Spying can be a part of an investigation.
So can wiretapping.
Yet earlier, you attempted to pretend the two are unrelated, didn't you, BRAD?
spying and wiretapping are two different things.
Spying can be a part of an investigation.
spying and wiretapping are two different things.
I think what you're looking for is here: https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/hearings/110846.pdf
no wonder he only got 14 days in jail....Quote Originally Posted by LOWCharacterAssHOLE View Post
LOL! It doesn't do a damned thing to Mueller's report or the collusion that's already been established, silly whore.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...r-russia-links
Can you present evidence before this forum to conclusively prove that B. Hussein Obama was unaware of the actions of a branch of the Executive, which he headed at the time in question, BRAD?
Good question lol.
My guess is the order came from the 7th Floor. They could have gone rogue though.
I actually don’t care about Obama.
I can't recall that we've ever seen the information about the actual FISA warrant have we?........did the Mueller report ever indicate they interviewed the judge who signed it about what he was told?......
You are mixing up two different things, you need a predicate for a warrant, and a judge issued that.... You do not legally need a predicate to investigate something.
I think you have some ACTUAL research to do before you continue discussing this what anyone other than Dummkopf. You really look silly when you ask adolescent questions.Simply talking to Russians gets you ‘investigated’ now lol?
What country are in?
Have you forgotten, or do you just ignore how the FBI first took interest in Page? It was indeed by spying.Predicate is just legalese for ‘justification’.
You have to have a legitimate justification to spy or use surveillance on US citizens. Fourth Amendment and all that. Barr wants to find out if spying on the Trump campaign was justified.
I don’t know what the big deal is unless democrats have something to fear from the investigation.
They are sure acting like they do have something to fear from it.
LMAO...are you another Dummkopf sock?Yeah, spying on an opposition campaign based on specious evidence is totally okay.
Move to Russia, your beliefs are practiced there.
Thanks, volrock. The investigation of the investigators proceeds.The conversation at a London bar in September 2016 took a strange turn when the woman sitting across from George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign adviser, asked a direct question: Was the Trump campaign working with Russia? The woman had set up the meeting to discuss foreign policy issues. But she was actually a government investigator posing as a research assistant, according to people familiar with the operation. The F.B.I. sent her to London as part of the counterintelligence inquiry
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/02/...gator-trump.html?login=email&auth=login-email
FBI Deep State In Panic Mode… Spygate Bombshell Just Dropped
This kills Mueller’s report on when the investigation began. In fact this completely kills the whole Russian collusion charge. For the NYT to be publishing this means the mustard is about to come off the hot dog.
interesting there is rthe preliminary Threat Assessment phase which is less strict,and then the actual investigative phase. But the investigative phase does require a predicate
Sounds like somebody better have a good predicate to spy on a presidential campaign.
Have you forgotten, or do you just ignore how the FBI first took interest in Page? It was indeed by spying.
But on whom?
Sounds like somebody better have a good predicate to spy on a presidential campaign.
Democrats didn’t do themselves any favors in antagonizing Barr, threatening him and smearing him. I get the idea he may become more ‘motivated’ to get to the bottom of this.