More bad news for the bad guys as the republican funded operatives of Project Veritas had the courts rule their first amendment defense doesn't cover them stealing property from the president's family.
https://apnews.com/project-veritas-okeefe-first-amendment-biden-0000018ca37bdc59adaeeb7b034b0000 Criminal prosecutors may soon get to see over 900 documents pertaining to the alleged theft of a diary belonging to President Joe Biden’s daughter after a judge rejected the conservative group Project Veritas’ First Amendment claim.
Attorney Jeffrey Lichtman said on behalf of the nonprofit Monday that attorneys are considering appealing last Thursday’s ruling by U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres in Manhattan. In the written decision, the judge said the documents can be given to investigators by Jan. 5.
The documents were produced from raids that were authorized in November 2021. Electronic devices were also seized from the residences of three members of Project Veritas, including two mobile phones from the home of James O’Keefe, the group’s since-fired founder.
Project Veritas, founded in 2010, identifies itself as a news organization. It is best known for conducting hidden camera stings that have embarrassed news outlets, labor organizations and Democratic politicians.
In written arguments, lawyers for Project Veritas and O’Keefe said the government’s investigation “seems undertaken not to vindicate any real interests of justice, but rather to stifle the press from investigating the President’s family.”
“It is impossible to imagine the government investigating an abandoned diary (or perhaps the other belongings left behind with it), had the diary not been written by someone with the last name ‘Biden,’” they added.
Anonymous
The judge rejected the First Amendment arguments, saying in the ruling that they were “inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent.” She also noted that Project Veritas could not claim it was protecting the identity of a confidential source from public disclosure after two individuals publicly pleaded guilty in the case. She was referencing the August 2022 guilty pleas of Aimee Harris and Robert Kurlander to conspiracy to commit interstate transportation of stolen property. Both await sentencing. The pleas came two years after Harris and Kurlander — two Florida residents who are not employed by Project Veritas — discovered that Ashley Biden, the president’s daughter, had stored items including a diary at a friend’s Delray Beach, Florida, house. They said they initially hoped to sell some of the stolen property to then-President Donald Trump’s campaign, but a representative turned them down and told them to take the material to the FBI, prosecutors say. Eventually, Project Veritas paid the pair $20,000 apiece to deliver the diary containing “highly personal entries,” a digital storage card with private family photos, tax documents, clothes and luggage to New York, prosecutors said. Project Veritas was not charged with any crime. The group has said its activities were newsgathering and were ethical and legal. Two weeks ago, Hannah Giles, chief executive of Project Veritas, quit her job, saying in a social media post she had “stepped into an unsalvageable mess — one wrought with strong evidence of past illegality and post financial improprieties.” She said she’d reported what she found to “appropriate law enforcement agencies.” Lichtman said in an email on behalf of Project Veritas and the people whose residences were raided: “As for the continued investigation, the government isn’t seeking any prison time for either defendant who claims to have stolen the Ashley Biden diary, which speaks volumes in our minds.”
Anonymous
>>1250118 >Project Veritas was not charged with any crime. The group has said its activities were newsgathering and were ethical and legal. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure buying goods you know to be stolen is a crime
yummmy strawberry shortcake
Is that strawberry shortcake,OP? I love strawberry shortcake, especially if the strawberries are in season. Thank you, OP, for posting that.
Anonymous
>>1250119 If the press isn't legally able to publish things the government doesn't like, you don't have a press any more.
The argument you're making, that the "information is stolen", applies to every whistleblower case. Bradley Manning, Edward Snowden, etc.
There's no situation where that information just doesn't belong to anyone. The point is public interest outweighs that consideration.
Anonymous
>>1250130 >wikileaks is a news outlet >assange is a journalist Wanna bet?
Anonymous
>>1250130 >If the press isn't legally able to publish things the government doesn't like, you don't have a press any more. 1. A private individual isn't the government.
2. They aren't in trouble for publishing, but theft.
The argument you are making is reporters should be allowed to steal whatever documents they want to make news. That destroys basic property rights. A reporter walks off with your laptop? Tough titties, it had info they might want on there.
Anonymous
>>1250131 The government doesn't get to decide who qualifies as a journalist. Everyone is a journalist when they're acting as one. That's basic law.
Anonymous
>>1250132 When telling the truth is a crime, every patriot is a criminal.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250134 When theft is telling the truth, every honest citizen is a liar. Your world's dumb.
Anonymous
Why is the FBI investigating a diary being stolen?
Anonymous
>>1250132 I know you faggots are too young and stupid to know who Woodward and Bernstein are, but why didn't they die in jail for releasing the Watergate documents? We already know those documents didn't belong to them. That's stealing, right?
