House Intelligence FISA memo released: What it says

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: RadioRobert

Yes they did vote, however, Nunes, did not answer questions. That is a problem.

Yes this information is classified, but you know, the President can easily say, it is to be released and to declassify that information. And as the President is empowered by the constitution to do such, then having a hearing on classified information, namely within this context around the memo, it would not be a problem.

But it's not that simple.

Look at how the media and dems have hyperventaliated all week about how trump is destroying the c9nstitution and Intel agencies by allowing the memo to be released.

And that was voted in by Congress.

Imagine if he releases stuff himself. They will say it's 9bstruction of justice and call for his head.

And yes, I know you will say that still trump legally could do that and I am exaggerating.

Well legally he was allowed to fire comey, and now the while investigation isn't really about Russia, but obstruction.

So now trump is screwed either way/ if he doesn't release things like the fisa warrant, it is said it proves there is nothing damaging there.

If he does release it, that will be said to be obstruction.

a reply to: soberbacchus

My guess about Gowdy's announcement...
There will likely be some openings shortly in top positions in the DOJ and FBI. Perhaps Gowdy was offered a position.

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: RadioRobert

Yes they did vote, however, Nunes, did not answer questions. That is a problem.

Yes this information is classified, but you know, the President can easily say, it is to be released and to declassify that information. And as the President is empowered by the constitution to do such, then having a hearing on classified information, namely within this context around the memo, it would not be a problem.

The intel committee can release information in tis possession, including classified information, without the President or OCA declassifying it.

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: RadioRobert

Yes they did vote, however, Nunes, did not answer questions. That is a problem.

Yes this information is classified, but you know, the President can easily say, it is to be released and to declassify that information. And as the President is empowered by the constitution to do such, then having a hearing on classified information, namely within this context around the memo, it would not be a problem.

Wait, so now everyone wants Trump to unilaterally declassify everything to release it? I thought all last week it was destroying the foundations of democracy to do that? Come on, you're not that naive.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: soberbacchus


You're still talking about Hillary. She's the one who claims someone is always out to get her, every time her far-left radical BS feminist agenda gets shot down by the majority.

Get over it. We don't want that agenda. We don't want those politics, and we most certainly do not want Hillary. I don't even want her in this country, but I'll settle for keeping her out of the WH/future public serviceexploitation

You do know you're not "the majority," correct?

You couldn't even win the majority number of votes.

Trump approval ratings on 538 show 54% disapprove versus 40% approval ratings right now: projects.fivethirtyeight.com...

BEST SUMMARY OF THE GIANT NOTHING BURGER SERVED UP BY NUNES: From Charlie Pierce at Esquire.com


Te The FBI found that Page had been actively cultivated by Russian intelligence as a possible asset. And now, your whole argument is that the FISA warrants were prompted by the Steele dossier and that Steele is a shtunk who was biased against the president*? For this, you needed a memo? For this, you needed a month’s worth of drama? For this, you needed to demolish the good faith between the intelligence community and the congressional committees designed to conduct oversight of that community? You couldn’t even get the date of David Corn’s breakthrough story in Mother Jones right. Hell, you could have saved us all the trouble and just done a couple of nights on Hannity to make that case. You’d have reached every single American that currently buys what you’re peddling.t


And because of that nothing burger, Trump thinks he's home free, poor snowflake, Trump. The only president ever to come into office with a federal workforce there to greet him, not 100% of whom perhaps support him.

According to Trump's tweet: "THEIR (SIC) is no Collusion." And "Obstruction" is the new "word" that people are using because there is no "collusion" ....

We wouldn't accept such shoddy work from a fourth grader.

originally posted by: Scrubdog
You do know you're not "the majority," correct?

You're funny!
Twisted and absolutely out of touch but funny! LOL

originally posted by: WhatTheory

originally posted by: Scrubdog
You do know you're not "the majority," correct?

You're funny!
Twisted and absolutely out of touch but funny! LOL

How so?

