I never claimed it was the catalyst for the investigation. Not once. I’ve maintained it was the catalyst for the FISA.
Sara Carter: Dossier was used for FISA warrant
- Thread starter TarHeelEer
- Start date
In that, they went to FISA court with a bunch of crap once, and was denied. They went a second time with a bunch of crap multiplied by a dossier piece of crap, and was accepted.
That is what I’ve maintained since it was first alleged back in January of last year.
What’s funny about me wanting to watch her segment? If she would have tweeted that she’d be on Maddow, I’d have watched her there.
When you sign for a FISA warrant you are swearing that all evidence is true and vetted. That is how the law is written.
Seem to be talking past each other on this. You said, "But didn’t you tell me today that the testimony proved the Dossier being a catalyst was all ********?" And I simply replied that I had done no such thing (ie said the testimony proved the dossier wasn't a catalyst for FISA), but that I had said the testimony had "proved" it wasn't a catalyst for the investigation. Which had been said by other people on this board on the past (and even in that very thread).
I don't think that's accurate. Do you have a link? This is what I found:
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) allows the FBI to get a warrant from a secret court, known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), to conduct electronic surveillance on U.S. persons if they can show probable cause that the target is an “agent of a foreign power” who is “knowingly engag[ing]…in clandestine intelligence activities.” In other words, the government has to show that the target might be spying for a foreign government or organization.
This is rather interesting. Link
What does this look like in practice? Well, say, hypothetically, that a group of U.S. persons seem to have not infrequent contact with diplomats known to be Russian spies, whom the FBI are already monitoring. (Pro-tip: While it’s possible that such contacts could be accidental – I mean, hypothetically, the Trump inner circle could be a riot to hang out with socially – spies, particularly Russian ones, are pretty good at what they do and don’t spend time with people unless there’s a good reason.) The FBI might determine that, if the U.S. persons have access to classified information or could otherwise be “developed” for intelligence purposes by a foreign spy service, a significant enough threat exists to open an investigation – this would require at least one layer of approval within the FBI, and possibly more if the investigation concerns high-profile individuals.
The case still wouldn’t be FISA bound. FISA warrant investigations can’t be opened “solely on the basis of First Amendment activities,” so mere fraternization, even with sketchy people, wouldn’t be enough. The FBI would have to gather evidence to support a the claim that the U.S. target was knowingly working on behalf of a foreign entity. This could include information gathered from other methods like human sources, physical surveillance, bank transactions or even documents found in the target’s trash. This takes some time, and, when enough evidence had been accumulated, would be outlined in an affidavit and application stating the grounds for the FISA warrant. The completed FISA application would go up for approval through the FBI chain of command, including a Supervisor, the Chief Division Counsel (the highest lawyer within that FBI field office), and finally, the Special Agent in Charge of the field office, before making its way to FBI Headquarters to get approval by (at least) the Unit-level Supervisor there. If you’re exhausted already, hang on: There’s more.
The FISA application then travels to the Justice Department where attorneys from the National Security Division comb through the application to verify all the assertions made in it. Known as “Woods procedures” after Michael J. Woods, the FBI Special Agent attorney who developed this layer of approval, DOJ verifies the accuracy of every fact stated in the application. If anything looks unsubstantiated, the application is sent back to the FBI to provide additional evidentiary support – this game of bureaucratic chutes and ladders continues until DOJ is satisfied that the facts in the FISA application can both be corroborated and meet the legal standards for the court. After getting sign-off from a senior DOJ official (finally!), a lawyer from DOJ takes the FISA application before the FISC, comprised of eleven federal district judges who sit on the court on a rotating basis. The FISC reviews the application in secret, and decides whether to approve the warrant.
According to the FISC website there is an application process and you include your evidence in the application. Maybe they dont have to swear to the validity of the evidence but that is doubtful.
Good morning libs
Hannity and Sara: Either Comey or McCabe paid 100k for Democratic opposition research dossier. Getting stinkier by the minute.
Hannity and Sara: Either Comey or McCabe paid 100k for Democratic opposition research dossier. Getting stinkier by the minute.
In honor of Cunty
“Has be*”
Hahahah, tell us more about being an accountant at a Big 8 firm, dumbass!
I have to admit that I laughed a lot at how many times I got him to say that footings was different from footers but that probably only translates to people who are in or around construction.
That whole discussion came out of left field too. Why he's so desperate to prove something and win a game of semantics is beyond me. Just today a site contractor asked me if I was ready for him to start digging my footers.... I had to correct him, "No good sir, according to the resident WV Rivals Off-Topic expert, you should be asking if I am ready to have you start digging my footings." [roll]
We call them either on plans. I mean I would rather call it a poured concrete footer on a plan so the contractor knows what he is building. If I instead note it "place footings blah blah" I am going to have 25 contractor call me and ask me what a pre-cast footing is and want a spec for it.
God bless these guys. It’s why I know I do my part for the small business economy, I’m not picking up a hammer unless it’s at gunpoint. I’d rather be fishing.
No I was clearly referring to you as a Nazi. I'm pretty sure everyone else here figured it out. Go ask your mom/roommate if you need some help.
Do you fantasize about gassing your female Jewish students after you're "done" with them?
These are the jokes man, they aren’t all funny. If you didn’t like that one, just wait, one will come around that you do and just go ahead and jump on that one.