[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/news/ - Current News



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: 1515651933718.png (442 KB, 851x315)
442 KB
442 KB PNG
https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/gop-mulling-ban-on-the-use-of-politically-funded-information-in-surveillance-requests/2018/02/09/6830ad5c-0dcf-11e8-95a5-c396801049ef_story.html

President Trump will not immediately agree to release a Democratic memo rebutting GOP claims that the FBI abused its surveillance authority as it probed Russian meddling in the 2016 election, but he has directed the Justice Department to work with lawmakers so some form of the document could be made public, the White House counsel said Friday night.

In a letter to the House Intelligence Committee, White House counsel Donald McGahn wrote that the Justice Department had identified portions of the Democrats’ memo that it believed “would create especially significant concerns for the national security and law enforcement interests” if disclosed. McGahn included in his note a letter from Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher A. Wray supporting that claim.

The decision stands in contrast to one Trump made last week on a Republican memo alleging the FBI misled the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in order to obtain a warrant to surveil a former Trump campaign adviser, Carter Page. After the House Intelligence Committee voted on a Monday to make that document public, Trump authorized its release swiftly on a Friday afternoon.

The process had been largely the same for the Democratic rebuttal. The committee voted on Monday to release the document, and it was sent to Trump’s desk for approval. But this time, the president waited until the evening, informing Capitol Hill of his decision via his White House counsel around 7:30 p.m.

The committee had earlier voted along party lines against releasing both the Democratic and Republican memos at the same time.
>>
McGahn wrote in his letter that Trump was “inclined to declassify” the Democrats’ memo, but given its sensitive passages, he was “unable to do so.” McGahn wrote that the president had instructed the Justice Department to work with Congress to mitigate those risks.

“I’m not surprised,” said Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) in a statement. “Those on the side of truth don’t fear transparency.”

A department spokeswoman declined to comment. Justice officials had raised national security concerns about the Republican memo before having seen it, but after Wray reviewed a copy, the FBI indicated publicly that it was concerned about the document’s accuracy.

The four-page document alleged law enforcement officials misled the FISA Court by not disclosing in an application for a warrant to surveil Page that they were relying in part on information funded by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee.

Trump’s decision on the Democrats’ memo came as some Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee pushed for a prohibition on the use of politically funded information in applications for surveillance warrants. The proposal, which earned swift pushback from Democrats, was made during a closed-door meeting of the House Intelligence Committee held on Monday, according to a newly released transcript of the session.

The dispute highlights the extent to which a now-famous dossier alleging Trump has personal and financial ties to Russian officials has divided the committee, as the parties quarrel over how congressional panels and federal law enforcement agencies have handled investigations into Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. elections.
>>
The dispute highlights the extent to which a now-famous dossier alleging Trump has personal and financial ties to Russian officials has divided the committee, as the parties quarrel over how congressional panels and federal law enforcement agencies have handled investigations into Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. elections.

Democrats have said they have no intention of releasing any part of the document that the FBI and Justice Department does not approve. They also say the classified information in their memo provides necessary context “to rebut the errors, omissions, and distortions in the Republican-drafted memo,” according to the top Democrat on the panel, Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.).

Republican members of the panel have stressed the FBI’s surveillance of Page was improper because the court was never told the work of the dossier’s author, former British spy Christopher Steele, was funded by Democrats.

“I certainly hope ... that we can come to the conclusion that we would all, Republicans and Democrats, believe that politically paid for materials should never be used as evidence in a FISA court,” said panel member Rep. Michael R. Turner (R-Ohio), referring to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. “I believe it was an abuse when it was done under the Obama administration. I believe it would be an abuse under the Trump administration ... This is wrong. It should not happen again.”

Democrats have pushed back against the Republican assertion the court was not informed, stressing it was told some of the information in the application was paid for by a political entity, even if the DNC and Clinton campaign were not specifically named, and there could have been further discussions in which more information was provided.
>>
Scrutiny of the dossier has pitted the parties against each other across the Capitol as well. On Friday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Calif.), the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, released a robust defense of Steele, who alerted the FBI to his findings before the election.

Feinstein’s memo was intended to rebut a criminal referral recently delivered to the Department of Justice by two of her Republican colleagues, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (Iowa) and panel member Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.). House Republicans have pointed to the specifics of Grassley and Graham’s memo as corroboration of the complaints they made in their memo. Feinstein also accuses Grassley and Graham of omitting key facts about Steele’s interactions with the FBI.