Anonymous
>>1250137 >I know you faggots are too young and stupid to know who Woodward and Bernstein are, but why didn't they die in jail for releasing the Watergate documents? Because they didn't steal anything or take possession of anything stolen?
Also were you thinking of the Pentagon Papers? Cause the guy there WAS charged. Case got dismissed cause the feds illegally interfered in it.
Anonymous
>>1250138 >Because they didn't steal anything or take possession of anything stolen? They absolutely did. They took it and published it, which is more than what veritas is accused of doing here. And it was classified government material, not just some girls diary.
The only reason this is a crime is because she wrote about taking inappropriate showers with her dad. Usually that would mean her father is charged with a sex crime against children, but in this case he's the president so the people with the information are being charged instead.
Anonymous
>>1250138 >Also were you thinking of the Pentagon Papers? Cause the guy there WAS charged. No, I wasn't, and no journalistic outlet that published the Pentagon papers was charged, either.
Anonymous
>>1250130 I love how Republicans think that any family member of Biden is part of the government now after Trump integrated his family into scamming the country.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250142 I didn't say she was part of the government, dumb shit. Law enforcement (government) are certainly trying to stop them from publishing it, though.
Anonymous
>>1250133 The government is the only one who decides.
>That's basic law Governments uphold or strike down laws.
Anonymous
The diary of Bidens granddaughter where she wrote about being molested? Gee.. i wonder why Bidens corrupt DoJ wants that.. certainly not as evidence ...
Anonymous
>>1250144 >The government is the only one who decides. Can you cite the law by which the government decides who is and isn't a "journalist"?
Presumably it's written down somewhere, right?
Anonymous
>>1250149 >cite the law We're not talking about one particular country. We're talking about all of them. Most treat journalists like this:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-says-hes-not-happy-about-china-expelling-journalists-from-three-u-s-outlets/ Anonymous
>>1250150 >We're not talking about one particular country. We definitely are. I don't give a fuck what they do in China. This is America, and until very recently, it mattered what the law says.
The US government has no process or procedure, authority or purpose in 'identifying' who is or is not a journalist, because everyone has the right to free speech, regardless of occupation.
The fact that you cite Chinese policy for dealing with press is telling, commie.
Anonymous
>>1250153 Assange is an Australian and Edward Snowden is a Russian. Both have US Federal cases pending. I'll accept your concession now.
Anonymous
>>1250137 That’s because Woodward and Bernstein were going after a republican president. Didn’t you get the memo?
Leftists will defend the left no matter what, even when proof of child molestation is brought to light.
Anonymous
>>1250155 >Nixon did nothing wrong edgy
Anonymous
>>1250156 The only thing Nixon did wrong is not burning the tapes.
Fuck you.
Anonymous
>>1250139 >They absolutely did No, they fucking didn't. Look it the fuck up. Common misconception.
>Usually that would mean her father is charged with a sex crime against children Brother, showering or bathing with your family isn't a sex crime. Fairly normal in a lot of countries and in parts of this country. Fuck's sake have you ever been to the boonies?
>>1250141 >No, I wasn't Oh god, you're mentally ill
>and no journalistic outlet that published the Pentagon papers was charged, either. Because SCOTUS upheld the papers' right to publish them and because by that point the feds had already botched any criminal inquiry with dirty bullshit.
Also they didn't fucking buy and weren't involved in the acquisition of the papers.
Anonymous
>>1250158 >Defending pedophilia Everyone should have expected this.
Anonymous
>>1250159 Brother, you realize public showers exist, right?
Hit the gym, after you touch grass.
Anonymous
>>1250160 Inb4 someone says those showers are segregated by sex and if someone is actually dumb enough to do so, let me just say while I appreciate you believing pedophiles cannot be attracted to the same sex (after all, usually people think pedos are nothing but homosexuals), I don't think that's accurate. Pedophiles go after both sexes.
But sure, showering with people at a pool or gym is definitely sex abuse.
Anonymous
>>1250161 >getting BTFO so hard you have to try to drag the argument over to pedophilia Doesn't change that knowingly taking possession of stolen goods is a crime.
Anonymous
>>1250162 proof that the diary was stolen?
proof that veritas knew it was stolen?
Anonymous
>>1250166 Being willfully stupid is no way to go through life
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250167 No proof then, got it. Chalk up another L for the libtards.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250131 >>wikileaks is a news outlet yes
>>assange is a journalist also yes
Anonymous
>>1250132 >>1250142 doesn't the diary show that joe biden was molesting his granddaughter? that
is in the public interest
Anonymous
>>1250156 obongo got caught spying on trump. that part isn't even up for debate. it is a fact president obongo was spying on candidate trump during the 2016 election. how is this different than nixon?
