Posted on 07/22/2018 12:16:41 PM PDT by Federalist Patriot
Contreras apparently appointed to FISA court May 2016
...and not one of the four.
“the judges feared the power of the Deep State.”
You are presuming that they are not biased and looked favorably in the FISA application and FISA warrant. I do not think that is a safe assumption. Don’t you think it is more likely the judges ARE the Deep State?
And NOTHING will be done. Magoo has known about this for a year and nothing was done and nothing will be done.
You have an optimistic view. Too optimistic, in my opinion. I’d wager one-third of Americans believe the Deep State committed sedition and treason; one-third don’t believe it and, instead still believe Trump was in cahoots with Russia to steal the election and the FBI was trying to protect Trump; one-sixth have heard of this crisis but don’t care; and one-sixth haven’t even heard of it.
The only way to effect change is get people elected who are committed to driving a stake through the heart of the DS cabal and plotters. But incumbents almost always win and it’s hard to find good Congressmen like Nunes and Jordan who will go after the corruption.
You are presuming that they are not biased and looked favorably in the FISA application and FISA warrant. I do not think that is a safe assumption. Don’t you think it is more likely the judges ARE the Deep State?
My first guess was that they are Deep State. But all four are Republicans. Dearie for example was first appointed as a US Attorney by Reagan and then by Reagan as a Judge.
Perhaps they're corrupt, perhaps they aren't. But I think there's a real fear that you don't cross the Deep State.
It wouldn’t surprise me if Contreras put a good word in with those four FISA judges on behalf of his ethical and upstanding good friend Strzok. The FISA judges are probably a professional clique.
Thank...I didn’t know their political affiliation. Are they actually Republicans or just appointed by Republican presidents?
The Deep State controls the media and more importantly, they still control the FBI and the DOJ. Until the FBI and the DOJ are drained and prosecuted, I wouldn't describe them as being a shallow puddle.
Good point. Perhaps that's what happened.
Colluders?
Sessions is a Republican.
it’s beyond disgusting how this story is being reported around the world.
it’s as if FBI, not DOJ, decided on their own to release documents (no mention of heavily-redacted) to show they believed/knew Trump campaign guy was a Russian agent.
that is not news.
the real story.
after long fight, Judicial Watch obtains FISA warrant documents showing fake anti-Trump dossier, financed by Hillary Clinton and DNC, was instrumental in obtaining FISA warrant, which was then used to spy on Trump campaign.
NPR certainly has it wrong.
Never forget that Judge Collyer (the first judge authorizing the surveillance) in respononding to a production request of a House panel, seemed to imply that perhaps what was submitted to the court was not what would be produced by the DOJ/FBI. I think there is still a lot of hair to be shorn.
Also, since Judge Contreras was not one of the four revealed, I wonder why he was recused in the Flynn matter after taking a plea.
Gwjack
The only reason we are seeing this is because of Judicial Watch, apparently the Judge in that case didn’t have a Dog in this fight, unlike the US CONGRESS, who by the way, the GANG OF EIGHT ave ALL KNOWN about this and ave spent 2 years willfully participating in this ATTEMPTED OVERTHROW OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT and subsequently in COVERING IT ALL UP!!!
Ryan or McConnell could have ORDERED these docs released a long long time ago.
Congress has ALL the power in washington, the executive and judicial branch operate according to the whims of CONGRESS!
“U.S. CODE
TITLE 2—THE CONGRESS
CHAPTER 6—CONGRESSIONAL AND COMMITTEE PROCEDURE; INVESTIGATIONS
Sec. 193. Privilege of witnesses
No witness is privileged to refuse to testify to any fact, or to produce any paper, respecting which he shall be examined by either House of Congress, or by any joint committee established by a joint or concurrent resolution of the two Houses of Congress, or by any committee of either House, upon the ground that his testimony to such fact or his production of such paper may tend to disgrace him or otherwise render him infamous.”
Simply look up Hinds Precedents, especially chapters 53 and 51, and Cannon’s Precedents, especially chapters 184-185. You’ll find numerous detailed cases of Congress asserting its power, arresting people, holding them until they agreed to answer questions, and then releasing them. Some of these people did not refuse to appear, but simply failed to satisfactorily answer questions.
Congress can Remove the President
Congress can remove the head of every executive agency Congress can remove ALL of their employees
Congress can Abolish every agency they so choose
Congress can remove EVERY JUDGE IN AMERICA, including every supreme court justice.
Congress can abolish every federal court except the supreme Court
Congress can decide which cases the Judicial Branch can hear and decide
CONGRESS can Imprison ANYONE they want for any reason they so desire for as long as they wish. EXCEPT The President and Vice President
Congress can declare WAR
No other governing body has even 10% of the power CONGRESS has!!
CONGRESS IS ALLOWING ALL OF IT!!!
Congress has the authority to arrest and imprison those found in Contempt. The power extends throughout the United States and is an inherent power (does not depend upon legislated act)
If found in Contempt the person can be arrested under a warrant of the Speaker of the House of Representatives or President of the Senate, by the respective Sergeant at Arms.
Statutory criminal contempt is an alternative to inherent contempt.
Under the inherent contempt power Congress may imprison a person for a specific period of time or an indefinite period of time, except a person imprisoned by the House of Representatives may not be imprisoned beyond adjournment of a session of Congress.
Imprisonment may be coercive or punitive.
Some references
[1] Joseph Story’s Commentaries on the Constitution, Volume 2, § 842 http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/a1_5s21.html
[2] Anderson v. Dunn - 19 U.S. 204 - “And, as to the distance to which the process might reach, it is very clear that there exists no reason for confining its operation to the limits of the District of Columbia; after passing those limits, we know no bounds that can be prescribed to its range but those of the United States.” http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/19/204/case.html
[3] Jurney v. MacCracken, 294 U.S. 125 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/294/125/case.html 73rd Cong., 78 Cong. Rec. 2410 (1934) https://archive.org/details/congressionalrec78aunit
[4] McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135 - Under a warrant issued by the President of the Senate the Deputy to the Senate Sergeant at Arms arrested at Cincinnati, Ohio, Mally S. Daugherty, who had been twice subpoenaed by the Senate and twice failed to appear. http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/273/135/case.html
[5] Rules of the House of Representatives, Rule IV Duties of the Sergeant at Arms - [] execute the commands of the House, and all processes issued by authority thereof, directed to him by the Speaker. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/HMAN-105/pdf/HMAN-105-pg348.pdf
[6] An analysis of Congressional inquiry, subpoena, and enforcement http://www.constitutionproject.org/documents/when-congress-comes-calling-a-primer-on-the-principles-practices-and-pragmatics-of-legislative-inquiry/
In 1857, a New York Times reporter refused to say which members of Congress had asked him to get them bribes (protecting his “sources” just as various Judith Millers today protect the people who feed them proven lies that costs thousands of lives), so Congress locked him up until he answered and then banned him from Congress.
In 1924 an oil executive appeared but refused to answer certain questions, so the Senate held — literally held — him in contempt. Senator Thomas Walsh of Montana argued that this question of contempt was of the gravest importance, and that it involved “the very life of the effective existence of the House of Representatives of the United States and of the Senate of the United States.” The matter was taken to court, and the witness fined and imprisoned.
The Sundance link that Silverleaf provided offers some suggestions:
Contreras was recused by DC Court for his role in Flynn case. He is on FISC but did not sign off on these four but may have done others including one denied in Summer 2016
Thanks.
And it took only 15% of the colinists to get rid of old George.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.