House Intelligence FISA memo released: What it says

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: soberbacchus
a reply to: luthier

So the memo was a dud and Devin Nunes has finally admitted the only thing he could hang his hat on in the Memo was a lie.

that took 24 hours.

I hope Nunes thinks it was worth it.

“Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele's efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior and FBI officials,” the memo alleged.

Lie.

So admits Nunes now.

www.politico.com...

Why did he choose to Lie in the Memo? He knew the underlying intelligence.

Did you read your source? The footnote was vague and didn't mention the Clinton campaign or the DNC. The problem is that the FISA court didn't know Trump's opponent's paid for this info. The footnote doesn't change that.

What difference would that make if the information it contains was verified independently. Remember, the actual warrant is still classified.

Because the application is supposed to include exculpatory information. I'll wait while you look that up. Bottom line, the fact that the information was paid for as opposition research would be important for the judge to know. Which is probably why that fact was omitted.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Read up here.

Congress critters have legal immunity from actions taken in session pertaining to the business thereof. It has been upheld time and time again.

This case involved aides who took action to publish classified material through a private printing house. The Court upheld immunity for Gravel's acts pertaining to the session (reading and entering the classified material of the Pentagon Papers into record), but ruled the aides acted outside that protection by acting to publish because that action was not in the course of business directly related to the session. If you want/need pure rulings on the speech and debate clause, they are referenced in this case.

So you are assuming that the memo has not deliberately withheld the presence of the exculpatory information?

originally posted by: DJW001

So you are assuming that the memo has not deliberately withheld the presence of the exculpatory information?

I don't have to assume anything. In their rush to mislead people, the Democrats admitted like dumbasses there was a vague reference in it to "political entities". If it said Clinton and the DNC, they'd be telling that to the media. That's not what they're saying though. Leaving out that it was Trump's political opponent is wrong no matter how you try to spin it, and I doubt the judge is pleased he or she was misled. Take off the partisan blinders. Would you like the government getting a warrant against you based on tabloid information paid for by someone who hates you? That would be perfectly fine with you?

a reply to: face23785

I have no secret connections to the Kremlin. Do you?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: face23785

I have no secret connections to the Kremlin. Do you?

It's embarrassing what you have to resort to in order to keep this false narrative going. Sure, # civil liberties, the government can do whatever it wants. As long as Trump gets removed. That's how delusional this Trump-Russia collusion myth has made you. You're pathetic. You got lied to. Time to grow up and face it. 3 more years of Trump.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: face23785

I have no secret connections to the Kremlin. Do you?

This guy has resorted to the point where he is saying "illegally surveil me and everyone else, as long as we don't have anything to hide it is fine."
That is what the ultra lefties have left in their arsenal on this one.

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

We do not know what all was in the FISA warrants. If Page is smart, he will be seeking and getting several attorneys, and the first thing would be to see all of the evidence used in all of the warrants against him. And to start to gear them up for any and all possible court cases against him, including if he is going to have to or possibly speak to Mueller.

Any sort of investigation is ruined, for now he knows he is and was under surveillance by the FBI and other intelligence agencies, and thus would start to either cut all ties to anyone or in short go to ground where it would be harder for them to continue or do any sort of monitoring of him. And those who may have replaced those looking at him, will go silent and start to leave or have left, where it leaves him in the cold.

ha what a joke
page under fisa surveillance since 2013.....why is he still free?
a 5 year investigation into him?
bs
what a bunch of crap
a complete pant load
paige walks free
no charges

what a steaming pile

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: face23785

I have no secret connections to the Kremlin. Do you?

just known established ones?

Uh oh...let's get ready for a new thread on the Grassley - Graham Memo just released. Oh yeah...this first memo is barely the tip of the ice berg.

It's about to get sooooooo much worse for the dems.

Republicans concede key FBI 'footnote' in Carter Page warrant

Devin Nunes said Monday the FBI had disclosed political backing for a Trump-Russia dossier in October 2016, but a controversial GOP memo released last week did not mention it.

All the lies and distortions in the memo are being exposed

originally posted by: Willtell
Republicans concede key FBI 'footnote' in Carter Page warrant

Devin Nunes said Monday the FBI had disclosed political backing for a Trump-Russia dossier in October 2016, but a controversial GOP memo released last week did not mention it.