Anonymous
>>1250144 >just let the corrupt pieces of shit control who is allowed to expose information on them being corrupt pieces of shit "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom...of the press..."
Anonymous
>>1250150 >the communist nation of china can control journalists, therefore brandon can good work there, chang
"Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom...of the press..."
Anonymous
>>1250154 and both are going to beat their cases because they are explicitly protected under the first amendment from communists like obongo and biden
Anonymous
>>1250176 Or they're going to fail, because the retards that stole the diary already pled guilty of breaking in and stealing it, and they were deliberately shopping around the stolen goods.
The Trump campaign wasn't even stupid enough to bite.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250172 >doesn't the diary show that joe biden was molesting his granddaughter? No.
Anonymous
>>1250186 Reminds me of when Tucker Carlson "lost" Hunter Biden's laptop.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250188 it's all so convenient isn't it
Anonymous
>>1250173 >obongo got caught spying on Trump I'll take things that never happened for $500, Alex.
Anonymous
>>1250174 >>1250175 Yeah right that's why Assange is being extradited to the US
Anonymous
>>1250190 He's a retard rightoid that can be disregarded
>Captcha: 20240 Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250136 Transported across State lines.
Anonymous
>>1250186 >no, you can't leak that obingo was spying on Americans without a warrant and that obongo had soldiers shooting noncombatants in afganistan reee Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250137 No. The Pentagon Papers were not stolen. And Ellsberg had the authority to show them (but not the endnotes) to whoever he wanted.
Anonymous
>>1250192 he is being extradited because communists like brandon and obongo want to murder him because they are chinese puppets
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250138 He was only charged with the misuse of office equipment.
Anonymous
>>1250190 >>1250193 It isn't even up for debate. the government under obongo issued a fisa warrant on the fake piss dossier and spied on trump during the 2016 campaign. that is how they convicted those trump campaign workers and where the >muh russia came from.
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/509002-more-willful-blindness-by-the-media-on-spying-by-obama-administration/ where do you think the evidence against those trump campaign workers came from?
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1250166 Depending on how the law is worded the prosecutor does not need to prove knowledge only possession.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250206 yeah, because trump is correct that assange literally did nothing wrong.
Anonymous
>>1250205 They monitored members of the Trump campaign because they were having unreported contacts with Russian citizens .
Anonymous
>>1250207 Mens rea (guilty conscience) is always required. Sometimes there is an exception for negligence, but there's certainly no legal assumption necessary that a diary is stolen just because it's in someone else's possession.
And then even if it is stolen, if the contents are of public interest and value, they can still be published even knowing that they were illegally obtained. Such as evidence that the government or the president is doing illegal shit. Providing that evidence to the public is not illegal.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250206 He should have taken the deal. He would be out now.
Anonymous
>>1250212 Depends on how the law is written. As in “…in possession of stolen property…” and “…knowingly in possession of stolen property…”. People got tired of fences getting off by saying “But I didn’t know!”. Proving what people know and when is harder than proving possession.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250215 >Depends on how the law is written. No it doesn't. Mens rea is a basic legal requirement for every law that exists.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250212 Certainly they can be published but not without consequences to the thieves and the publisher.
Anonymous
>>1250215 I know for a fact that in The Great State of Washington people in possession of stolen property get convicted without the prosecutor having to prove knowledge. Simple possession is all that is required. Curtis Lee Cameron burgled my house and friends of his got prison on possession alone.
Anonymous
>>1250219 I guess I shouldn't be surprised that the same people that think due process doesn't apply when they don't want it to also don't have a clue what mens rea is.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250220 I was at his trial. The prosecutor made no attempt to prove knowledge only that my chain saw (serial number) was found in the trunk of his car, that he was driving, after I reported it stolen. He denied knowledge that it was stolen and CLC denied telling him. The judge told the jury explicitly that knowledge was not required only proof (beyond a reasonable doubt) that the saw was in his possession. The jury said he was guilty and the judge agreed.
Anonymous
>>1250205 Man, that opinion article you linked sure convinced me. Who cares about facts when you have some faggots opinion.
Feel free to try again if you want to show Trump got spied on
Anonymous
>>1250205 >https://thehill.com/opinion This is why I say you idiot rightoids can be disregarded
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1250205 >the government under obongo issued a fisa warrant on the fake piss dossier and spied on trump during the 2016 campaign The fisa warrant was for some rando that wasn't even attached to the campaign by that point.
