House Intelligence FISA memo released: What it says

Next is the question of were other documents used to justify the fisa warrant.

Two points. The first is that originally, the warrant against page was declined, which is al;most unheard of for a fisa court to deny one of these request.

We then know that the fbi went back and at least in part used the dossier to get the warrant. That means that if the dossier was used at all in an effort to put the request for the warrant that was originally denied over the top, it is a huge scandal, even if other evidence was provided.

Secondly, if its true that McCabe tetsified that there would have been no warrant without the dossier, or that as is being reported the dossier was the headlined item on the fisa request, then its a done deal of how corrupt this was.

a reply to: Grambler

Two things.

Page wasn't on the team.

And the counter Intel ivestigation ws started before the fisa warrants.

Now there can be plenty of real abuses and I don't doubt there are. But this memo isn't impressive to me in terms of building a case.

I don't feel any more real information has been given that can be verified at this point.

a reply to: Grambler

But I am fairly certain things like Steele being biased is accurate for example. This is huge in my mind. I am wondering, after Comey tried to guess Putin's motivation and being "FOR HILLARY", why Comey never informed Congress that Steele was completely biased?

a reply to: luthier

Okay, it seemed like you were getting at the judges involved with that one.

And what about thems judges that were involved, while we're at it, everyone???? Again and again they failed proper scrutiny! Damn rubber stamp commission going on up there. How many other warrants they be rubber stamping???

The last thing I will touch on now is the idea that the investigation into russia had already started, and therefore this isnt a big deal.

First, even if that is true (which seems likely) that doesnt mean that this corruption should be ignored. I have said all along questions of the dossier aside, it seems Manafort and Gates are likely guilty of what they have been accused of, and that doesnt involve the dossier whatsoever.

Secondly, the idea that the Papdopolous drunken rant was used to start the investigation (by Trump hating agent strzok) is almost no better. Papadopolous apparently said russians had told him that they had emails of dirt on Hillary. At that time thopusands of people, including here on ATS, were speculating that hillarys server may have been hackled by countries like russia.

So to start an investigation of this magnitude based on such a flmisy excuse is terrible, especially when taken in conjunction with strzoks texts of insurance policies, and the use of the kremlin sourced, dnc paid for dossier.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Grambler

Two things.

Page wasn't on the team.

And the counter Intel ivestigation ws started before the fisa warrants.

Now there can be plenty of real abuses and I don't doubt there are. But this memo isn't impressive to me in terms of building a case.

I don't feel any more real information has been given that can be verified at this point.

I mentioned your second thing on the post above.

As far as page being on the team, the original warrant was issued when Page was. And by spying on him, they could get all of pages documents from when he was on the team, and capture anything he said to team members or anyone else afterwards.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Grambler

Two things.

Page wasn't on the team.

And the counter Intel ivestigation ws started before the fisa warrants.

Now there can be plenty of real abuses and I don't doubt there are. But this memo isn't impressive to me in terms of building a case.

I don't feel any more real information has been given that can be verified at this point.

I mentioned your second thing on the post above.

As far as page being on the team, the original warrant was issued when Page was. And by spying on him, they could get all of pages documents from when he was on the team, and capture anything he said to team members or anyone else afterwards.

Did the memo mention there was no probable cause? They don't seem to make any legal claims.

Seems trump even knew the guy was shady.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: luthier
...
And what about thems judges that were involved, while we're at it, everyone???? Again and again they failed proper scrutiny! Damn rubber stamp commission going on up there. How many other warrants they be rubber stamping???

I would imagine that the FBI would in general would be believed. I wonder if that is going to change, or at least their information may be questioned now.

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: CB328
Is there anything in this memo that says Trump's buddies aren't guilty?? I didn't think so.

Guilty of what? Obstructing an investigation that never should have happened?

Is that an impeachable offence?

Nevermind that Comey and other DOJ officials have testified repeatedly that the administration hasn't hampered the investigation in any way.

