The Robert Mueller Investigation

[Homercles 10206]

It’s time to post the dumb gifs, it’s time to fight the libs, it’s time to meet the Trumpkins on the Anastasis and Washpark show tonight!  It’s time to hate on Comey, it’s time to parrot the right, it’s time to reform FISA on the most delusional, circle jerkable, self celebrational, puppetational...this is what we call the Anastasis and Washpark showwww!!!

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Gates is about to get sentenced 

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Edited December 17, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[washparkhorn 9974]

25 minutes ago, Homercles said:

It’s time to post the dumb gifs, it’s time to fight the libs, it’s time to meet the Trumpkins on the Anastasis and Washpark show tonight!  It’s time to hate on Comey, it’s time to parrot the right, it’s time to reform FISA on the most delusional, circle jerkable, self celebrational, puppetational...this is what we call the Anastasis and Washpark showwww!!!

 

If civil liberties are not important to you, please ignore me. I will continue to speak up for your civil liberties regardless of your proclivities.

And the fight is against the Establishment Democrats who have embraced neoliberalism and neoconservatism instead of progressive policies. It is a difficult concept to appreciate, but there is a difference between Establishment Democrats and Progressive Democrats - just as there is a difference between Establishment Republicans, Libertarians and Populist Republicans. I am sure you understand those distinctions, but some may not. 

I wish you the best. 

Edited December 17, 2019 by washparkhorn
removing gif to save bandwidth

[washparkhorn 9974]

4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Cooperating for two years, candid in his testimony, and accepting of culpability in actions - the Judge's sentence appears to be fair and appropriate. 

Anyone left before Durham finalizes his investigation?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

Well....bye

[Anastasis 23722]

FISC orders CAPA plan, and declassification of an order they issued on Dec 5th to the FBI. 

https://www.fisc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/MIsc 19 02 191217.pdf

ORDER Docket No. Misc. 19-02

This order responds to reports that personnel of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided false information to the National Security Division (NSD) of the Department of Justice, and withheld material information from NSD which was detrimental to the FBI's case, in connection with four applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) for authority to conduct electronic surveillance of a U.S. citizen named Carter W. Page. 1 When FBI personnel mislead NSD in the ways described above, they equally mislead the FISC.

In order to appreciate the seriousness of that misconduct and its implications, it is useful to understand certain procedural and substantive requirements that apply to the government's conduct of electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes. Title I of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), codified as amended at 50 U.S.C. §§ 1801-1813, governs such electronic surveillance. It requires the government to apply for and receive an order from the FISC approving a proposed electronic surveillance. When deciding whether to grant such an application, a FISC judge must determine, among other things, whether it provides probable cause to believe that the proposed surveillance target is a "foreign power" or an "agent of a foreign power." See§ 1805(a)(2)(A). Those terms are defined by FISA. See § 1801(a)-(b). A fi nding of probable cause to believe that a U.S. citizen (or other "United States person" as defined at Section 1803(i)) is an agent of a foreign power cannot be solely based on activities protected by the First Amendment. See § 1805(a)(2)(A).

An electronic surveillance application must "be made by a Federal officer in writing upon oath or affirmation." § 1804(a). 2 When it is the FBI that seeks to conduct the surveillance, the Federal officer who makes the application is an FBI agent, who swears to the facts in the application. The FISC judge makes the required probable cause determination "on the basis of the facts submitted by the applicant." § 1805(a)(2) (emphasis added); see also§ 1804(c) (a FISC · judge "may require the applicant to furnish such other information as may be_ necessary to make the determinations required by" Section 1805) (emphasis added). Those statutory provisions reflect the reality that, in the first instance, it is the applicant agency that possesses information relevant to the probable cause determination, as well as the means to potentially acquire additional information.

Notwithstanding that the FISC assesses probable cause based on information provided by the applicant, "Congress intended the pre-surveillance judicial warrant procedure" under FISA, "and particularly the judge's probable cause findings, to provide an external check on executive branch decisions to conduct surveillance" in order ''to protect the fourth amendment rights of U.S. persons."3 The FISC's assessment of probable cause can serve those purposes effectively only i_f the applicant agency fully and accurately provides information in its possession that is material to whether probable cause exists. Accordingly, "the government ... has a heightened duty of candor to the [FISC] in ex parte proceedings," 4 that is, ones in which the government does not face an adverse party, such as proceedings on electronic surveillance applications. The FISC "expects the government to comply with its heightened duty of candor in ex parte proceedings at all times. Candor is fundamental to this Court's effective operation .... " 5

With that background, the Court turns to how the government handled the four applications it submitted to conduct electronic surveillance of Mr. Page. The FISC entertained those applications in October 2016 and _ January, April, and June 2017. See OIG Report at vi.

