It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

House intel committee votes on party lines to release the memo

page: 13
79
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 04:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Guess it's okay to release classified info it it helps the president.
The house minority wrote a corresponding report to accompany the memo. In an effort towards transparency the majority said...nope


That's because the Democrats, desperate to deflect, made up a memo after they saw the evidence. They are a joke and their propaganda was quite rightly rejected. Given they are scum bags, I fully expect them to leak it anyway to CNN and MSNBC so their lapdogs can try and reduce the damage.
edit on 30/1/2018 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

It would be better if we could see the info the memos are based on with the memos.

These are not exactly the people to take their word for it.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: RadioRobert

It would be better if we could see the info the memos are based on with the memos.

These are not exactly the people to take their word for it.


I agree!



 And they should both (D&R) put as much source material forward as possible. They should all try to get as much context out there as possible...


Let's release the source material and show everyone (again) how the government is hoovering up all the data and using it improperly. Extremely improperly and politicized it would appear in this case.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

I very much agree. However, by the outrageous claims made from conservative media who hasn't even read the memo, and the outrageous claims made by the 180 or so people who haven't seen the source material I have my doubts the intention is transparency.

And the fact they wouldn't even debate the fisa program before expanding it to include more people also makes me cynical.

I hope people get pissed if there are some real crimes that these people sat on their memo and canned the debate over the program.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 05:08 PM
link   
SO far other then "hearing" that GOP and Trump's memo claims that FBI without merit wiretapped him and his staff. I am guessing that Trump was just on his own committing act of treason for interacting with the Russians on allegedly getting "Dirt on Hillary" but other things were discussed.

That US Intel agents noticed this contacted the appropriate authority to get legal wiretaps that could be used in a court. That NOW because that individual is NOW a sitting president all of that most had been political based. Obama have ben informed prior to the election BUT elected to NOT make it public knowledge prior to the election. That NOT making its political was in the GOP and Trump mind actual a political play.

Yes, I agree Obama was the ball-less wonder afraid of his own shadow. SO Obama should have made know prior to the election. BUT did NOT.

BUT releasing damning information that was misleading at best that Hillary had an email account. As if having an email account was a criminal act. The GOP went on a fish trip hoping that clarified information was sent via email and that Hillary and her staff might randomly over look some emails that may have contained classified information. It is my understanding that since they did not find any example of Hillary and her staff NOT deleted that classified information send to her. Therefore Hilary MUST have deleted all of those email. AND therefor Hillary must be a crook. Again to my understanding there still has BEEN evidence that any o the emails sent to Hillary later turned up as expoing classified information.

So even at best Hillary might but there is no proof allowed classified information to leaked. That is a mistake if it happen. On the flip side Trump knowingly interacted with Russia to undermine our nation. That its TREASON. It like comparing an orange to a football.

This is the beginning of the coup that will forever end the United States of America. Will I am certain as the original coup started in 2000. The allowed and tolerated Obama. That though Obama was the ball-less wonder he did not coward enough and public.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 05:20 PM
link   
So heres my take: i dont like Trump, but I hope he obliterates the democrqric party from top to bottom, from inside and out. Im not even against having a party represent liberal values, but the democratic party has done so in such a way as to cripple our entire country and culture. Theyve become a band of raving lunatics on crusade. Good riddance. Reform and give me a candidate that doesnt make me vomit.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

You know what i find ironic? Remember that demonrats, i mean democrats were daring Nuñez to release the memo? Which he couldn't until Congress voted whether to release it or not. Now the demonrats...shoot, i mean democrats are claiming that because Congress voted not to release the "minority memo" that it is a sad day... Obviously demonrats....aaargh, I mean democrats want to once again twist the truth.

Watch this video on how Adam Schiff makes this comment, and that the minority memo (the democrat memo) is about "why they did the things mentioned in the memo demonrats...democrats were daring Nuñez to release, in their attempt to claim that there was nothing of concern in the FISA memo"...

It is obvious the demonrats want to once again control the narrative by claiming they had noble intentions in the corruption and collusion they participated in...



If you would notice first Schiff mentions that the "minority memo" is the views of the demonrats, later on he claims that not releasing the views of the demonrats equals to not releasing the whole truth...


First they were arguing that Nuñez was not going to release the FISA memo because there was nothing incriminating in it... Now they are claiming that because their own views on why they did these things is not going to be released that the public won't know the whole truth... roflmao...


edit on 30-1-2018 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 06:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

I very much agree. However, by the outrageous claims made from conservative media who hasn't even read the memo, and the outrageous claims made by the 180 or so people who haven't seen the source material I have my doubts the intention is transparency.
...