Grassley and Graham have urged law enforcement to investigate whether Steele lied to the FBI before the 2016 election regarding his contacts with the media. The two Republicans pointed out a warrant application submitted by the Justice Department noted the FBI did not believe Steele had directly provided information to Yahoo News before the news organization published an article in September 2016 that included information similar to Steele’s allegations. However, in a court document filed in London, Steele has acknowledged meeting with a Yahoo News reporter around the same time.

In her rebuttal, Feinstein noted her Republican colleague’s investigation request did not cite a specific instance in which Steele was asked by the FBI about his media contacts nor a time when he lied about them. She described Steele as a “respected and reliable expert on Russia,” who had provided credible information to the FBI in the past about corruption in soccer’s governing body, FIFA, as well other issues, and who came to the FBI voluntarily out of his concern for U.S. security.


tl;dr Trump decides to not declassify stuff when it hurts him and Feinstein BTFO out of Grassley, again.
>>
Blatantly fake news
>>
>>228779
Defend your position.
>>
>>228798

>Washingtonpost

That's all I need to call it bullshit
>>
>>228802
Not an argument.
>>
>>228804

And Washingtoncompost opinion pieces are not news
>>
>>228798

Not him but these seem to be some of the reasons which were not addressed very clearly in the op article.

>Donald McGahn, the White House counsel, released a letter Friday night arguing that disclosure of the Democrats’ memo would “create especially significant concerns for the national security and law enforcement interests” and claiming that Trump was “inclined to declassify” the document, but could not at this time due to “classified and especially sensitive passages”.

>But McGahn said the memo in its current form could not be released. His letter said that “given the public interest in transparency in these unprecedented circumstances”, the president had directed the justice department to assist the House committee if it wished to revise the Democrats’ memo to “mitigate the risks”.

>The FBI director, Christopher Wray, and the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, also wrote on Friday that the disclosure could raise concerns about “intelligence sources and methods, ongoing investigations, and other similarly sensitive information”.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/09/donald-trump-blocks-democrat-nunes-memo-russia
>>
>>228807
You're saying the information in the piece is just plain fabricated? Or misrepresented? Or editorialized? Just because you can't defend our cuck of a president doesn't mean the shit calling him out is fake news.
>>
>>228810
right... after both the DOJ and FBI vehemently opposed releasing the GOP's memo, we were fed the line "we should always prefer transparency in these matters". Now, once a memo is to be made public by the DNC, there's concern about vetting the intel.
Keep in mind, the GOP refused to have both memos released simultaneously. They just want Fox News to have a field day feeding blatantly misleading and erroneous information to their base from a memo written by a Trump campaign staffer for a while.
>>
>>228814
Not saying I agree with it just trying to get complete information out there for both sides.
>>
>>228811
you're trying to have an actual conversation with a brainwashed pawn. They aren't having a dialog, they are doing as instructed.

All news is fake.
Facts do not matter.
Not applauding the president is treason.
Land of the free.
>>
>>228811
>>228820


It is fake news though, shill

The Democrats opposed the GOP memo for the exact same reason their memo can't be released, but the Democrat version contain more and sensitive intel than the GOP version

Trump has already said he encourages the Democrats to work with the DoJ to edit their memo and he haa given them full access to DoJ resources to do so and he would release it when it was changed

It's fake news because you left out the most important part, but "Trump tells Dems he will release their memo web redacted intel" isn't good clickbait for wapo, which is why it's a garbage news source
>>
>>228823
The DOJ has already vetted the document.Trump has the power to redact what he deems sensitive. He didn't do that.
>>
>>228826
oh, not to mention the FBI also approved of the release of the memo. but they're the bad guys right
>>
>>228826
>The DOJ has already vetted the document.
>>228827
>oh, not to mention the FBI also approved of the release of the memo
Do you have a source for these statements?
>>
>>228823
They opposed it on grounds because they railroaded it through committee, outright ignoring any pleads from the intelligence community on what damage it would do or care about the damage it would do to national security. Also the whole thing was a bunch of lies.