On December 9, 2019, the government filed with the FISC public and classified versions of the OIG Report.6 The OIG Report describes in detail the preparation of the four applications for electronic surveillance of Mr. Page. It documents troubling instances in which FBI personnel provided information to NSD which was unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession. 7 It also describes several instances in which FBI personnel withheld from NSD information in their possession which was detrimental to their case for believing that Mr. Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power. 8

In addition, while the fourth electronic surveillance application for Mr. Page was being prepared, an attorney in the FBI's Office of General Counsel (OGC) engaged in conduct that apparently was intended to mislead the FBI agent who ultimately swore to the facts in that application about whether Mr. Page had been a source of another government agency. See id. at 252-56. The information about the OGC attorney's conduct in the OIG report is consistent with classified submissions made to the FISC by the government on October 25, 2019, and November 27, 2019. Because the conduct ofthe OGC attorney gave rise to serious concerns about the accuracy and completeness of the information provided to the FISC in any matter in which the OGC attorney was involved, the Court ordered the government on December 5, 2019, to, among other things, provide certain information addressing those concerns.

The FBI's handling of the Carter Page applications, as portrayed in the OIG report, was antithetical to the heightened duty of candor described above. The frequency with which representations made by FBI personnel turned out to be unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession, and with which they withheld information detrimental to their case, calls into question whether information contained in other FBI applications is reliable. The FISC expects the government to provide complete and accurate information in every filing with the Court. Without it, the FISC cannot properly ensure that the government conducts electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes only when there is a sufficient factual basis.

THEREFORE, the Court ORDERS that the government shall, no later than January 10, 2020, inform the Court in a sworn written submission of what it has done, and plans to do, to ensure that the statement of facts in each FBI application accurately and completely reflects information possessed by the FBI that is material to any issue presented by the application. In the event that the FBI at the time of that submission is not yet able to perform any of the planned steps described in the submission, it shall also include (a) a proposed timetable for implementing such measures and (b) an explanation of why, in the government's view, the information in FBI applications submitted in the interim should be regarded as reliable.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to FISC Rule of Procedure 62(a), that the government shall, no later than December 20, 2019, complete a declassification review of the above-referenced order of December 5, 2019, in anticipation of the FISC's publishing that order. In view of the information released to the public in the OIG Report, the Court expects that such review will entail minimal if any redactions. SO ORDERED. Entered this 171 h day of December, 2019.

Edited December 17, 2019 by Anastasis

[jimmyjazz 47373]

4 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

And the fight is against the Establishment Democrats who have embraced neoliberalism and neoconservatism instead of progressive policies.

Why is the fight not against the autocrat in the White House and the 200 or so Republicans who support him?

See, this bullshit is why people laugh at you.  You're not up for a "fight".   You're an enabler, and you enable evil.  Fuck that.

[Lagunamadre 1975]

4 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

That witch hunt sure did find a lot of witches. 

[triplehorn 2664]

neoliberalism and neoconservatism.  Now that's quaint. 

The frontline of the fight today is against the international spread of Putinism - primarily defined by autocrats employing a lack of transparency in governance, cronyism, pervasive corruption, mafia style violence using both traditional (baseball bats, guns, window ledges, bone saws) and state sponsored approaches (Novochok, surface to air missiles, arming the worst actors), and lack of political freedoms.

Takes asymmetrical warfare to a whole new level.

 

Edited December 17, 2019 by triplehorn
never forget bone saws

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

8 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Why is the fight not against the autocrat in the White House and the 200 or so Republicans who support him?

See, this bullshit is why people laugh at you.  You're not up for a "fight".   You're an enabler, and you enable evil.  Fuck that.

He’s not completely wrong.  The folks in Nazi Germany that stood silently by and watched Hitler execute the Holocaust were just as much of a problem.  