False... the redacted copy was made public. It is not the full memo but it does mention some of the corruption and collusion the democrats participated in. Nuñez could not release the memo until Congress voted on whether to release it or not... To read the unredacted memo you needed a security clearance, but now that Congress voted to release it, it can finally be released to the public when President Trump makes his decision.

I know some people have no concern for the law and would have loved for Nuñez to just have released the memo from the start, but that would mean Nuñez would have broken the same laws that democrats broke and which are mentioned in the memo...


edit on 30-1-2018 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 07:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Noppie

Could you please at least post one sentence that makes sense?



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 07:30 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Uh no the redacted memo was not released to the public.

And who cares politicians can say anything. I want the proof.

Same with schiff the dude is a crook he can say anything.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 10:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
Uh no the redacted memo was not released to the public.


Redacted Copy of FISC Memo from April 26 2016


originally posted by: luthier
And who cares politicians can say anything. I want the proof.
...


And we will have it, but it had to be done LEGALLY, not how democrats have done which is criminal...



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 10:19 PM
link   
Nunes has jumped into a great big deep hole that Trump has dug for him. Why does he keep digging, digging, digging, himself in deeper and deeper and deeper? Claiming to have this memo , publicizing it, then hiding it, then releasing it (not), then leaking it, then... what's next? Was it really vaporware all along until the people it supposedly exposed called his bluff and demanded that it be released? - if they had something to hide why would they want it released? - and then it took him two weeks to actually write something that could be "leaked"?

Five Questions the Nunes Memo better answer

Read the full article for detailed explanations about why each point is critically important.


The House Intelligence Committee has voted to release the Nunes Memo, which allegedly outlines widespread abuses by the DOJ and FBI in obtaining a surveillance order against former national security advisor to the Trump Campaign, Carter Page. ... such an allegation, if true, would require a vast number of people – across two branches of government – to be on board and willing to put their careers on the line for a conspiracy. To that end, in advance of the memo being released, I want to highlight five questions that the Nunes Memo must clearly address in order for its allegations of abuse to be substantiated and credible.



1. When did the FBI open an investigation on Carter Page?

THE TAKEAWAY: If the Nunes Memo does not indicate when the investigation underlying the Page FISA application was opened or how many months/years of investigative activity preceding the dossier is detailed in the Page FISA application, it is not telling a sufficiently complete or accurate story.



2. Who in the DOJ conducted the Woods Procedures on the FISA application?

THE TAKEAWAY: If the Nunes Memo doesn’t address who conducted the Woods Procedures for the Page FISA application, any material deficiencies in those procedures, or address this part of the DOJ review process at all, it is skipping over a critical part of the vetting process.



3. Who was the federal judge who approved the memo?

THE TAKEAWAY: Alleging a concerted conspiracy by the FBI/DOJ in obtaining the Page FISA necessarily implicates the judge who approved it, and suggests they are incompetent (at best) or corrupt (at worst). If Nunes is alleging serious crimes on the part of the FBI and DOJ, he must put his money where his mouth is and identify the judge who approved the FISA application. If he doesn’t, it’s likely because even he knows that this would be taking his accusations too far.



4. Was the FISA warrant ever extended?

THE TAKEAWAY: Neither the FBI nor the DOJ has the power to extend a FISA surveillance order, they must request it. If a request to extend FISA surveillance that began in September 2016 was made by DAG Rosenstein in or around March 2017, the FBI had shown a federal judge that it had collected additional foreign intelligence information justifying the original order at least once already, around December 2016. The Nunes Memo should address the fact that additional information validating the original FISA order was obtained, and reviewed and approved by a (potentially additional) federal judge, in addition to new administration staff at the DOJ.



5. Has Robert Mueller used anything derived from the FISA in his investigation?

THE TAKEAWAY: Anything that discredits the Page FISA application by definition is intended to cast doubt on the Mueller investigation. (This may also be an attempted implication of the Nunes Memo if it tries to tar DAG Rosenstein, since each major step that has been taken by Mueller have been approved by DAG Rosenstein.) If this is the case, then Mueller should be named directly in the memo as someone who has personally engaged in misconduct in reliance on the Page warrant. If he is not, it is because Nunes knows that this is a line he cannot politically cross directly without real evidence – and is trying to do so indirectly.



The bottom line: (IMHO) If these 5 points are not addressed directly, fully, and accurately, it exposes Nunes to the charge of Criminal Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Obstruction of justice must be the new/old talking point. You'd think they'd get a lawyer involved to help them understand it.



