Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Fri Jan 19 13:14:24 PST 2018

Utopia Talk / Politics / And There You Have The Collusion
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Jan 11 08:00:10

It is now proven that the FBI used the phony dossier to get the warrants to spy on Trump's people.


The FBI used the bombshell Trump-Russia dossier to get permission to surveil a former Trump adviser

Bryan Logan

Apr. 18, 2017, 7:17 PM


The FBI used information from the explosive, unverified dossier detailing President Donald Trump's alleged ties to Russia to obtain a warrant to secretly monitor former Trump adviser Carter Page.

That same dossier — a collection of memos compiled by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele — has been used in other elements of the US investigation into whether there was any inappropriate contact between Trump campaign associates and Russia.

CNN first reported the FBI's use of the dossier to secure the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant on Page, the former Trump foreign-policy adviser who has appeared to be at the center of the Trump-Russia investigations — due in part to his previous work in Russia and his communications with Russian officials.

President Donald Trump has previously called the dossier "phony stuff" and "fake news."

Page has resurfaced in headlines at several points since the 2016 election — most recently last week, when he declared that he could not "definitively" say that he never discussed US sanctions with any Russian official. The dossier alleges Page met senior Russian officials during a trip to Moscow last July, when he gave a speech critical of US policy toward Russia. It also alleges Page discussed sanctions and business opportunities with the Russian officials. Page has denied the information contained in the dossier.

Page has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing and said suggestions of his alleged involvement in any perceived collusion between the Trump camp and Russia were "lies."

Page said in a statement to Business Insider on Tuesday: "I look forward to the Privacy Act of 1974 lawsuit that I plan to file in response to the civil rights violations by Obama Administration appointees last year."

"The discovery process will be of great value to the United States, as our nation hears testimony from them under oath and we receive disclosure of the documents which show what exactly was done in 2016."

The matter of those sanctions felled another Trump adviser in recent months. Former national security adviser Michael Flynn resigned from Trump's White House in February amid questions about his conversations with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak.


http://www...arter-page-fisa-warrant-2017-4

Delude
Member
Thu Jan 11 08:03:39
How is it phony?
Cold Rod
Member
Thu Jan 11 08:11:06
Lol hot rod can't read
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Jan 11 08:14:36

It was a total work of fiction.

The only thing that is true is that Carter Page did indeed go to Russia, from what I hear, but everything he is alleged to have done is false.

But it it now proven that the FBI used it to get warrants to spy on Trump's people during the election campaign.

Wrath of Orion
Member
Thu Jan 11 08:16:28
Hack Rod believes it to be fake because Trump says so. Derp.
Delude
Member
Thu Jan 11 08:24:06
What you are claiming does not prove that the dossier is phony you are just repeating what the liar in chief is saying.

Both of you cannot provide any evidence to show otherwise
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Jan 11 08:47:11

Sorry, I didn't check the date before posting this thread.

See the new thread when it is posted.



Seb
Member
Thu Jan 11 09:00:40
If the dossier is fake, why have at least two (more now?) pleaded guilty?
Seb
Member
Thu Jan 11 09:03:06
I read the leaked testinomy from Fusion to the senate. It's pretty damning all round.

The Dem senator questions seem to show very good reasons to inform the FBI, nothing suggests malfeasance, and the republicans seem entirely interested in muck raking character and motivation to try and discredit the reports authors rather than the substance of the report and end up with nothing.

It's kind of worrying that the way republican politicians approach this now is entirely in terms of trying to cover the republican parties arse rather than establishing whether or not there has been dammage to the nation.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Jan 11 09:04:49

They caught then for lying to the FBI about their other actions. It had nothing to do with Trump or his campaign.



Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Jan 11 09:32:03

PLEASE DO NOT POST TO THIS THREAD.

THE OP IS FROM LAST YEAR; SEE THE NEW THREAD I POSTED.


Maybe I have a cold that effected my facilities.

smart dude
Member
Thu Jan 11 16:36:11
"effected my facilities"

lol what a retard.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Jan 11 17:28:24

Just repeating what Feinstein used as an excuse for leaking the entire transcript (over 300 pages) to the press yesterday.


And yes, she said facilities instead of faculties.

delude
Member
Thu Jan 11 22:13:48
It was not a leak....
werewolf dictator
Member
Fri Jan 12 00:09:36
yeah the russians figured out over six years ago trump would be president and began cultivating him then and got pee pee tape on him to blackmail him and michael cohn was at the center of collusion conspiracy theory in prague meetings

steele dossier couldn’t be more ridiculous and discredited if it claimed ufo alien grays had kidnapped trump to venus and held him captive there for last ten years where he murdered and ate babies in cannibalistic white supremacy rituals with steve bannon and saddam hussein

it takes hillary and disgusting british and usa deep state to come up with big lies as evil as this [see their similar combined work to create iraq war]
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Jan 12 00:30:53
he doesn't need to be president to be worth getting dirt on

even the most hard to believe part of dossier (uriantion thing) is plausible... Trump's a buffoon, would be an easy target to blackmail... just tell the prostitutes to go pee on the bed while he's being taped (although with his massive Obama obsession/hate can't rule out it being his idea either)
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Fri Jan 12 02:06:54

Delude, how in God's name can you sit there and say it is not a leak?