Folks that believe there is some common ground or public good to be gained by negotiating in good faith with people hell bent on destroying truth and democracy are a big part of our problems today.  

[Biff Tannen 46252]

4 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

neoliberalism and neoconservatism.  Now that's quaint. 

 

I know it's Tony, but I can't fix it.

[washparkhorn 9974]

The FISA Court's Order is a huge step in the right direction. That is a rare public rebuke. It has accused the FBI of misleading it and demands they propose changes. It calls into question whether the FBI has been reliable in other applications. The ACLU has suggested appointing a third party to analyze whether the government's case for a wiretap. 

The effort to reform the FISA process is a rare instance of bipartisan agreement, with Sen. Blumenthal joining Republicans in calling for reform of the FISC Court. 

 

Edited December 17, 2019 by washparkhorn

[Biff Tannen 46252]

4 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

The FISA Court's Order is a huge step in the right direction. That is a rare public rebuke. It has accused the FBI of misleading it and demands they propose changes. It calls into question whether the FBI has been reliable in other applications. The ACLU has suggested appointing a third party to analyze whether the government's case for a wiretap. 

The effort to reform the FISA process is a rare instance of bipartisan agreement, with Sen. Blumenthal joining Republicans in calling for reform of the FISC Court. 

 

Cool.  So we good here?  Seems like wheels are turning, things are in motion.  How about now we focus on the guy actively dousing the country and our institutions in gasoline.

[Degenerate Gardner 4160]

4 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

The FISA Court's Order is a huge step in the right direction. That is a rare public rebuke. It has accused the FBI of misleading it and demands they propose changes. It calls into question whether the FBI has been reliable in other applications. The ACLU has suggested appointing a third party to analyze whether the government's case for a wiretap. 

The effort to reform the FISA process is a rare instance of bipartisan agreement, with Sen. Blumenthal joining Republicans in calling for reform of the FISC Court. 

 

Maybe start a FISA thread? We could talk about the Mueller investigation there.

[jimmyjazz 47373]

8 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

He’s not completely wrong.  The folks in Nazi Germany that stood silently by and watched Hitler execute the Holocaust were just as much of a problem.  

Folks that believe there is some common ground or public good to be gained by negotiating in good faith with people hell bent on destroying truth and democracy are a big part of our problems today.  

Are you being intentionally obtuse?  Over half the country sees the imminent threat for exactly what it is, and yet some of you wonks are determined to classify the problem as "neoliberalism" or some such.

No.

The problem is autocrats trying to destroy the Republic.  That's the problem.  Nothing else.  The flu is an issue, surveillance abuses are an issue, low unemployment achieved by minimal wages and a gig economy is an issue.

The threat is Trump and the Republicans.  There is no other threat that even approaches what they are doing.,

For fuck's sake, think less, because when you think more you get way off into the weeds.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

11 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Are you being intentionally obtuse?  Over half the country sees the imminent threat for exactly what it is, and yet some of you wonks are determined to classify the problem as "neoliberalism" or some such.

No.

The problem is autocrats trying to destroy the Republic.  That's the problem.  Nothing else.  The flu is an issue, surveillance abuses are an issue, low unemployment achieved by minimal wages and a gig economy is an issue.

The threat is Trump and the Republicans.  There is no other threat that even approaches what they are doing.,

For fuck's sake, think less, because when you think more you get way off into the weeds.

How did the autocrats get where they are now?  There was an entire corporate establishment that opened the door for them.  It’s more corruption and irresponsibility than some jargony ideology like “neoliberalism.”  Perhaps neoliberalism/neoconservativism is symptom of a corrupt political culture that has lost its way too.

If these issue are not addressed, we are going to get more and more crazy leaders and more citizen rights are going to be forfeited.  

Yeah, Trump is an enormous problem but removing him isn’t going to solve the bigger picture.  Trump is a distraction from the underlying issues that have allowed a Trump to even exist.

Edited December 17, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[wildcat09 29609]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

How did the autocrats get where they are now?  There was an entire corporate establishment that open the door for them.  It’s more corruption and irresponsibility than some jargony ideology like “neoliberalism.”  Perhaps neoliberalism/neoconservativism is symptom of a corrupt political culture that has lost its way too.

If these issue are not addressed, we are going to get more and more crazy leaders and more citizen rights are going to be forfeited.  