Democrats wanted their memo out to correct the record. But Trump would rather have his lies out there as long as possible since he's a fan of the Big Lie.
>>
sounds like trump is actually beginning to be able to stop fake news from being released
>>
>>228844
>If I change the way I write, maybe no one will notice my samefaggotry!
>>
>>228823
Nothing in this article is fake.

Just because you don't like something does not make it fake.
>>
>>228848
lol wut this is my first post on 4chan since this morning i just got out of uni and had dinner and began to shitpost and already im being accused of samefaggotry
i fucking hate that this is the only board i can discuss news on which isnt /pol/
>>
>>228852
FourTwentychan's and Eightchan's news boards are unironically better because 4chan's become Facebook 2.0 (typed out the numericals because of spam detection system bullshit)
>>
>>228855
thanks, i haven't visited fu11chan in a while, i think ill give it a go
>>
>>228855
42Och.an is lame. You tell someone to kill themselves on /qq/ and they permaban you. They're very sensitive over there
>>
If you don't think every bit you do on the net isn't tracked by AI then you are a dumber man then I

I help run the Internet, and I come here to post this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYIaDYRipoM&t=306s
>>
>>228858
Maybe that's the kind of shit that actually results in a better environment for discussion?
>>
>>228837
>"correct the record"
gotta love this newspeak, it's called a record because it is what actually happened, to correct it is to change history into what did not actually happen, ie make everyone believe your lie.
>>
>>228870
When the record is filled with lies and intentionally withheld information like the Nunes memo, what are you supposed to do? Accept the lies?
>>
>>228871
Wasn't referencing anything in particular, just wanted to point out that it doesn't really matter what 'side' you are on. Everyone is feeding us lies to further their own goals. Even supposed grassroots organizations sell out their own people, maybe they have no choice.

Either way we live in a world where facts really don't matter. Forget the overly political stuff even the supposed agencies that are supposed to protect us such as the WHO and law enforcement regularly lie to us 'for our own good' Can you tell me how anyone is supposed to choose what is fact and what is alternative fact in this day and age?
>>
>>228871
also
>when the record contains stuff that is inflammatory to us (the people in power in whatever context) we should not only promote our story but should legislate/prohibit the spreading of alternate stories.
This has long been the case in places like china and it is saddening but maybe not too surprising to see it here.

This is why it is troubling to see the state putting pressure on media companies like facebook to police their users content. It is really about limiting the ability of people to spread information deemed inappropriate by the state because the state doesn't want to encourage rational discussion and critical thinking among it's citizens.. that could be dangerous. If the people are to believe what they are told without question they must naturally police what they can be told.
>>
>>228874
>>228875
>Trying to say everything is wash because one side blatantly lies.
>People should be allowed to lie with impunity
I wasn't going to call you a Russian bot, but your flawed arguments leave me no recourse.
>>
>>228874
Good point anon. I think you're supposed to just go with whatever appeals to you. And if you find out they lie, you move on. Humans are farrrrrrrrrr from perfect. The best thing you can do is try to expose them or go live in the woods. This is why trump is the best president we've had in forever. He's not afraid to tell you who is lying to you and what is just blatant bullshit. He's here for you, he's a man of the people. He's looking out for us, but liberals may they rot in hell are so against America and American ways that they'll do anything to turn this country Into a third world even if it means lying to you, me and themselves. It's absolutely disgusting, but it's also common with young people. Young people should be allowed to die for our country, but they should not be allowed to have a say. They know nothing! And its always been that way. Young people are not getting smarter, they're just as stupid as they've ever been.
>>
>>228877
he might not be a vlad
he might just be a victim of a vlad

i have a non-shitpost to make about the best way to actually find reliable sources of truth in this modern society but i'll make it tomorrow
>>
>>228877
I am not saying one side or the other blatantly lie, but both sides are blatantly lying and they must if they want to have any sort of power or control. How naive are you to not see how it is all a game/show?

Also calling me a 'russian bot' when 1) I have never referenced anything political or taken a side in my posts. and 2)my posts are written and obviously not a bot.

The whole point of my posts was to point out that the whole idea of lying is relative and you trying to discredit/write-off my idea without any sort of argument is a confirmation of the lack of critical thinking and rational discussion in society.

50 years ago common knowledge was that tobacco all but cured cancer, in another 50 we will all be believing whatever else whoever has money shoves down the throats of the masses. Open your eyes.
>>
>>228879
I am not really pro-trump (I am not even american) , and I am not really sure how he won because most of the people I have talked to even in fly over states have him, but maybe that is just because I mostly talk to younger people.