The trump Jr and Hope Hicks are the newest issue.

Comey never really said he wasn't being told to stand down on Flynn. He alludes that the president was making a sort of threat. Then trump steps on his own foot in tweets..

It isn't exactly clear sailing.

"I hope you can drop this, I hope you can let Flynn go" doesn't sound like a threat to me. I think you'd have a hard time convincing the Senate that it was too.

I want to believe. But I'm going to look into Devin Nunes and try to understand if he's above the swamp or a chess piece

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Maybe it's the process.

TextIn 2002, The FISA court complained that FBI agents made more than 75 false or misleading claims to secure warrants;

The Bush administration took the case to a specially-created FISA Appeals court which unanimously granted Ashcroft’s wish and ignored the problem of deceptive federal agents.

In the summer of 2007, the Bush administration railroaded FISA amendments known as the “Protect America Act” through Congress which authorized surveillance of any phone call or email by any Americans which the government “reasonably believed” was contacting someone - anyone - outside the U.S.

Americans were shocked to learn (thanks to former NSA contractor Edward Snowden) that the FISA court had approved daily roundup of scores of millions of Americans’ phone records.

TextThe FISA court complained that, in the final years of Obama’s presidency, the NSA was guilty of “an institutional lack of candor” connected to “a very serious Fourth Amendment issue;” naturally, the gory specifics were kept under wraps.

www.usatoday.com...

originally posted by: Xcathdra
The FISA memo has been released.

And apparently the Dems have compiled a memo that refutes some of what has been stated by Nunes. But the Republicans have voted not to release it.
Release the memo!

Phase II starts -

Nunes says House intel panel looking at State Dept. involvement in Russia probe

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) on Friday foreshadowed a forthcoming second memo by House Intelligence Committee Republicans focusing on potential abuses or missteps by government agencies, specifically the State Department.

Speaking on Fox News just hours after Intelligence Committee Republicans released a controversial memo alleging abuses by the FBI and Justice Department, Nunes said the panel was moving onto "phase two" of its investigation.

"We are in the middle of what I call phase two of our investigation, which involves other departments, specifically the State Department and some of the involvement that they had in this," Nunes said.

"That investigation is ongoing and we continue work towards finding answers and asking the right questions to try to get to the bottom of what exactly the State Department was up to in terms of this Russia investigation."

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Xcathdra
The FISA memo has been released.

And apparently the Dems have compiled a memo that refutes some of what has been stated by Nunes. But the Republicans have voted not to release it.
Release the memo!

The dems memo was voted to be read by all of congress, the exact same first step as with the Republican memo.

The white house has said that they will work to help to get the dem memo public.

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Xcathdra
The FISA memo has been released.

And apparently the Dems have compiled a memo that refutes some of what has been stated by Nunes. But the Republicans have voted not to release it.
Release the memo!

Incorrect.. Democrats are lying about that.

The intel committee actually approved, unanimously, to release the Democrats memo to the full house for review. They were told they had to use the exact same process Republicans had to use.

Vote to release to the House. Determine if it needs to be released publicly and if it is a vote is held. POTUS then gets 5 days to review.

a reply to: TritonTaranis

I am not delusional. I have been around to see this before. I know this is a cliche, but here goes: When Watergate first got started, and they wanted the tapes, then Nixon fought, then said he would give a review and sign off on it, with only the parts that dealt with Watergate. Then it was he was going to give them to a half deaf senator to listen to and that would be fine.

This memo is not proof. If that was the case, then I can provide hundreds of convicts who should have gotten off all on their say so. This memo does not prove one way or the other what the facts are. Evidence is what I am saying we need, show us the warrant that was mentioned, treat we the people like a judge and show us the hard cold evidence, and the truth, not a memo that already got caught breaking protocol and lying about it.

They say they based this memo off of documents from the DOJ and the FBI, well how about we the people see it, get it all out in the light, let we the people see the proof.

