Jezcoe
83
You are just simply wrong on this.
The FISA warrant is specifically for surveillance for the dates spelled out in the warrant. They can’t get communications that have already happened. That would mean that they would have to get a subpoena for that.
Surveillance on Page after he left the Trump campaign wouldn’t have affected the Trump campaign unless there were communications between the two of them during the period of the warrant… and seeing as he wasn’t a key figure in the campaign and he had left…
Samm
84
What movie are you talking about? That plot does not sound familiar … Well unless you’re discussing the Clintons that is.
Jezcoe
86
The proof that a warrant is for the period that the warrant spells out?
You want proof that your wrong notion of how any of this works is somehow validating?
In what world do you think that getting a warrant to surveil someone allows for the collection of data before the date of the warrant on figures who just happen to be communicating with the target?
I now await some sort of weird response that amounts to me not being able to prove your insane notion wrong.
1 Like
conan
87
Need more…now show me your proof that FISA warrant is day issue forward.
Because you don’t have it.
1 Like
Jezcoe
88
Section 702 doesn’t apply to domestic targets. So… start there.
Seriously.
We could have a conversation about FISA and likely come to a broad agreement.
But as the law stands, the initial and first renewal of the warrant on Carter Page were legal.
And since he had left the campaign, it is hard to make the case that it was to spy on the campaign.
What we can agree on is that it was used to see what Page’s role was in the broad Russian disinfo campaign into the election and the best that we can assess is that he is a useful idiot and not a traitor
conan
89
You can say whatever you want…but facts remain they were looking for connection between Trump and Russia. That is a fact.
Taking one out on Trump would have been to obvious…so they went at it indirectly.
1 Like
Jezcoe
90
Sure… because in September of 2016 there was a massive foreign attack on the election and one campaign in particular welcomed it because they thought it would help them.
Jezcoe
92
Yes there was.
Literally no one disagrees on this.
conan
93
A massive foreign attack?
conan
95
Really…massive attack huh?
Layoff libs news.
1 Like
Jezcoe
96
conan
97
I’ve read parts of it…end results it didn’t change anyone minds.
1 Like
Jezcoe
98
Does that mean that there wasn’t a massive attack? Heck… parts of the Mueller Report shows how Russian Intelligence got Americans to do political stunts like get a Hillary for Prison Parade Float.
We can’t ever really determine the extent of the effects of the election interference because it is impossible to say whether someone changed or decided not to vote because of the propaganda campaign… the difference in 2016 is that the Trump campaign embraced the effort.
The fact that Barr redacted whole swaths of the Mueller report that were later unclassified later by a judge and that those sections pertain to the extent of russian efforts should be telling.
conan
99
Just one network does 10 times more damage than what Russians ever could.
Now what is Hillary paying you?
1 Like
