Nunes Memo to be Released

[gatorbait]

10 minutes ago, njbuff said:

I love how Trump hating morons keep telling us uninformed little white racist Americans that Trump lies all the time and don't ever believe anything the man says. 

 

All the leftist sheep sheep laughed at Trump when he said he was wire-tapped by 44 and candidate for 45, led by gay moron Don Lemon, who said he didn't want to insult his audience with Trump's "lying" tweet about the wire-tapping.

 

Well, whether the liberal douchebags like it or not, Trump told the truth about it.

 

Trump just made the biased leftist media look like the fools they are and MSM will still protect Obama and Hillary till their dying breaths, guilty or not.

 

I will never vote Democrat again. Nothing but a crime-filled dirty treasonous America-hating party. You're exposed............... get out of my country or go to jail,

People might respond to your posts and take you serious if you sounded a little less ignorant and full of hate. 

[Deranged Rhino]

8 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

This was never going to be anything more than partisan sniping.  

 

The idea that a Republican memo was going to open a can of worms was ridiculous to begin with.  It would do nothing more than reinforce confirmation bias on both sides.

 

Just a small point: The can of worms was opened when 44 and HRC decided to weaponize the USIC against their political opposition. 

 

The memo isn't opening that can, it's the first step in exposing the malfeasance to the public. 

 

Let's not shift the narrative already. This wasn't started by Nunes. This was EXPOSED by Nunes (and others). There's a key difference. 

 

[Tiberius]

Oh, well this explains a lot! HA HA 

 

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/371951-hannity-denies-report-he-advised-trump-on-nunes-memo

 

Hannity advising the president 

[DC Tom]

5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Just a small point: The can of worms was opened when 44 and HRC decided to weaponize the USIC against their political opposition. 

 

The memo isn't opening that can, it's the first step in exposing the malfeasance to the public. 

 

Let's not shift the narrative already. This wasn't started by Nunes. This was EXPOSED by Nunes (and others). There's a key difference. 

 

 

I'm not shifting the narrative.  The memo was, is, and will do nothing more than encourage partisan confirmation bias.  I've been telling you for a while that it would have minimal real effect, for that very reason.  It'll be the IG's report that really matters - that's actionable, the memo isn't.

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, DC Tom said:

 

I'm not shifting the narrative.  The memo was, is, and will do nothing more than encourage partisan confirmation bias.  I've been telling you for a while that it would have minimal real effect, for that very reason.  It'll be the IG's report that really matters - that's actionable, the memo isn't.

 

I know you're not. I'm just clarifying for others. 

 

The can of worms wasn't opened by Nunes. 

 

*********************

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*************************

 

Grassley chimes in now (Remember the batting order: Nunes, Grassley, Goodlatte, Horowitz)

 

 

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-investigations-should-be-about-fact-finding-not-undermining-political

[Doc Brown]

These warrants aren't hard to get.  Unfortunately, the Senate voted to renew the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (60-38) back in January that includes the controversial NSA warrantless internet surveillance program. 

 

 

[/dev/null]

Has CNN announced it's illegal to read the memo yet because it contains classified information?

[Cugalabanza]

13 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Just a small point: The can of worms was opened when 44 and HRC decided to weaponize the USIC against their political opposition. 

 

The memo isn't opening that can, it's the first step in exposing the malfeasance to the public. 

 

Let's not shift the narrative already. This wasn't started by Nunes. This was EXPOSED by Nunes (and others). There's a key difference. 

 

 

Just because the dossier is unverified and the FISA warrant was approved, that doesn't mean that the dossier was the only evidence submitted to the court.  It's possible that Comey (and the court) dismissed the dossier yet still considered other information as sufficient for the warrant.

 

I'm not saying that's what happened, but it's a possibility, no?

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Doc Brown said:

These warrants aren't hard to get.  Unfortunately, the Senate voted to renew the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (60-38) back in January that includes the controversial NSA warrantless internet surveillance program. 

 

 

 

Very true. One thing to note regarding the ease of FISA warrants and how this relates to my overall concerns- 

 

Remember the FBI/DOJ got DENIED FISA warrants multiple times between June and September of 2016. It wasn't until they got the dossier bolstered that they got approved. So what does that tell you? That before the dossier the notoriously EASY to get FISA was unattainable... why? Because they had NO EVIDENCE of collusion. Still have no evidence. 

 

But then, thinking bigger, if this memo's narrative is accurate (and I believe it is), then what does that say about OTHER FISA warrants obtained by 44's administration? Did the FBI/DOJ black hats lie to get those warrants as well? This is going to open up a rabbit hole of corruption within the FISC. 

 

1 minute ago, Cugalabanza said:

 

Just because the dossier is unverified and the FISA warrant was approved, that doesn't mean that the dossier was the only evidence submitted to the court.  It's possible that Comey (and the court) dismissed the dossier yet still considered other information as sufficient for the warrant.

 

I'm not saying that's what happened, but it's a possibility, no?

 

For clarity (to all) I speak with speed and authority on this subject because I've been up to my eyeballs in it doing direct research and writing about it for a book project for over a year now. That shouldn't be confused with me believing I have all the answers. I most assuredly do not. I speak passionately about what I do know to be true because I've verified it independently through my sources directly or with open source material I can share. I've been greatly concerned about abuses in the surveillance system for years now (see the Dangers of the New Normal thread for reference) - this isn't about right or left for me. I'm not a republican. This is about whether or not we live in a democratic republic or a banana republic. 

 

I say all of that to remind folks I'm open to conversation, debate and new information. Always. ALWAYS. 

 

To your question, I agree that the dossier was NOT the only evidence submitted to the court. I think this is proven. 

 

They tried to get FISAs before, to no avail, without using the dossier. So they have more "evidence" but it was evidence even the notoriously easy to please FISC didn't think was good enough (because it was unsourced or unverified most likely). What happened between April '16 and June 20th when Steele submitted the first draft of the dossier (which Ohr and Simpson most assuredly wrote most of) is of key import.

 

It seems, through all the IG evidence released so far, black hats in the FBI were scrambling at that time to BOLSTER the dossier's import. They did this through the media. They did this by lying and omitting evidence about those media reports to the FISC. 

 

Then suddenly they got the FISA. 

 

So we know the earlier evidence they had wasn't good enough or strong enough because they got denied. Then the dossier is created - and we know now it was created hand in hand with the FBI and the DNC to justify previous ILLEGAL 702 quarries - and it strengthens their case (because it was retroactively written to strengthen their old evidence I bet).

 

Now, there COULD be new evidence found between April and June that ALSO lead to the FISA approval. That's possible, yes, though I haven't seen anyone on either side say that or hint at it. Instead, it seems during that time frame they were scrambling to cover their own ass - coming up with the dossier as plan B thinking they could be sloppy because HRC was going to win and none of this would be investigated seriously. 

 

And that should be chilling to all those who are anti-Trump at this moment. Had he lost, we never would have known ANY OF THIS. And what we are learning, in my opinion, is nothing short of a complete undoing of the foundation of our entire justice system as well as our entire form of government. 

[B-Man]

You know what really undermines our faith in an institution?

 

When the FBI executive level expresses "grave concerns" about our national security- that are actually "grave concerns" about their job security

[Deranged Rhino]

 

*************************

Key to keep in mind: 

 

It doesn't matter how much the memo is downplayed by the media or the left. What matters is what the House and Senate Judiciary Committees do next:

Remember the batting order... 

 

Grassley's up.

 

 

And right on cue:

 

(That's Horowitz)

 

 

*******************************

 

[Azalin]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Again, the DNC head doesn't understand our system of justice. It's designed to protect the accused, not the justice system. 

 

 

I have to disagree on this point. You're looking at what he's saying in the literal sense, so of course it's going to come off as nonsense.

 

Everyone on the left who is going on the record or taking a turn at the mic right now is only doing so to add to the chorus of democrat sound bites & talking points for their legion of blind partisan hacks to scream helplessly at the sky as they march through the streets in their kitty hats and vag suits in manufactured outrage. 

[boyst]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Priestap. Head of Counterintelligence for FBI. 

 

 

Fiction. Complete fiction. 

 

The changes that were made were edits to typos and syntax asked for by the minority on Schiff's committee and the DOJ. 

 

Correct. PDBs are classified. Evidence from the FOIA releases yesterday shows she not only received them, but TRANSMITTED THEM as well. 

Bill parcels 

[row_33]

just read the 6-pager, thank you, says quite enough.

 

[bdutton]

CNN Spin Doctors are doing everything they can to discredit the memo and Trump.  Sad day when they can publicly defend the use of the fabricated Dossier in order to secretly spy on a US Citizen.  So much for Due Process/rule of law.

[DC Tom]

1 hour ago, /dev/null said:

Has CNN announced it's illegal to read the memo yet because it contains classified information?

 

We just had that announcement go out at work, to which I responded to our security people that, no, it was declassified by the most senior classifying authority.