You're not in the majority, whether you like it or not.

Whatever makes you laugh.

Bottom line. Even if one doesn't want to accept the facts of the Memo, Comey/Mccabe used the Dossier despite it being known as something having salicious and unverified claims. That is fraud on the court. Did they tell the court it was unverified?

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: RadioRobert

Yes they did vote, however, Nunes, did not answer questions. That is a problem.

Yes this information is classified, but you know, the President can easily say, it is to be released and to declassify that information. And as the President is empowered by the constitution to do such, then having a hearing on classified information, namely within this context around the memo, it would not be a problem.

He is.

He is also empowered to fire the FBI director whenever he sees fit.

Its good that we are now recognizing that the president has acted within his authority, and yet still shows restraint for hte good of "truth". Strange, coming from Trump...but still.

Anyone seen this?

apnews.com...

WASHINGTON (AP) — In a story Feb. 2 about a Republican memo on the Russia investigation, The Associated Press erroneously reported that a former British spy’s work on an opposition research project was initially funded by the conservative Washington Free Beacon. Though the former spy, Christopher Steele, was hired by a firm that was initially funded by the Washington Free Beacon, he did not begin work on the project until after Democratic groups had begun funding it.

Minor correction?

originally posted by: Scrubdog
You're not in the majority, whether you like it or not.
Whatever makes you laugh.

Okay, whatever you say professor. LOL

originally posted by: ausername
Anyone seen this?

apnews.com...

WASHINGTON (AP) — In a story Feb. 2 about a Republican memo on the Russia investigation, The Associated Press erroneously reported that a former British spy’s work on an opposition research project was initially funded by the conservative Washington Free Beacon. Though the former spy, Christopher Steele, was hired by a firm that was initially funded by the Washington Free Beacon, he did not begin work on the project until after Democratic groups had begun funding it.

Minor correction?

In other words, the collusion with the foreign spy and the Russians with the DNC and Clinton began after money exchanged hands. Wonder how much the Russians got out of this?

originally posted by: talisman
Bottom line. Even if one doesn't want to accept the facts of the Memo, Comey/Mccabe used the Dossier despite it being known as something having salicious and unverified claims. That is fraud on the court. Did they tell the court it was unverified?

No, it is not "fraud on the court" - I really doubt you have ever seen a PC affidavit in your entire life.

I love listening to the Hannity Calamity Army play justice warriors.

FWIW: The WaPo thoroughly documented that the FISA court well-knew that - to the extent the dossier was used - it was in part paid for the by the Clinton campaign.

FWIW2: These "fraud upon the court" claims are the stuff that would go away immediately were the FBI and Dems allowed to set out the "omitted" facts which was the the primary concern of the intel community and Dems, not what was IN the memo so much as what WAS NOT in the memo, those things that would demonstrate that no fraud was put upon any court.

Just go and cut/paste from RT. They are by-far the biggest Trump supporters on the planet, support Trump second only to Putin. www.rt.com...

Of course, doing so would force an intellectually honest person to ask why RT is so heavily in favor of Trump against the U.S. intelligence services. Why do you suppose that is?

originally posted by: WhatTheory

originally posted by: Scrubdog
You're not in the majority, whether you like it or not.
Whatever makes you laugh.

Okay, whatever you say professor. LOL

Trump got more votes than Hillary?

Trump's approval ratings are higher than 50%?

LOL LOL LOL LOL

Keep LOL'ing till your boy is in jail, LOL.

Never mind, I forgot. You're using Russian math. Putin's vote counts 50.1%, so you are correct by your way of numbers.

And thanks for the compliment. In much of the world professors and teachers are very respected.

originally posted by: Scrubdog

originally posted by: WhatTheory

originally posted by: Scrubdog
You're not in the majority, whether you like it or not.
Whatever makes you laugh.

Okay, whatever you say professor. LOL

Trump got more votes than Hillary?

Trump's approval ratings are higher than 50%?