I swear to fuck, Republicans are so attracted to claiming to be a part of other people's persecution that I'm surprised they don't collectively claim to have died on the cross for our sins.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250225 >>1250227 Nta but what he said is factually true and easily googable. Didn't even read his url
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250229 That what is claimed without evidence can be refuted without evidence, anon. There's no point in engaging with them. Their brains are gone.
Anonymous
>>1250229 Most of your post is a lie. The individuals that were being investigated using illegally acquired fisa warrants were part of the trump campaign
Anonymous
>>1250229 >retard doesn't understand how FISA warrants work Here's how it goes.
>FBI nominates you as a national security threat because you posted a picture of a duck on 4chan or whatever >FBI files request for FISA warrant >you are now being spied on >everybody you speak to is now being spied on >everybody those people have talked to are now also being spied on Anonymous
>>1250233 >Coffee boy that hadn't been part of the campaign for months >Talking to anyone remotely attached to the campaign Also, that's not actually how FISA warrants work. You're welcome.
Anonymous
>>1250232 Carter Page is only a single individual. Flynn's communications got unmasked, but not because he was under surveillance, but because he was talking to the fucking Russian ambassador to the USA and all that motherfucker's comms are spied on by us because legitimately, what the fuck do you think we pay the NSA for?
Anonymous
>>1250234 >but what abou- You didn't actually read about the warrants, you were told what happened and how to feel, huh?
Anonymous
>>1250234 >Also, that's not actually how FISA warrants work. ..yes, it is. It's called the 2 hop rule.
Anonymous
>>1250236 >You didn't actually read about the warrants I gotchu fam
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/FISA%20Warrant%20Application%20for%20Carter%20Page.pdf >(B) as specified herei.n, the facilities or places at which electronic surveillance will be directed are being used or are about to be used by, and the premises or property to be searched is or is about to be owned, used, possessed by, or is in transit to or from, this target; The target being Carter Page and solely Carter Page, as named in the warrant.
Anonymous
>>1250239 Was this one the fisa warrants they illegally obtained by falsifying emails, or was this the first fisa warrant, the only legitimate one?
Honestly curious
Anonymous
>>1250238 The 2 hop rule relates to metadata such as call logs, not direct surveillance/wiretapping, you fucking idiot.
Anonymous
>>1250240 There was only one warrant, it was just fucking renewed 3 times, eventually illegitimately.
Anonymous
>>1250241 >>1250242 I have no clue why you people bother arguing with conservatives. You know they're just making this shit up as they go based on their feelings, right? You'll be doing this all day.
Anonymous
>>1250210 so they were spying on trump and his campaign, got it
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250247 >don't pay attention to our treason, it's not fair Anonymous
>>1250225 >>1250227 how did they get the convictions if they were not wiretaping trump? how did they get the wire tapped convos?
Anonymous
>>1250228 >whataboutism obongo should be tried for treason
Anonymous
>>1250229 >citation needed Anonymous
>>1250250 Hurting your feelings isn't a crime, unfortunately
Anonymous
>>1250235 >no its totally fine we spied on ambassadors and US citizens without a warrant. totally isn't fruit of the poisonous tree or anything Anonymous
>>1250242 Oh ok.
So it was a single warrant illegally renewed multiple times, my bad.
>>1250229 >The fisa warrant was for some rando that wasn't even attached to the campaign by that point. Outright lie. "Page was a focus of the 2017 Special Counsel investigation into the many suspicious links between Trump associates and Russian officials and spies and Russian interference on behalf of Trump during the 2016 presidential election."
Anonymous
>>1250252 spying on American citizens without a warrant and executing American citizens with drones without a trial are both in violation of the constitution. Pretty sure obongo drone striking civilians and having a130s gun down civilians are war crimes. hell, obongo and biden directly told the saudi arabians to bomb a hospital and then helped them do it
Anonymous
>>1250255 it's funny how you have to say the quiet part out loud just to pretend you're a victim. are all the good shills cubed?
Anonymous
>>1250257 What the hell are you talking about? You or whoever I replied to was lying, a typical behavior for leftists.
Deal with it.
Anonymous
>>1250258 you're being dealt with
Anonymous
>>1250259 Oh shit, the leftard is off it's meds again.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250260 >just let Trump get away with crimes! nope
Anonymous
>>1250241 >it's not surveillance >it's just surveillance >you idiottttt Anonymous
>>1250256 Great headcanon. Can't wait to see all of this evidence of civilian executions in court.