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 04:31 AM
link   
a reply to: rnaa

Are you that naive that you can't understand the memo could not be released without Congress approving it?... (BTW it still needs president Trump approval...) Do you think the entire American public have a security clearance?... Is that how it works in Australia?... The public can read all classified documents?...

Me thinks leftists have a big problem with reading comprehension and understanding the difference between legal and illegal or criminal and law abiding...


edit on 31-1-2018 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 07:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: luthier
Uh no the redacted memo was not released to the public.


Redacted Copy of FISC Memo from April 26 2016


originally posted by: luthier
And who cares politicians can say anything. I want the proof.
...


And we will have it, but it had to be done LEGALLY, not how democrats have done which is criminal...



Lol, sure we will

And that memo is not the memo we are talking about.

Your problem is assuming the Republicans are any better.. they just voted down even debating the fIsa expansion.



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 05:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

Lol, sure we will

And that memo is not the memo we are talking about.

Your problem is assuming the Republicans are any better.. they just voted down even debating the fIsa expansion.


FISA expansion?... For what?... You still can't understand that the DNC/FBI/CIA used false allegations and false claims to file the FISA warrant?... Or that it was simply a political ploy to use said false allegations to try to stop Trump from becoming President which in itself is also illegal to do?...

You can't extend a FISA warrant when it was filed under false pretenses and false claims... Again, reading comprehension problems seems to be very prevalent among people in the left side of politics.


edit on 31-1-2018 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment.



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
...
Your problem is assuming the Republicans are any better.. they just voted down even debating the fIsa expansion.


BTW, this has nothing to do with assumptions... The illegal steps that the DNC/FBI/CIA took for filing the FISA warrant were not "assumptions"... It was simply a political ploy using false allegations to try to stop a political opponent from becoming POTUS...



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 08:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: rnaa

Are you that naive that you can't understand the memo could not be released without Congress approving it?... (BTW it still needs president Trump approval...)


No, I understand exactly how that works. But that is only so because Nunes decided to put secret information into it. And that is exactly why he decided to put it in - so he could say any crap he wants in public but continue to claim that we can't see the proof because its top secret.

You are aware that Nunes has supposedly recused himself from the investigation aren't you? So anything he has put into that memo is not any investigation derived information, but is completely fabricated from his imagination and conspiracy theory reading (and that of the White House Coverup Office of course
)

Remember, its just a 'memo', that Nunes wrote, containing his personal opinion of what makes a good talking point (or that of the WHCO), based on zero evidence, for the sole purpose of taking attention away from the actual investigation.

Also, the WH will almost certainly NOT release the memo, for several reasons, the least of which is that it contains secret info (the President can de-classify things if he wants). If it were to be released, its 'talking points' would be subject to scrutiny and debunked so fast Trumps head would never stop spinning. He knows that, Nunes knows that, journalists know that, and you, in your heart, know that too. It does much more good as a talking point for internet trolls while its contents can only be hinted at and speculated about.



Do you think the entire American public have a security clearance?... Is that how it works in Australia?... The public can read all classified documents?...


Yeah, well, there is this causing a few waves in Oz at the moment... The Cabinet Files Sold to an Op-Shop because it was too heavy and they'd lost the keys! Bought for a few dollars by a guy that stuck them in the back of his garage for a couple of years before deciding to drill the locks. Brilliant!



Me thinks leftists have a big problem with reading comprehension and understanding the difference between legal and illegal or criminal and law abiding...


Project much? You know when you are looking into a mirror your right side could be mistaken for your left side if your brain doesn't translate it correctly.

The Mueller investigation will find out if there was illegal behavior and whether there it was civil or criminal. There is no doubt that obstruction of justice is a criminal offense. If Nunes purpose in writing the memo was to attempt to make a case to derail the investigation that is an attempt at obstruction of justice.

By the way, Nunes was asked directly in a Committee meeting whether or not the WH had anything to do with the memo. If that answer is yes, its going to point directly at an impeachable offense. Obstruction of Justice, Perverting the Course of Justice, what ever you call it, it is a criminal offense.



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 09:23 PM
link   
FYI...

The TRANSCRIPT from the House Intelligence Committee meeting on Monday (where the MEMO's release was OK'd) is now available.

Excerpt:

"If it turns out the majority memo is wrong, there will be hell to pay. If it turns out that the minority memo is wrong, there will be hell to pay," said Rep. Jim Himes, D-Connecticut, according to the transcript.

Full article w/link to transcrpt at: www.cbsnews.com...



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 09:25 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Thanks for this link!




top topics



 
79
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join