TrumPutinGate

#14,776
#14,776
carlos86 said:
The situation is different because Manafort was actually acting as an unregistered foreign agent.
Click to expand...

you are trying too hard and if you are hanging your hat on this investigation you will be sorely disappointed. Kind of like when you told us with 99% certainty for 12 months there was no way Trump would win.
 
#14,777
#14,777
theFallGuy said:
you are trying too hard and if you are hanging your hat on this investigation you will be sorely disappointed. Kind of like when you told us with 99% certainty for 12 months there was no way Trump would win.
Click to expand...

So you're going to tell me that Manafort was not an unregistered foreign agent???
 
#14,779
#14,779
Timeline.


June 9 Trump Tower meeting with Russian government lawyer
July 7 Carter Page gives speech in Moscow, approved by campaign
July 7 Manafort offers briefing to Russian oligarch
July 12 Trump campaign changes GOP platform on Ukraine
July 22 First DNC emails leaked




Gee, all just one huge coincidence, right fellas?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#14,780
#14,780
lawgator1 said:
Timeline.


June 9 Trump Tower meeting with Russian government lawyer
July 7 Carter Page gives speech in Moscow, approved by campaign
July 7 Manafort offers briefing to Russian oligarch
July 12 Trump campaign changes GOP platform on Ukraine
July 22 First DNC emails leaked




Gee, all just one huge coincidence, right fellas?
Click to expand...

I'm sure you have a link for this Carlos?
 
#14,783
#14,783
carlos86 said:
Allegations inside the Trump dossier continues to be proven true.

[twitter]https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/910883574613757952[/twitter]
Click to expand...

Dossier?

You mean the one Steele got 100k for doing?

Lol

I love all this hoop-la. It's a distraction to the crap that really happened and the Dems don't want it to come out.

Just wait.
 
#14,784
#14,784
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#14,787
#14,787
theFallGuy said:
"This means that about 99.7 percent of warrant requests have been approved in the 36 years since FISA’s inception. The last time a warrant was rejected was in 2009, when two requests were rejected and 1,320 were approved."

FISA Surveillance Requests Are Almost Never Rejected
Click to expand...

"A few words in response to the many people who have pointed out to me the government's win-loss rate in the FISA Court.

The government's rate of success in getting normal Title III criminal wiretaps and normal old search warrants is also very high. When there's a known standard and a great deal of experience meeting it, a litigant knows what it needs to do and when it's there.

The win-loss rate in the FISA context is, in addition, a little deceptive, because FISC practice is, when an application is deficient to identify the defects and allow the application to be revised and resubmitted. This is an informal but long-standing practice.

This happens both with the FISA judges and also with the court's staff attorneys who help the judges. So the finished FISA application should really be understood—at least sometimes—as an iterative back and forth not just between the FBI and the DOJ NSD, but also between NSD and the court. This isn't necessary in the simple cases, but it is relatively routine. And it warps the win-loss ratio making it seem like the court is far more of a rubber stamp than it really is.

FISA applications do not generally become public but there are two bodies of evidence—other than the descriptions of the process by participants—that give a window into its rigor.

One is the declassified litigations that took place before the court over errors on the government's part in both the 215 and 702 programs. Only someone with real ideological blinders can read those documents and fail to see a serious judicial oversight process. The second, and more directly relevant, case is the many instances of specific FISA surveillances that have faced federal court challenge when their fruits have ended up in criminal proceedings.

This doesn't
happen all that often, but it does happen, and the cases have added up over the nearly 40 years of FISA's life. Many cases have been reviewed by both federal district courts and federal courts of appeals. There is not a single case in which a subsequent reviewing court has found a FISA wiretap or physical search application defective. That should tell you a lot about the integrity of the underlying processes. Yes, I know that publications like "the intercept" have written stories alleging that lots of FISA surveillance is unjustified. That's as easy for a journalist to write as it is for Paul Manafort to declare his (apparent) monitoring political.

There simply is no history of FISA warrants being subsequently found illegal. Finally, the Administrative Office of the US Courts now reports the number of FISA warrants "modified"—as opposed to granted or rejected. As you can see, the number is not trivial" - Benjamin Wittes
 

Attachments

  • DKVd3KUWkAAGPNG.jpg
    DKVd3KUWkAAGPNG.jpg
    88.8 KB · Views: 0
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#14,789
#14,789
Trump tweeting today that the Russia story is a hoax, and in particular blasting the info on ads coming from FB.

Does he really think this is going to somehow shame Mueller into not looking into this? What's he going to say as more and more ad buys are uncovered as having come from Russian agents working to deceive? And what's he going to say if it turns out that his campaign played some role in that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#14,790
#14,790
LouderVol said:
lol. buying FB adds is illegal? because I got plenty of people you can lock up. plenty of third party groups buying political adds on FB.
Click to expand...

A foreigner buying campaign ads on Facebook would be an FEC violation and a crime yes. The same goes with Twitter.
 