You are right about people trying to turn the country into a shit show (not just america) and the problem is both external with forces like soros and other countries looking to destabilize the country but also internal with a culture that celebrates disability. It is truly toxic how everyone is basically vying to be the most disabled or most hard done by so they can get the most sympathy and free stuff from society. I truly hope that people can put things right and start celebrating hard work and self-direction.
>>
>>228880
I'd unironically love to read it.
>>
>>228874
>>228879
The ultimate redpill is realizing that their is no truth, just a narrative, and he who controls the narrative, controls the world. /pol/ realized this early, which is why they are winning.
>>
>>228885
>Becoming a mouthpiece for (((them))) in order to feel like they're winning
Neets were a mistake
>>
>>228885
>There is no truth

I thought /pol/ hated post modernism
>>
>will not immediately agree
>immediately
Sure it's not good that he's not being forthwith, but he's also not refused to release it. Meanwhile hasn't the House memo already been leaked to NBC?
>>
>>228811
Disingenuous. Take the headline, "Trump will not release Democrats’ memo on FBI surveillance". However Trump hasn't refused to release the memo. Further scrutiny from other sources show that they want a handful of extra redactions.

Also, the Democrats' critiques of Nunes' and Grassley/Graham's memos have been pretty weak thus far. Grassley is not claiming Steele lied to the FBI, he wants an investigation to cross-reference because he MAY have done so. The core points of the memos -- that the Steele dossier was essential to obtaining the 2016 FISA warrants and that the FBI had not corroborated the hearsay in said dossier -- haven't been touched.
>>
>>228866
kill yourself
>>
>>228764
lol get rekt libshits
>>
>>228914
Actually he just told the dems 'Rewrite it and try again' which is basically means 'The truth dies with you and it will never get out.' by the time the Dems might get it out, Nunes will release his next hatchet job.

Also, Grassley made a criminal referral of Steele which means there was criminal wrongdoing. Not a 'let's look for more facts' Hell. he spent months lying about Fusion GPS and jerking people around before he got exposed when the transcripts were released. Grassley is just another Trump pawn doing the bidding on his dictator.
>>
>>229085
>dictator
Do you genuinely believe this?
>>
>>229092
he would if he could but he can't so he won't

imagine that trump ACTUALLY had the power to arbitrarily prosecute democrats he didn't like for treason, do you really think he wouldn't use it
>>
>>228898
/pol/ hates the Enlightenment.
>>
>>229085
FBI director Wray and Rod Rosenstein both support Trump's assertion that the Dems' memo was had actually sensitive classified information regarding sources and methods. While it's entirely plausible that these claims are just as specious as those about Nunes' and Graham/Grassley's memos, it's also plausible that NOT getting published was the Democrats' intention -- that their strategy was to complain about redactions or to complain about getting blocked rather than mount a fair criticism of the Republicans' memos.
>>
>>229092
>Says people who don't applaud him are Unamerican and treasonous.
>Story about how Trump wants a military parade in his honor breaks not 48 hours later.
Clapistan is supposed to be a joke, not a real thing you dolt.

>>229160
Actually the Republican memo received ZERO scrutiny and didn't even go through the redaction process because Trump rubber stamped it's release so quickly. That's how biased Trump is.
>>
>>229230
>Actually the Republican memo received ZERO scrutiny and didn't even go through the redaction process
Yes, it did. Even left-leaning sources acknowledge it.
>>
>>228802
Typical Republican Ivan response.
>>
>>229236
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/02/02/politics/fbi-nunes-memo-full/index.html
>The FBI issued a rare public warning on Wednesday that the memo omits key information that could impact its veracity.
Here, lefties. That's the best hit you got on the GOP memo. Don't be butthurt it was weak as fuck and you want another shot. Now, the GOP has its turn to tear the Dem memo because it's only fair.
>>
>>229257
>>229236
Zero scrutiny from the White House, because they don't care about national security if it helps Trump.
>>
>>229268
Must be comfy living the life of a brainwashed ideologue. You have a one-line explanation for all problems: "Trump and Republicans are evil, the Democrats are corrupt too but nowhere as much as the GOP xD fuck drumpf and white people"