LOL LOL LOL LOL

Keep LOL'ing till your boy is in jail, LOL.

Never mind, I forgot. You're using Russian math. Putin's vote counts 50.1%, so you are correct by your way of numbers.

And thanks for the compliment. In much of the world professors and teachers are very respected.

LOL, you're both silly & delusional. LOL
Sleep tight, don't let the bed bugs bite.

Scrubdog,

It absolutely is a Fraud. Did they tell the court that the Dossier was not even known to be true? That it was salicious and unverified material? And if your claiming that they told the court that it was funded or a democratic researched inspired dossier, then when did Comey ever admit this in his testimony? I recall he didn't know who funded the Dossier? If he didn't know who funded it, then how the heck did he know when they were applying for the FISA? Or was he lying? One can't have it both ways. It was through the court that the funding had to be found out, and the Dems fought that.


Btw, how the hell would the Washington Post know so quickly when the congress was seeking this info for a good number of months but were stonewalled by the FBI and the DOJ?

originally posted by: Scrubdog

originally posted by: talisman
Bottom line. Even if one doesn't want to accept the facts of the Memo, Comey/Mccabe used the Dossier despite it being known as something having salicious and unverified claims. That is fraud on the court. Did they tell the court it was unverified?

No, it is not "fraud on the court" - I really doubt you have ever seen a PC affidavit in your entire life.

I love listening to the Hannity Calamity Army play justice warriors.

FWIW: The WaPo thoroughly documented that the FISA court well-knew that - to the extent the dossier was used - it was in part paid for the by the Clinton campaign.

FWIW2: These "fraud upon the court" claims are the stuff that would go away immediately were the FBI and Dems allowed to set out the "omitted" facts which was the the primary concern of the intel community and Dems, not what was IN the memo so much as what WAS NOT in the memo, those things that would demonstrate that no fraud was put upon any court.

Just go and cut/paste from RT. They are by-far the biggest Trump supporters on the planet, support Trump second only to Putin. www.rt.com...

Of course, doing so would force an intellectually honest person to ask why RT is so heavily in favor of Trump against the U.S. intelligence services. Why do you suppose that is?

Well it's going to be really simple then...Provide those things that were not in the memo and this will all be straightened out...

originally posted by: keenmachine

originally posted by: soberbacchus
a reply to: TheLead

The only thing mildly interesting in this nothing burger of a memo was FISA not being told it was politically funded.

That turned out to be a bald faced lie.

I give it a week before Donald starts tweeting about how Nunes is a Democrat Plant made to embarrass him.

I gotta give you credit in this thread you have made alot of posts about this subject, most have received no stars with a few getting one star as if little or no one agrees with what you are saying.

If ever I find myself searching for popularity and affirmation vis-à-vis little stars on an anonymous internet board I will seek professional help.

Truth is not a popularity contest, nor should it be.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: keenmachine

originally posted by: soberbacchus
a reply to: TheLead

The only thing mildly interesting in this nothing burger of a memo was FISA not being told it was politically funded.

That turned out to be a bald faced lie.

I give it a week before Donald starts tweeting about how Nunes is a Democrat Plant made to embarrass him.

I gotta give you credit in this thread you have made alot of posts about this subject, most have received no stars with a few getting one star as if little or no one agrees with what you are saying.

If ever I find myself searching for popularity and affirmation vis-à-vis little stars on an anonymous internet board I will seek professional help.

Truth is not a popularity contest, nor should it be.

Yeah Idisagree with almost everything you say.

But how boring would the thread be if everyone agreed.

I htink you raise good points, so I appreciate your posts most of the time.

originally posted by: Scrubdog
FWIW: The WaPo thoroughly documented that the FISA court well-knew that - to the extent the dossier was used - it was in part paid for the by the Clinton campaign.

Comey: "... memo ... damaged relationship with FISA court"
twitter.com...

If the FISA Court knew everythink about the dossier, how could the memo then damage the FBI / FISC relationship?

Nothing new -> no damage, bad news -> damage.