Yeah, Trump is an enormous problem but removing him isn’t going to solve the bigger picture.  Trump is a distraction from the underlying issues that have allowed a Trump to even exist.

German communists helped the Nazis seize power, rather than allying with the center-left to fight them, because they thought anything that hurt the system they opposed would ultimately be good. We know how that ended. We can fix the fucking system when the Nazis have been annihilated.

[jimmyjazz 47373]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

How did the autocrats get where they are now?  There was an entire corporate establishment that opened the door for them.  It’s more corruption and irresponsibility than some jargony ideology like “neoliberalism.”  Perhaps neoliberalism/neoconservativism is symptom of a corrupt political culture that has lost its way too.

If these issue are not addressed, we are going to get more and more crazy leaders and more citizen rights are going to be forfeited.  

Yeah, Trump is an enormous problem but removing him isn’t going to solve the bigger picture.  Trump is a distraction from the underlying issues that have allowed a Trump to even exist.

Well, you have two choices.  Get rid of Trump and live to fight another round, or focus on some Anastasis bullshit and let Trump get reelected, at which point we are proper fucked.

You decide.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

2 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

German communists helped the Nazis seize power, rather than allying with the center-left to fight them, because they thought anything that hurt the system they opposed would ultimately be good. We know how that ended. We can fix the fucking system when the Nazis have been annihilated.

How do you know when the Nazis have been eliminated?  Best case scenario is the Republicans get wiped out in elections but the approach of the establishment democrats seems to be afraid to really go on the offensive.  This is my concern. 

[Biff Tannen 46252]

20 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

How do you know when the Nazis have been eliminated?  Best case scenario is the Republicans get wiped out in elections but the approach of the establishment democrats seems to be afraid to really go on the offensive.  This is my concern. 

We will certainly find out for sure if he gets re-elected.  If that happens and the Dems still act afraid to go on the offensive once the country is truly on fire, then I will be ready to take it to Defcon 1.  Or 5.  Or whatever the bad one is.

[washparkhorn 9974]

Hugo - as tuned in as you are to politics, you should understand the widespread implementation of neoliberalism as a policy matter. At the retail level of politics, understanding the policy structures behind the campaigns is helpful. Let me know if I can help point you in the direction. It is murky out there. 

[Lagunamadre 1975]

14 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Hugo - as tuned in as you are to politics, you should understand the widespread implementation of neoliberalism as a policy matter. At the retail level of politics, understanding the policy structures behind the campaigns is helpful. Let me know if I can help point you in the direction. It is murky out there. 

Are you a fan of neoliberalism? 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

The thing about neoliberalism is no one really goes around saying they’re a proud neoliberal so the nomenclature is elusive and I’d argue masks deeper problems in our contemporary political culture such as consolidated corporate power and influence operating under the guise of an ideology. 

Edited December 17, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[washparkhorn 9974]

15 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

Are you a fan of neoliberalism? 

No - as an economic policy, efficiency may be an ideal, but one must account for humans in the final output. Neoliberalism has no plan for humanity other than to further enrich the wealthy extreme. The consolidation of wealth in the hands of the very few has led to the political chaos we now see playing out in the world. The ever widening wealth gap between the top .001% and the 99.999% will lead to trouble - and rubble. A new consensus is needed before we sink into the depths of tribalism. 

[washparkhorn 9974]

18 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The thing about neoliberalism is no one really goes around saying they’re a proud neoliberal so the nomenclature is elusive and I’d argue masks deeper problems in our contemporary political culture such as consolidate corporate power and influence operating under the guise of an ideology. 

What you are seeing today with Mayor Pete is progressives taking it to a neoliberal. Progressives understand Modern Monetary Theory and understand if we can bail out financial interests today (a half-trillion for the teetering Repo market this year) and $17 trillion for the 2008 crisis - plus and expanding military budget - we can afford to take better care of the 99.999%. 

The Pete Peterson scare words about the "debt" is a scam. MMT recognizes inflation is not an impediment to raising all boats - not just the super luxury yachts. . 

Edited December 17, 2019 by washparkhorn

[jimmyjazz 47373]

Are you just spewing words for the sake of spewing words?  My understanding of "neoliberalism" is that it has jack shit to do with progressive policy, and it shouldn't be ascribed to progressives.

You're seriously just trying to hang a boat anchor around the necks of the naive, aren't you?