Anonymous
>>1250262 Might want to get your ankles checked after that massive pivot, anon
Anonymous
>>1250264 >>1250263 Just shut up already retard.
The trump campaign was illegally spied on. FBI agents lied to be able to continue to do so. It's a fact.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250267 or you got caught
Anonymous
>>1250267 >The trump campaign was illegally spied on. FBI agents lied to be able to continue to do so. It's a fact. I just don't know what you want anybody to do with this story. You can keep repeating the same conspiracies over and over but it doesn't make them true.
Anonymous
>>1250269 >The trump campaign wasn't spied on. It was only members of trump campaign that were spied on Semantics games, oh yay. My favorite libshits strategy, totally not overused at all
Anonymous
>>1250267 >The trump campaign was illegally spied on. >Russia wasn't supporting Trump >Jan 6th was a peaceful protest whining about it won't make it true
Anonymous
>>1250270 My favorite conservitard strategy is the wild, incoherent strawmanning and changing the argument when you realize that your conspiracies don't mean shit. No one argued that people weren't spied on. You used the word ILLEGALLY. You said ILLEGALLY spied on. Once you realized couldn't support your argument you shifted the goalposts and left the word "illegally" out and ridiculously strawmanned what the argument is because you know all you have is your feelings. Super fucking boring, honestly.
theoneshopowner sellsitsself
Quoted By:
>>1250127 >Is that strawberry shortcake,OP? >I love strawberry shortcake, especially if the strawberries are in season. >Thank you, OP, for posting that. Frozen strawberries are better than out of season ones.
>Project Veritas paid the pair $20,000 apiece to deliver the diary containing “highly personal entries,” a digital storage card with private family photos, tax documents, clothes and luggage to New York, prosecutors said. >Project Veritas was not charged with any crime. The group has said its activities were newsgathering and were ethical and legal. I agree. I have a room full of stolen stuff from the local walmart.
I buy it from the run & grab gangs and sell it in my mom & pop shop, this activity is just local retail and it's ethical and legal.
Anonymous
>>1250274 >You used the word ILLEGALLY. You said ILLEGALLY spied on.. Yes for fucks sake shut the fuck up and try reading for once.
Fisa judges were lied to. An FBI agent falsified emails. He was convicted of a crime for this.
What the fuck is so hard for you to understand
Anonymous
>>1250277 >admits that the judges properly approved the warrants based on information they provided So they were legal warrants, thanks for playing
>b-b-b-but falsified... The agent was found, convicted. Trump wasn't indicted on the crimes that were uncovered because of improperly acquired info. Sounds like the system is working.
Stop being a little bitch. The warrant was properly issued. If you have problems with the details, take it up with Breonna Taylor and countless others who caught the same deal. Trump got the same treatment everyone else got in that situation.
Anonymous
>>1250243 >I have no clue why you people bother arguing with trannylibs. You know they're just making this shit up as they go based on their feelings, right? You'll be doing this all day. Ftfy.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250279 relax josef milfsud
Anonymous
>>1250277 >What the fuck is so hard for you to understand What I understand is that you keep changing the argument depending on whatever talking point you're losing on. You said the campaign was illegally spied on. When I confronted you your response was "OH, SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE CAMPAIGN WASN'T SPIED ON?", completely pivoting away from what we were talking about. When you were confronted again, you pivoted BACK to the original claim that's already been debunked. The altered e-mail Clinesmith was convicted for was not the sole basis for the warrant. In fact, this e-mail was only for an extension of an already legally obtained warrant. The judge also clearly stated that it wasn't at all made clear to him during the trial that this error made the warrant illegal. There is no evidence that the FISA warrant was illegally obtained. The judge in charge of Clinesmith's trial even said so. You're just repeating what you heard on conservative alt media
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1250278 >convicted Yes.
Of a crime.
Crimes are illegal.
Your mental gymnastics are shite, but keep licking that boot, faggot
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250279 >No u! Standard conservative tier argumentation
Anonymous
>>1250281 >You keep changing the argument! I literally replied to exactly what you said.
It was illegal.
Someone got convicted because of it.
And you are a retard.
These are all facts.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250287 you need to go back to the drawing board
Anonymous
>>1250284 >Well, I don't have any evidence of criminal wrongdoing but here's a bunch of articles from activist organizations! You people are so boring
Anonymous
>>1250285 So what I'm seeing in this thread are Repubicunts like you believe that:
Information obtained from a crime against Democrats is acceptable and should be followed up on
Information obtained from a crime against Republicans is unacceptable and cannot be followed up on
How do I get enough brain damage to accept your hypocritical bullshit?
