>>7890052

Additional DJT's from LB that didn't make it into dough:

>>7889800 /pb DJT

>>7889862 /pb DJT

>>7890044

>>7890131

Baker, the Article cap for the below Q post does not contain the entire article. I have it capped here if you want to replace that cap.

Q POST

>>7889726 ————————————–——– there was “insufficient predication to establish probable cause."

>https://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-believes-it-lacked-legal-basis-for-continued-surveillance-of-trump-adviser-11579810061?

>>7890195

>>7889726 /pb Q

>https://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-believes-it-lacked-legal-basis-for-continued-surveillance-of-trump-adviser-11579810061?

Q, so you are saying that WSJ (or DOJ) is providing information that they KNOWINGLY will have to subsequently correct?

>>7890381

BAKER NOTABLE

WFJ Updated

That's a pretty big difference from the original, but they still didn't correct the most glaring inaccuracy: there was insufficient predication for the first FISA warrant, not just subsequent renewals.

DJT

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1220463728535252992