- 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: Steele relied on claims posted by a random person on CNN website to "verify" dossier
Posted on 3/17/19 at 12:56 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Posted on 3/17/19 at 12:56 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:I loved his comment, what it is or what I think it should be.
Guys....you do realize decatur works in the intel community, right? He is completely a conflict of interest.
0
Posted on 3/17/19 at 12:58 pm to Bunyan
I'm trying to figure out what you mean by "legit".
I think information obtained from human sources is commonly hearsay so the usual caveats would apply.
I think information obtained from human sources is commonly hearsay so the usual caveats would apply.
Posted on 3/17/19 at 1:01 pm to Decatur
Under ZERO circumstances should the bar EVER be this fricking low to approve SPYING on members of a friggin Presidential campaign and, by extension, the candidate himself.
That disgusting humans like you think it's ok is a testament to just how slimy the left has become
That disgusting humans like you think it's ok is a testament to just how slimy the left has become
Posted on 3/17/19 at 1:02 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
Guys....you do realize decatur works in the intel community, right?
Come on, Hail
This post was edited on 3/17/19 at 1:04 pm
Posted on 3/17/19 at 1:10 pm to Decatur
quote:
so the usual caveats would apply.
But they didn't. Based on what we know now, this 100% looks like a it was a designed mission with the goal of determing the presidency of the USA. Mind you that this was to be accomplished by perverting our DOJ with the aid of a British subject providing fictional and unverified information (paid for by the opposition no less!).
Posted on 3/17/19 at 1:11 pm to Decatur
quote:
so the usual caveats would apply.
Yes or no?
Posted on 3/17/19 at 1:24 pm to JuiceTerry
Classic noted libertarian, JuiceTerry, defending the government at every turn
Posted on 3/17/19 at 1:38 pm to jimmy the leg
I think the memos get some things wrong and some things right. Some things there are no way to corroborate. It was not an analyzed or otherwise finished product.
Posted on 3/17/19 at 1:52 pm to Decatur
Was the Woods procedure followed?
Posted on 3/17/19 at 1:58 pm to Decatur
quote:
t was not an analyzed or otherwise finished product.
And yet it was used to undermine the presidency of the United States. FWIW, had this occured under GW Bush prior to Obama, I would be equally pissed. I just don't get how ANY of this can be deemed acceptable. Is there a limited amount of plausible deniability of responsibility by a few (very few) persons involved...sure. The major players, however, look to be conspirators in an act that seems to fit the parameters of sedition, if not treason (using a foreign agent to assist). I just don't get how the revelations this week can be explained away as a whole. Very small details thst aren't germane to the end result...maybe. The big ticket item and the major players - no way.
Yes or no amigo?
This post was edited on 3/17/19 at 2:12 pm
Posted on 3/17/19 at 1:59 pm to jimmy the leg
quote:
perverting our DOJ with the aid of a British subject providing fictional and unverified information (paid for by the opposition no less!).
_ _ e _ s _ n
Can I get a "T", Pat?
Posted on 3/17/19 at 1:59 pm to BBONDS25
quote:He knows the answer to that, Rexcatur dgaf.
Was the Woods procedure followed?
Posted on 3/17/19 at 2:08 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Was the Woods procedure followed?
I think all that info would be in the Woods file. Haven't heard anyone from Congress who have reviewed that file complain about it yet.
There's info in the FISA applications that would suggest that the procedures were followed (the info on Page's prior involvement with the FBI would have come up in the ACS search).
The Woods file would have been attached to the applications and available for the judges to review. If they had a problem with it I sure they could have brought it up at the time.
Posted on 3/17/19 at 2:09 pm to Decatur
quote:
I think all that info would be in the Woods file. Haven't heard anyone from Congress who have reviewed that file complain about it yet.
So Steele was lying in his deposition?
Posted on 3/17/19 at 2:14 pm to BBONDS25
Lying about what? What knowledge would he have regarding whether the FBI followed Woods procedures?
Can you direct me to the part of the deposition you are referencing?
Can you direct me to the part of the deposition you are referencing?
Posted on 3/17/19 at 2:15 pm to Decatur
Lindsey Graham letter to Barr last week:
quote:
“[T]he Committee is concerned that the Woods procedures and a full presentment of material and relevant facts may not have occurred with regard to the applications for FISA warrants for (and the opening of the underlying investigations on) Carter Page and other individuals associated with the presidential campaign of Donald Trump,”
quote:
Enacted in 2001, the Woods Procedures were intended to protect U.S. citizens from improper surveillance by the government, seeking to “ensure accuracy with regard to the facts supporting probable cause.”
Posted on 3/17/19 at 2:17 pm to Bunyan
Well cool then let's check it out.
Posted on 3/17/19 at 2:21 pm to Decatur
quote:
Lying about what? What knowledge would he have regarding whether the FBI followed Woods procedures?
Did Steele say in his deposition the information was not verified? Does the woods procedure require information be verified?
You know the answer to both of those questions. You just don’t care. Extremely short sighted.
This post was edited on 3/17/19 at 2:22 pm
Posted on 3/17/19 at 2:25 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Did Steele say in his deposition the information was not verified?
They were talking about an article from 2009 regarding a company that has nothing to do with Carter Page or whether the FBI followed procedures while investigating Page.
Posted on 3/17/19 at 2:30 pm to Decatur
Yet it was used to support the dossier. You don’t understand why that is a problem? Again...you know what happened. You understand. You just don’t care.
Page 5 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News