General Discussion

sharedvalues

(6,916 posts)

46. UK has an agenda. And more people than that know

Tue May 16, 2017, 06:40 PM

May 2017

US Marshals have to make arrests. They need a plan. So people there know. Several DOJ people know too.

As for GCHQ - if the UK thinks Trump is a criminal you bet they would leak if it would help America. And those leaks might even be officially sanctioned, tacitly or not.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

46 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

OK, So Taylor and Mensch are now reporting a sealed indictment [View all] LaydeeBug May 2017 OP

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