Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 46

Thread: Carter Page and the fourth amendment

  1. #11
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    8,608
    Amen (Given)
    3881
    Amen (Received)
    3826
    Quote Originally Posted by lao tzu View Post
    I understand Nunes suggests this, but it's far from proven, and Nunes' history suggests he's not particularly careful with facts in his defenses of the Trump administration. It bears repeating that there remains a still-undisclosed 10 page response, purportedly containing point-by-point refutations.



    McCabe can testify on his part of the decision to seek a warrant, but he's not well placed to comment on the deliberations of the FISC, and cannot speak definitively even on the decision to seek the warrant. Notably, while McCabe signed off on the last extension, the initial application and the earlier extensions were signed off for the FBI by then-director Comey, and also required approval from a relevant DOJ official, which has included Boente, Yates, and Rosenstein, sequentially.

    More, Nunes' report on McCabe's testimony is not McCabe's testimony. In the absence of McCabe's testimony, we have to consider dissenting witnesses.

    But the people familiar with the Democratic memo said that Republicans had distorted what Mr. McCabe told the Intelligence Committee about the importance of the information from Mr. Steele. Mr. McCabe presented the material as part of a constellation of compelling evidence that raised serious suspicions about Mr. Page, the two people said. The evidence included contacts Mr. Page had in 2013 with a Russian intelligence operative.

    Mr. Page’s contacts with the Russian operative led to an investigation of Mr. Page that year, including a wiretap on him, another person familiar with the matter said.

    Mr. McCabe told the committee that the decision to seek a warrant under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, was also prompted by Russia’s attempts to target Mr. Papadopoulos, by a trip Mr. Page took to Moscow in July 2016 and by the Russian hacking of Democratic emails that appeared to be aimed at harming the Clinton campaign, the two people familiar with the Democratic memo said.

    If Nunes', as these comments suggest, has materially misrepresented a witness who appeared before the committee, his tenure on the committee has likely found its third rail. Nunes' previous attempt to derail the HPSCI investigation led to his forced recusal. At this point, I don't believe the reputation of the committee itself can be salvaged while Nunes remains in place as its chairman.
    So why was McCabe removed after the memo was reviewed by his bosses?

  2. #12
    radical strawberry
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Everglades
    Faith
    Taoist
    Posts
    2,535
    Amen (Given)
    359
    Amen (Received)
    839
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    So why was McCabe removed after the memo was reviewed by his bosses?
    And, after the release of an internal IG report, which I suspect was far more relevant. McCabe certainly did leave earlier than he'd intended.

    On Monday, McCabe left the FBI, following a meeting with FBI Director Christopher A. Wray in which they discussed the inspector general’s investigation, according to people familiar with the matter.

    I can't find anything more definitive on this than a quote by Wray, rallying the troops in full opposition to the president, that he's a "by the book" kind of guy. Possibly, McCabe's actions related to the Clinton email investigation and detailed by the IG would have created a distraction.

    The memo is now public. If there's something there that you feel implicates McCabe, please feel free to share it.

    It should be remembered that by the end of the campaign, Trump had attracted overwhelming opposition from conservatives, and the FBI is a famously conservative organization. And it should be noted that in the 2016 election cycle, McCabe voted as a Republican.
    There is no lao tzu

  3. #13
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    37,178
    Amen (Given)
    8280
    Amen (Received)
    19305
    Quote Originally Posted by lao tzu View Post
    The Dubious Legal Claim Behind #ReleaseTheMemo

    As a Fourth Amendment nerd, it seems to me that the premise of #ReleaseTheMemo is pretty dubious. The apparent idea is that the failure to adequately document the funding behind Steele's work is a huge deal and a fraud on the court. But as a matter of law, that seems pretty unlikely to me. When federal judges have faced similar claims in litigation, they have mostly rejected them out of hand. And when courts have been receptive to such claims, it has been because of specific facts that are likely outside the scope of the memo that will be released.

