Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TNLib

(1,819 posts)
13. I didn't realize the tweet said FISA court
Sat May 13, 2017, 09:48 PM
May 2017

I assumed it was from the Grand Jury that has already been confirmed.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

His tweets tomorrow will give an indication if it's true The Blue Flower May 2017 #1
Seeing is believing... wcmagumba May 2017 #2
I'm not holding my breath GP6971 May 2017 #3
The FISA court has no authority to issue indictments jberryhill May 2017 #4
The grand jury issued the indictment. n/t Qutzupalotl May 2017 #5
And what, pray tell, would the FISA court have to do with that? jberryhill May 2017 #7
Here is a fuller explanation of the story. Qutzupalotl May 2017 #11
Ah, a five month old blog explains it all..... jberryhill May 2017 #14
+ a really big number onenote May 2017 #18
I don't think I have to prove my anti-Trump or anti-Deplorable bona fides. DemocratSinceBirth May 2017 #32
Custom dictates the president would be removed from office via impeachment and then prosecuted. DemocratSinceBirth May 2017 #31
Maybe nothing? Mensch doesn't mention FISC sharedvalues May 2017 #16
FISC is an appellate court jberryhill May 2017 #17
FISCR is the appellate court sharedvalues May 2017 #29
Yes, I was replying to your mention of FISCR jberryhill May 2017 #35
And FISA is not a court. It's an Act. sharedvalues May 2017 #37
The point remains jberryhill May 2017 #38
Point: you misuse "FISA" as much as Taylor sharedvalues May 2017 #39
You do know that the tweet links to a blog jberryhill May 2017 #41
You misused FISA/FISC sharedvalues May 2017 #42
Also: I agree about computer tech sharedvalues May 2017 #44
thank you... dhill926 May 2017 #6
This message was self-deleted by its author TNLib May 2017 #8
Please explain WHAT THE FUCK that has to do with anything? jberryhill May 2017 #10
I didn't realize the tweet said FISA court TNLib May 2017 #13
See my post above, apparently the associated blog has more nonsense jberryhill May 2017 #15
There's a lot of wishful thinking around here customerserviceguy May 2017 #26
Right. H2O Man May 2017 #9
FISA does not issue sealed indictments leftofcool May 2017 #12
After reading alll the posts in this thread Dem2 May 2017 #19
Claude's "clarifying tweet" doesn't help much. yodermon May 2017 #20
I posted this a while ago: L. Coyote May 2017 #21
FISA court can convene a grand jury who can issue a true bill. Madam45for2923 May 2017 #22
No it can't Lee-Lee May 2017 #36
A little update here for the naysayers: Kingofalldems May 2017 #23
Yep, that clarifies. I'm still waiting for some more meat on that bone, but it's worth a thread. LaydeeBug May 2017 #25
The blog post is still nonsense jberryhill May 2017 #27
And Orin Hatch is getting security briefings to become President SHRED May 2017 #24
These two are trying to make Libs look like fools Johnny2X2X May 2017 #28
Indictments out of Eastern District of Virginia-under Dana Boante? Ellipsis May 2017 #30
Right. The guy that did what Sally Yates was unwilling to do. onenote May 2017 #33
Yes Boante... Ellipsis May 2017 #34
Here is the thing about sealed indictments Lee-Lee May 2017 #40
One source is likely GCHQ sharedvalues May 2017 #43
I doubt an intelligence agency would be leaking that Lee-Lee May 2017 #45
UK has an agenda. And more people than that know sharedvalues May 2017 #46
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»OK, So Taylor and Mensch ...»Reply #13