[Anastasis 23722]

He's dropping words, yes. And unsurprisingly, you fail to grasp the distinctions he is drawing and point he is making. 

Edited December 17, 2019 by Anastasis

[washparkhorn 9974]

8 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Are you just spewing words for the sake of spewing words?  My understanding of "neoliberalism" is that it has jack shit to do with progressive policy, and it shouldn't be ascribed to progressives.

You're seriously just trying to hang a boat anchor around the necks of the naive, aren't you?

Jimmy with all due respect - sincerely - progressive policies - such as MMT - stand in DIRECT opposition to neoliberal economic policy. It is not a controversial take. That is the divide between Establishment Democrats (who have adopted right wing neoliberalism since the days of Clinton and his Third Way Movement) and progressives (who reject neoliberalism and its austerity for the masses). 

Would you like me to point you in the right direction?  

A lot has changed in the political landscape since Nixon. If you missed a moment of it, the political world is a very confusing place since Establishment R's and D's are essentially the same thing these days.

The old terminology does not work anymore in reality based political discussions.

Really, no offense intended. A lot of older Americans have been fed so much pablum they don't know which way is right, left, up or down. But they can catch up, but first they have to let go of old, wheezy terminology. 

[jimmyjazz 47373]

8 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Jimmy with all due respect - sincerely - progressive policies - such as MMT - stand in DIRECT opposition to neoliberal economic policy. It is not a controversial take. That is the divide between Establishment Democrats (who have adopted right wing neoliberalism since the days of Clinton and his Third Way Movement) and progressives (who reject neoliberalism and its austerity for the masses). 

This does not contradict what I posted.  I think MMT is fraught with problems, but "neoliberal" policies . . . aren't.  It's a bad name.

[burntorangebongos 10826]

 We need to take the dark money influence out of our political system. Warren talks about doing that as a priority, which it is.

We are fucked because of how rigged we've allowed our system to become. And also because we stopped funding education the way we did in generations past. Nobody would give a fuck about reality TV if we were more cultured and educated. We'd watch the Kardashians with anthropological curiosity instead of considering them to be influencers and people to emulate. 

 

[DDD Dad 14673]

FISC orders CAPA plan, and declassification of an order they issued on Dec 5th to the FBI. 
https://www.fisc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/MIsc 19 02 191217.pdf