She took a 300 page document from a closed door questioning of an ongoing investigation and gave copies to the press. The reason it was closed door is because the investigation was ongoing and it was not yet ready for public consumption.

When she started getting heat for doing so she said she had a cold and it must have effected her 'facilities'.

Not her faculties, her 'facilities'.

Delude
Member
Fri Jan 12 03:18:17
Because you fucking idiot the definition of a leak was give to you in another thread and the criteria doesn't fit.

Werewolf dumbass, you are aware the Russians has a history on keeping files on high profiles figures, yes? Kompromat. No, not probably "over six years ago." But it doesn't negate the doesnt that their government does these things. But again your the same dumbass that has Putin's dick so far shoved up your ass and down your throat.
delude
Member
Fri Jan 12 04:01:34
"it takes hillary and disgusting british and usa deep state to come up with big lies as evil as this [see their similar combined work to create iraq war] "

Also, this is laughable as you continue to push the idiocy that Hillary 'created the Iraq war.' You're as retarded as hot rod.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Fri Jan 12 05:16:42

Delude, then please educate me as to exactly what the true definition of a leak is.

Delude
Member
Fri Jan 12 05:45:38
Jesus fucking christ dipshit. Did you forget your own god damn stupid fucking travesty of a thread.

http://uto...hread=81829&time=1515631080315
American Democrat
Member
Fri Jan 12 06:14:16
There are various definitions that describes what a leak is or a "news leak." All of it intertwines.

Commonly a leak falls under; "information released by an unnamed source." Typically which the White House currently, and in the past, has been fighting in regards to various information. And the current White House has been critical of wanting "unnamed sources" to stop being a practice.

You calling it a "leak" is a viable description, but not in a sense that it is commonly viewed.

Feinstein did not hide the fact she released the information publicly. Nor did she prioritize it being released to news organization. As it has a distinct definition on its own.

Merriam-Webster has a definition that covers it, but it too uses words indicating a "leak" is done secretly.

As for the rules for the committee Feinstein and others belong. There are set rules in regards to "closed" meetings. And there isn't anything unlawful in what the action has taken place. (Something you seemingly inferred previously)

It Sen. Grassley is also on record stating he wasn't planning on it, from his end, to release it. So this also alludes to the fact that it had not been agreed upon yet when to release it or not. So that also supports the notion that this was not a "leak."

Semantics aside. It is rather counterproductive to argue that point of it. But I am merely giving perspective.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Fri Jan 12 12:07:01

Delude, so it was transparency rather than a leak?

Do you know ho silly that is?


The idea of a closed door meeting is it is inherently not intended to be transparent. That is why they close the door rather than have the press and all of their cameras there to record it for the public.

It is an ongoing investigation where additional people will be called to testify. The testimony that Feinstein released could have consequences for others that will be called. In other words, they might testify to something other than the truth based on what is contained in this transcript.

Think of it this way. When the cops pick up two people they suspect of a crime they usually separate them so they don't have a chance to make up a story. If they haven't already.

Another way to think of it try thinking of a pail of water. The water is the testimony. If you make a small hole in the bucket you create a leak.

Well, Feinstein kicked the bucket over which is a really huge leak, so to speak.


I know one thing for absolute certainty.

If I were going to conduct a closed door hearing, Sen. Feinstein would not be allowed in the room ever again. She made a serious mistake and she should be made to pay for it. And if I were opposing her in this years election, I believe she is running for reelection, I would certainly use this against her,


She can't keep a secret and in her position she is privy to some of our nations secrets. What is she going to 'leak' next?




delude
Member
Fri Jan 12 12:14:24
"Delude, so it was transparency rather than a leak?

Do you know ho silly that is? "

So you're now complaining of transparency, when you railed for years about how secretive the Obama administration was and you made numerous threads asking the same fucking broken record question. "What does he have to hide?!?!"

Yeah, fuck you.

""The idea of a closed door meeting is it is inherently not intended to be transparent. That is why they close the door rather than have the press and all of their cameras there to record it for the public. "

And any time obama did it you made a thread and complained about it. Fuck you.

"It is an ongoing investigation where additional people will be called to testify. The testimony that Feinstein released could have consequences for others that will be called. In other words, they might testify to something other than the truth based on what is contained in this transcript. "

Like how you called forth for every tidbit of information regarding clinton's affairs? Fuck off hypocrite.

