0
0

[–] Patriotknife100 ago 

Thank you. Reminded me of this Admiral Mike Rogers video testifying before Congress on "unmasking".

0
0

[–] redtoe_skipper ago 

good thread explaining some features of the fisa use and abuse.

question: where is the sauce?

0
1

[–] Q20191776 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

0
1

[–] sbt2160p 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

1
1

[–] Crensch [S] 1 point 1 point (+2|-1) ago 

... and a great way to feel humbled about your lack of knowledge of such things.

0
5

[–] sheepdoggie 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

He did a great job laying that out. I believe in the end, the Judge whom authorizes the act is responsible for verifying and endorsing the approval. This is where it gets sketchy. The judge may have to answer if and when assuming they are alive. I also suspect this is a reason we see ABJ and the 9th circuit judges being allowed to run rampant with outrageous decisions stretching their power and impacting POTUS and cases like Flynns and Stones. Its for optics and emphasis. Its going to be a hell of a storm.

0
2

[–] Intlrnt2 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Don’t want to miss

Indeed. Great post. Thanks.

Easier to read the ThreadReader version here

0
2

[–] SCRoadTrip 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Kill FISA today. Now. It's a "trust me" system designed for abuse of American citizens based on politics. It was weaponized from the beginning. It is a direct violation of our constitutional rights. Rand Paul is 100% correct on this and lays it all out clearly how legitimate cases should be handled. Anybody that supports the current FISA is corrupt and wants to circumvent constitutional law. That includes B2, Turtle, Wittle Windsey, etc. You cannot correct something that is fundamentally flawed in its foundation. Tear it down and rebuild the system the correct way as Rand Paul states.

1
2

[–] GumbyTM 1 point 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

Rare is an understatement:

Since 1979 through to 2015, the last round of reporting figures, the court has approved 38,365 warrants but only rejected a dozen. That's a rejection rate of 0.031 percent.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/us-spy-court-didnt-reject-a-single-secret-government-demand-for-data/

To be fair the other presidents would have then had a rate of 1.28 rejections per term where Obama had a rate of 1.5 rejections per term.

The big problem here is not so much the rejections but that the orders were sought against a political rival.

0
1

[–] PGLiterati2 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I remember when i first learned that the fisa court had turned down these requests--I was shocked. FISA court has been termed a rubber stamp court by so many historians that I figured they didn't turn anything down, That's how rare. You only need the slimmest appearance of evidence--which means they didn't even have that.

load more comments ▼ (3 remaining)