Anonymous
>>1250291 Libshit headcannon is wild. You invented an entire story complete with lore.
Anonymous
>>1250287 >I literally replied to exactly what you said. You flip flopped twice. I've already explained how with the receipts of your actual quotes. You can't wiggle your way out of this one. The internet is permanent, child.
>It was illegal. A claim you have zero evidence of. Not a single legal or law enforcement body has determined the FISA warrant illegal. You're just giving me your feelings. The judge in the criminal case YOU cited even said so. You don't even know the details of the own case you're citing.
>Someone got convicted because of it. They weren't. You didn't read anything about Clinesmith's case. Nobody was convicted of an illegal warrant. The warrant being illegal or not wasn't even the subject of the trial.
>These are all facts. Consider the possibility that feeling really strongly about something is not the same as knowing what you're talking about.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250293 Its all here.
You'll keep denying it though, because you can't argue in good faith
Anonymous
>>1250294 No, I haven't flip-fopped, it was illegal and someone was charged with a crime for it.
Oh, and also for the sake of clarity/consistency you are a retard.
Also, over the last couple hours it seems like there's been probably 4+ anons in this thread. Idk maybe the source of your confusion is you think I'm everyone else online
Anonymous
>>1250298 >it was illegal still false
Anonymous
>>1250299 Well, no matter how much you kick and scream, someone was charged with crimes for doing it, so yeah, it became illegal even though it was not at first.
Anonymous
>>1250289 >it isn't a crime for the government to drone strike Americans without a trial what?
Anonymous
>>1250298 >it was illegal But, for the record, this is just your really strong feeling. No court, judge or legal body of any kind has determined that the warrant was illegal.
>someone was charged with a crime for it. No one was charged for an illegal warrant. You keep saying "it" because you clearly had no idea what the trial was about. You can't even cite the specific charges or how it relates to the warrant. The judge in the case you're citing stated there was no evidence to conclude the warrant was illegal. The subject of the trial had nothing to do with whether or not the warrant was illegal. No court has ever determined the warrant illegal. You have no clue what you're talking about.
>Oh, and also for the sake of clarity/consistency you are a retard. Its okay to not know something, anon. I have no clue why this is so difficult for you. You started confidently talking about a topic you didn't even bother researching before bringing it up. You made a claim that isn't supported by any evidence other than your feelings. Like, what other outcome did you expect?
>>1250300 >Well, no matter how much you kick and scream, someone was charged with crimes for doing it No judge, prosecutor or legal body of any kind has determined that the FISA warrant was illegal. You're giving us your feelings.
Anonymous
>>1250304 If you have evidence of a crime then present it in a trial. Give me a link to a court finding someone guilty of criminal wrongdoing. Links to a bunch of articles written by some non-profits you like isn't evidence.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250305 >No court, judge or legal body of any kind has determined that the warrant was illegal. Well, this is a smimey half truth.
The warrant was officially reviewed at a later date (I think 2018?) and was found that it never should have continued because it was all based on lies made as the result of a crime.
The warrant itself was issued legitimately and then continued because of a crime. A FBI agent was altering emails and misrepresenting the truth to a fisa judge.
Don't remember who exactly performed this review in 2018. Was it Congress? The DoJ? Don't remember, but the review did in fact happen, and it did in fact determine that the warrant continued because of a crime committed by an FBI agent.
The continuation of the spying was illegal and someone got charged for the crimes that caused it to continue.
Take that how you will.
Anonymous
>>1250305 >No one was charged for an illegal warrant Lying faggot
Kevin Clinesmith. Google it.
Anonymous
>>1250311 Kevin Clinesmith wasn't charged for an illegal warrant.
Fact.
Anonymous
>>1250313 >Oh you see, let me just try some semantic bullshittery. You see, It wasn't the warrant itself that was illegal, it was only the lies used to justify it that were illegal! Keven? He got charged for concocting all of the lies used as the foundation for extending a perfectly legal warrant The spying was illegal
If it were legal, nobody would have got to jail for doing it.
Your sad attempts at mental gymnastics are quite pathetic.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250130 *Chelsea Manning
Anonymous
>>1250313 Kevin Clinesmith was charged for the crimes he committed while illegally extending a warrant
Fact
Anonymous
>>1250316 >>1250321 No one went to jail for issuing or extending a warrant.
cope and seethe all you want, but actually read instead of relying on bullshit talking points and you'll see its true.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250271 >Republicans caught stealing goods from the Biden family >/pol/ppets whataboutism to Obama Interesting
Anonymous
>>1250329 >Well, err, yeah ok so it was totally illegal *but* he didn't go to jail, did he? >Ha, looks like I win this one. It was never illegal at all Shut up retard
Anonymous
>>1250321 >Kevin Clinesmith was charged for the crimes he committed while illegally extending a warrant The judge in the case disagrees with you.