"Think of it this way. When the cops pick up two people they suspect of a crime they usually separate them so they don't have a chance to make up a story. If they haven't already. "

This makes no sense and does not apply to this current situation. But that is because you are a fucking retard.

"Another way to think of it try thinking of a pail of water. The water is the testimony. If you make a small hole in the bucket you create a leak.

Well, Feinstein kicked the bucket over which is a really huge leak, so to speak. "

This was information already known to the FBI and now to the committee. Then you fucking retards started to complain how "bias" the intelligence agencies have been and how much in "shambles" they are in and outright calling them liars in the course of the investigation and this was a way to say "fuck you" make your own mind up here is the information we know and you should know.

"I know one thing for absolute certainty. "

You don't know anything for certainty which has been pointed out to you on every god damn occasion you post something about a subject and fail.

"If I were going to conduct a closed door hearing, Sen. Feinstein would not be allowed in the room ever again. She made a serious mistake and she should be made to pay for it. And if I were opposing her in this years election, I believe she is running for reelection, I would certainly use this against her, "

American Democrat pretty much addressed this issue. So you're fucking stupid.

"She can't keep a secret and in her position she is privy to some of our nations secrets. What is she going to 'leak' next?"

You're an idiot and a hypocrite.
delude
Member
Fri Jan 12 12:15:00
Also you can't even man up and address what AD said to you anyways. What a fucking pussy you are.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Fri Jan 12 12:22:29

He is an ass hole hiding behind a phony multi. I don't always read his posts, especially if it is a long one.

delude
Member
Fri Jan 12 12:23:51
You don't read it because he is usually correct and you're a pussy as he has corrected you or the situation numerous times.

It's because youre a pussy coward and incorrigible. Hence why you repeat the same false information.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Fri Jan 12 12:26:50

I did read his pompous post.

I think I covered his opjection in my post even before i read his remarks.


"Another way to think of it try thinking of a pail of water. The water is the testimony. If you make a small hole in the bucket you create a leak.

Well, Feinstein kicked the bucket over which is a really huge leak, so to speak."

American Democrat
Member
Fri Jan 12 12:28:00
I honestly do not care if he reads or responds to me. I address his points and will point out his errors as well give facts, or address facts with an opinion. Something he has shown difficulty in doing.

As for the various points he brought up, I had coincidentally addressed them in my prior post. It is up to him to read it and see the error of his ways. Or him being scrutinized for it.
American Democrat
Member
Fri Jan 12 12:29:35
"I think I covered his opjection in my post even before i read his remarks. "

You honestly didn't cover anything except repeated incorrect assertions and information.

""Another way to think of it try thinking of a pail of water. The water is the testimony. If you make a small hole in the bucket you create a leak.

Well, Feinstein kicked the bucket over which is a really huge leak, so to speak." "

Addressed: As for the rules for the committee Feinstein and others belong. There are set rules in regards to "closed" meetings. And there isn't anything unlawful in what the action has taken place. (Something you seemingly inferred previously)

Sen. Grassley is also on record stating he wasn't planning on it, from his end, to release it. So this also alludes to the fact that it had not been agreed upon yet when to release it or not. So that also supports the notion that this was not a "leak."

Feel free to counter...
delude
Member
Fri Jan 12 12:31:11
"I did read his pompous post.

I think I covered his opjection in my post even before i read his remarks. "

In other words you've got nothing and a coward.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Fri Jan 12 12:39:17

Did you even bother to tread ny last post?

Thought not.

It explained the definition of a leak that I was using.

She told the world something that was considered by the others involved to be confidential.

Then she turns around and blames a cold for such a serious error.


THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR WHAT SHE DID.

The UP Archivist
Member
Fri Jan 12 12:39:47
-archived-
American Democrat
Member
Fri Jan 12 12:46:41
"id you even bother to tread ny last post?

Thought not."

I did. And explained how you are wrong.

"It explained the definition of a leak that I was using."

I addressed this point and indicated it was feasible. But I also explained what "leak" actually meant and how information is disseminated.

"She told the world something that was considered by the others involved to be confidential."

In a testimonial format, which the release of such information had not yet been agreed upon at the time. Considering the committee rules and all for "closed sessions."

"Then she turns around and blames a cold for such a serious error."

No, she said that related to relaying to Mr. Grassley her intent. She was going to do it anyways.


"THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR WHAT SHE DID. "

Transparency. Are you denying that the republican crowd and Trump crowd has been savagely requesting transparency in the course of the investigation. I am willing to provide many examples...
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Fri Jan 12 12:52:29

Transparency? That is bullshit.

IT WAS A FUCKING CLOSED DOOR MEETING.

GET IT?

American Democrat
Member
Fri Jan 12 12:54:33
So I am correct in my assessment that you are denying that the republican crowd and Trump crowd has been savagely requesting transparency in the course of the investigation.
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share