ORDER Docket No. Misc. 19-02
This order responds to reports that personnel of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided false information to the National Security Division (NSD) of the Department of Justice, and withheld material information from NSD which was detrimental to the FBI's case, in connection with four applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) for authority to conduct electronic surveillance of a U.S. citizen named Carter W. Page. 1 When FBI personnel mislead NSD in the ways described above, they equally mislead the FISC.
In order to appreciate the seriousness of that misconduct and its implications, it is useful to understand certain procedural and substantive requirements that apply to the government's conduct of electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes. Title I of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), codified as amended at 50 U.S.C. §§ 1801-1813, governs such electronic surveillance. It requires the government to apply for and receive an order from the FISC approving a proposed electronic surveillance. When deciding whether to grant such an application, a FISC judge must determine, among other things, whether it provides probable cause to believe that the proposed surveillance target is a "foreign power" or an "agent of a foreign power." See§ 1805(a)(2)(A). Those terms are defined by FISA. See § 1801(a)-(b). A fi nding of probable cause to believe that a U.S. citizen (or other "United States person" as defined at Section 1803(i)) is an agent of a foreign power cannot be solely based on activities protected by the First Amendment. See § 1805(a)(2)(A).
An electronic surveillance application must "be made by a Federal officer in writing upon oath or affirmation." § 1804(a). 2 When it is the FBI that seeks to conduct the surveillance, the Federal officer who makes the application is an FBI agent, who swears to the facts in the application. The FISC judge makes the required probable cause determination "on the basis of the facts submitted by the applicant." § 1805(a)(2) (emphasis added); see also§ 1804© (a FISC · judge "may require the applicant to furnish such other information as may be_ necessary to make the determinations required by" Section 1805) (emphasis added). Those statutory provisions reflect the reality that, in the first instance, it is the applicant agency that possesses information relevant to the probable cause determination, as well as the means to potentially acquire additional information.
Notwithstanding that the FISC assesses probable cause based on information provided by the applicant, "Congress intended the pre-surveillance judicial warrant procedure" under FISA, "and particularly the judge's probable cause findings, to provide an external check on executive branch decisions to conduct surveillance" in order ''to protect the fourth amendment rights of U.S. persons."3 The FISC's assessment of probable cause can serve those purposes effectively only i_f the applicant agency fully and accurately provides information in its possession that is material to whether probable cause exists. Accordingly, "the government ... has a heightened duty of candor to the [FISC] in ex parte proceedings," 4 that is, ones in which the government does not face an adverse party, such as proceedings on electronic surveillance applications. The FISC "expects the government to comply with its heightened duty of candor in ex parte proceedings at all times. Candor is fundamental to this Court's effective operation .... " 5
With that background, the Court turns to how the government handled the four applications it submitted to conduct electronic surveillance of Mr. Page. The FISC entertained those applications in October 2016 and _ January, April, and June 2017. See OIG Report at vi.
On December 9, 2019, the government filed with the FISC public and classified versions of the OIG Report.6 The OIG Report describes in detail the preparation of the four applications for electronic surveillance of Mr. Page. It documents troubling instances in which FBI personnel provided information to NSD which was unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession. 7 It also describes several instances in which FBI personnel withheld from NSD information in their possession which was detrimental to their case for believing that Mr. Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power. 8
In addition, while the fourth electronic surveillance application for Mr. Page was being prepared, an attorney in the FBI's Office of General Counsel (OGC) engaged in conduct that apparently was intended to mislead the FBI agent who ultimately swore to the facts in that application about whether Mr. Page had been a source of another government agency. See id. at 252-56. The information about the OGC attorney's conduct in the OIG report is consistent with classified submissions made to the FISC by the government on October 25, 2019, and November 27, 2019. Because the conduct ofthe OGC attorney gave rise to serious concerns about the accuracy and completeness of the information provided to the FISC in any matter in which the OGC attorney was involved, the Court ordered the government on December 5, 2019, to, among other things, provide certain information addressing those concerns.
The FBI's handling of the Carter Page applications, as portrayed in the OIG report, was antithetical to the heightened duty of candor described above. The frequency with which representations made by FBI personnel turned out to be unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession, and with which they withheld information detrimental to their case, calls into question whether information contained in other FBI applications is reliable. The FISC expects the government to provide complete and accurate information in every filing with the Court. Without it, the FISC cannot properly ensure that the government conducts electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes only when there is a sufficient factual basis.
THEREFORE, the Court ORDERS that the government shall, no later than January 10, 2020, inform the Court in a sworn written submission of what it has done, and plans to do, to ensure that the statement of facts in each FBI application accurately and completely reflects information possessed by the FBI that is material to any issue presented by the application. In the event that the FBI at the time of that submission is not yet able to perform any of the planned steps described in the submission, it shall also include (a) a proposed timetable for implementing such measures and (b) an explanation of why, in the government's view, the information in FBI applications submitted in the interim should be regarded as reliable.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to FISC Rule of Procedure 62(a), that the government shall, no later than December 20, 2019, complete a declassification review of the above-referenced order of December 5, 2019, in anticipation of the FISC's publishing that order. In view of the information released to the public in the OIG Report, the Court expects that such review will entail minimal if any redactions. SO ORDERED. Entered this 171 h day of December, 2019.

Good. Court is taking this shit seriously.

Now, can we get back to taking about Trump’s collusion with Russia and other foreign governments and obstruction of justice?

[washparkhorn 9974]

Cool Jimmy. We stand in an honest intellectual disagreement about whether neoliberalism is fraught with problems. I respect that stand. Galbraith over at the LBJ has done some good work on the divide.  But until another day. This is the wrong thread for it anyways.

Cheers.

[washparkhorn 9974]

1 minute ago, DDD Dad said:

Good. Court is taking this shit seriously.

Now, can we get back to taking about Trump’s collusion with Russia and other foreign governments and obstruction of justice?

And the election in 2020? 

[jimmyjazz 47373]

3 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Cool Jimmy. We stand in an honest intellectual disagreement about whether neoliberalism is fraught with problems. I respect that stand. Galbraith over at the LBJ has done some good work on the divide.  But until another day. This is the wrong thread for it anyways.

Cheers.

Well, it's not "liberal", but cheers.

