OIG Report on FISA Abuse Released

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
Lol
Yep
Not your problem

Excellent!

a reply to: shooterbrody

Nope, it isn't. If you're so upset with the issue go fix it.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
Not your problem
What do you care?

a reply to: shooterbrody

Just trying to help you since you seem extremely upset that I said this would happen four years ago. I gave you plenty of heads up but it appears you didn't prepare yourself for this very obvious outcome.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
Lol
Too funny

Hope you get your cash
Perhaps some still have integrity

a reply to: shooterbrody

Funny and true.

You: "The government is corrupt!"

Me: "The sky is blue..."

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: JohnTitorSociety

Yeah, that's nice. Three people charged, one low level, no name nudnik convicted. He was wrong, I was correct. The end.

My point, while relevant to FISA has nothing to do with a specific person.

Look up “parallel construction” and “incidental collection” and get back to us. People who don’t understand both concepts and how they are connected doesn’t understand 96% of non-citation / non-reactive law enforcement in the USA.

originally posted by: JohnTitorSociety
My point, while relevant to FISA has nothing to do with a specific person.

My point does, I'm not interested in your tangential supposition.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: JohnTitorSociety
My point, while relevant to FISA has nothing to do with a specific person.

My point does, I'm not interested in your tangential supposition.

I made no supposition. I pointed out that understanding the FISA court generally and the interplay between IC OGAs and domestic law enforcement requires an understanding of “parallel construction.”

Why you wouldn’t want to learn what that is, regardless of your political team, is astonishing.

Here, I’ll help

“Parallel construction is a law enforcement process of building a parallel, or separate, evidentiary basis for a criminal investigation in order to conceal how an investigation actually began.”

This is what’s known as “evidence laundering” in order to conceal a due process violation that led to an evidence and arrest without actual probable cause.

The classic example would be:

A narcotics trafficker is USA uses a cell phone AND is not being surveilled and communicates with an individual in another country who is subject to direct surveillance and to which the US Constitution does not apply — but the 1st party has rights, including due process and absent a FISA court ruling, is immune to search, seizure and arrest despite his conversation with the actual target of international surveillance.

During the conversation, it becomes illegally known that the US individual is transporting a few kilos of coc aine in his car trunk in Kentucky. This is not actionable information to domestic law enforcement, the incidental collection is a violation of due process, no US law enforcement agency has probable cause to stop the U.S. individual nor search his trunk.

IC OGAs tell local law enforcement that the US individual has blow in his trunk, but they must “parallel construct” probable cause and “launder the evidence” that leads to the US unsub’s search, seizure and arrest.

Local law enforcement follows the U.S. individual and generates pre-textual probable cause — perhaps by typing the wrong plate number in to ping the car as possibly stolen, or any other “parallel construction” workaround to having probable cause.

Based on this, local LEO, lacking probable cause, lacking a warrant, “launder the evidence derived from international incidental collection” and search, seize and arrest the US citizen violating his due process— but concealing this fact via parallel construction and evidence laundering.

This is a huge Constitutional violation and it happens hundreds or thousands of times a day in the US.

This chain of events is entirely illegal and unconstitutional, it doesn’t matter that he is guilty — no probable cause existed domestically and there was no warrant — thus it is a violation of the 4th Amendment and many other laws.

But you can bet no one will talk about it — after all who has sympathy for a drug trafficker? So what if his rights are violated?

But one day someone reading this or you, your rights will be violated in a similar fashion — and your myopic focus on the short term will put you in the dock, without due process, in a scenario more akin to pre-Magna Carte feudalism than a Constitutional Republic.

Wake up before it is too late.

originally posted by: FredT
a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne

he report, which spans hundreds of pages, is expected to conclude that the top FBI officials running the Russia investigation were not tainted by political bias and that they had adequate cause to open a probe ahead of the 2016 election, according to people familiar with drafts of the document.

????? Or the the FBI did their jobs with issues but free of political bias?

what say now Fred? FBI still your heros?

originally posted by: JohnTitorSociety
I pointed out that understanding the FISA court...

I'm not interested in 'understanding the FISA court'. All I'm here to do is basically say, "I told you so", about something which was obviously going to happen from four years ago.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: JohnTitorSociety
I pointed out that understanding the FISA court...

I'm not interested in 'understanding the FISA court'. All I'm here to do is basically say, "I told you so", about something which was obviously going to happen from four years ago.

Then the ignore the post and consider it valuable information for others.

a reply to: JohnTitorSociety

Thanks, but I pretty much did that already.