    Information presented in a search warrant needs to be true. Not all of it, but enough to justify the application. Bias of the informants is relevant only if it leads to false information.

    Here's the context. It turns out that there is lots of litigation on whether warrant applications need to discuss the bias of informants. Franks v. Delaware allows a criminal defendant to challenge a search warrant by arguing that the statement of probable cause that supported the warrants was fatally flawed. Maybe the officer who swore out the affidavit was lying about the basis for probable cause. Or maybe he recklessly included facts that he should have known were false. Or maybe–as is particularly relevant here–he intentionally or recklessly failed to include facts that the judge needed to know in order to pass on whether there was probable cause. Under Franks, a court will void a search warrant if the defendant can establish that the officer who swore out the warrant "knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth" either included information that was false or excluded information that was true when that information was critical to the probable cause determination.

    While hatred of a former spouse too often leads to false claims of child abuse, it would be perverse to require that hatred of a spouse stemming from abuse of the complainant's children should void a warrant. Steele is reliably reported to have been desperate to see Trump prevented from election, but, at the same time, it's reliably reported he initially approached the FBI in the belief that a crime was in progress.
    I just love your formatting.

    1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.

  4. #14
    tWebber Starlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    New Zealand
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    6,376
    Amen (Given)
    2178
    Amen (Received)
    1345
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    The FBI should have made a full disclosure of the facts and let the judge decide.
    The Dems and FBI are both implying that the FBI did disclose these facts to the judge, that the Democrat memo says this which the Republicans are trying to prevent from being released, and that the Nunes memo is factually false in this and other respects.

    The fact that they didn't because they knew the dossier wasn't worth the paper it was written on
    The dossier continues to be confirmed. However, we now know there was a second dossier compiled by a different group that mirrored much of the content in the first dossier. We also know that, as the Nunes memo admits in its final paragraph, that the dossier wasn't the reason for this FBI investigation in the first place - the reason for it was George Papadopolous got drunk in a London bar and told the top Australian diplomat about dealings with Russia, and the Australians alerted the FBI.

  5. #15
    radical strawberry
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Everglades
    Faith
    Taoist
    Posts
    2,535
    Amen (Given)
    359
    Amen (Received)
    839
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    I just love your hair.
    I get that a lot.
    There is no lao tzu

  6. #16
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    37,178
    Amen (Given)
    8280
    Amen (Received)
    19305
    Quote Originally Posted by lao tzu View Post
    I get that a lot.
    And the translation was flawless!

    1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.

  7. #17
    tWebber demi-conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    2,139
    Amen (Given)
    108
    Amen (Received)
    357
    Quote Originally Posted by lao tzu View Post
    As it's been addressed, my interest in promoting this article, especially after the release of the memo, was in how well it addressed the underlying legal claim of the memo itself.
    How? Where is 'Fourth Amendment' in memo?
    Americans are dreamers too

  8. #18
    tWebber NorrinRadd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Wayne Township, PA
    Faith
    Full Gospel Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    750
    Amen (Given)
    174
    Amen (Received)
    266
    Dershowitz and Turley both believe the (apparent) failure to inform the FISA judge of the biased nature of the dossier to be significantly problematic, and both believe that much MORE info should be released.

    Dersh: https://youtu.be/j_8bOJnGDd0

    Turley: Blog entry.
    Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

    "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

  9. #19
    radical strawberry
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Everglades
    Faith
    Taoist
    Posts
    2,535
    Amen (Given)
    359
    Amen (Received)
    839
    Quote Originally Posted by demi-conservative View Post
    How? Where is 'Fourth Amendment' in memo?
    Constitution of United States of America 1789 (rev. 1992)

    Amendment IV

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
    There is no lao tzu

  10. #20
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    8,608
    Amen (Given)
    3881
    Amen (Received)
    3826
    The fact is, they couldn't show "probable cause" without the memo (McCabe has admitted this on the record) and only by deliberately concealing its true nature and lack of veracity from the court. In short, they lied to get a warrant to spy on an American citizen. It's curious how little this seems to bother liberals.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •