House Intelligence FISA memo released: What it says

originally posted by: BlueAjah
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.

I'm with ya. In fact there's a rumor that calls have been made for resume submissions. It seems that some of those calls went to blue dog Democrats who have shown themselves honest and even-handed in past prosecutions. Seems that Trump understands that there are honest Democrats out there. And no, I don't know for sure who made the calls but hope to find out in the near future.

A complete clean-up will take time because it will take time to find suitable (baggage-free) replacements. I believe the phrase used was "people of impeccable character."

originally posted by: greyhat

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.

See, people with critical thinking skills don't fall for this stuff!

Another thing that has been bothering me is that the media has focused on this warrant saying a US citizen, as though only one citizen's information was collected. As I understand it, that is not the case. This warrant covered all contacts.

Think about how many people would be impacted if someone obtained a secret spying warrant on you. Can you imagine having your florist tell you that the FBI had been in to visit and ask how you paid for the flowers you bought last week? Every contact....thinking about it makes my head go sideways.

A good listen.

On January 29th, 2018, the House Intelligence Committee voted to release the document detailing surveillance abuses by the FBI and DOJ, leading to outrage from the political establishment, mainstream media and the intelligence community who clearly prefer to operate in secrecy.

Over 1 hr tho.

a reply to: Scrubdog

As a person who has seen them and written them - it is a fraud on the court.

a reply to: Xcathdra

This is actually sorta fun.

60 pages tho.....
I read the OP at least.

One topic of the memo that I have not seen discussed too much involves more information regarding the source of the dossier:

3) Before and after Steele was terminated as a source, he maintained contact with DOJ via then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, a senior DOJ official who worked closely with Deputy Attorneys General Yates and later Rosenstein. Shortly after the election, the FBI began interviewing Ohr, documenting his communications with Steele. For example, in September 2016, Steele admitted to Ohr his feelings against then-candidate Trump when Steele said he “was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not, being president.” This clear evidence of Steele’s bias was recorded by Ohr at the time and subsequently in official FBI files— but not reflected in any of the Page FISA applications.

a) During this same time period, Ohr’s wife was employed by Fusion GPS to assist in the cultivation of opposition research on Trump. Ohr later provided the FBI with all of his wife’s opposition research, paid for by the DNC and Clinton campaign via Fusion GPS. The Ohrs’ relationship with Steele and Fusion GPS was inexplicably concealed from the FISC.

so:
1. An Associate Deputy Attorney General was working with an FBI source after the FBI fired that source for leaking and violating privacy of their agreement. This allowed Steele, who had stated his extreme bias against Trump, to continue to have an inside contact after the FBI separated with him.
- The FBI knew that Ohr continued contact with Steele.

2. Ohr's wife was directly involved with partisan opposition research, which she then gave to her husband. This gave the DNC a (another) direct contact in the Justice Department to push their agenda.

3. Since Ohr's wife was being paid by Fusion GPS for this research, Bruce Ohr was financially profiting from this arrangement.

This is obvious corruption and abuse of the Justice Department as a tool of the DNC.

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?

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?

The answer to that is obvious. They've always opposed US Intel, so nothing new there. And as long as you can keep internal strife between Republicans and Democrats at a fever pitch, why wouldn't you? Once the myth was create that Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election, of course Russia is gonna run with that full speed ahead to sew discord. The sad part is the only ones helping the Russians at this point are the #resist idiots who bought the myth in the first place and can't let it go.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Scrubdog

As a person who has seen them and written them - it is a fraud on the court.

XC..... Don't you love when somebody shoots themselves in the foot? Then again, people pushing their opinion/belief as settled fact has been a hallmark of this entire Russia incident.

Some individuals just get the facts so very wrong. This is the type of assumption that marks their entire case against Trump, though. It is their opinion, which is then repackaged as fact and sent out with a pretty little bow on top.

Case in point, you have indeed written plenty affidavit for search. So what else is this individual (and many other Dems) spouting off as fact (when it is really opinion)? The entire investigation? Material details? Irrelevant details? Who knows, but they have a clear trend at embellishing the truth or parading their opinion as fact

I concur that it is indeed fraud on the court. It is a gross miscarriage of justice that it is allowed to continue

Especially when you consider that Trump's already been cleared by an FBI investigation into him

www.businessinsider.com...

"The FBI says there is no direct connection between Donald Trump and Russia"

theduran.com...

"BBC confirms ‘no evidence found of Trump/Russia collusion’ in FBI probe"

a reply to: diggindirt


Once you get to the 3rd "hop" you have millions or tens of millions, I believe

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?

Certain claims in the Dossier were salacious and unverified.
That is not the same as discredited.
It means just what it says, Salacious and Unverified.

