The Fringe | Conspiracy, News, Politics, and Fun Forum!

Full Version: Trump team communications captured by intelligence community surveillance, Nunes says
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Members of the intelligence community collected ‘incidental’ communications of the Trump transition team during legal surveillance operations, producing ‘dozens’ of reports which eventually unmasked several individuals’ identities and which were ‘widely disseminated,’ a top lawmaker said Wednesday afternoon.

House Intelligence Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said none of the reports he had read mentioned Russia or Russians and he was unsure whether the surveillance occurred at Trump Tower. 


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/22/trump-team-communications-captured-by-intelligence-community-surveillance-nunes-says.html 
So everyone calling the President a liar with his accusations was wrong?  Or sort of wrong?   And not one news outlet who did will recant their story.

Guest

Incidental communications can't be used in court under 4th Amendment case law. The search warrant must be specific, and only issues discussed related to the warrant can be admitted in that particular case. If anything else came up, they would have to amend the warrant and give evidence that meets the reasonable suspicion standard.

Resident Wonk

(03-22-2017, 02:15 PM)Pure rock fury Wrote: [ -> ]So everyone calling the President a liar with his accusations was wrong?  Or sort of wrong?   And not one news outlet who did will recant their story.

He accused a president of a felony. Due process. 4th Amendment.

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.


Trump made baseless accusations. So what has to happen is an investigation to substantiate those claims. In this situation, he is able to simply produce the documents to substantiate those claims. He has not. Oath or affirmation means that an objective third party must provide a warrant so that there is due process. This has not happened. As the commander in chief, he could circumvent the courts by simply providing unclassified documents. He has not.
(03-22-2017, 02:15 PM)Guest Wrote: [ -> ]Incidental communications can't be used in court under 4th Amendment case law. The search warrant must be specific, and only issues discussed related to the warrant can be admitted in that particular case. If anything else came up, they would have to amend the warrant and give evidence that meets the reasonable suspicion standard.

And here is where we get bogged down by CT woo.

I don't think they actually wanted to 'build a case' as per the legal requirements of getting such a warrant. I'm beginning to be of the opinion that it was all done in order to 'dig up dirt' that could be leaked in order to A) Derail his candidacy, and when that failed to B) Derail his agenda, which will keep him fighting instead of cleaning things up which will eventually lead to C) Grounds for impeachment, so that they can get rid of the "Great Disrupter" and his attempts to 'Drain The Swamp". 

If you go back and look at the Shiff/Comey interaction where Shiff asks the question and Comey answers it, things seem very scripted. As if they colluded beforehand to make sure that exactly the right message was put out for sound bite purposes for media outlets around the world.
Pretty sure most people took his "wire tapping" statement as meaning "surveillance" in general.  And it looks like he (or his team) WAS being spied on in some capacity.
(03-22-2017, 02:20 PM)Resident Wonk Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-22-2017, 02:15 PM)Pure rock fury Wrote: [ -> ]So everyone calling the President a liar with his accusations was wrong?  Or sort of wrong?   And not one news outlet who did will recant their story.

He accused a president of a felony. Due process. 4th Amendment.

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.


Trump made baseless accusations. So what has to happen is an investigation to substantiate those claims. In this situation, he is able to simply produce the documents to substantiate those claims. He has not. Oath or affirmation means that an objective third party must provide a warrant so that there is due process. This has not happened. As the commander in chief, he could circumvent the courts by simply providing unclassified documents. He has not.

And here is where the narrative falls apart on all of this.

The FBI and NSA admit in open session before Congress that there is an ongoing investigation into Trump's alleged ties with Russia including intercepted communications. There have been numerous reports from varied outlets such as the NYT about the FBI wiretapping varied individuals in the Trump organization.

Then before Congress, the American People and probably under oath, Comey says there is no evidence of wiretapping.

Which is it?

Pick one and stick to the story because from all I can determine at this point, it's a political witch hunt being perpetrated by people who are rapidly losing power and wish to hold on to whatever shreds they can possibly claw out regardless of the damage it does for the country.
I wonder how much time Maddow spends tonight admitting Trump was right?

T-Dub

(03-22-2017, 02:49 PM)mountain man Wrote: [ -> ]Jptdknpa

I wonder how much time Maddow spends tonight admitting Trump was right?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5