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.

 

Break down the memo for me. I must be stupid

page: 10
88
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

The fact that she let Comey do that is equivalent to a recusal as far as I’m concerned.

The fact that she let Comey do that is equivalent to a recusal as far as I’m concerned.


Maybe she was worried about the same thing you folks are accusing the FBI of. Though in this case—supporting Trump. since old Comey virtually gave Trump the election with his letter that Hillary was still under investigation.

Then guess what, her poll numbers went done.

You see you good folks don’t believe in

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander

edit on 3-2-2018 by Willtell because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 03:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
This is listening ONLY to the GOP (Trump ardent supporters) and we have yet to hear the dems side

As I hear, they wouldn’t even let the dems memo come out.

That should tell you something


Eh, I tend to think this memo and all of *this* is coordinated (by both the majority and minority) and I already have my working theory on how the investigation is going to end.

If the Dem memo changes anything...I'll certainly be changing my working theory.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 03:16 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Maybe so. This all might be a big charade.

In-fact, I have posted my theory many times that Trump’s presidency is a black psychological operation.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 03:17 PM
link   


Because most people don't mind white collar criminals leading our country and they all want the status quo and until real hardship hits us personally they don't care what happens and they'd'd rather live with Their heads in the sand.


This is a pretty good summation of the majority of Americans. Sad but true. It is why it changes very little to the positive.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Back at you old friend. 👍 I haven't been able to shake that feeling since it hit me almost a year ago and it's only gotten stronger since.

It's AMAZING--even Cosmic--to watch the evil intent bounce back on these Jokers who have often used "National Security" as a cover for deep state crimes against humanity.

There's much meaning to be found in the theory, imo, when one looks at the National Security Act of 1947. Especially who was responsible for it and all the pure evil it has allowed to happen the World over as a result.

Keep the faith and be heartened...and take this BIG bro hug with you, Fly! 🙂



edit on 3-2-2018 by The GUT because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 03:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
She did recuse herself, that’s why Comey took over the decision process


CNN added some false memories to the spin cycle, don't be so gullible Charlie Brown & stop listening to them...



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Grambler

Yep exactly. He has no problem with the fact that the memo says the dossier was the essential part of getting the warrant.

That lets you know exactly where he and others like him are coming from.

They have no problem with the fbi using dossier paid for by hillarys team to spy on trump.

Truly disturbing.


When I google the definition for 'essential,' I find this:

Essential (adjective): absolutely necessary; extremely important

***

I feel like Nunes played a dirty trick using that word. Was it absolutely necessary or extremely important? It makes a difference.

I think the motive behind the memo is not what we are supposed to believe it is.

Some will read "essential" as "absolutely necessary" and others will read it as *cough* merely "extremely important."



You are correct. The use of the term is a matter of interpretation and it leaves just enough room for plausible deniability.

Regardless, I think you would agree that this memo proves nothing and offers nothing in the form of real evidence.




Records include all books, papers, maps, photographs, machine-readable materials, or other documentary materials, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by an agency of the United States Government under Federal law or in connection with the transaction of public business and preserved or appropriate for preservation by that agency or its legitimate successor as evidence of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations, or other activities of the Government or because of the informational value of the data in them
Link

So, technically, I think the memo is real evidence.

However, it is uncorroborated so it's of little value TO ME -- because I don't automatically trust Nunes or anyone in Congress.

Likewise, I don't trust the FBI when they write down on their Form 302s that an interviewee said something (or didn't say something). And, yet, that Form 302 serves as the official record of statements made to the FBI in a court of law. There's no electronic recording to corroborate those written, paraphrased, interpreted, filtered through bias records either.

So...the memo is about as good as the FBI's form 302 that's used as evidence to indict and prove someone made false statements to the FBI.




I do not think the memo itself has any value in regards to evidence. Not when there is real evidence to the truth of the matter in the hands of investigators and those in a position to see such information.

As far as the FBI, I have no reason to doubt their abilities or integrity at this point.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Wide-Eyes



You're just being pedantic. The memo was written around facts. This is confirmed by pretty much everyone in DC.


That is a logical fallacy. It doesn't mean anything of substance.



Us peons aren't privy to the background evidence yet but I've seen enough confirmation to know that it's legit.


