Anonymous ID: 3c9136 April 15, 2018, 10:41 p.m. No.1061763   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1770

>>1061731

Spitballing…

GCHQ provides info thru 5eyes agreement.

Info used to obtain FISA.

Info not vetted..turns out to be fake.

Can Comey and Lynch be LEGALLY held responsible for not vetting partner agency info?

Anonymous ID: 3c9136 April 15, 2018, 10:48 p.m. No.1061827   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1898

>>1061796

Not going any further with this for fear of being called the shill word…

Just seeing this play out…info from partner…warrant obtained based on that info…oops, info was bs…sorry.

We'll look at agreement and make changes, or abandon the agreement.

Not sure what laws were broken, in this instance.

Plenty of other shit to get the whole crew on tho.

Anonymous ID: 3c9136 April 15, 2018, 10:56 p.m. No.1061903   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>1061839

I am.

Just insult and walk away.

I'm asking if info obtained by 5eyes partner is req'd to be hands on verified by FBI prior to using it as justification for warrant.

Do we know the info was solicited, or did GCHQ 'offer it up'?

Big difference…and they've had 2 yrs to get the story straight.

If you don't have an answer and just need to insult, feel free.