more than troubling, it's illegal. The whole point of FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is to surveil non-US citizens, and the identities of any US citizen caught in the surveillance net are to be kept strictly confidential and out of any and all reports prepared from the surveillance.
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:51 pm to narddogg81
quote:Yeah Flynn's identity was pretty clearly leaked
I mean, what kind of cognitive dissonance does it take to say it was not leaked when clearly it was leaked illegally and in violation of the conditional rights of the us citizens on the calls? It was in the newspapers, but it wasn't leaked. You have a disease
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:52 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
leaks from his underlings
Tell us more about Trump's underlings in the IC while Obama was still president.
This dumbass narrative is crumbling around you.
This post was edited on 3/22/17 at 1:57 pm
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:53 pm to blackjackjackson
quote:
nunes gonna get his arse handed to him.
He's making the best argument yet for an independent commission,
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:54 pm to Damone
quote:No, you misunderstand. FISA does allow for surveillance of US persons if a warrant is obtained and the investigating agency can show probably cause the the target is an agent of a foreign power. The identities of US persons are generally masked if their identities are incidentally collected, but there are procedures for unmasking those identities when needed.
It's more than troubling, it's illegal. The whole point of FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is to surveil non-US citizens, and the identities of any US citizen caught in the surveillance net are to be kept strictly confidential and out of any and all reports prepared from the surveillance.
US person != US citizen. FISA law generally refers to "US persons" and that includes aliens
There are basically two branches of FISA law, when related to electronic surveillance. One branch covers warrantless surveillance, the other covers surveillance with a warrant. The latter allows for surveillance of US persons.
This post was edited on 3/22/17 at 1:56 pm
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:55 pm to VOLhalla
quote:
Please show where this is legal against a US citizen. FISA powers given to the President relate solely to foreign nations/actors.
The President cannot order surveillance of a US citizen. Period. That's why everyone freaked out over Trump's tweet.
Because in practice you wouldn't direct it at a US citizen. If you are trying to do what the Obama admin likely attempted, which is cast a wide surveillance net under FISA in order to "incidentally" intercept communications from individuals involved with the Trump campaign, you would direct it at certain Russian interests that just so happened to be located in Trump Tower. The net is so wide that they "incidentally collect" communications from individuals related to Trump (See: Michael Flynn). Then leak the identities and "whoops, don't know how it got leaked but it came from valid surveillance." The toothpaste can't be put back in the bottle at that point, and the job is done.
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:56 pm to VOLhalla
quote:
Presidents don't "let" wiretaps happen. They are completely removed from FBI criminal investigations and aren't involved in any stage of obtaining a warrant.
This!
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:56 pm to Deuces
quote:
Which all goes back to lawyer word play. Obama did in fact let the wiretaps happen, and that's what Trump's statement could be interpreted as for normal people. The literal meaning of the statement can be denied in a court of law, sure. Trump could've been more specific in his statement.
Well when you're making this type of accusation, words do matter.
If Trump were called to testify, "Well you know what I meant" doesn't fly.
I don't really know how to respond to "Obama let it happen" without more information. If surveillance was conducted with malicious intent, then all involved should be brought to justice. I'm not going to automatically assume that possibility as the likely possibility outside of evidence. We need more information.
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:57 pm to Damone
quote:
Because in practice you wouldn't direct it at a US citizen. If you are trying to do what the Obama admin likely attempted, which is cast a wide surveillance net under FISA in order to "incidentally" intercept communications from individuals involved with the Trump campaign, you would direct it at certain Russian interests that just so happened to be located in Trump Tower. The net is so wide that they "incidentally collect" communications from individuals related to Trump (See: Michael Flynn). Then leak the identities and "whoops, don't know how it got leaked but it came from valid surveillance." The toothpaste can't be put back in the bottle at that point, and the job is done.
Where's the proof that Obama had anything to do with this?
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:57 pm to Hog on the Hill
quote:
No, you misunderstand. FISA does allow for surveillance of US persons
But you have told me since the tweet, that Trump was crazy, he was never surveilled
Now we know he was
/thread
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:57 pm to Damone
quote:Nunes explicitly said in his comments today that it wasn't related to the investigation of Russian ties. Not sure what he could mean by that, but it's interesting.
If you are trying to do what the Obama admin likely attempted, which is cast a wide surveillance net under FISA in order to "incidentally" intercept communications from individuals involved with the Trump campaign, you would direct it at certain Russian interests that just so happened to be located in Trump Tower.
Posted on 3/22/17 at 1:58 pm to League Champs
quote:First of all, I don't think I ever told that to you. Second, what Nunes said today does not support your claim that Trump was surveilled.
But you have told me since the tweet, that Trump was crazy, he was never surveilled
Now we know he was
/thread
Posted on 3/22/17 at 2:00 pm to Deuces
quote:It's almost as if words matter when it comes to politics and law. Shocker, I know.
Which all goes back to lawyer word play. Obama did in fact let the wiretaps happen, and that's what Trump's statement could be interpreted as for normal people. The literal meaning of the statement can be denied in a court of law, sure. Trump could've been more specific in his statement.
This does not get them out of the water though. A political opponent in an election was being spied on.
Posted on 3/22/17 at 2:00 pm to joshnorris14
Let's recap:
•Fake media runs with a false Russian narrative
•Trump makes an accusation that the media takes literal, which throws them off their Russian game and in a spinning tizzy
•Experts come in to dismiss both Trump's literal wiretapping claim and Russian collusion claim
•Fake media and dems call trump a liar without realizing they perpetrated a collusion lie.
•They start to declare victory while Trump stands firm in the face of adversity, never backing down
•New info is released proving Trump is right again and still no collusion
•Fake media goes silent on the vindication and moves to next target
•Look out Ivanka, they coming for that new West Wing office you just moved into. Nepotism will be the upcoming dog whistle
I think we have all see this leftist movie
•Fake media runs with a false Russian narrative
•Trump makes an accusation that the media takes literal, which throws them off their Russian game and in a spinning tizzy
•Experts come in to dismiss both Trump's literal wiretapping claim and Russian collusion claim
•Fake media and dems call trump a liar without realizing they perpetrated a collusion lie.
•They start to declare victory while Trump stands firm in the face of adversity, never backing down
•New info is released proving Trump is right again and still no collusion
•Fake media goes silent on the vindication and moves to next target
•Look out Ivanka, they coming for that new West Wing office you just moved into. Nepotism will be the upcoming dog whistle
I think we have all see this leftist movie
This post was edited on 3/22/17 at 2:01 pm
Posted on 3/22/17 at 2:01 pm to Dwag4life
quote:
Where's the proof that Obama had anything to do with this
I said LIKELY. And considering it is indisputable that the Obama administration not only put journalists under surveillance, fought FOIA requests at every turn, and weaponized the IRS, one doesn't have to do mental gymnastics to imagine a scenario where he would direct the massively powerful and secretive US surveillance capabilities at a man who he, by all accounts, dislikes on a personal level.
Posted on 3/22/17 at 2:01 pm to Goldrush25
quote:
I'm not going to automatically assume that possibility as the likely possibility outside of evidence. We need more information.
Of course you do lol
Posted on 3/22/17 at 2:02 pm to Hog on the Hill
His campaign and transition team were surveiled. We will know in time whether he was personally surveiled, but can we please stop with the word play here?
The highly politicized Obama IC spied on Trumps team. Period
The highly politicized Obama IC spied on Trumps team. Period
Page 10 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News