[washparkhorn 9974]

Agree - not liberal using the terminology of our fathers. Classical liberal - which is right wing free market theory.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

38 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Jimmy with all due respect - sincerely - progressive policies - such as MMT - stand in DIRECT opposition to neoliberal economic policy. It is not a controversial take. That is the divide between Establishment Democrats (who have adopted right wing neoliberalism since the days of Clinton and his Third Way Movement) and progressives (who reject neoliberalism and its austerity for the masses). 

Would you like me to point you in the right direction?  

A lot has changed in the political landscape since Nixon. If you missed a moment of it, the political world is a very confusing place since Establishment R's and D's are essentially the same thing these days.

The old terminology does not work anymore in reality based political discussions.

Really, no offense intended. A lot of older Americans have been fed so much pablum they don't know which way is right, left, up or down. But they can catch up, but first they have to let go of old, wheezy terminology. 

Not all progressives subscribe to MMT but it is tolerated in the progressive movement. 

[washparkhorn 9974]

14 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Not all progressives subscribe to MMT but it is tolerated in the progressive movement. 

100% accurate Hugo. Bernie and ACO are leading that charge - with Ph.D's in tow. 

[Anastasis 23722]

39 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

Good. Court is taking this shit seriously.

Now, can we get back to taking about Trump’s collusion with Russia and other foreign governments and obstruction of justice?

Yes. It is indeed good. Fortunately people in the right places pressed for the investigation in the face of a constant barrage of denial and opposition. For better or for worse, one of perhaps the most long lasting legacies of the FBI investigation that morphed into the Mueller investigation will hopefully the be exposure of abuse in the FISA process and meaningful reforms to the system  

And nobody is stopping you from discussing obstruction or anything else.  Although I don’t think there is much meat on that bone anymore. No serious person continues to argue that the president did not obstruct justice. 

Edited December 18, 2019 by Anastasis

[David Dennison 19574]

Fuck that. Let's eliminate the FISA court root and branch.

[Anastasis 23722]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Fuck that. Let's eliminate the FISA court root and branch.

Gonna have to root out the capabilities as well. The court is just a system to legitimize use of the apparatus against Americans (and others). You have to dismantle the actual surveillance apparatus. I don’t see that happening.

[bolverk 30391]

11 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

No serious person continues to argue that the president did not obstruct justice. 

Au contraire. There is an entire political party compromised of Representatives from horrendously gerrymandered districts and Senators from states that actively suppress the vote that refuses to concede or even recognize this point.

[Anastasis 23722]

1 minute ago, bolverk said:

Au contraire. There is an entire political party compromised of Representatives from horrendously gerrymandered districts and Senators from states that actively suppress the vote that refuses to concede or even recognize this point.

I said “serious”. 

[Brisketexan 107063]

3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I said “serious”. 

I'd say the party that 1) controls the Federal Government, 2) prevents checks and balances from operating, and 3) will continue to control our country as a result of their multifarious campaign of voter suppression, disinformation, and outright fraud, is "serious."  They SHOULD be a joke, but nobody should be laughing now.

"Serious" is a function of power.  They have it.  They are serious.

[bolverk 30391]

32 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I said “serious”. 

I get that. But it's poor representation that prevents us from getting rid of shitty laws like the Patriot Act in the first place. Fixing gerrymandering and voter suppression (along with getting rid of dark money) might not be a panacea to all present and future Constitutional abuses, but we won't have an answerable government until they are. Or at least that would be my starting point for righting the ship.

Edited December 18, 2019 by bolverk
Brisket beat me to it and stated it more eloquently.

[DDD Dad 14673]

Maybe we can move the FISA abuse discussion to a thread where it can be discussed without detracting from the main points of the Mueller investigation.

It really doesn’t fit here. Further discussion just tends to feel like trolling or thread drift.

Just saying.

[Anastasis 23722]

Just now, bolverk said:

I get that. But it's poor representation that prevents us from getting rid of shitty laws like the Patriot Act in the first place. Fixing gerrymandering and voter suppression (along with getting rid of dark money) might not be a panacea to all present and future Constitutional abuses, but we won't have an answerable government until they are. Or at least that would be my starting point for righting the ship.

I think that the first step is more clear cut, along the lines of what @burntorangebongos with his bouncing buoyant balloon avatar. Get the fucking money out of politics. Step 1.