#14,792
#14,792
carlos86 said:
A foreigner buying campaign ads on Facebook would be an FEC violation and a crime yes. The same goes with Twitter.
Click to expand...


You know, originally when asked FB did not necessarily realize what had occurred.

The announcement that Facebook would share the ads with the Senate and House intelligence committees came after the social network spent two weeks on the defensive. The company faced calls for greater transparency about 470 Russia-linked accounts — in which fictional people posed as American activists — which were taken down after they had promoted inflammatory messages on divisive issues. Facebook had previously angered congressional staff by showing only a sample of the ads, some of which attacked Hillary Clinton or praised Donald J. Trump.
Facebook’s admission on Sept. 6 that Russian agents covertly bought ads on the site during last year’s campaign has brought intense scrutiny on the social network and on Twitter, entangling both companies in the investigation by Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel. Both companies have turned over detailed data to Mr. Mueller.
Click to expand...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/21/technology/facebook-russian-ads.html?mcubz=3


I hope people are paying attention to this. It wasn't just a small number of ads. It was ad buys by Russian agents disguised as someone else. And, there were 470 accounts that were fake. Set up by Russians masquerading as Americans.

The investigation continues, there could be more, and FB has promised to turn those over as they are found.

What if Mueller finds that Kush or Trump, Jr., knew of that? I'd wager right now that Manafort did, and that's why the administration has been distancing himself from him for awhile now.

But hey, I guess like Trump says, its all just a hoax.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#14,793
#14,793
lawgator1 said:
You know, originally when asked FB did not necessarily realize what had occurred.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/21/technology/facebook-russian-ads.html?mcubz=3


I hope people are paying attention to this. It wasn't just a small number of ads. It was ad buys by Russian agents disguised as someone else. And, there were 470 accounts that were fake. Set up by Russians masquerading as Americans.

The investigation continues, there could be more, and FB has promised to turn those over as they are found.

What if Mueller finds that Kush or Trump, Jr., knew of that? I'd wager right now that Manafort did, and that's why the administration has been distancing himself from him for awhile now.

But hey, I guess like Trump says, its all just a hoax.
Click to expand...

So what is Facebook's liability here? Charged as an accessory and fined the amount they made from the ads plus penalties?
 
#14,796
#14,796
hog88 said:
Well Russia isn't extraditing anyone and Facebook took the money and haven't given it back or donated it so.
Click to expand...


That's really a side issue.

Point 1: This is further evidence of Russian meddling in our election, something that Trump and his legion of mindless followers have yet to really acknowledge out of fear it undermines his legitimacy. Which it most certainly does.

Point 2: The question naturally arises as to whether the Trump campaign was aware that this was going on.

Point 3: The question naturally arises whether the Trump campaign encouraged this activity by the Russians.

Point 4: The question naturally arises whether the Trump campaign intimated to the Russians that he would look favorably on them if he won by virtue of their having done this.

Point 5: The question naturally arises whether the Trump campaign in any way coordinated with this endeavor by, for example, providing information on what stories or ads to promote, or where to promote them to the audiences likely to be most susceptible to them.

As I understand it, FB has the ability to target your ads, and an account has the ability to focus itself, in areas of geographic interest, or in areas of certain demographic ranges, or both.

There is understandably great interest as to whether this was all coordinated, including with or by the campaign, to influence elections in key electoral states or gender, age ranges, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#14,798
#14,798
theFallGuy said:
Mueller team under fire for 'brass-knuckle' tactics in bid to squeeze Manafort
Click to expand...


Let me get this straight.

It was the right that championed maintaining government intrusion into private lives to detect illegal activity tied to foreign governments or interests, most notably terrorism.

Now that this very same mechanism has been used to attempt to secure evidence which might implicate a Republican president or his campaign in dealings with a foreign government, suddenly you are aghast at the mechanism?

And its Fox leading the charge with articles like this?

200w.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#14,799
#14,799
This seems totally reasonable. Apparently we live in the Soviet Union now

Mueller investigating Manafort for decade-old crimes: report

"The FBI warrant to raid Manafort's home in July said that Mueller’s investigation into Manafort is stretching back to January 2006, according to CNN.

This points to Mueller stretching his probe far beyond Manafort’s involvement in the 2016 presidential election and examining President Trump's former campaign head for other crimes as well."
 
#14,800
#14,800
theFallGuy said:
This seems totally reasonable. Apparently we live in the Soviet Union now

Mueller investigating Manafort for decade-old crimes: report

"The FBI warrant to raid Manafort's home in July said that Mueller’s investigation into Manafort is stretching back to January 2006, according to CNN.

This points to Mueller stretching his probe far beyond Manafort’s involvement in the 2016 presidential election and examining President Trump's former campaign head for other crimes as well."
Click to expand...

Even Muller and his gestapo can't get around the statue of limitations.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top