And yes, Trump's cabinet is kissing his ass like how Obongo's cabinet kissed his ass and his dick at the same time. Problem?
>>
>>229257
>The best hit
>Memp came out and it was disproven almost immediately

Lol
>>
>>229291
>Whataboutism
The absolute state of the Fascist right.
>>
>>229454
>It's okay when we act sleazy and break the rules, but when you do it you're LITERALLY HITLER
you're not really interested in politics, libtard
just move to your socialist utopia. How about Venezuela? Or Cuba?
>>
>>229501
>whataboutsim again
>When asked for evidene, all they can do is post things that are legal
Meanwhile Republicans have committed treason and gone so over board with voter suppression and trampling on Constitutional rights, that the Republicans courts are stopping them.

LOL
>>
>>229505
>whataboutism again
>When asked for evidence, all they can do is just post things that are legal
Meanwhile Democrats have defended a candidate that technically committed treason and have gone so over board with voter fraud and trampling on Constitutional rights, that there's only one retarded lefty Supreme Justice left now.

LOL
>>
>>229522
>>229505
Both your posts are factually correct. Do you morons not see how broken your stupid two party system is and that voting WILL NOT FIX IT?
>>
Just release the full damn memo so we can FINALLY hear both sides of the story. Politics today are beyond retarded and is ran by children.
>>
>>229539
>Do you morons not see how broken your stupid two party system is
I do. I just don't pretend to be on the better side, and I find people who do unfit to talk politics. I never made the case that Democrats are evil or worse than Repubs. Only dumb lefties make character attacks just like their own politicians do.
>>
>>229539
The two party system is vastly superior to multi-party parliamentary democracy.
>>
>>228831
>oh, not to mention the FBI also approved of the release of the memo
>Do you have a source for these statements?
>no replies

Figures, welcome to /news/. Agree with us or you're a russian /pol/bot.

>>228871
>record is filled with lies and intentionally withheld information like the Nunes memo
[citation needed]

>>229539
>Both your posts are factually correct.
Based on publicly available evidence, the only party that has ties to colluding with Russia, has gotten caught rigging both investigations and elections, and committed anything resembling treason is the Dems. Unfortunately we have ramped up media machine spewing out misleading headlines faster than they can be addressed and corrected, and thus people still believe in the narrative that was created as an "insurance policy".

Thankfully it should implode at or just before the midterms this year. Can't wait to watch the blue wave buckle like the blue wall.
>>
>>229522
>No proof
>Trump has to turn the FBI into a personal goon squad firing everyone who doesn't pledge personal loyalty to him.
>Still can't dig up dirt on Hillary
>Meanwhile FBI is investigating him for treason.
Also
>MUM 3 Million illegal votes
The world would be a better place if we killed all Republicans.
>>
>>229615
>>Trump has to turn the FBI into a personal goon squad firing everyone who doesn't pledge personal loyalty to him.
One person who served at the pleasure of the person who fired him constitutionally, who according to evidence, fumbled an investigation and was documented covering for political buddies.

>Still can't dig up dirt on Hillary
Only if you ignore everything brought up on the email investigation or Stryzok or the texts or Uranium one. Which you will do. "Stop watching [insert low hanging fruit aka well known right-wing media host] and get educated by this major left leaning MSM outlet relying on anonymous sources."

>The world would be a better place if we killed all Republicans.
They have all the guns and make up most of the military. The DNC are all limp wristed academics who hide behind riot cops and think filtering stream water is white privilege. Please stay in your lane.
>>
>>229623
>Uranium One
>Emails
>Texts

Would you like fries with your nothingburger?
>>
>>229636
>Would you like fries with your nothingburger?
Excellent refutation, everyone knows calling something a nothingburger makes it a nothingburger. Just like everyone knows that calling Hillary Madame President will make her... oh wait, right.