Do you really trust the politicians fully, believing everything that they say? Like say a wall that another country is going to pay for it as was promised, yet it appears we are going to have to pay for anyways, and not get reimbursed.

originally posted by: GuidedKill
...
because rumors were used to gain a warrant to spy on a democratically elected president in an effort to unseat him.

That is treason.

They weren't rumors, they were made up rumors from people who were being paid by the DNC and Clinton campaign, and Steele even admitted to Ohr that he "was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being President". Ohr documented what Steele had told him, which would have been seen by Comey and McCabe. What's more, the FBI top people, Comey and McCabe, among some others, knew this because Ohr himself had documented what Steele had told him, and never did they point out that all of this was being funded by the DNC and the Clinton campaign which is illegal and would have stopped the FISA spying on it's tracks had they done the right thing and notified the FISA courts about this evidence which shows collusion between the DNC/Clinton campaign, the firms they employed and Steele himself.

What many leftists don't understand and want to dismiss is the fact that this is just the start. This was also known by the Obama administration and Obama himself. Obama himself knew that if Trump was elected "Obama's legacy" would end, and Obama has made clear he does not want his legacy ended.

This was all a ploy by Obama officials, Obama himself, Hillary Clinton and high members of the intelligence community to stop Trump from becoming President.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
Phase II starts -

Nunes says House intel panel looking at State Dept. involvement in Russia probe

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) on Friday foreshadowed a forthcoming second memo by House Intelligence Committee Republicans focusing on potential abuses or missteps by government agencies, specifically the State Department.

Speaking on Fox News just hours after Intelligence Committee Republicans released a controversial memo alleging abuses by the FBI and Justice Department, Nunes said the panel was moving onto "phase two" of its investigation.

"We are in the middle of what I call phase two of our investigation, which involves other departments, specifically the State Department and some of the involvement that they had in this," Nunes said.

"That investigation is ongoing and we continue work towards finding answers and asking the right questions to try to get to the bottom of what exactly the State Department was up to in terms of this Russia investigation."

So, after nothingburger #1, we're going for nothingburger #2.

Even Redstate(A Significant Inaccuracy in #TheMemo Calls Its Credibility Into Question) is debunking this nonsense:

Amid all the excitement over the Devin Nunes #TheMemo, it is important to remember that it is a partisan summary of FISA warrant applications that we the People have not been allowed to see. And in determining whether you trust Nunes’s summary, it might be relevant that it inaccurately summarizes something that is public record: James Comey’s testimony in 2017 regarding whether the allegations in the memo had been verified.
...
Got that? Nunes claims that James Comey testified in June 2017 that “the Steele dossier” was “salacious and unverified.” The claim is not that a particular portion of the dossier is salacious and unverified. The claim is that Comey testified that the dossier (“it”) is salacious and unverified. That’s what Nunes says in the memo excerpt above.

And it’s not true. That’s not James Comey’s testimony.

Never mind that the investigation was renewed multiple times because they kept finding dirt up to a year in total.
Never mind that the whole 'dossier' thing being the impetus for the FISA being , as admitted in the memo, WRONG.

So much hype and feverdreaming about this memo... yet, nothing of substance resides within.

originally posted by: slapjacks
a reply to: Xcathdra

Crackin a cold one for this one!

woohoo!

This might be cigar material there and untainted by you know what....

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Xcathdra
The FISA memo has been released.

And apparently the Dems have compiled a memo that refutes some of what has been stated by Nunes. But the Republicans have voted not to release it.
Release the memo!

Incorrect.. Democrats are lying about that.

The intel committee actually approved, unanimously, to release the Democrats memo to the full house for review. They were told they had to use the exact same process Republicans had to use.

Vote to release to the House. Determine if it needs to be released publicly and if it is a vote is held. POTUS then gets 5 days to review.

Blah, blah, blah. Release the memo!