Uh huh.

Sure you have.



How many times do you want to ask fruitless questions to deflect from what has actually happened here?


Asking what this memos provides in the way of proof is a deflection?

Interesting.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Some minds will expand, others will collapse, I'm ready for the perp walks Mr. President. I will clear my schedule and tune right in as we MAGA. Just remember that we must come together to assist with the masses of mentally ill that will wander the streets in short order.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: M5xaz
a reply to: introvert



The memo outlines criminal activity in failing to disclose information to the court.

You cannot use a Clinton campaing document to spy on opponents as I detailed above.

Deny Ignorance.


Are you referring to them failing to disclose Steele's political bias?

If so, why does that matter? Warrants are not granted on the basis on one's political bias. They are granted on potential evidences that may have been corroborated.


No.

Per the memo, the FBI on multiple occasions failed to tell the court that this "dossier" was opposition reasearch paid for by Trump's opponent.

No court would have approved an interception warrant had this been disclosed, particularly in light of the fact the FISA warrant application, per the memo, had NO other source of corroboration, except a Yahoo news article whose source was Steele.

Any LEA applying for any interception had the legal OBLIGATION to reveal to the court ALL information in their possession. Anything else is contempt AND criminal. That is the LAW. Period.

Is this hiding of information clear enough criminal behaviour for you ?
edit on 3-2-2018 by M5xaz because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: wakeupstupid

BWAHAHAHA

It is hilarious you think hillary will be arrested..

She isn’t even under investigation after over a year..


I cant believe how much pro government propaganda is being pushed..



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 04:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: Realtruth

Indeed your right, but just like the Trump logic, you have this all distorted.

Trump is abusing power not any democrats.


Are you out of your ever-loving mind??

If you truly believe no democrats are abusing their power, what a waste of a mind...



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 04:05 PM
link   
a reply to: M5xaz



Per the memo, the FBI on multiple occasions failed to tell the court that this "dossier" was opposition reasearch paid for by Trump's opponent.


Why does that matter? If the info could be corroborated, it would not matter if it was found by political opposition research or by another source.



No court would have approved an interception warrant had this been disclosed, particularly in light of the fact the FISA warrant application, per the memo, had NO other source of corroboration, except a Yahoo news article whose source was Steele.


And is that true? Do we know for sure?

If so, please link.



Is this clear enough criminal beheviour for you ?


No. You have to have more info before you jump to that conclusion.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 04:11 PM
link   
Some Facts:

qz.com...


The memo doesn’t say that the FBI and Department of Justice did anything illegal



The supposed purpose of the memo is to highlight the potential violation of Page’s civil liberties. (Trump’s opponents say it’s an attempt to discredit the FBI’s Russia investigation.) However, the memo never says the application to monitor Carter Page was illegal. Moreover, as USA Today justice reporter Brad Heath points out, even wrongful omissions aren’t enough to stop a warrant being issued when there’s a good case for it.


The memo claims that a controversial dossier was used to justify surveillance—but doesn’t say whether the information in it was wrong



The memo says the Steele dossier formed “an essential part” of the warrant application. It bases this on classified testimony given by then-deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe to the House Intelligence Committee.However, the memo does not publish McCabe’s statement in full

The memo claims that Steele leaked information to Yahoo News—but again, doesn’t dispute the information itself

Norm Eisen points out, the Steele dossier’s (potentially biased) provenance was public knowledge by the time the surveillance application was up for renewal, and the court chose to renew it anyway.



The memo is just a partisan over-hyped statement trying to defend Trump. They have a right to do that but the methods are questionable.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 04:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
I do not think the memo itself has any value in regards to evidence. Not when there is real evidence to the truth of the matter in the hands of investigators and those in a position to see such information.

As far as the FBI, I have no reason to doubt their abilities or integrity at this point.


It's the opposite for me. Why make false claims that evidence contradicts?

OTOH, the FBI can simply write what they want down on Form 302 and there's ZERO recorded evidence to refute it or corroborate it...it's their word against the interviewee's word. THAT gives me far more reason to doubt than claims made that can be proven or disputed with evidence.

Different standards, I guess.