Also if you use the term "nothingburger" seriously you're a dink. JTLYK.
>>
>>229623
>One person who served at the pleasure of the person who fired him constitutionally,
Only with just cause a vast majority of the time. Every single time Trump has fired someone it was to further his own political ends because the person refused to violate the Constitution or to obstruct the investigation into his ties of Russia.
>All that Clinton stuff
Already all debunked. Some even by the right wing media. Also even if they were true, they don't hold a candle to Trump's crimes of conspiring with the Russians in their attack on America.
>Thinking that matters
You'll notice people are being a lot more quiet on gun control. But do stay overconfident, that makes things much easier.
>>
>>229641
Consider there are yet to be discovered irrational statements that can literally drive someone insane by thinking about them too much. Consider I didn't post it just now as an attempt at peace.
>>
>>228802

Sick meme
>>
>>229648
>Only with just cause a vast majority of the time.
But, fucking up the Hillary email investigation is just cause. You don't have to like it personally for it to be just cause, and he did objectively fuck it up.

>Every single time Trump has fired someone it was to further his own political ends because the person refused to violate the Constitution to obstruct the investigation into his ties of Russia
[citation needed]
Also, please explain in detail how any of the events you cite explicitly deal with a refusal to violate the constitution (specifically what clause in the constitution) or constitute obstructing an investigation (citing specific legal codes).

>>229648
>You'll notice people are being a lot more quiet on gun control.
Because the pro-gun control crown finds itself intellectually, technically, legally, and constitutionally outmatched on the issue and its core platforms are consistently and empirically debunked.

>But do stay overconfident, that makes things much easier.
This is not overconfidence. Overconfidence would be something like "Hillary is so far ahead in the polls and has a 98% chance of winning so she doesn't even think about Trump anymore".
Don't ever forget that hubris. It can and should follow you to your (likely early and self induced) grave.
>>
>>229658
>Consider there are yet to be discovered irrational statements that can literally drive someone insane by thinking about them too much. Consider I didn't post it just now as an attempt at peace.

Consider that you are a sheltered dullard with no functioning argument and were dismissed as such.
Consider that there can be no peace while vile disinformation agents such as yourself continue to propagate.

Consider also: deez nuts.
>>
>>229610
Plenty of the Republicans who pushed for the Patriot Act and the NDAA are still around, that shit was the definition of treason. But you probably don't even know what those are because you are a newfag Redditor.
>>
>>229679
>Plenty of the Republicans and Democrats who pushed for the Patriot Act and the NDAA are still around, that shit was the definition of treason.
FTFY, but agreed.

>But you probably don't even know what those are because you are a newfag Redditor.
Newfag redditors are people who abandon entire arguments/threads in favor of derailments and whataboutisms- just like you're doing now. You could not be a newfag redditor and actually address my arguments, but we already know why you wont/cant.
>>
>>229673
>Fucking up the investigation
Want to give me sources that aren't tin foil?
If anything they did everything to damage Clinton with the letter saying the case was reopened because we got new evidence only to then go 'LOL there was nothing'
>What parts were violated
I'll make this easy for you and only focus on his Muslim ban
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/01/here_are_all_the_parts_of_the_constitution_trump_s_muslim_ban_violates.html

I guess it won't matter when officials end up dead if the gun nuts are right according to you. Your arrogance will be your undoing, and it will be a pitiful end for you.
>>
>>229707

>muh muslim ban

Equal protection doesn't apply to non-Americans seeking to enter our country. Fail #1.

First amendment doesn't apply to non-Americans seeking to enter our country. Fail #2.

Due Process doesn't apply to non-Americans seeking to enter our country. Fail #3.

Habeus Corpus doesn't apply to non-Americans seeking to enter our country. Fail #4.

"Family Reunification Rights" aren't a real thing. Fail #5.
>>
>>229712
I get it, you're a racist, bigot. But rule of law applies to everyone. And you just can't say it doesn't apply because you don't like them.
>>
>>229720

I wasn't aware people the UK were allowed to own guns because of the 2nd amendment in the US constitution...

Oh, wait.

Nobody has the right to enter this country. Per the founding fathers, the President has the authority to ban anybody (or any group of people) for any reason for any amount of time.
>>
>>229720
>dass raycis
every time
>>
>>229720
american law doesn't apply to non-americans.

if it did we'd have to invade every country on earth to guarantee their citizen's right to free speech. we'd have to kick over at least all of europe, and then we'd have to head across the pacific and overthrow everybody there too.

in particular can you point out why american laws would apply to non-americans and how the fuck that would even work?
>>
>>229725
>Per the founding fathers, the President has the authority to ban anybody (or any group of people) for any reason for any amount of time.
The President is not given authority over immigration in the Constitution: that power is specifically given to Congress in Article I, Section 8 ("uniform rule of naturalization"). The President only has power to ban foreigners because Congress expressly delegated it to him in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. It's not something that the founding fathers decided.