It also does not mean all the claims of the Dossier are Salacious.
Some are boring.
It also does not mean all the claims of the Dossier are unverified.
Everyone with insight into the investigation has answered the question "what has been verified?" with "can not discuss in open session" or "Can not discuss due to ongoing investigations"

Honestly whatever side of the fence anyone sits on, they should be willing to agree on basic logic.
Any argument that purposefully chooses to ignore the basic meaning and context of words and blurs or obfuscates basic logic should not be taken as credible.

a reply to: soberbacchus

FBI can not use unverified information to obtain a FISA warrant.
It is illegal.
Comey was calling it unverified at the same time he was obtaining FISA warrants.

a reply to: soberbacchus

So you would be comfortable with the FBI going to court to get a warrant to have you and your associates and family surveiled based primarily on the written testimony of a person that is in parts salacious and unverified, minimally verified, and in fact, the FBI had questions concerning his reliability and actually terminated his relationship as an informant? Oh, and also he was being paid to smear someone you worked for. You wouldn't care if the feebs omitted those details when presenting to the judge? After all their other evidence was rejected by the FISC (98% chance of success, failed at least twice), they presented the pages of smear and an online article from Yahoo! News leaked by the same PI to bolster it. That would be just fine by you, eh?

You'll be okay in 2020 when the old Trumpster, paragon of truth and virtue, as I'm sure you'd admit, decides to hire a PI to dig dirt on the Dem frontrunner and presents the "only partly" "salacious and unverified" results in front of the judge to spy on associates of the campaign? And if he loses, his appointees can rally the troops behind the PI's report to undermine the rest of someone else's administration, right?

Everyone is fine with these "minor" incidents of abuse as long as their team wins, I guess.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: BlueAjah

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: RadioRobert

I did read the transcript, that was released. And how Nunes, the man who directed the creation of the memo, did not read the information being used, or even want to answer any questions on such.

Hence the public hearings, where people are going to have to answer questions and not hide behind the double talk or refusing to answer questions, unless it is to take the 5th amendment.

The only thing that Nunes did not see was the actual FISA warrant information. This was because the highly classified information was released on the condition that only one person from each side could view it, in a high security room. He appointed Gowdy to review it based on his extensive background in law. Then Gowdy reported back what was seen.

The other information in the memo was based on a year of investigation, document review, and interviews, of which Nunes was absolutely involved first-hand.

The mis-info you are using is one of the invalid points being pushed by the MSM, while avoiding the facts.

What's interesting about the fact Gowdy was the chosen one is the timing of his announcement that he is going back into the justice system and not seeking his political seat again....maybe he saw something or had been planning this for a while and this whole thing was a big plan to get Gowdy access to the FISA warrant....

Gowdy say the underlying intelligence.
He knew the MEMO was a lie.
He is sickened by his colleagues, Nunes et al.
Announces he is leaving politics the day before the MEMO was released.

And he tweets this yesterday:
Trey Gowdy
Twitter
As I have said repeatedly, I also remain 100 percent confident in Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The contents of this memo do not - in any way - discredit his investigation.

And NOW THIS

Washington (CNN) — South Carolina Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy said the recently released, controversial GOP memo alleging FBI abuses of its surveillance authority does not have "any impact on the Russia probe," and even without the Steele dossier, there would be a Russia investigation.

"There is a Russia investigation without a dossier," Gowdy said in an interview that aired Sunday on CBS's "Face the Nation," days after he announced his decision not to seek re-election.

www.cnn.com...

a reply to: BlueAjah

I think he's looking for a supreme court appointment.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Of course the Investigation into the 2016 Election will continue. The dossier is meaningless and a distraction. Their focus is not solely on Trump. Their focus is on the many other paths that they are discovering. I am personally in support of Mueller's investigation for I believe in the end, it will be useful in draining the swamp across all parties!

a reply to: talisman

That's not true . First because the dossier wasn't all they used to obtain the warrant and second it wasn't all unverified as they already knew about Page and the Russians attempt to use him and they knew about trumps team being aware of the hacked emails weeks before it was released because Papadopolis shot him mouth off in a London wine bar.
And obviously they did tell the judges that parts were salacious and parts were unverified.
I guess if the judges themselves made a statement that would still get thrown out by this crowb.

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: soberbacchus

FBI can not use unverified information to obtain a FISA warrant.
It is illegal.

Correct, but the claims with regards to Carter Page were not "Salacious and unverified", that was the golden shower and Trump.

Comey was calling it unverified at the same time he was obtaining FISA warrants.

He called certain claims in the dossier unverified and salacious.
Not the Dossier itself.

The same testimony includes him being asked directly what has been verified in the Dossier.
He clearly says he can not answer that in an open session.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Right.

I keep posting it, but people believe what they want to believe.

From the same testimony where Comey said certain parts were salacious and unverified.

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.

www.redstate.com...

a reply to: BlueAjah

This make the inability of spouses to testify against one another somewhat convenient for these sorts of arrangements, no?

a reply to: soberbacchus

Of course they should investigate Russian meddling. But it has nothing to do with Trump.

Recent reports have shown that the Russian meddling via social media was on both sides. They were even the instigator for some of the "demonstrations" aka riots.

Their goal is to create derision and keep the US in turmoil. They do the same thing to other countries. It is nothing new, and it did not start with this election.