[Gary M]

3 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Cherry picked facts.  Twisted and distorted. 

Paul Ryan starting to get nervous:

 

The memo, said House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) on Thursday, isn't “an indictment of the FBI, of the Department of Justice.”

 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-obama-wiretap-claim-no-evidence-tweets-department-of-justice-a7926561.html

 

[elroy16]

 

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cardillo's tweet is inaccurate and misleading. 

 

 

Quote

At the time of your departure from the FBI, was the FBI able to confirm any criminal allegations contained in the Steele document?

COMEY: Mr. Chairman, I don’t think that’s a question I can answer in an open setting because it goes into the details of the investigation.

**Later in the testimony.**

SEN. SUSAN COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Comey, let me begin by thanking you for your voluntary compliance with our request to appear before this committee and assist us in this very important investigation. I want first to ask you about your conversations with the president, three conversations in which you told him that he was not under investigation. The first was during your January 6th meeting, according to your testimony, in which it appears that you actually volunteered that assurance. Is that correct?

COMEY: That’s correct.

COLLINS: Did you limit that statement to counterintelligence invest — investigations, or were you talking about any FBI investigation?

COMEY: I didn’t use the term counterintelligence. I was briefing him about salacious and unverified material. It was in a context of that that he had a strong and defensive reaction about that not being true. My reading of it was it was important for me to assure him we were not person investigating him.

**Later in the testimony.**

COMEY: The president called me, I believe, shortly before he was inaugurated, as a follow-up to our conversation — private conversation on January the 6th. He just wanted to reiterate his rejection of the allegation and talk about — he thought about it more, and why he thought it wasn’t true — the — the — the verified — unverified and salacious parts.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/08/us/politics/senate-hearing-transcript.html

 

 

Comey never says the dossier is salacious and unverified. At best, he says there is salacious and unverified material in the dossier, but he doesn't say the dossier is salacious and unverfieid in full, which is what Cardillo implies.

 

I say at best, because in the testimony they don't reference the dossier during this question and answer, so he could be referencing information gathered through different means. 

 

Edited February 2, 2018 by elroy16

[Tiberius]

These guys are just bad at this 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sentence-buried-in-gop-memo-may-undercut-trump-efforts-to-discredit-russia-probe/2018/02/02/4133ebe4-0846-11e8-b48c-b07fea957bd5_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_probeorigin-320p%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.52e2d6d999a3

Though President Trump and his allies hope that the controversial release of a GOP-written memo alleging surveillance abuses by the FBI will tarnish the legitimacy of the entire Russia probe, that argument may be undercut by a single sentence buried near the end of the four-page document.

It confirms for the first time that the event that set the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation in motion was not the surveillance of Trump adviser Carter Page — a subject upon which most of the memo dwells — but rather that it was opened as the result of information the bureau had received about another person connected to the Trump campaign.

That other individual is George Papadopoulos, a young foreign policy consultant who in October became the first person associated with the campaign to plead guilty in the special counsel’s investigation. He is now reported to be a cooperating witness.

“The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok,” the memo noted in its final paragraph.

[bdutton]

6 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

These guys are just bad at this 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sentence-buried-in-gop-memo-may-undercut-trump-efforts-to-discredit-russia-probe/2018/02/02/4133ebe4-0846-11e8-b48c-b07fea957bd5_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_probeorigin-320p%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.52e2d6d999a3

Though President Trump and his allies hope that the controversial release of a GOP-written memo alleging surveillance abuses by the FBI will tarnish the legitimacy of the entire Russia probe, that argument may be undercut by a single sentence buried near the end of the four-page document.

It confirms for the first time that the event that set the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation in motion was not the surveillance of Trump adviser Carter Page — a subject upon which most of the memo dwells — but rather that it was opened as the result of information the bureau had received about another person connected to the Trump campaign.

That other individual is George Papadopoulos, a young foreign policy consultant who in October became the first person associated with the campaign to plead guilty in the special counsel’s investigation. He is now reported to be a cooperating witness.

“The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok,” the memo noted in its final paragraph.

 

Two totally unrelated subjects, but would warrant further internal investigation.

 

Page was the subject of a FISA warrant based on an uncorroborated Dossier (Sorry... Yahoo news story fed by the author of the Dossier does not count), and renewed multiple times on the same basis.  I could care less about the Papadopoulus investigation (unless new evidence of FISA funny business comes to light in that one).

 

There are two outcomes IMO that would fix everything...

 

1. The FBI is corrupt and the leadership and tainted middle management needs to be replaced.

2. Repeal FISA.