>>229712
>First amendment doesn't apply to non-Americans seeking to enter our country. Fail #2.
Do you believe that Congress can constitutionally pass a law requiring that all immigrants be Christians?
>>
>>228764
Good. Don't enable the left wing lunatics..
>>
>>229735
>Do you believe that Congress can constitutionally pass a law requiring that all immigrants be Christians?

no, but that's because the american government is bound by american laws, not foreigners.

foreigners have rights guaranteed by the treaties we signed (bilateral or multilateral) such as treaties ordaining certain conducts in war and diplomacy. but beyond those, they are not protected at all. they certainly have no right to any resources that are owned by america and/or americans.
>>
The Dems, the Dems in the FBI and DoJ were all politically motivated to pursue the Steele Dossier even after the FBI and NSA stated there wasn't enough evidence, nor was there adequate vetting of sources to warrant further investigation.

But Lynch and Feinstein, didn't like the answer from NSA and FBI and used the politically like-minded people in both the NSA and FBI organizations to pursue it and like about the justification. So, just like Comey's assessment of the unsecured private server that HRC had in her basement..... he altered facts to fit the Dems agenda.

My question to you all: Do you still trust our top law enforcement agencies, and our judicial system to be impartial? Or will they follow party lines?
Also, do you think they should be subjected to annual poligraphs to ensure they are foremost supportive of the rule of law, over their political parties?
>>
>>229749
>even after the FBI and NSA stated there wasn't enough evidence
To do what? Apply for a FISA warrant? Because that's exactly what they did with it, and the FISA court decided it was in fact enough evidence.

>Do you still trust our top law enforcement agencies, and our judicial system to be impartial? Or will they follow party lines?
Of course. Two separate Trump administration officials put the national security of the United States above partisan politics, and reauthorized the legitimately acquired FISA warrant on Carter Page. The system works.
>>
>>229749
Grassley controls the committee but you're worried about Feinstein, who has no power? Very telling.

Like a lot of people, no wonder you seem to see everything that's happening to Trump because of Trump as a Democrat conspiracy against Trump.
>>
>>229725
>>229729
>>229730
>All these strawmen.
Once you are on US territory, you are subject to US laws, along with US protections under those laws. Also that doesn't even take into account all the deals the military made before Trump's Muslim ban stabbed them in the back.

You tried racists, and failed. Again.
>>
>>229764
>Once you are on US territory
The overwhelming majority of people affected by the travel ban were not on US territory.
>>
>>229764
there isn't actually a thing that protects you from being deported for any reason

you don't have a right to not being deported just because your feet are on US fucking soil. you are not a citizen, and can be thrown out at the pleasure of the appropriate authorities.
>>
>>229648
Hillary Clinton actually violated the gross negligence clause of the Espionage Act when she put above top secret information, programs which the Inspector General of the intelligence community had to be read into just to investigate, on a private server to which administrators without security clearances had unfettered access. Comey fabricated an intent requirement for gross negligence and falsely claimed that the statute had only been used once [1]. Meanwhile uncorroborated hearsay paid for by Hillary Clinton's campaign was used to obtain a warrant against an associate of her political rival, as covered in the memos here. The evidence of conspiracy against said political rival remains hearsay to this day.

[1]: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/437595/military-prosecutions-show-gross-negligence-prosecution-would-not-unfairly-single-out
>>
>Democrats violate multiple federal laws
>aren't held accountable
>instead, want to complain about Republicans

Why hasn't the population removed Democrats from this country?
>>
>>229853
all political parties should just be abolished. made illegal. banned.
if you want to make a political donation, its to a candidate, not a party.
no party partisanship.
candidates would be described by their ideals not their party.
no party that politicians must stay loyal to if they want to win elections, its up to them.
>>
>>229778
No, but were actively trying to do so, and they happened to be a threat at the time.
It'd be like banning white supremacists from progressive rallies.
Yes, theyre not there yet, but if they so show, there's going to be trouble.
>>
>>229764
As a US citizen, on US soil, you're subject to US law.
As a Non Citizen, you're also subject to Immigration Law.
So tell me where breaking the laws that apply is ok?




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.