All the lies and distortions in the memo are being exposed

Name the lies of the memo. We'll wait.

FYI...Steele was being fed false info by Hillary Clinton's team. The dems are complicit in conspiracy to commit treason mate.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Really? That is a short amount of time. It took them 2 years to find a spy who had been giving secrets up for 16 years (Walker). 5 years to find and convict another who was selling secrets (Pitts). Took them 12 years to do an investigation on Lee. Lee's case was botched badly and he got off with a slap on the wrist and a 1.8 million dollar settlement.

So this 5 years is not unheard of or unexpected.

Too many professionals here. I'm out.

a reply to: RadioRobert

Interesting, thanks it is an interesting read for both sides of the courts decision. I guess that it can, though they should not.

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: soberbacchus
a reply to: luthier

So the memo was a dud and Devin Nunes has finally admitted the only thing he could hang his hat on in the Memo was a lie.

that took 24 hours.

I hope Nunes thinks it was worth it.

“Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele's efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior and FBI officials,” the memo alleged.

Lie.

So admits Nunes now.

www.politico.com...

Why did he choose to Lie in the Memo? He knew the underlying intelligence.

Did you read your source? The footnote was vague and didn't mention the Clinton campaign or the DNC. The problem is that the FISA court didn't know Trump's opponent's paid for this info. The footnote doesn't change that.

What difference would that make if the information it contains was verified independently. Remember, the actual warrant is still classified.

The Woods protocol requires any FISA warrant that targets a US citizen to have all information used in the warrant application be verified / corroborated. It has been in place since the early 2000's and was done because agencies were abusing FISA then by targeting US citizens using less than above board information.

If the material was not verified / corroborated then the applications for the FISA warrants were/are invalid. If the warrant applications used info not verified / corroborated then the people who filled out the application blatantly lied to the court.

originally posted by: xxspockyxx
a reply to: soberbacchus

Is there any update on the Russian collusion investigation? I have been out of the news for the last few days and I really don't know.

Well, most of it is not public, but some of it does leak out.

Mostly it looks like Mueller is searching for hard facts in cash transactions.

It always comes down to follow the money.

This is just the latest:

Investigators Are Scrutinizing Newly Uncovered Payments By The Russian Embassy
www.buzzfeed.com...

FBI investigating whether Russian money went to NRA to help Trump
www.mcclatchydc.com...

Manafort actually did get payments from the black ledger in Ukraine.

Now, financial records newly obtained by The Associated Press confirm that at least $1.2 million in payments listed in the ledger next to Manafort’s name were actually received by his consulting firm in the United States. They include payments in 2007 and 2009, providing the first evidence that Manafort’s firm received at least some money listed in the so-called Black Ledger.

lawandcrime.com...

Lots of different stuff going on daily.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: Sillyolme

No, it is not nearly over:
Steele wrote memo based on information fed through Clinton campaign

Now people start going to jail.

As bad it looked for the Dems before, it just got worse. We now know that at least some of the information in the Dossier was given to him by Clinton's people.

So, now we have a dodgy dossier whose information comes from a mixture of Russian intelligence and the Clintons, with a 4Chan troll thrown in for good measure. And this was presented to the courts as a document that should be taken seriously.

And we're supposed to worry about Trump's foreign dealings?

And don't forget---Yahoo News is now a legitimate source of information for the FISA court! Who was it that signed an affidavit as Yahoo News? Or does this court not require affidavits?

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: DJW001

So you are assuming that the memo has not deliberately withheld the presence of the exculpatory information?

I don't have to assume anything. In their rush to mislead people, the Democrats admitted like dumbasses there was a vague reference in it to "political entities". If it said Clinton and the DNC, they'd be telling that to the media. That's not what they're saying though. Leaving out that it was Trump's political opponent is wrong no matter how you try to spin it, and I doubt the judge is pleased he or she was misled. Take off the partisan blinders. Would you like the government getting a warrant against you based on tabloid information paid for by someone who hates you? That would be perfectly fine with you?

Schiff is so desperate for vindication that he doesn't realize he's hurting his own cause. A vague reference to "political entities" that was buried in a footnote of the application isn't much of a disclosure. It reminds me of the hidden fees and things that credit card companies bury in fine print, knowing that there is almost no chance you'll spot it.

originally posted by: DJW001
Too many professionals here. I'm out.

Remember when you used to pretend you were objective?