Cope.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250346 it's almost like law has nuance
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250346 No judge, court or any legal body has ever determined that the warrant was illegal. We're all very sorry that this hurts your feelings but you're going to have to learn to cope with the truth.
Anonymous
>>1250347 >The judge in the case disagrees with you. The judge is the one who sentenced him for the laws he broke you blithering retard
Anonymous
>>1250255 Page was expelled from the campaign in early 2016.
>>1250253 >no its totally fine we spied on ambassadors and US citizens without a warrant The US citizen wasn't spied on. And yes, it is fine we spy on ambassadors without a warrant. Countries tend to operate intelligence work out of embassies and ambassadors play key roles in that. The Russian ambassador to the US is effectively the head of operations for Russian spying in the US. No god damn shit we're gonna scoop up any comms he's involved with that don't take place on US soil. Warrants are only required for targeting US based numbers/accounts or US citizens/nationals. If you don't want your comms collected, don't talk to foreign spies on foreign soil.
Seriously, what in the actual fuck do you think we pay the NSA for?
>>1250251 >citation needed Bitch I posted the warrant.
>>1250262 Gathering metadata on a person's communications is by no standard surveillance. Eat shit.
sur·veil·lance
/sərˈvāləns/
noun
close observation, especially of a suspected spy or criminal.
Anonymous
>>1250383 >we're NOT surveilling you >we're JUST collecting metadata on your communications >no this is NOT the same thing, STOP bullying us! Anonymous
>>1250388 Brother, collecting metadata on your communications is the equivalent of reading where letters you send are going.
You know, the shit you literally pay for the government to do when you use the USPS.
There's zero privacy violations and it certainly doesn't rise to the level of surveillance. If that's your standard then the government spies on literally fucking everyone and the Trump campaign wasn't targeted regardless, which was the fucking claim.
Seriously, quit being a dumb bitch. It's not that hard. Just spend less time sucking cock and more time reading.
Anonymous
>>1250389 Assuming I'm actually sending an email to someone who works in the public sector, the FBI/NSA would have no way to access my metadata unless they explicitly asked a private entity to provide that information.
>collecting metadata on your communications is the equivalent of reading where letters you send are going. As a function of the fucking PATRIOT act, you unmitigated streetshitter.
Get eaten by a train.
Anonymous
>>1250390 >Assuming I'm actually sending an email to someone who works in the public sector, the FBI/NSA would have no way to access my metadata unless they explicitly asked a private entity to provide that information. Setting aside the fact that they would be able to read the metadata off the recipient in the public sector. I'm assuming you meant private sector.
>unless they explicitly asked a private entity to provide that information. Yes. And? Private entities regularly provide that information without a warrant.
>As a function of the fucking PATRIOT act, you unmitigated streetshitter. Cry moar you, pussy ass bitch. You tried to spin what numbers and accounts are talking to which into actually reading comms/wiretapping by equivocating gathering metadata with surveillance. The FBI doesn't have a damn clue what anyone that wasn't directly talking to Carter Page was saying and he was long gone from the campaign before any surveillance took place. Nobody in the campaign was fucking spied on. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if nobody in the campaign was even hit by the 2-hop rule given how fucking useless Page was to the fucking campaign. Certainly nobody, including you, ever put forward any evidence anyone in the campaign was spied on. The best you ever had was their *metadata* "might" have been scooped up. You're a lying cuck mad that your conspiracy theories turned out to be absolute bullshit and people wised up to you.
Imagine being mad there's no evidence people you support were spied on. Crawl up on a cross if you want to feel persecuted.
Anonymous
>>1250306 laws don't apply to democrats
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250398 >ignore republican crimes >highlight democrat crimes How's that working for you?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250249 Apparently true, yet the only thing that faggot could find was a random opinion article to back it up.
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1250391 >You're a lying cuck mad that your conspiracy theories turned out to be absolute bullshit and people wised up to you. Ironic coming from someone who still peddles the Russian collusion conspiracy nonsense.
This board is a fascinating microcosm of impotent leftist rage
Anonymous
>>1250424 I didn't mention Russian collusion once. But way to deflect like a bitch.
>impotent Aren't you the one bitching that the left controls the entire deep state and is ruining the lives of and locking up a bunch of right wing figures? Is the left impotent or all powerful?
