Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do you expect the Democrat rebuttal to the Nunes memo will indicate that the FISA court was on four separate occasions informed that the Steele dossier was produced by Russians and paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign?
Do you think they knew that and still approved the warrants?
How will we ever know if we don't get the opportunity to see it ? If I call you a criminal and you are not permitted to respond to those allegations , is that fair ?
This raises THE most basic question regarding "the memo"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mistermobile
Must be a record for spinning of the Nunnes memo contents. I practiced law for 50 years. If an attorney submits a pleading (say a request for a warrant), he must sign a statement that the contents that he is presenting to the court are true and correct. Any adverse information must be disclosed, otherwise it's a fraud on the court. For example, if the Steele Dossier was submitted as a part of the evidence submitted to the FISA court and the FBI did not notify the court, that it was prepared at the request of and paid for by the Democratic National Committee, the Hillary Clinton Campaign, and the FBI, then it is a fraud on the court. The doctrine of the fruit of the poison tree may arise in any case involving the FISA warrant or the Steele Dossier if it can be proved that it was obtained wrongfully, or with the intent to deceive.
it's not whether or not the DNC/the HRC Campaign/or the FBI paid for the Steele Dossier or even the Dossier's contents, but the failure of the DOJ/FBi to disclose contextual facts to to the FISA court so it had a fair chance to weigh the evidence in this ex parte proceeding.
If Nunes/tRump really had concerns over the validity of Carter Page's FISA warrant, then why on earth didn't they take their case to court instead of releasing this dud of a public comment?
One of the benefits of the publication of this memo should be to raise the level of scrutiny that these FISA judges give to these FISA warrant applications.
Regardless of what anyone's political perspective is on the release of this memo, I hope we can all at least agree on that point.
I don't trust Nunes or Trump at all. They are both proven liars and care ONLY about their own agenda (Trump--only about himself). And it is going to come out in the wash--this big smoke screen. Jordan and another GOP yahoo were on tv promoting their BS yesterday and they came off like two loud drunks in a bar--embarrassing.
Must be a record for spinning of the Nunnes memo contents. I practiced law for 50 years. If an attorney submits a pleading (say a request for a warrant), he must sign a statement that the contents that he is presenting to the court are true and correct. Any adverse information must be disclosed, otherwise it's a fraud on the court. For example, if the Steele Dossier was submitted as a part of the evidence submitted to the FISA court and the FBI did not notify the court, that it was prepared at the request of and paid for by the Democratic National Committee, the Hillary Clinton Campaign, and the FBI, then it is a fraud on the court. The doctrine of the fruit of the poison tree may arise in any case involving the FISA warrant or the Steele Dossier if it can be proved that it was obtained wrongfully, or with the intent to deceive.
it's not whether or not the DNC/the HRC Campaign/or the FBI paid for the Steele Dossier or even the Dossier's contents, but the failure of the DOJ/FBi to disclose contextual facts to to the FISA court so it had a fair chance to weigh the evidence in this ex parte proceeding.
Well if you read the Nunes memo then you can see that it was renewed twice during the Trump administration, including being signed off on by Trump appointed officials.
The last renewal was inauguration day, by Comey.
Page was used to get the legal documents to be in the system snooping. The trace says they unmasked over 30,000 American Citizens as this thing branched out.
Obama quarterbacked it, via Susan Rice. Hillary was the wide receiver, via Cheryl Mills.
Hillary's campaingn was getting full Trump strategy intel from the NSA gathering the entire campaigns communications and distributing it throughout the intel agencies.
Clapper, Brennen, Comey, Holder, Lynch. The only one of the bunch that blew the whistle was Rodgers and he got canned the following day.
As an attorney of 50 years, you know there are two sides to every story. You only have one side. When and if the Democratic memo comes out, you will have a more balanced view. I write "if" because the memo must be approved by Trump. There is chance, albeit a small one, that Trump may not approve a release. I would withhold judgement if I were you until all sides are heard.
That's why the OP wrote this:
..............if it can be proved that it was obtained wrongfully, or with the intent to deceive.
The GOP is going to have to prove the contents of the memo.
How will we ever know if we don't get the opportunity to see it ? If I call you a criminal and you are not permitted to respond to those allegations , is that fair ?
Let me get this straight...you think the FISA court was told that the Steele dossier was put together by Russians (we know it was) and paid for by the DNC and Hillary campaigns (we also know that to be true) and the FISA court approved warrants to spy on a political campaign in the middle of an election four times?
That's why the OP wrote this:
..............if it can be proved that it was obtained wrongfully, or with the intent to deceive.
The GOP is going to have to prove the contents of the memo.
The way to do that is to declassify the underlying documents, which the FBI/DOJ has so far been unwilling to do, probably because they do provide proof of the Republican memo.
Must be a record for spinning of the Nunnes memo contents. I practiced law for 50 years. If an attorney submits a pleading (say a request for a warrant), he must sign a statement that the contents that he is presenting to the court are true and correct. Any adverse information must be disclosed, otherwise it's a fraud on the court. For example, if the Steele Dossier was submitted as a part of the evidence submitted to the FISA court and the FBI did not notify the court, that it was prepared at the request of and paid for by the Democratic National Committee, the Hillary Clinton Campaign, and the FBI, then it is a fraud on the court. The doctrine of the fruit of the poison tree may arise in any case involving the FISA warrant or the Steele Dossier if it can be proved that it was obtained wrongfully, or with the intent to deceive.
it's not whether or not the DNC/the HRC Campaign/or the FBI paid for the Steele Dossier or even the Dossier's contents, but the failure of the DOJ/FBi to disclose contextual facts to to the FISA court so it had a fair chance to weigh the evidence in this ex parte proceeding.
Those that lied to the court perjured themselves....I hope to see Comey & Rosenstein wearing orange and taking an extended vacation in Leavenworth.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This raises THE most basic question regarding "the memo"