But I don't really trust any of it all that much, honestly.



edit on 2/3/2018 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 04:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: M5xaz



Per the memo, the FBI on multiple occasions failed to tell the court that this "dossier" was opposition reasearch paid for by Trump's opponent.


Why does that matter? If the info could be corroborated, it would not matter if it was found by political opposition research or by another source.



No court would have approved an interception warrant had this been disclosed, particularly in light of the fact the FISA warrant application, per the memo, had NO other source of corroboration, except a Yahoo news article whose source was Steele.


And is that true? Do we know for sure?

If so, please link.



Is this clear enough criminal beheviour for you ?


No. You have to have more info before you jump to that conclusion.


Wrong, again.

1."Per the memo, the FBI on multiple occasions failed to tell the court that this "dossier" was opposition research paid for by Trump's opponent."
- For the court to grant a interception warrant, the supporting information must be supported and credible, BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. The dossier was written by Trump's opponents (e.g. rife with obvious conflict of interest and absence of impartiality) with ZERO supporting information.
Think .

2."No court would have approved an interception warrant had this been disclosed, particularly in light of the fact the FISA warrant application, per the memo, had NO other source of corroboration, except a Yahoo news article whose source was Steele."
This very fact is confirmed in the memo, and McCabe himself admitted as much.
www.thegatewaypundit.com...

3. "Jumping to conclusions"
No, I am not. I know very much of what I speak.
Revealing ALL information to the court to obtain a warrant is legally required.
Omitting and/or misleading the court is a criminal offense.

I know it upset you, and it ruins your image of the previous administration, but those are the facts.
They were running a criminal, autocratic organization and need to go to jail for it. Upcoming events and disclosures will more than prove me right

By far, the worst scandal in US history.

edit on 3-2-2018 by M5xaz because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 04:26 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye



It's the opposite for me. Why make false claims that evidence contradicts?


For propaganda's sake. It doesn't matter if it's true. All that matters is that it is repeated over and over for it to work.

Obviously, it's working.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: M5xaz



1."Per the memo, the FBI on multiple occasions failed to tell the court that this "dossier" was opposition research paid for by Trump's opponent." - For the court to grant a interception warrant, the supporting information must be supported and credible, BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. The dossier was written by Trump's opponents (e.g. rife with obvious conflict of interest and absence of impartiality) with ZERO supporting information. Think .


You do not know what evidence was or was not provided to the FISA court.



2."No court would have approved an interception warrant had this been disclosed, particularly in light of the fact the FISA warrant application, per the memo, had NO other source of corroboration, except a Yahoo news article whose source was Steele." This very fact is confirmed in the memo, and McCabe himself admitted as much. www.thegatewaypundit.com...


McCabe is not alleged to have said any such thing.

Read your source again.



3. "Jumping to conclusions" No, I am not. I know very much of what I speak. Revealing ALL information to the court to obtain a warrant is legally required. Omitting and/or misleading the court is a criminal offense.


Can you tell me what exactly was presented to the courts? Please provide links.



I know it upset you, and it ruins your image of the previous administration, but those are the facts. They were running a criminal, autocratic organization and need to go to jail for it. Upcoming events and disclosures will more than prove me right By far, the worst scandal in US history.


Why am I upset? The memo does not say what many think and you have to provide any real evidence.

It appears to me you are now taking a personal approach because you may be the one upset. Otherwise, there is no need to talk out of your ass.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 04:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: MotherMayEye



It's the opposite for me. Why make false claims that evidence contradicts?


For propaganda's sake. It doesn't matter if it's true. All that matters is that it is repeated over and over for it to work.

Obviously, it's working.


I believe nothing I see as far as this investigation goes....and I take nothing at face value.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

No, you're not stupid, you're just looking at it with political eyes.

"Donald Trump, Mike Pence, Kelly-Anne Conway and Steve Bannon made up a fake document then used that document to illegally obtain permission to spy on Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election campaign - that's why she lost the election. Trump and Co also held secret meetings and gave away lots of Americas Uranium to Russia. Trump and Co are desperate to push the Russian-Clinton narrative so as to deflect attention away from Impeaching Trump because of what he did to Hillary"

There - now that the names have been swapped and I've removed your political eyes, it should all now make sense.




top topics



 
88
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join