The Trump Presidency

[sonofdaxjones]

Doesnt Dax hate fisa when it's used by political operatives to spy on political opposition?

Yes

So being denied fisa good thing or bad thing?  Seems they are asking for them for poor reasons.....

With the poorest being to spy on political opponents.

[Phil Titola]

Almost like that’s not what happened....but I’m sure fisa courts are just part of the deep state machine to trumpers

[sonofdaxjones]

Almost like that’s not what happened....but I’m sure fisa courts are just part of the deep state machine to trumpers

Then why does the FBI/DOJ refuse to fully comply with subpoenas and FOIA to answer even the simplest of questions regarding the FISA warrant on the Trump campaign?

[Rage Against the McKee]

My best guess is that they are trying to conduct an investigation competently.

[bucket]

Almost like that’s not what happened....but I’m sure fisa courts are just part of the deep state machine to trumpers

Then why does the FBI/DOJ refuse to fully comply with subpoenas and FOIA to answer even the simplest of questions regarding the FISA warrant on the Trump campaign?

They did. This happened.

[sonofdaxjones]

Almost like that’s not what happened....but I’m sure fisa courts are just part of the deep state machine to trumpers

Then why does the FBI/DOJ refuse to fully comply with subpoenas and FOIA to answer even the simplest of questions regarding the FISA warrant on the Trump campaign?

They did. This happened.

Substantially redacted, and unless I've missed it they have refused to answer questions regarding things like:  Who presented the "evidence" to the FISA court and related questions. 

One could even make the case they have purposely had the document deliveries messed up to slow the process. 

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

The Libtards are still denying FISA warrants were used to improperly spy on the trump campaign???

 

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Trump is kind of kicking ass right now, guys.

[bucket]

The Libtards are still denying FISA warrants were used to improperly spy on the trump campaign???

 

 

Why does anyone have reason to believe otherwise. It's a bi-partisan agreement that the warrants were properly obtained. However, radicals/extremists scream DEEPSTATE!!!

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Holy crap! 

[bucket]

Strong argument, as usual

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

There's nothing to argue about. Enjoy fantasy land, population libtards.

[bucket]

There's nothing to argue about. Enjoy fantasy land, population libtards.

Your argument. The previous administration unfairly monitored the Trump administration. However, a Republican Deputy Attorney General, Republican FBI Director and four Republican FISA judges found monitoring warranted. They don't fall in lock step with you and other Republican loons so you scream DEEP STATE!!!

Where am I wrong?

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

 Bipartisan agreement equals six random dudes, thx bucket

 

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

What a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

[bucket]

Bipartisan agreement equals six random dudes, thx bucket

 

There have been Republicans at every level of the government to check these warrants but they found them legal. Psychopaths from Fox say otherwise and so it must be true.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

So, you completely made up the bipartisan agreement.

[sonofdaxjones]

Did the DOJ fully disclose the source of the evidence and who presented the evidence?

[sonofdaxjones]

Bipartisan agreement equals six random dudes, thx bucket

 

There have been Republicans at every level of the government to check these warrants but they found them legal. Psychopaths from Fox say otherwise and so it must be true.

That doesn’t mean anything.

[bucket]

Did the DOJ fully disclose the source of the evidence and who presented the evidence?

Dax, why would the DOJ do that considering the person in charge of the House Intelligence Committee is in cahoots with the President? It's an active investigation.

[sonofdaxjones]

Did the DOJ fully disclose the source of the evidence and who presented the evidence?

Dax, why would the DOJ do that considering the person in charge of the House Intelligence Committee is in cahoots with the President? It's an active investigation.

Was the evidence political opposition research? 

[sonofdaxjones]

Did the DOJ fully disclose the source of the evidence and who presented the evidence?

Dax, why would the DOJ do that considering the person in charge of the House Intelligence Committee is in cahoots with the President? It's an active investigation.

When was the warrant obtained?  Was Trump President? 

[bucket]

Did the DOJ fully disclose the source of the evidence and who presented the evidence?

Dax, why would the DOJ do that considering the person in charge of the House Intelligence Committee is in cahoots with the President? It's an active investigation.

Was the evidence political opposition research?

Main source? No. Supporting evidence? Sure.

[sonofdaxjones]

Did the DOJ fully disclose the source of the evidence and who presented the evidence?

Dax, why would the DOJ do that considering the person in charge of the House Intelligence Committee is in cahoots with the President? It's an active investigation.

Was the evidence political opposition research?

Main source? No. Supporting evidence? Sure.

What was the main source?  Who presented the evidence to the court?

[bucket]

Did the DOJ fully disclose the source of the evidence and who presented the evidence?

Dax, why would the DOJ do that considering the person in charge of the House Intelligence Committee is in cahoots with the President? It's an active investigation.

Was the evidence political opposition research?

Main source? No. Supporting evidence? Sure.

What was the main source?  Who presented the evidence to the court?

George Papadopoulos. Australia. Not to the court, but to US intelligence.