Anyway, enjoy watching the walls tumble down. I'll enjoy the view with a nice glass of your whine.
Anonymous
>>1250426 >getting this mad cause his russian conspiracy theory still isn't true Easy chuddy, pissing yourself with rage won't bring your dad back from getting cigarettes
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250426 you sure upset him, he's veering into total strawman territory now
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250427 Deflect or project. Pick one.
Anonymous
>>1250391 >Private entities regularly provide that information without a warrant. Yes, because the government is monitoring those communications. That's what it means to be under government surveillance.
>Nobody in the campaign was fucking spied on. It was confirmed by the Attorney General Barr you lying faggot.
Kill yourself.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250247 They were following the Russians not the Trumpeters.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250519 This should really go without saying, but you can't monitor communications you can't read or listen to.
Anonymous
The alleged "theft" was a diary written by Ashley Biden, one of the daughters of Pedo Joe Biden. Ashley Biden's diary said that Pedo Joe sexually molested her in the shower over a number of years. You can find and download a copy of the entire diary online.
Anonymous
>>1250665 >Source: Trust far right wing Republican operatives. Anonymous
>>1250698 Why is the FBI investigating the theft of a diary? National security? What's the risk exactly? Does it perhaps say something bad... about the current president?
What's your alternative theory about why the FBI is investigating this at all, libshit?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250724 the girl is involved in a prophecy or has some extraordinary talent
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250146 She didn't say she was molested by Joe biden.
Meanwhile trump was actually accused of child rape together with epstein and said he was more sexually attracted to his 13 year old daughter than his adult wife which is why when biden became his presumptive opponent you started projecting pedophilia on him to deflect.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250157 >the only issue is we didn't hide our crimes well enough! Conservatives.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250159 >>1250161 So showering with family is automatically sexual and pedophilia but trump saying he was sexually attracted to his 13 year old daughter and raping a little girl with epstein is....?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250159 >>1250161 So showering with family is automatically sexual and pedophilia but trump saying he was sexually attracted to his 13 year old daughter and raping a little girl with epstein is....?
>>1250166 >proof that the diary was stolen? How did they get it? Not from her.
>proof that veritas knew it was stolen? How did they get it? Where did they think the person who gave them the diary that wasn't theirs got it from?
You know it was stolen. Everyone knows you know. It's very telling that you still feel the need to be so disingenuous to deflect.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250172 No.
So either you're repeating disinformation that the president molested his granddaughter without even trying to look it up or you know it's a lie and are trying to push it anyway to try to hurt democrats and/or deflect from trump's/the gop's long history of pedophilic connections and behavior.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250173 You mean when American intelligence, not obama, was wiretapping some Russian spies and suddenly people from the trump campaign popped up on the call and then later one of them drunkenly bragged to an Australian official about their Russian connections and then trump's own administration confirmed russia had been interfering to help trump?
And you wanna know how that's different from Nixon hiring some people to physically break into a democratic party facility to try to steal info?I
Well I think I just spelled it out.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250247 So if we're monitoring literal foreign agents, russian, chinese, North korean, and someone from the biden or trump or any campaign pops on the line and says "about those bribes..." American intelligence has to stop listening and disregard what they heard?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250256 Trump increased the rate of drone strikes and civilian casualties including American citizens.
You don't actually care about those casualties, it's just an excuse because you know saying you just hate Obama because he's black or whatever won't convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250375 >The judge is the one who sentenced him for the laws broke But not for an "illegal warrant" which people keep pointing out and you keep deflecting from.
We're just gonna keep going around in circles like this because you can't accept that the facts, even your own sources, do not support your feels that the warrant was illegal.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250388 So we can't surveil literal foreign agents in case a trump crony might pop up looking for a bribe?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250665 >pedo Joe pedo Joe pedo joe! The diary does not say that Joe molested her.
You're lying, probably to deflect from how trump said he was sexually attracted to his 13 year old daughter and was accused by two girls of child rape together with his I'm all epstein.
The worst the diary said about joe was that he once showered with her and she questioned whether it was a appropriate. It's normal for parents/grandparents to bath children/grandchildren. It'd be irresponsible to leave a too-young kid unattended in a bath or shower. Of course standards for appropriate ages vary over time and location and joe is old as fuck.
It's not even that unusual for adult family members to shower together some places like, at a camp or whatever on vacation. People come in dirty from the lake or sea or whatever and because it's family everyone just rinses off together in the limited facilities. I've showered with cousins across age ranges when I was younger, nothing sexual happened. Hell, I was a bit of a nudist when I was little running around refusing to get dressed.